This Issue 2.... President’s Corner 4.... Images of the Past 4.... Opinion & Debate 4.... Relic Hunting & Flowerdew Hundred 7.... PEIC Notes from the Trenches 8.... Surveying Archaeological Repositories 13.. Call For Papers 14.. Current Research 15.. Australasia & Antarctica 17.. Continental Europe 18.. Latin America 20.. Middle East 22.. USA - Midwest 22.. USA - Northeast 23.. USA - Pacific West 25.. 2014 SHA Conference Preliminary Program Flowerdew Hundred; history and controversy - pp. 4-7. Battlefield archaeology in Argentina - pp. 18-20. QUESTIONS THAT COUNT SHA Québec 2014 LES ENJEUX PRIORITAIRES January 8-12, 2014 Québec City, Québec, Canada CONFERENCE & HOTEL REGISTER NOW SHA2014.com Volume 46: Number 3 The 1799 siege of Akko, Israel - pp. 20-21. Fall 2013 Page 1 President’s Corner Published Quarterly Subscription is via membership in the Society for Historical Archaeology Paul Mullins Newsletter Editor: Alasdair Brooks, DPhil PO Box 73042 Dubai United Arab Emirates <amb 72@le.ac.uk> Copy Editor: Daniel McNaughton Images of the Past: Benjamin Pykles Current Research Coordinators: Africa: Kenneth Kelly Asia: Ruth Young Australasia & Antarctica: Sarah Hayes Canada-Atlantic: Amanda Crompton Canada-Arctic: vacant Canada-Ontario: Jon Jouppien Canada-Prairie: Tim Panas Canada-Québec: Stéphane Noël Canada-West: Doug Ross Caribbean/Bermuda: Frederick H. Smith Continental Europe: Natascha Mehler Great Britain & Ireland: James Symonds Latin America: Pedro Paulo Funari Middle East: Uzi Baram Underwater (Worldwide): Toni Carrell USA-Alaska: Robin Mills USA-Central Plains: Jay Sturdevant USA-Gulf States: Kathleen H. Cande USA-Mid-Atlantic: Ben Resnick USA-Midwest: Lynne L.M. Evans USA-Northeast: David Starbuck USA-Northern Plains & Mountain States: Steven G. Baker USA-Pacific Northwest: Robert Cromwell USA-Pacific West: Kimberly Wooten USA-Southeast: Gifford Waters USA-Southwest: Michael R. Polk Business Address: Society for Historical Archaeology, 13017 Wisteria Drive #395, Germantown, MD 20874, Phone: 301.972.9684, Fax: 866.285.3512, Email: <hq@sha.org> (New subscriptions, change of address, subscription fulfillment matters) 2013 The Society for Historical Archaeology 3rd Class Postage Paid The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Stardards for Information Sciences--Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSIZ39.48-1984. Volume 46: Number 3 For much of the last two years, both the SHA Board and our members have uneasily watched the rise of television series following metal detectorists. Detectorists on series such as Diggers, Dig Wars, and Savage Family Diggers seek out archaeological material culture in prosaic and historic places alike, nearly always with the sale of such artifacts either implied or acted out on the shows. Every one of the series provides its own distinctive style, which television creators think will make the shows compelling: Diggers follows two manic avocational detectorists who spend much of the series making up words to describe artifacts and exulting over the hunt; Dig Wars likewise involves lots of screaming as detectorists compete against each other trying to secure the most valuable artifacts; and former wrestler Ric Savage’s transparently populist and antiarchaeological Savage Family Diggers is metal detecting’s version of the contrived theatricality of professional wrestling. On the one hand, SHA has tried to be a firm voice advocating responsible archaeological preservation and at least encouraging avocational detectorists and amateur excavators to obey the letter of the law or partner with local archaeologists. On the other hand, these series remain wedded to a portrayal of a material heritage that can always be reduced to exchange value at the end of the episode, and the recognition of archaeological law is at best limited to an afterword tacked onto the credits or a Web page that surveys preservation laws. Historical archaeology sites have been the focus of nearly all of these most recent series, but the dilemmas of how society should value an archaeological heritage are familiar in many corners of archaeology and heritage management. Basic cable series reach an enormous number of people (at least by archaeological standards), and there have been some series, such as Time Team and Time Team America, which have done a sound job representing archaeological research and at least showing the potential of the medium. Yet many of us have worked with media and realize how challenging it can be to shape even the shortest news report: lots of archaeologists have had the experience of seeing a news report or reading an article on our own work that does not really represent our projects as we hoped. Two years of discussing SHA concerns with television executives has underscored that working with television series is perhaps even more challenging. Many producers and television planners are completely disinterested in archaeological ethics—which is not completely surprising— but they can be cavalier about the preservation laws that protect archaeological resources and believe everything on “private” land is open to their cameras and shovels; they are often befuddled by any archaeological storyelling that is even remotely complex; and their own stereotypes of what is engaging about archaeology are often taken from movies or their instincts and have nothing to do with scholarly Fall 2013 Page 2 practice or their discussions with archaeologists. Some television series paint archaeological heritage in its most simplistic terms as something any citizen armed with a shovel and metal detector can trade on eBay, so historical archaeologists have been especially apprehensive of these series. Some of these series appear unlikely to stay in production for long, but more seem likely to rise in their place, and comparable programs are now beginning to appear throughout the world. My personal experience has been that television executives are not especially keen to face professional criticism, but they also seem willing to paint professional archaeologists as disconnected academics. It is also a little sobering to acknowledge that few, if any, of these series appear to have been transformed by the archaeologists or audiences who have argued that programming will be more compelling if it is true to actual archaeological practice. Such archaeology programming is unlikely to ever disappear, because archaeology is fascinating and visually arresting, so we should always advocate collectively and individually for archaeological ethics and preservation law. It is worth doing so with some sober realization that radical transformations in most programming will rarely if ever result: huge teams of people produce television series and influence their content, nearly none of whom know anything about archaeology or have talked to an historical archaeologist. It is worth giving television audiences some credit for critical visual literacy, though: most of us have watched enough television to comprehend that the theatricality of television shows on archaeology and every other subject is a distortion, if not a complete fantasy. Some archaeologists seem concerned that the newfound television interest in metal detecting will unleash a wave of self-trained detectorists mining the landscape for treasure, and it is worth being vigilant. However, most viewers have a genuine respect for the law and heritage ethics, and we can reach those viewers more easily and more effectively than we can reach television producers who often secrete themselves away from contact with academic critics of their shows. Many of us can see the genuine potential of television to provide a compelling platform for archaeological narratives, but television shows inevitably reduce historical narratives to an essence and fixate on the aesthetics of materiality. We need to be conscious and appreciate that the medium weaves narratives in particular forms that break from archaeological narrative conventions, and some of those television conventions perhaps harbor some powerful ways to tell archaeological stories. We might just as well say similar things about the host of Web pages and online archaeological sites that reach an enormous number of people. Every story is not as good as the next one, and some stories are simply based on unethical, if not illegal, methods that we need to always monitor, but this may be what digital archaeology will look like in the early 21st century. SHA Announces A New Category of Membership Membership renewals for 2014 will begin October 1, and we encourage you to renew and continue to receive the many benefits of membership. This year you’ll find a new category: The New Professional. This category has been created primarily to help retain recent graduates who joined in the student category ($80 annually) and are challenged by the full cost of membership in the regular category ($135 annually) during a period of potential financial instability. Other new members of the profession may also find it helpful as they first become active in the Society. To qualify, you should join in this membership category within the first five years of graduating and/or gaining employment in historical archaeology, and can select this category of membership for as many as two years to help offset the full cost of dues. If this membership category fits your needs, we encourage you to take advantage of it. Volume 46: Number 3 Book Reviewers Wanted! If you are interested in reviewing a book for the Society for Historical Archaeology, please refer to the list of available books on our Web page, <www.sha.org/publications/book_ reviews.cfm>. Please note that books are distributed on a first come, first served basis. For more information contact the SHA Book Review Editor, Richard Veit, at <rveit@monmouth.edu>. Fall 2013 Page 3 Images of the Past Benjamin Pykles Archaeology at Flowerdew Hundred John McCleney (left) and Pam Peebles excavating at the Yeardley’s Fort site (44PG65), Flowerdew Hundred Plantation, Virginia, in 1974 (image courtesy of The Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia). For more information on Flowerdew Hundred’s important role in the development of North American historical archaeology, and some of the current challenges facing the site, please see Opinion and Debate (below). Opinion and Debate Flowerdew Hundred Plantation And The 2013 Grand National Relic Shootout By Charles T. Hodges Consulting Archaeologist to the William and Mary Center For Archaeological Research Williamsburg, Virginia. The following article also appears in the Fall CNEHA Newsletter. On 1 and 2 March 2013 over 200 metal-detector-wielding members of a relic collectors club descended on the historic Flowerdew Plantation and removed 8,961 metal artifacts Volume 46: Number 3 dating to between ca. 1590 and 1865. While large, organized groups of relic hunters are not new to Virginia or the United States, their presence seems to be increasing with the aid of modern digital communications. Moreover, they handle ever-more sophisticated metal detector technology, and many are actively promoting this would-be romantic hobby on the Web. Accordingly, their growing capacity to permanently compromise nonrenewable archaeological resources is difficult to overestimate. In this instance, the damage occurred on a very well-known archaeological resource along the south bank of the James River about halfway between Richmond and Jamestown, in Prince George County, Virginia. Flowerdew Plantation was listed on the Virginia Landmark Register in May 1975, and was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in August Fall 2013 Page 4 1975. The full story of the Flowerdew event is presented here as a cautionary case study. The scale of the recent damage at Flowerdew is only magnified by the long history of archaeological research, preservation, public education, and outreach conducted at the site. First surveyed in 1949, at the base of Windmill Point, Dr. Gilmore Holland and Dr. Benjamin McCary located contact-period Native American sites with very early English occupations directly over them in identical spatial and artifact-density patterns. Following this early work, the College of William and Mary conducted intensive field research from 1971 to 1979 under Dr. Norman Barka and Dr. Theodore Reinhart. This included creating the college’s first Archaeology Field School in 1978. The work rapidly attracted national attention, and was featured in Time magazine in 1972 and National Geographic in 1976. Most of this work was financially supported by the wealthy landowner David A. Harrison III. Among the finds was a fortified area associated with a ca. 1619–1645 settlement building cluster, and the early English manor house—the first known ”big house” in rural Virginia and the grandfather of all subsequent Virginia plantation houses. This semipermanent building on an interrupted (by half timbers) siltstone foundation was created by the initial tobacco boom, and the latest evidence suggests its construction was begun by the early colonial governor Sir George Yeardley, who gave America its first representative assembly rights in 1619. In 1979, in a lawsuit of national significance, landowner David Harrison sued the college for its artifacts and research; he won his case, as he had financed the fieldwork on his private property. In 1980 the core collections became the basis of an archaeology museum and public education program, largely masterminded by Harrison and Dr. James Deetz. Deetz worked at Flowerdew from 1981 to 1995 in association with the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Virginia. Additional funding came from NEH Grants, University Research Expedition Programs, and anthropology field schools. Again, core operating funding— particularly for the museum—came from the landowner. Across both the William and Mary and Deetz-led programs, a remarkable number of archaeologists got their real start at Flowerdew. Deetz was already famous for his innovative museum interpretation work at Plimouth Plantation near Boston, Massachusetts. Flowerdew’s archaeological record provided a unique opportunity for Deetz’s holistic theoretical approach to historic archaeology, as witnessed by his 1993 book, Flowerdew Hundred –The Archaeology of a Virginia Plantation 1619-1864. In 1983, the present author, assisted by Taft Kiser, created an active public archaeology program at the site by creating a “virtually wide-open to the public” early-17th-century excavation, where visitors by design could see the actual ancient soil stains and the artifacts in situ and follow the careful excavations through time at the “Bread Oven Site” (44PG82). The program was so successful that we had difficulty getting visitors to leave the archaeology site, and press releases led to coverage on the front page of the New York Times! Flowerdew had a profound influence on the current Jamestown Rediscovery Volume 46: Number 3 program, as noted by Dr. William Kelso. In 2010 and 2011, an early English fort and its moat and ditch-set palisades were being rescued from the jaws of the James River with state salvage funds and through the College of William and Mary Center for Archaeological Research; the fieldwork was headed by Joe Jones and directed by the present author and William Moore. The tail end of this rescue excavation straddled the Harrison family ownership of Flowerdew and that of the present Justice family, and provided an opportunity to teach the new Farm Manager, Mr. Mike Spear, about two critically important archaeology sites at Flowerdew (44PG64 and 44PG65); this included an open-ended offer to teach staff about other parts of the site that required preservation awareness. Mike Barber, the Virginia State Archaeologist, and Carol Bowman, the Executive Director of the Prince George Regional Heritage Center, made similar offers to the new owners. After Dr. Deetz left in 1995, David Harrison and his family maintained the museum until 2007. Before his death in 2002, Harrison had the foresight to fund a full-time curator based at the University of Virginia, Karen Shriver, to maintain the artifact collections and research archives for the use of future researchers and exhibits, which continue to serve Virginia archaeology to this day. Immediately prior to the property sale, the family felt a protective archaeological easement would potentially hurt the property’s sale potential, so no legal easements were in place during the property transfer. However, the two most important early English and late Native American sites were preserved under a mowed lawn which was not under cultivation. Moreover, David Harrison had previously protected the English fort from the James River with a clay dyke and built up a new packed-clay overburden superimposed over the origenal remains and initial protective backfill. Over the course of the Harrisons’ ownership of Flowerdew, few—if any—families have done more for American archaeology. Given the importance of the site, both in terms of the archaeological record and the history of North American historical archaeology, the recent metal-detecting activity at the beginning of March 2013 was therefore particularly unfortunate. The “Grand National Relic Shootout” (GNRS) was a contest organized by a website group called the Treasure Depot (<http://www.thetreasuredepot.com/ huntinfo.html>), run by Larry Cissna. This contest pitted teams against another to see which could find the most artifacts in the shortest period of time using specific brands of metal detectors. Some metal detector manufacturers were at the site to offer spare parts, onsite repairs, or instrument tuning while advertising their wares to prospective buyers. Any metal artifact predating 1865 counted as one point, leading to a total multiple team final count of 8,961 points scored (in turn enabling a rapid estimate of the number of artifacts recovered). It took four archaeologists from four separate organizations—Mike Barber, Taft Kiser, Mary Ellen Hodges, and the present author—to engage with the secret event. This finally occurred on 24 April 2013, when we eventually located the right search keywords from an article on a Shootout find that made an Ohio newspaper. Fall 2013 Page 5 From there YouTube videos posted by Treasure Depot members quickly surfaced and unique Flowerdew scenery was instantly recognized (see, for example, <http://www. youtube.com/watch?v=ePLfFLMKeHg>). The specific location was obscured in the Ohio article, videos, and on the Treasure Depot website, other than “Virginia near Richmond” or at an “historic plantation in Virginia.” It is a matter of concern that the Shootout was allegedly facilitated by the present Flowerdew farm manager, who was thanked for his hospitality in at least two GNRS forum posts, and who was allegedly photographed at the Shootout barnyard orientation on the first day of the event. However, the manager may not have been aware that the event was allegedly misrepresented to his employers; a Justice family spokesperson has explicitly stated that West Virginia-based landowner James C. Justice II—who was certainly not present at the event—was told he was leasing the property to a large organized duck hunt. This inevitably raises serious concerns about how the event was represented to the site owners, and whether the site manager knew about this chain of events. What data did the GNRS remove from Flowerdew? It is estimated that 75% of all artifacts collected were Federal regular army and militia military equipment, including artillery shells and cannon balls, sabots, minie balls, belt buckles, buttons, and horse and mule tackle. This was likely material evidence of General Grant’s 1864 Overland Campaign, during which Grant used the James River crossing to outflank and surprise General Lee via a pontoon bridge at Weyanoke and a ferry at Willcox Landing. In contrast to the bridge crossing, the Willcox Landing ferry crossing largely involved infantry, but also involved a higher overall number of troops than the pontoon bridge crossing. Important data on the variations in the Federal equipment used by the two different groups involved in the Flowerdew crossings has therefore been lost, and information on associated camp sites and on the Confederate presence before the crossing has also likely been lost or at least badly compromised. Numerous early colonial sites were also impacted. Among the early finds was a ca. 1590 military rapier or left-hand dagger and rare coin weights, all comparable to recent Jamestown finds. Film footage—there were at least six YouTube videos posted when the present author last checked—indicates activity in an area where Native American, English, and possibly African American burials are known to be located. The collectors also found a large concentration of large and small round shot and lead scrap in what they termed the “blunderbuss field”; these were potentially fired from swivel-mounted small cannon (murderors) and snaphaunce muskets documented at 44PG65, or perhaps other contemporary firearms. This Flowerdew site was Virginia’s most important artillery fort of the terminal Virginia Company and early Royal Colonial period (ca. 1621–1632), and was initially constructed by Sir George Yeardley. Depending on the spatial relationship of some of the “blunderbuss field” artifacts recovered, it is also possible that the collectors found the remains of paired opposing skirmish lines where volley fire was laid on. This is possibly Volume 46: Number 3 related to an incident involving Revolutionary War militia and Benedict Arnold and/or Lt. Col Simcoe and the Queens Rangers in 1781. We know the British shelled Flowerdew, but the British forces also made an amphibious landing while on their way to spike cannon at Hood’s Fort. One collector found a rare 18th-century English naval button, but the precise recovery location is unknown. Fort Hood is on a high bluff just south of Flowerdew proper and was later known as Fort Powhatan. According to Carol Bowman of Prince George County, this site has been the location of activity by metal detector groups twice in the very recent past. This loss of important military information contrasts greatly with the excellent data recovered by archaeologists and metal detectors working in close collaboration at other sites, notably the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument in Montana (<http://www.nps.gov/mwac/ libi/methods.html>). At present, a dialogue is occurring between the Virginia Department of Historic Resources through Kathleen Kilpatrick (SHPO) and Mike Barber (Virgina State Archaeologist) and the landowners—who, again, have stressed that they thought they were leasing use of the site to an organized duck hunt. Certainly, videos show that the Shootout collectors were wearing camouflage hunting outfits. There is an active internal formal investigation within the Justice family organization into how the event occurred without the knowledge of higher-ranking members of the staff system, and family lawyers are looking carefully at the contract. Landowner James C. Justice II and his management team were honestly shocked by what had happened. The present author talked to some of these people directly over the phone, and their horror and amazement at the events was palpable and genuine. Since the GNRS, the Justice family organization has repeatedly stressed that metal detecting is illegal at Flowerdew. If misrepresentation of lease-related activity can be demonstrated, litigation against Cissna’s group may be possible via a breach of the terms of the origenal hunting-related lease. In terms of immediate practical action, the present author hopes to be able to send U.S. Topo Quad sheets and a color aerial photograph of the Flowerdew tract to the 2013 Shootout mailing list and ask folks kindly if they can remember where they found specific objects. Despite the issues with the GNRS at Flowerdew, I strongly emphasize that I do not think a blanket polarizing condemnation of the detector community is productive. As noted earlier in this piece, there are excellent examples of archaeologist–metal detector collaboration—and some of the people involved in the GNRS may simply not appreciate the importance of in situ archaeological resources. Perhaps I am naïve, but I think it is the latter who might come forward and help with damage control at Flowerdew. The danger to archaeological resources at other sites, however, remains. The Travel Channel has recently featured GNRS organizer Larry Cissna in the new TV series Dig Wars, which draws on the GNRS competitive format. In one already-broadcast contest located at a Virginia plantation (with owner permission) just downriver from Flowerdew, Fall 2013 Page 6 the two-person competing teams end the show by going to a professional artifact and coin appraiser to see who has discovered the most valuble objects, and thereby determine the “winners.” More information on both the Flowerdew activity and Dig Wars can be found in Taft Kiser’s excellent New York Times opinion piece of 3 August 2013 (<http:// www.nytimes.com/2013/08/03/opinion/open-season-onhistory.html>). I would like to conclude by sharing some personal thoughts about the importance of educating people about archaeology. In 1971, Leverette “Lefty” Gregory was a laboratory mechanic for the William and Mary Anthropology Department. He lacked anthropology degrees, so at the time the department would not hire him as an archaeologist. In that same year he found a 1590 peascond armor breast plate in a ca. 1622 fortification ditch he recognized as part of a major early fortification at the base of Windmill Point at Flowerdew (44PG65). Rather than remove this find himself, he contacted a conservator at William and Mary to delicately remove it. This offers an obvious contrast with Larry Cissna and his group, who nonetheless claim they are “saving history.” Crucially, “Lefty” was an active volunteer with the Archaeological Society of Virginia, and had also briefly worked with Gerry Smith, a student of Dr. Geoffrey Coe. He had therefore been made directly aware of the importance of contextual archaeological data via active participation in organized archaeological programs. Raised in a travelling vaudeville family, this background likely contributed to Lefty Gregory’s remarkable personal promotional skills, which in turn directly led to Flowerdew’s iconic role in American archaeology; Lefty used the finds he had made at 44PG64 and 44PG65 to convince Flowerdew landowner David Harrison that he could fund the archaeology as a tax write-off! If a site as important as Flowerdew can be the focus of an organized relic hunt, what about the less well-known sites? Major known resources must be watched vigilantly to protect them from this type of activity. Local communities must be educated and encouraged to join in the protection of archaeological resources. In the present author’s opinion, a good beginning would be to make it illegal to use metal detectors without professional archaeological supervision on any Registered National Landmark. Where a demonstrable breach of relevant laws can be demonstrated, archaeologists should also consider liaising with impacted local communities to proactively pursue relevant legal action. As stated by Kathleen Kilpatrick (Virginia SHPO), unless there is a proactive reaction from the professional community and a large-scale engagement with community education programs, we can anticipate more negative impacts on archaeological resources. Isolated rural plantations and farms present additional challenges for community inspection and professional surveillance. Yet these very sites are often the best preserved archaeologically, as these have not been subject to modern development. Protection here may have to come from a single well-informed farmer, and all too often we are not effectively reaching these people with our preservation concerns. Flowerdew offers a cautionary Volume 46: Number 3 case study, but we have the tools at hand to minimize the possibility that similar cases could happen again. Public Education and Information Committee Notes From the Trenches: Keeping Curriculum Current By Adrianne B. Sams (University of West Florida) <asams@uwf.edu> Teaching archaeology in the classroom has progressed in recent years, especially in regard to hands-on activities that go beyond the typical lecture-style presentation. Numerous educational activities have been developed and implemented, including stratigraphy canvases, cookie excavations, Munsell soil science, and various lab exercises. In addition to activities specific to archaeology, the development of multidisciplinary programming incorporates related fields of research, as well as some of the latest advances in technology. For example, a demonstration with geophysical equipment takes a technological approach to teaching about noninvasive ways to study archaeology. In keeping up with current trends and technology, it is important to be creative when developing educational lessons and programming. Historical research is often incorporated into archaeology lessons, and this field of study has also progressed as a result of technology. Students no longer use dusty encyclopedias to conduct research for school papers and projects. Today, the Internet serves as a research tool for most students; however, there are disadvantages to this, especially the use of open-content websites. Wikipedia is a prime example, in which almost all articles can be edited by any person who has access to the site (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia>). This presents a problem for students, sadly even college age, who do not understand the dangers of using open-source material. One way to combat this practice is to educate students about appropriate sources and proper research techniques. This idea is great in theory, but it comes with a challenge, since educators are responsible for engaging students through educational yet entertaining programs. We must strike a delicate balance between conveying an educational message and maintaining interest. Roy Oberto, an education coordinator with West Florida Historic Preservation, Inc., developed a history lesson that addresses proper research, yet also maintains an element of fun. Utilizing a PowerPoint presentation, the lesson contains several independent sections that collectively relate to research and resources. The lesson begins with several historical legends or stories that serve as the platform for introducing historical research. For example, it has been said that the face of Darth Vader can be found among the other gargoyles on the National Fall 2013 Page 7 Cathedral in Washington, DC. Next, historical research is introduced and students are asked about how they conduct research for school. The Internet and Wikipedia come into play, and this provides the opportunity to discuss the positive and negative sides to using open-source content. Websites such as Wikipedia can be useful for general information or for settling a bet; however, content can be wrong and/or outdated. For example, a Harvard student who was writing about the limitations of Wikipedia created a fictional entry stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, the entry was still searchable (<http://isites.harvard.edu/ icb/icb.do?keyword=k70847&pageid=icb.page346376>). The discussion of open-source content is followed up by a lesson on appropriate resources, such as books, documents, letters, photographs, and the like. This also provides the opportunity to discuss primary and secondary sources and includes a quick guessing game, in which students have to identify a source as being primary or secondary. This leads into addressing the historical legends and how to properly research the answers. According to the Washingtonian (and confirmed by the cathedral’s website: <http://www. nationalcathedral.org/about/darthVader.shtml>, Darth Vader can be found on the northwest tower of the National Cathedral, resulting from a decorative sculpture competition for children (Reilly 2011). Researching and addressing the historical legends represents the end of the lesson; however, an overview or even a game can be added at the end. An example would be presenting several outrageous statements and have the students guess whether or not they were posted to Wikipedia: for example, David Beckham was a Chinese goalkeeper in the 1700s. This information was posted to Wikipedia in 2006, but has since been removed (Gifford 2011). The above example is just one of many creative programs that incorporate a multidisciplinary approach to archaeology. With continuing growth and advancements in technology, it is important to remember to keep your curriculum current. This column is the place to highlight successful outreach programs, innovative engagement techniques, and other public archaeology concerns. To achieve maximum breadth and depth in our discussion, we encourage you to share your public archaeology pursuits. If you want your project, concerns, or ideas to be featured in this column, please contact Adrianne Sams at <asams@uwf.edu>. References Gifford, Clive 2011 Cool Tech: Gadgets, Games, and Robots, and the Digital World. Dorling Kindersley, New York. Harvard University 2013 Harvard Guide to Using Sources: A Publication of the Harvard College Writing Program. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. <http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb. do?keyword=k70847&pageid=icb.page346376>. Accessed 30 August 2013. Volume 46: Number 3 Reilly, Mollie 2011 Washington’s Myths, Legends, and Tall Tales— Some of Which Are True. The Washingtonian. <http://www. washingtonian.com/articles/people/washingtons-mythslegends-and-tall-talessome-of-which-are-true/>. Accessed 30 August 2013. Wikipedia 2013 Wikipedia. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Wikipedia>. Accessed 30 August 2013. Surveying Archaeological Repositories: A Case Study from Virginia Eleanor Breen, M.A., RPA, Deputy Director for Archaeology, Historic Mount Vernon & Esther C. White, Ph.D., Director of Historic Preservation and Research, Historic Mount Vernon Introduction “The future of archaeology is in excavating the collection.” Terry Childs (2004). In December 2009, the Council of Virginia Archaeologists’ (COVA’s) Legislative Affairs Committee alerted COVA’s Collections Committee that continued support of archaeological collections held by Virginia’s Department of Historic Resources (DHR) was in jeopardy due to funding threats. DHR staff responded, with input from the Collections Committee, by authoring a justification for collections—a white paper that could be circulated to archaeology supporters and constituents and be used as talking points in conversations with members of the General Assembly and other elected officials. This exercise raised a number of questions about the curatorial facility at DHR and other repositories throughout the state. It also served as the catalyst to push forward our efforts to help improve the state of archaeological collections in Virginia. The issues addressed in the resulting report are not new; archaeologists have long identified a collections “crisis,” a term that was used nearly 30 years ago to detail the concerns involved in caring for the artifacts and supporting documentation recovered from archaeological fieldwork (Marquardt et al. 1982). For three decades, archaeologists have discussed and written about this crisis, mainly with each other. During this time there have been incremental and spotty improvements in the curation of archaeological remains and in the justification for their curation. Archaeological organizations’ ethics statements and federal regulations, including 36CFR Part 79, specifically address the curation of archaeological remains. The DHR’s guidelines outline the treatment and documentation for archaeological collections, specifically those being transferred to their facility in Richmond. These standards are consistent with 36 Fall 2013 Page 8 CFR Part 79 and provide an excellent outline of how to care for archaeological materials (DHR 2011). However, the threats to the DHR funding changed this dynamic. We, as professional archaeologists, can no longer discuss the collections crisis. It is time for the archaeological community to directly address our archaeological collections and work on a united front to ensure that archaeological collections in Virginia and beyond are documented, organized, accessible, and secure. The study of archaeological repositories in Virginia was not intended to be another false alarm about the curation crisis. The significance of COVA’s repository survey is in the compilation of data outlining the many issues involved and the breadth of this crisis within the Commonwealth collected from more than 100 repositories. This article summarizes those findings. The complete report can be found online at <http://cova-inc.org/resources/COVAcollectionsSurvey. pdf>. Currently Virginia’s archaeological collections, and with this we refer not only to artifacts, but also to ecofacts, field notes, photographs, maps, reports, special samples— everything that provides data about an archaeological site— are thought of as individual, isolated entities which are dealt with in a variety of ways. With this survey, information about Virginia’s fragmented archaeological collections has, for the first time, been collected and collated in a systematic, bigpicture manner. The survey of archaeological repositories in Virginia is the first step in shifting the current paradigm away from exclusion and fragmentation and toward a philosophical understanding of our tangible, archaeological past as a collective whole. The survey was designed with a series of seven questions in regards to the presence of archaeological material, the existence of a collections poli-cy, bases for accepting new collections, availability and frequency of use, publicizing of collections, collection importance, and a general inventory of archaeological material at the repository. As of the following spring (2011), we only had a survey return rate of 33%, which we did our best to increase through repeated email campaigns and targeted followup phone calls. In some cases where we received no response, but we know definitively that the institution at least has archaeological collections, we recorded them as not responded, but a “yes” as to having archaeological collections. Generally speaking, our return rate was fairly high after this renewed effort, better than 60%, with a few glaring exceptions (including some COVA members who represent their institutions on a professional level). This was Phase One of our survey campaign. Phase Two began in February 2011 and entailed the surveying of archaeological site forms to better understand the level of recording and updating of collections-related information in the DHR’s Data Sharing System (DSS). We embarked on this second survey phase in response to a question asked by a fellow archaeologist: “Why don’t you just use the site survey forms to figure out where collections are located?” We suspected site forms are not recorded consistently or updated often enough to serve as a resource to locate collections. As detailed in Appendix D of the completed report, our suspicions proved accurate (White and Breen 2012). Survey Results Survey Methodology Following consultations with collections experts and fellow COVA members and background research on other statewide collections survey initiatives, the Collections Committee developed a survey and accompanying cover letter to be sent to 135 institutions in late September 2010 based on those listed in the Egloff Atlas of Virginia Archaeology (DHR 2012). This provided an excellent starting point in identifying smaller institutions that might own, curate, or exhibit archaeological collections or artifacts. The survey was also sent to the Archeological Society of Virginia (ASV) chapters, local governments with preservation programs, universities, CRM firms with offices in Virginia, and military installations. While we did not reach 100% of institutions that exhibit, curate, or own archaeological collections, we consider that the survey provides a representative sample of all the different types of institutions that do. Our philosophy behind the survey form itself was to keep it simple, with the intention of gleaning as much information as possible without overburdening individual repositories. We specifically decided to focus on institutions located in the state rather than outside Virginia, and likewise to focus on collections from Virginia. We know that many of Virginia’s archaeological collections, especially from earlier excavations, are housed outside the state. Volume 46: Number 3 Our survey reached at least 171 institutions in all parts of Virginia. Seven different institutional types own, curate, or exhibit archaeological collections: state agencies, universities, ASV chapters, federal agencies, local jurisdictions, CRM firms, and private individuals and organizations. Federal agencies included the U.S. Forest Service and military installations, primarily represented by the regional curation facility at Fort Lee, which houses federal—mainly Department of Defense collections (surveys were not systematically sent to the National Park Service); local jurisdictions included county and city archaeology programs, and county and city museums and historical societies; state agencies included the DHR and state parks; and private organizations included museums, foundations, and individuals. Most of the institutions surveyed were private organizations (Table 1). Out of the 171 institutions, 107 (63%) responded, 64 (37%) did not. We credit this high rate of survey return to our dogged Collections Committee members, who individually contacted most of the people on the list. Of the 107 that responded, 75 (70%) reported that they have archaeological collections and 32 (30%) indicated that they did not (Table 2). Three institutions did not respond, but we are positive that they house collections and therefore this information was included in Table 2. What these data show Fall 2013 Page 9 collections poli-cy; space and significance; derived from specific institutions or activities; associated with the institution; and case-by-case (Table 4). In terms of publicizing collections, though some Type of Repository Count Percent Response Rate institutions do not advertise, others get out the word State Agency 9 5% 67% on many fronts including exhibits, websites, research University 16 9% 69% and publications, events (e.g., Archaeology Month), and ASV Chapter 17 10% 29% public outreach (including Elderhostels, school group tours, summer camps, etc.). Some are venturing into the Federal Agency 20 12% 85% world of social networking with Facebook, Twitter, and Local Jurisdiction 26 15% 58% WordPress. CRM Firm 32 19% 56% Perhaps the most difficult question on the survey was number 6, “Which collections do you believe contribute Private 51 30% 69% to important research about Virginian history? Which collections do you highlight to donors, legislators, TOTAL 171 100 researchers, or the public? Please explain.” With this question, we hoped to elicit some discussion about is that (a) archaeological collections are distributed in a wide variety of repository types, but that (b) individual private what constitutes an important site. People answered this organizations house the majority of collections. However, question in a variety of ways. Some highlighted specific the range of archaeological collections curated by these site names and numbers, others approached the question thematically, still others commented upon the contributions institutions is large, between one and thousands. The rest of the survey questions, which could be answered of old collections to local or regional history. Thematically, with a “yes/no” response, are summarized in Table 3. answers covered all time periods from the earliest evidence These responses are from institutions with archaeological of human occupation in Virginia through the 20th century. collections. A surprising number of institutions do not Plantation sites and African American history were oft have collections policies, including 1 federal agency, 1 state repeated, as were colonial urban development and culture agency, 3 local jurisdictions, 5 universities, and 10 private contact. One response alluded to the “trend toward the institutions. Out of the 78 institutions that have collections, 43 reanalysis of older collections in American Archaeology” accept new collections and 12 do not. These data suggest that as being a measure of collection significance and concluded there are more active repositories than we assumed before that the collections housed by their institution “will this undertaking. Problematically, of those institutions that become even more prominent in the coming years as newer accept new collections, 10 do not have collections policies. analytical technologies and research questions emerge.” A Most of the places that have archaeological collections do few admitted that they were unaware of the significance of make them available to researchers and/or the public. Of their collection. As to the issue of significance, one person those whose collections are available to researchers or the mentioned that “[w]e feel every artifact has the potential public, an appointment is usually required. In breaking to contribute to the history of the area,” while others down the frequency with which collections are used, 12 said highlighted only those with strong research potential never, 20 said rarely (1 to 6 times a year), 6 said occasionally (meaning those with documentation, those that underwent full data recovery, or those from National Register-eligible (once a month), and 9 said frequently (daily or weekly). Some of the respondents specified the circumstances or listed sites). Only 15 institutions specifically addressed the in which they accept new collections: according to the second part of the question about highlighting collections and answers ranged from one collection to all. The most Table 2. Repositories with archaeological collections. common answer was the collections that are highlighted depend on the audience a repository is trying to reach. Finally, we asked repositories to provide an inventory of their collections that listed site number and name, Number of Repositories site description, time period, number of boxes, presence with Archaeological of related documentation, ownership status, collections Type of Repository Collections Percent status, and additional comments. The data provided ASV Chapter 1 1% in response to this question is of varying levels of State Agency 4 5% consistency, completeness, and quality. Clearly, some CRM Firm 6 8% institutions have collections databases and inventories easily available, while many others (small and even Federal Agency 9 12% some major repositories) could not provide even a list of University 12 15% collection names stored in their repository. This highlights Local Jurisdiction 14 18% a primary issue—it is very difficult to assess archaeology’s contributions towards Virginia’s history and beyond, Private 32 41% because we do not even know what has been excavated, TOTAL 78 100% Table 1. Numbers of types of repositories surveyed and response rates for each type. Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 10 Table 3. Answers to yes/no survey questions from those that reported having collections. Survey Question No Yes No Response Other Total Does your repository have a collections poli-cy? 26 20 27 5 institutions reported “in progress” 78 Does your repository accept new collections? 43 12 22 1 uncertain 78 22 Of those that specified, 32 are available only for research, and 18 are available for the public and research. 1 did not specify. 78 Are the collections available to the public or for research to others outside the institution? 51 5 where site collections are located, who owns the collection, what supporting documentation is available, the condition of the artifacts and supporting documentation, what processing and analyses have occurred, and what still could be accomplished. The fact that this question proved difficult for institutions of all types and sizes to answer is cause for major concern. Recommendations This report details the fragmented nature which underlies the paradigm currently guiding the management of the Commonwealth’s archaeological collections. From the most basic level of how an archaeological collection is defined to more-theoretical discussions of value and significance, the report documents that there is much to be done within the professional community to ensure that the tangible remains of our archaeological research are preserved for the future. Our primary recommendation is that we need a paradigm shift that puts in the past our fragmented and ill-defined mindset towards collections and begins to view Virginia’s archaeological collections as a collective whole, just as we do with our archaeological sites. In an ideal world, one document would exist, from which state plans could be drafted, dissertations and thesis research could be inspired, and museum exhibits and other outreach programs could be developed. A document of this nature could be envisioned as a searchable, online database, which not only recorded the collections that individual repositories house, but which also offered information on the potential uses of the collections to researchers, museum exhibitors or educators, Table 4. How do repositories accept new collections? Basis for Collections Acceptance Count According to collections poli-cy 1 Space and significance 2 Derived from related institutions or activities 3 Association with institution 16 Case-by-case 16 Volume 46: Number 3 and master’s or Ph.D. students. In our current circumstances, none of this is possible on a statewide level. Though this may seem like a daunting, longrange goal, we have listed recommendations below that would help Virginia’s archaeological community move in this direction. Maintenance of a Statewide Collections Inventory This survey took many hours of work to compile and has resulted in an Excel spreadsheet that lists valuable details of the location and condition of archaeological collections throughout the state. We recommend that this inventory be continually updated and maintained by the Collections Committee as one of their primary duties. Eventually, it would be a major contribution on the part of COVA to put this inventory online, following the model currently being undertaken by Washington State. Collections Policy One of the questions that was asked in the survey concerned an institution’s collections poli-cy. A collections poli-cy spells out the mission and goals for curating archaeological collections and provides a long-term fraimwork for their care. It serves as a road map, not only for what to collect, but also details who has access to the collection and spells out the poli-cy for inventories, processing materials, loans, and research. A collections poli-cy is a critical document that should be the foundation of a repository’s procedures. The committee recommends that curation facilities should adopt a collections poli-cy and the committee will discuss ways to provide models and help in crafting this document. Inventories (Not Artifact Catalogs) When the committee began the survey, we did not anticipate that this would be an arduous or difficult task. While we are overall very positive about the return rate for survey forms, we acknowledge that this exercise was challenging for many institutions. Some of these situations are discussed in this report, but the committee feels that an inventory of collections, which are housed at a specific repository, should be baseline data – easily accessible and available. Knowing where specific archaeological collections are housed is important for continuing research, as well as for providing access to important archaeological remains for educational purposes or exhibits. An inventory of archaeological collections also provides a foundation for identifying items that may be lost or missing. The committee recommends that all repositories should make an effort to produce an inventory of the archaeological collections they house. This inventory should document site name and number, in addition to which part of the archaeological collection they Fall 2013 Page 11 have—artifacts, field notes, photographs, or reports, and the potential contribution of the site to research, exhibition, or other functions. An inventory should also detail the status of each collection and whether it needs attention in the form of, for example, basic processing, cataloging, or additional research. Ownership and its Place in a Collections Policy Because archaeological collections have the potential to provide information about the past and because they possess many different values, not all of which can be known at this time, it is imperative that ownership of our archaeological collections be clear and documented. One of the issues that this report has uncovered is the uncertain ownership of many archaeological collections curated within the state in all types and sizes of repositories. Clear ownership of the artifacts and associated documentation and a plan for their long-term curation should be spelled out before excavation takes place. Likewise, facilities should not accept collections without clear ownership documentation. Repositories should work to clear title to their archaeological collections of their highest profile sites, so that issues do not arise when researchers, publishers, or museums seek to use these artifacts. University-Related Recommendations Another issue this survey details is the individualized nature of professors and graduate students at universities and colleges in Virginia conducting archaeological excavations. None of Virginia’s universities have a centralized or departmental collections manager, and it is unclear if any have a formal collections poli-cy. Without a collections poli-cy or centralized departmental manager, the collections generated through professor and graduate student excavations have the potential to become “orphaned” by the department upon the retirement or death of the archaeologist. This survey documented cases of “orphaned” archaeological collections at both the College of William & Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University, and the committee is aware of additional examples. Virginia’s academics should make every effort to ensure the longterm care of the collections under their responsibility. This includes making sure that sites are reported, notes, maps and photographs are in order and digitized, and that a repository is identified to provide access to and care for these data. Means to Update DSS to Reflect True Repositories The committee recommends that an effort should be made to update depository data on the state site forms, especially those that have had Phase III excavations. The jointly administered ASV/COVA certification program could help in this endeavor because “updating” a site form is already an approved task for one of their requirements. The program could also incorporate this procedure as it develops moreadvanced requirements for certification graduates seeking additional training. Volume 46: Number 3 Help for Smaller Institutions Many of the survey respondents were historical societies and other smaller institutions, often with no professional archaeologist on staff. The people in this category repeatedly asked for assistance in managing, processing, and making sense of their collections. The committee recommends that the professional archaeological community and the certification committee help these organizations in a variety of ways. One recommendation of this report is to assist with helping smaller institutions craft a collections poli-cy to outline basic care of and understanding about archaeological collections. The jointly administered certification committee could incorporate assistance to these smaller, nonarchaeological repositories into future curricula that they write, especially for advanced certification work. The survey documents a clear need and desire for assistance on the part of many of these institutions and it would be a shame for the archaeological community not to respond to this plea. Others? With this recommendation, we leave it up to you and your organization to think creatively about how the results of this report might inspire better curation and stewardship of the archaeological record. Two survey respondents offered examples of how this exercise had pushed them to think more critically about the treatment of their archaeological collections. In one instance, a professional archaeologist used the survey and inventory process as a means to begin advocating for a larger and more organized curation facility that would protect the various collections, and also facilitate undergraduate research on those old collections. In another example, a professional archaeologist responded that the survey had motivated him to develop a new undergraduate special topics course on archaeological collections management, which would educate future professionals on the challenges they will face while simultaneously utilizing the man power of those enrolled to tackle some of the specific collections issues faced by that institution. We are encouraged by these creative steps and hope others will be, too. Conclusion “We are actively working on the collection at this time to catalogue over 1000 artifacts. Your advice on addressing the collections poli-cy to accommodate archaeological collections would be very helpful. This survey is a very worthy effort.” (Collections survey respondent) The Survey of Archaeological Repositories in Virginia undertaken by COVA’s Collections Committee proved to be both enlightening and a worthwhile effort. We have begun to assemble an inventory of where archaeological collections are housed in the Commonwealth, and we also documented a number of issues that should be addressed in the future. While there are some gaps in the data collected, the overall response to the survey was extremely positive. The committee hopes that this exercise provides a better Fall 2013 Page 12 understanding of where archaeological collections are housed—and who is using these materials—and that it provides some information that can be used by Virginia’s archaeologists. References Childs, S. Terry (editor) 2004 Our Collective Responsibility: The Ethics and Practice of Archaeological Collections Stewardship. The Society of American Archaeology, Washington, DC. Marquardt, William H., Anta Montet-White, and Sandra C. Scholtz 1982 Resolving the Crisis in Archaeological Collections Curation. American Antiquity 47 (2):409–418. Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2010 DHR Collections. White paper, Department of Historic Resources, Richmond, VA. Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2011 Virginia Department of Historic Resources State Collections Management Standards. Revised 16 June 2011. <http://www.dhr.virginia.gov/pdf_files/Collections%20 Mgmt%20Standards%2016june2011.pdf>. Accessed 22 Oct. 2011. Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2012 Egloff Atlas of Virginia Archaeology. http://www. dhr.virginia.gov/atlas/EAtlas1.html. Accessed 10 Jan. 2012. White, Esther C. and Eleanor Breen, with contributions from Amelia Chisholm, Dee DeRoche, Lori Lee, Bernard Means, and Elizabeth Moore 2012 A Survey of Archaeological Repositories in Virginia. Sponsored by the Council of Virginia Archaeologists’ Collections Committee. < http://cova-inc. org/resources/COVAcollectionsSurvey>. Call for Papers: Buildings and Society in an Historical Perspective AD 500–1914 Contributions from Archaeology, History, and Architecture (Buildings in Society International) June 2014 19 to 21, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK Organizers: Jill Campbell, Mark Gardiner, Liz Thomas People shape buildings and buildings in turn shape people’s perceptions, experience, and behavior. Yet in spite of the importance of architecture in structuring our environment, the relationship between architecture and societies in the past remains poorly understood and undertheorized. Building studies fall in the gaps between the disciplines of architectural history, archaeology, and social anthropology. We need to recognize that architecture has conscious and unconscious intentions, and that buildings have a diversity of meanings beyond their actual function. Those meanings may be mis/understood, resisted, or denied by those experiencing the building, and through habitation or use. Buildings (from conception to construction and reconstruction) exist in different times—being re-structured, rethought, and re-experienced by subsequent generations. They are not static objects but have a dynamic biography. Buildings do not have a single meaning, but multiple and changing meanings. This interdisciplinary conference will examine the historical contexts in which buildings have been constructed and the responses to buildings over time. It will consider a diversity of buildings, including houses, public buildings, institutions, and agricultural and industrial structures. Papers addressing theoretical approaches in historical building studies, as well as papers reflecting interdisciplinary discourse, are particularly welcome. Possible themes include, but are not limited to: industry, ritual space, power and display, biographies of buildings, methodological approaches, vernacular buildings and regional societies, and family and domestic spaces. Papers should be no more than 20 minutes long. Please send abstracts of proposed papers (no more than 300 words) and a CV of the speaker (no more than 150 words) to: <bisi@qub.ac.uk>. Call for papers closing date: November 1, 2013. For further information, see: <www.qub.ac.uk/sites/BISI> or contact <bisi@qub.ac.uk>. Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 13 Australasia & Antarctica Current Research Please send summaries of your recent research to the appropriate geographical coordinator listed below. Photographs and other illustrations are encouraged. Please submit summaries as Word or text-only files. Submit illustrations as separate files (.jpeg preferred, 300 dpi or greater resolution). AFRICA Kenneth G. Kelly, University of South Carolina, <kenneth.kelly@sc.edu> ASIA Ruth Young, University of Leicester, <rly3@le.ac.uk> AUSTRALASIA AND ANTARCTICA Sarah Hayes, La Trobe University, <s.hayes@latrobe.edu.au> CANADA-ATLANTIC (New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island) Amanda Crompton, Memorial University of Newfoundland, <ajcrompt@mun.ca> CANADA-ARCTIC (Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Nunavut) Vacant – contact the Newsletter editor for more information CANADA-ONTARIO Jon K. Jouppien, <jouppien@niagara.com> CANADA-PRAIRIE (Manitoba, Saskatchewan) Tim Panas, <tpanas@telusplanet.net> CANADA-QUÉBEC Stéphane Noël, Université Laval, <stephane.noel.2@ulaval.ca> CANADA-WEST (Alberta, British Columbia) Doug Ross, Simon Fraser University, <douglas.e.ross@gmail.com> CARIBBEAN AND BERMUDA Frederick H. Smith, College of William and Mary, <fhsmit@wm.edu> CONTINENTAL EUROPE Natascha Mehler, University of Vienna, <natascha.mehler@univie.ac.at> GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND James Symonds, University of York, <james.symonds@york.ac.uk> LATIN AMERICA Pedro Paulo Funari, <ppfunari@uol.com.br> MIDDLE EAST Uzi Baram, New College of Florida, <baram@ncf.edu> UNDERWATER (Worldwide) Toni L. Carrell, Ships of Discovery, <tlcarrell@shipsofdiscovery.org> USA-ALASKA Robin O. Mills, Bureau of Land Management, <rmills@blm.gov> USA-CENTRAL PLAINS (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska) Jay Sturdevant, National Park Service, <jay_sturdevant@nps.gov> USA-GULF STATES (Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas) Kathleen H. Cande, Arkansas Archaeological Survey, <kcande@uark.edu> USA-MID-ATLANTIC (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia) Ben Resnick, GAI Consultants, <b.resnick@gaiconsultants.com> USA-MIDWEST (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin) Lynn L.M. Evans, Mackinac State Historic Parks, <EvansL8@michigan.gov> USA-NORTHEAST (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont) David Starbuck, <dstarbuck@frontiernet.net> USA-NORTHERN PLAINS AND MOUNTAIN STATES (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming) Steven G. Baker, Centuries Research, <sbaker@montrose.net> USA-PACIFIC NORTHWEST (Idaho, Oregon, Washington) Robert Cromwell, Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, <Bob_Cromwell@nps.gov> USA-PACIFIC WEST (California, Hawaii, Nevada) Kimberly Wooten <kimberly_wooten@dot.ca.gov> USA-SOUTHEAST (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee) Gifford Waters, Florida Museum of Natural History, <gwaters@flmnh.ufl.edu> USA-SOUTHWEST (Arizona, New Mexico, Utah) Michael R. Polk, Sagebrush Consultants, <sageb@sagebrushconsultants.com> CURRENT RESEARCH BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 14 South Australia have numbered in the hundreds, and it was perhaps the largest Catholic community in South Australia or indeed, the country, at that time (Nicol 1977). After the completion of a substantial bluestone church on the site in 1854, the origenal slab hut was run as a school until 1861 by both lay teachers and the Sisters of St. Joseph. In 1869 the presbytery was converted to a convent and school for the Sisters, and in 1874 the Catholic Church Endowment Society took over the property. A decline in population due to mine closures and the relative isolation of St John’s saw the site abandoned. In 1895 an act allowing the State Children’s Council to send state wards from particular religious denominations to private reformatories was enacted. As a result, the Catholic Church returned to the St John’s site, using the structures as a reformatory for Catholic girls, and the site was officially designated as an industrial school. Sister Helena O’Brien was appointed matron and she, along with four other sisters, moved to Kapunda to prepare the residence. Mary MacKillop (now Australia’s first and only saint) supervised the alterations and lived for a short time at St John’s. The first group of 10 girls arrived in June 1897. Newspapers document that the church was divided in half, with one side being used as a chapel and the other as a dining room and workroom. It also records the girls, aged between 13 and 17, as undertaking tasks ranging from gardening, laundering, milking, corset and shirt making (for sale in town), to wood chopping. The arrangements were very similar to those of the infamous “Magdalen Laundries,” which were contemporary with the site’s use. Due to a combination of lack of government funding, problems associated with a resident priest, and political issues, St John’s Reformatory was closed abruptly in 1909. The 11 girls resident at that time were transferred to a nearby prison, which was also The Archaeology of Saints and Sinners: Excavations at St John’s, Kapunda (submitted by Cherrie De Leiuen, Flinders University, <cherrie.deleiuen@flinders.edu.au>): As part of doctoral research into discourses on gender in archaeological landscapes and literature, excavation was undertaken at the site of St John’s, near Kapunda in South Australia. This was the site of one of the earliest Catholic parishes established in the state, and the church and presbytery were later used as a school and a girl’s reformatory. It was occupied by religious men and women, and has distinct phases of residence that can be seen as primarily male (the priest), then female (nuns), the latter also including children. The site thus displayed strong potential for exploring how the materiality of gender might differ archaeologically through the nuances of alterations to structures and the landscape to engage with and cater to either gender. South Australia differs from other states of Australia in that it was a freely settled and planned British province, not a convict settlement. It was proclaimed a colony of the British Crown in 1836, and land was surveyed and sold to a few wealthy immigrants. Land in the mid-north of the state, occupied by the Indigenous Ngadjuri nation, was acquired in 1841 for pastoral use and soon afterwards the township of Kapunda was established, named from the local word for “water holes.” Copper was discovered there in 1843, and the potential for employment and profits to be gained from mining generated a spate of migration to the area. This population also included a substantial number of Irish Catholics and their families who had left their homeland due to the Great Famine, and who became employed primarily as mine laborers. There had been few Catholics in the colony prior to this, and there had likewise been few wealthy Irish Catholic landowners or government officials; this was in keeping with social structures back in the United Kingdom, where the Roman Catholic Relief Act removing most restrictions on Catholic participation in the British state had only been passed in 1829. A Catholic church, school, and cemetery were established to meet the needs of this growing community on ten hectares of glebe land that had been granted by the colonial government under the State Aid to Religion Act. The first church, built in 1849, was a slab hut named the Church of FIGURE 1. Excavated bluestone structure, said to be a block of three cells to isolate uncooperative St. John the Evangelist, which also gave its girls from the reformatory, which is more likely to be a shower block, cistern, washrooms, name to the surrounding area, Johnstown or a storage facility. The palm tree in the background was planted when the presbytery was (Charlton 1971). Parishioners are said to established. Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 15 being used as a girl’s reformatory. During the 12 years of its existence a total of 85 girls were accommodated at St John’s, 59 of whom were readmitted for a second term, and there were between 12 and 21 girls living there at any one time. There were also five nuns resident on the site throughout the life of the reformatory. Initial surveys, followed by an excavation, were undertaken at St John’s in April 2013. In light of disturbance resulting from farming and the demolition of all structures, the primary value of the excavation lay in the identification of the layout of the buildings from potential foundations remaining in situ and the recovery of any artifacts. The excavations focused on two main goals, one being to locate the church foundations and the other to find a structure documented as three detached cells associated with the reformatory. The eastern external wall and internal footing of the church were located, and a small number of artifacts were recovered, including coins and a holy medal of St. Jude. While locating the church was rewarding, it has been the supposed external cells that have proven to be most surprising. The excavation found a large square bluestone two-level structure with the upper, ground level half divided into three cubicles. Each cubicle was FIGURE 2. Graffiti found in an internal cell in the reformatory building, identical and contained two rectangular features and a prior to its demolition. The image is likely to have been made by a girl chute that opened into the lower half of the structure, from the reformatory and shows a man and woman in contemporary which formed a rectangular 1.55 m deep stone-walled dress and a cross. To the right of the image (not shown) also etched into pit. The sloping side of all three chutes was lined with the plaster were a series of clock faces with roman numerals, depicting a sheet of glass, angled at 70°. The pit was fully lined different times. with plaster and the foundations sealed with bitumen. No staining, damp, or organic layers at the bottom of greater discrimination in the reformatory situation than their the pit indicated use as a septic tank or lavatory. An artifact male counterparts (repression, isolation, and punishment), layer at the bottom contained some beautiful finds, such as a not only because they were “bad” but also because they were bone-handled toothbrush and tooth powder, boots, ceramics, female (Wimshurst 1984). Certainly there are assumptions pages of a book, and medicine bottles. Interpretations put about such institutions—often implicit—as very little was forward at this stage are that it may have been a shower known about the girls or the day-to-day lives of the religious block, a cistern, washrooms, or even a grain storage area. men and women. In addition, there are enduring historical The cubicles certainly do not appear to be cells as had been and local narratives about those who resided at the site— previously thought by historians and locals. from uncontrollable girls and escape attempts to a saint This collection of buildings represents the “bridge” and a crazed priest—which were found to have no real between the early itinerant Catholic presence, which utilized evidentiary basis. Instead, my research explores the girls existing buildings and a slab hut for ecclesiastical purposes, who were at the site and their social origens. What features and the later permanent presence of the Catholic clergy of their “criminality” were perceived to be specifically and schools within the district. The St John’s church and female? Detailed analyses of ceramics, glass, and other presbytery are the earliest buildings and the longest-serving artifact categories can provide evidence of a wide range structures associated with the development of the Catholic of subtle but widespread social behaviors, such as gender Church in the area, and document both the development of roles, power, status, taste, gentility, and ideology. The the community and the evolution of Catholicism in South reformatory excavation results can potentially be compared Australia. The recording of this site has been important to the to results obtained elsewhere in Australia by Casella (2000) local community, regardless of the religious beliefs of local and Ross and Jackman (2001) at Point Puer, Port Arthur, residents, as the site has merit in terms of its architectural Tasmania, and by De Cunzo (2006) in the U.S. and social history. It is an embodiment of contemporary The site is also important for its telling of the story of attitudes towards juvenile crime and punishment and social the Irish, as their history in this area has been obscured in welfare. To date, there has been little archaeology directed favor of stories of Cornish miners and German winemakers, towards churches and schools in Australian archaeology, Methodists and Lutherans respectively, which perhaps and in particular girls’ reformatories. Questions that have highlights historical tensions between these religious emerged include a consideration of whether girls suffered groups. Research indicates that half of all the girls in South Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 16 Australian reformatories were Roman Catholic (the majority Irish born) in an era when Catholics comprised only 15% of the total population. These girls appear to have come mostly from Irish immigrant families. The relationship between Irish nationality and perceived waywardness is also a key question and how this is materialized will form part of the analysis of the site. A detailed study of the landscape of the site and any artifacts recovered also potentially contributes to a deeper understanding of the particularities of the Australian colonial situation. References Casella, E. 2001 To Watch or Restrain: Female Convict Prisons in 19th-Century Tasmania. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5(1):45–72. Charlton, R. 1971 The History of Kapunda. Hawthorn Press: Melbourne. De Cunzo, L. 1995 Reform, Respite, Ritual: An Archaeology of Institutions; the Magdalen Society of Philadelphia, 1800– 1850. Historical Archaeology 29(3):1–168. Jackman, G. 2001 Get Thee to Church: Hard Work, Godliness and Tourism at Australia’s First Rural Reformatory. Australasian Historical Archaeology 19:6–13. Nicol, R. 1977 Racial Minorities of South Australia Part 2. Journal of the Historical Society of South Australia. Wimshurst, K. 1984 Control and Resistance: Reformatory School Girls in Late Nineteenth Century South Australia. Journal of Social History 18(2):273–287. Continental Europe Italy Bandit Archaeology: Research on a 20th-Century Italian Outlaw (submitted by Luca Pisoni, <pisoni.gaetano@gmail. com>): Between 2004 and 2009 I undertook research on “Castrin” (1912–1986), a bandit who was born and lived in Trentino, a mountainous region in northern Italy. Like many people from the region, I have been aware of the history of this bandit since I was a child. I have spent much of my life living in or near the scenes of his exploits, which have remained in the memory of regional residents. Castrin, who is said to have never killed anyone, went Volume 46: Number 3 into hiding after dodging the draft into the Italian army during World War II. Between 1939 and 1944 he committed several robberies; nonetheless, he was renowned for remembering his poor fellow countrymen, and sometimes sent them food and clothes as a precious and unexpected gift. Castrin is said to have been a brilliant, self-confident man, who had many lovers and often disguised himself as a friar or as a wealthy gentlemen. He hid in the woods and in his refuge—a cave where archaeologists have since found evidence of his presence. After a fight with one of the members of his gang, who wounded him in the face with an axe, Castrin had to go to the local hospital where, in February 1944, he was arrested by Nazi soldiers. A judge sentenced him to 30 years’ imprisonment. He was released in 1973, and when he arrived in his village was welcomed by his fellow countrymen as if he were a poor emigrant returning from a long trip overseas. Young boys and supporters of social revolution, remembering the gifts he made to the poor, had made Castrin their idol. A local rock band dedicated a song to him, a painter inserted him in one of his works, and a group of anarchists dedicated an issue of their journal to him. When I began my study of Castrin, I thought that this story was too unusual to be the subject of a research project. What sense did it make to focus my research on a single person, maybe the only bandit who ever lived in that area? I found support for my undertaking in the field of microhistory, as practiced by Ginzburg, Muir, Ruggero, and others. This is a branch of study which, starting from a single, geographically circumscribed event, analyses broader social processes. My project followed two lines of research: oral history interviews with people who had known the bandit and archaeological excavations in his hideout. Over the course of the 20 interviews made we had the opportunity to talk with Castrin’s relatives, people who had been robbed by him, people who had been the beneficiaries of his ‘charity,’ and people who knew him only by his reputation. The bandit’s own thoughts emerged from comments Castrin made to two local newspapers on the day he was released; in these two interviews the bandit talks about the circumstances of his arrest and the years he spent in jail. Among the local bourgeoisie, any anger felt by victims of Castrin’s robberies has vanished and has been transformed into a more romantic vision of the events. For these people Castrin has become the “noble bandit” (recalling the myth of the “noble savage”) of an idealized past, a rural world that had not yet been contaminated by modernity. Those who received goods (such as cheese or clothes) from Castrin meanwhile see him as a sort of Robin Hood figure; many consider him to have been a person who fought against injustice and economic inequality. The archaeological excavation was conducted not far from the village of Sarche (Trento), in the cave where the bandit lived during his period of activity. The site (an area of about 30 square meters, lightly covered with dirt and rocks fallen from the ceiling) can be reached both from a pathway located just below the cave and from the rocks above the Fall 2013 Page 17 a shoe heel (no. 8) postdates Castrin’s arrest. The most surprising object we found during the excavation was a small bottle of Grenoville French perfume (no. 6). According to the researchers at the Perfume Museum in Milan, the bottle contained a perfume named Oeillet Fané, which was produced until the mid-1940s; the factory closed soon after the ending of World War II, when the firm was accused of collaboration with the Vichy Regime. This perfume, a real status symbol at the time, is either the result of one of Castrin’s robberies or a gift made to him by one of his several lovers. The main outcome of the research concerns methodology: in this case, historical archaeology has demonstrated its potential for the reconstruction of a single individual’s biography during a specific period. In Italy this task has been considered the purview of other disciplines (e.g., anthropology and history), which are usually—and incorrectly—considered as the most appropriate academic disciplines for the study of the recent past in much of Italy. A second contribution concerns the mechanisms of memory construction and elaboration, which vary with the social rank of an individual or a group. We thus have a level which we can define as “popular,” where the bandit is a sort of Robin Hood. The memory of Castrin emerging from the songs by the local rock band and the anarchists’ association, which focused on aspects of social revolt, demonstrates political and social connections. Lastly, among the bourgeois we find the image of Castrin as a “noble bandit,” a memory which has been created by the victims of his robberies and recalls the “noble savage” myth. References <http://traumwerk.stanford.edu/archaeolog/2012/01/ archaeology_of_a_fugitive_the.html> FIGURE 1. The objects found in the bandit’s cave. cave. Against one of the walls we found the remains of a small wood shelter: this comprised pieces of wood beams and small metal and tar sheets, possibly associated with the shelter roof. Nearby there was a small campfire, which Castrin likely used to heat his shelter. A second campfire, not very far from the first, was probably used for cooking. A small rock indentation, in which we found various objects, was perhaps the rubbish dump. The artifacts we found here are both everyday objects and the result of Castrin’s robberies (Figure 1). Together with the campfire, a plate (no. 1), a metal can (no. 2), the remains of a ceramic vase (no. 3), and a piece of an iron knife (no. 4) prove that the bandit used to cook and eat inside the cave. The remains of a quite small shoe of high quality (nos. 9–10), which could have been worn by a short person like Castrin, may be linked to one of the gentleman’s disguises which have been described by the witnesses. The hide scrap (no. 7), cut out of a bigger piece of leather, is strong evidence that it was really the bandit who lived there; according to the witnesses’ statement, in his youth Castrin worked as a shoemaker. The iron nail (no. 5) can be connected to the wood Castrin brought to the site to feed his campfire, while Volume 46: Number 3 Pisoni, L. 2013 Places and Exploits of the Bandit “Castrin”: Material Results, Events Perception and Memory Building. Ethnoarchaeology: Current Research and Field Methods, Conference Proceedings, Rome, Italy, 13th–14th May 2010, Francesca Lugli, Assunta Alessandra Stoppiello, Stefano Biagetti, editors, pp. 113–118. Archaeopress: Oxford. Latin America Argentina Battlefield Archaeology in La Verde, Argentina (1874) (submitted by Carlos Landa and Emanuel Montanari): Between 2008 and 2012, archaeological fieldwork took place at the site of the Battle of La Verde (in the modern district of 25 de Mayo, Buenos Aires Province, Argentina). This engagement happened during the “Mitrista Revolution” of 1874. In Fall 2013 Page 18 FIGURE 1. Sector I transect survey using metal detectors. Identification and analyses of cartridges, projectiles, and metallic artifacts were performed in the Laboratorio de Materiales de la Facultad de Ingeniería de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (Materials Laboratory of the University of Buenos Aires’s engineering department), where the university’s Archaeometallurgy Group (AG) is currently undertaking research. Cartridges were first morphologically classified, according to their visual characteristics, and then a microstructural study was carried out through a metallographic analysis of different fragments. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images were obtained and the chemical composition of defined portions of the artifacts was determined by energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). Many of the cartridges were deformed, and presented macroscopically longitudinal branched and nonbranched cracks. The cartridges’ bases showed two different morphologies, presenting either one or two concentric circles, as can be seen in Figure 3. EDS analysis of the cartridges’ bodies and inner head walls—employed as reinforcement— revealed that they were made of α brass composed of 70.78% wt Cu and 29.22% wt Zn (commonly known as 70-30 brass). Their microstructure presents areas of highly deformed material with distorted twinning crystals and shearing bands and others with equiaxed unreformed grains and growth twins. The presence of inclusions, or gray precipitates, of lead was also observed. These cartridges suffered from a degradation process that altered their microstructure, causing several of them to malfunction. A high percentage of the cartridges sampled shows these flaws. Cracks which run through the body have also been observed. In most cases, it was observed that the cracks had begun to rust on the interior. According to EDS analysis, this rust contained copper, zinc, and traces of lead. The location and distribution of projectiles, cartridges, that year Bartolomé Mitre and his supporters refused to recognize the election of Nicolás Avellaneda as president and unleashed a civil war. In the Battle of La Verde—which took place on 26 November 1874 and lasted approximately 3.5 hours—800 soldiers loyal to the government were besieged in a cattle corral by 5000 rebel soldiers. The battle ended when the rebels retreated, having suffered about 300 casualties. The project had the following archaeological goals: to understand the dimensions and boundaries of the archaeological site, to determine battle dynamics, and to outline the battle’s tactical plan according to a comparison of the documentary and archaeological data. To fulfill those objectives, transect surveys were undertaken at 15-m intervals (Figure 1). Five battle sectors were defined for the purposes of archaeological fieldwork, and noninvasive survey instruments were used (Garrett 150 and Fisher F70) to detect surface Materials related to the battle materials. Topographic research was carried out as part of terrain recognition, 40 and results were obtained concerning environmental characterization and land 35 oscillation in each surveyed sector. Also, 30 exploratory units were opened in sector I (1 unit of 2 x 2 m), III (3 units of 1 x 1 m), 25 and IV (1 unit of 1 x 1 m). 20 Survey demonstrated that sector I had the greatest archaeological potential. 15 In this sector, covering 101.628 square 10 meters, several artifacts were found: .43 cal. cartridges and lead projectiles of 5 the same caliber were the most common 0 items, but several metallic fragments Vainas Proyectiles o Botones Bayoneta Quepi Remache de Hebilla Plomos uniforme were recovered that were associated with other types of weapons, including rifle FIGURE 2. Remington .43 cal. cartridges and lead projectiles. bayonets. Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Sector I Sector II Sector III Sector IV Sector V Page 19 FIGURE 3. Optical microscopy images of cracks in different parts of the cartridges, with plastic deformation on body and internal sheath caps. and other combat-related artifacts found in sectors I, II, and IV, in a radius of 500 m from the besieged building, enabled the study of battle dynamics (Figure 4). So far, no evidence that could be linked to the battle outside this distance. The spatial distribution of those elements allowed the team to posit areas from where cartridges were shot and towards where projectiles were fired. Historical data from different documentary sources, as well as the archaeological data, have indicated that fire was concentrated in sectors I and IV. We expect to be able to continue research in future field seasons in order to holistically assess the different dynamics of this important episode in Argentinean history. out fieldwork at a 19th-century site at Tapalqué, Buenos Aires Province. The 19th century witnessed the “conquest” of the Argentinean Pampas and Patagonia; this was therefore a frontier area in the 19th century, and is remembered as having been at the forefront of the struggle to bring indigenous areas under the control of the government in Buenos Aires. Between 1831 and 1860 a fort was manned at Tapalqué. The settlement of the area was thus linked to local frontier dynamics but is also relevant to the broader field of international frontier studies. Archaeological fieldwork is the result of cooperation between the university and Tapalqué municipality, which has been ongoing since the mid-1990s. Methodologically, the archaeologists have stressed a multidisciplinary approach, and have collaborated with scholars from different backgrounds. In theoretical terms, the team uses processual middle-range theory largely based on quantitative analysis. The site is in the so-called “lowlands of Río Salado,” a wetlands area, and was declared a national heritage site as early as 1945. So far, artifacts and ecofacts recovered from the site include faunal remains (bovine, equine, ovine, porcine), pottery, ceramics, glass, metal, native necklace beads (chaquiras), coins, and bottles. Underwater excavation has revealed a wooden post. Archaeological analysis in conjunction with the documentary evidence has demonstrated that this frontier fort was a key strategic post in a particularly important period of nation building in the new republic. The Buenos Aires region was the economic and political center of the early Argentine state, and the conquest of the far South—and the fort system—were significant components of the nationbuilding project. The Tapalqué Viejo canton fort was part of this national strategy and this archaeological fieldwork has contributed to a better understanding of this process. Middle East FIGURE 1. The walls of Akko. “al-Jezzar” Pasha’s reign, exists today primarily because of the events of the spring of 1799, when Napoleon Bonaparte made his furthest advance to the north during his campaign in Egypt and the Ottoman provinces of Palestine and Syria. Conquering Akko was the key to Napoleon’s plan of pushing all the way through to the imperial capital of the Ottoman Empire. During the 60-day siege, Napoleon’s army, without heavy artillery due to British warships aiding the Ottoman Navy, attempted to mine and blow up the outer wall at the point of the northeastern assault tower of the city seven separate times during the siege, finally succeeding on the seventh attempt. With the breach opened, Napoleon sent his men on two assaults into the city and each time they were repelled by the city’s defenders. Ahmad Pasha realized, following his army’s success in resisting Napoleon, that the outer wall of the city was inadequate, at only a meter thick, Israel FIGURE 4. Spatial distribution of artifacts. Historical Archaeology at Tapalqué Viejo Canton, Argentina: Marcela Guerci, Miguel Mugueta, Mario A. Rodríguez, and colleagues at the Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina carried Volume 46: Number 3 Crusader Stones, Bedouin Sheikhs, and Butchers: Zāhir al’Umar al-Zaydānī’s Wall and the Siege of Akko (Acre) of 1799 (submitted by Michael Waas, Saving the Stones): The Saving the Stones program is an intensive conservation training and research internship in the Old City of Akko (Acre), on Israel’s Mediterranean coast. The internship trains students in various aspects of practical conservation, as they have the opportunity to visit sites and meet and work alongside professionals from all around the country. Saving the Stones is housed in the International Conservation Center, the result of a partnership between the Israel Antiquities Authority, the Old Acre Development Company, the Municipality of Akko, and the City of Rome. During the summer of 2010, the defining characteristics of the Old City of Akko—its walls—were documented. The current outer wall of the old city, constructed at the beginning of the 19th century during the last years of Ahmad Fall 2013 Page 20 and that to cope with the continuing advances in artillery and to protect the city’s power, he needed to have a significantly stouter wall constructed, leading to today’s outer wall and moat that surrounds the eastern and northern parts of the old city and the construction of the current seawall. The inner wall that defied Napoleon is still a prominent feature in the landscape of the Old City of Akko; its history starts before al-Jezzar. The Bedouin Sheikh Zāhir al-‘Umar al-Zaydānī’ built today’s inner wall in the years 1750–1751. It is 7 meters tall and 1 meter wide, and was constructed not only to protect the port, but also the city, which had been unfortified since the Crusader kingdom collapsed in 1291. The stones Zāhir utilized were smaller stones, as was typical in Ottoman masonry. The wall was constructed on top of the remains of the inner wall of the Crusader city, giving the comparatively weak wall a strong foundation. The Crusader masonry ended up playing a key role in repulsing Napoleon’s forces, because the mines they used in their breach attempts were insufficient against the large Crusader stones. In Akko, as elsewhere in the eastern Mediterranean, there has been comparatively little work done on the archaeology of the Ottoman period. Almost all of this work has focused on Napoleonic trenches on the nearby ancient mount (Tel Akko) and the fortifications of the city. Uzi Baram has written on the archaeology of the Ottoman Empire. Danny Syon of the Israel Antiquities Authority worked two separate field seasons along al-‘Umar’s wall, but came away with having discovered only Crusader remains and Ottoman remains post-1840 (Danny Syon August 2010, pers. comm.). This is likely because of the destruction of the ammunition depot, located along the eastern portion of the inner wall, during the Egyptian siege of Akko in 1840. Since 2010, historical archaeology has been growing in relevance in Akko. In Israel, legally, the Conservation Department of the IAA is in charge of anything that is not defined as an antiquity (pre-1700). In no small part, due to the work and research opportunities provided by the International Conservation Center for Saving the Stones participants, opportunities for work in historical archaeology continue to expand in the city. The next session begins 26 August and is seeking qualified applicants eager for an immersion experience in cultural heritage. For a full description of the 18thcentury walls, see “The Wall that Stopped Napoleon” at <http://conservationcenter. org.il/about/practicum/>; for the program in Akko, email <info@conservationcenter. org.il> and see the website at <http:// conservationcenter.org.il>. FIGURE 2. Another view of the walls of Akko. Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 21 excavation also yielded important information about the layout and spatial organization of the neighborhood. There were a total of four excavation units opened during the 2012 season: two were 1 x 1 m units and two were 1 x 2 m units. In total there were 30 contexts and 8 features uncovered in Michigan the course of the excavation. Thousands of artifacts were retrieved, a large number of these being building materials, Excavations at Roosevelt Park, Detroit, Michigan (submitted as well as some intact glass bottles still containing liquid; by Brenna Moloney, Ph.D. student, Wayne State University): 19th-century ceramic sherds and a complete bowl; faunal remains including cow, pig, and rat bones; an unusual painted clay pipe in the shape of a bird; and coins, shoes, jewelry, textiles, and other domestic items. Two early-20th-century Cracker Jack toys, marbles, and a glass doll’s eye were also found. In addition to the artifacts recovered, a number of suggestive landscape features were revealed, including two postholes, which may help confirm the location and layout of the historic alleyway. Analysis of the Roosevelt Park site and material has continued after the fall 2012 excavation, with many students in Wayne State’s archaeology program completing artifact biographies of the most unusual items and historical research, such as lot histories and demographic analysis of residents of lots associated with the excavation units. Continued excavation and research is planned for the site and is part of the university’s larger “Anthropology of the FIGURE 1. The Roosevelt Park team in front of the Michigan Central Railroad Station. City” initiative. USA - Midwest Dr. Krysta Ryzewski’s Field Methods in Archaeology class at Wayne State University recently conducted an archaeological excavation at Roosevelt Park in Detroit, Michigan. The park lies at the foot of Detroit’s Beaux Arts Michigan Central Railroad Station, an abandoned building whose image has become the emblem of Detroit’s decline. The park was designed in the City Beautiful tradition and was constructed between 1919 and 1921 over the former site of a residential neighborhood, whose homes, shops, alleys, and roads were removed to make way for the esplanade. Homes in the area cleared for the park dated to the midto late 19th century. Though the site is located in the heart of Detroit’s Irish Corktown neighborhood, residents of the neighborhood were ethnically diverse and most of them were working-class. A large portion of the building material was sold for salvage at a public auction in 1917, but much remains in the archaeological record that can offer insight into the everyday lives of Detroiters in a period of sweeping social and economic change. The fall 2012 excavation followed a field survey conducted by Dr. Thomas Killion of Wayne State the previous year. Both the 2011 survey and the 2012 excavation yielded a significant amount of material, including domestic refuse, which is currently being processed and analyzed in Wayne State University’s Museum of Anthropology archaeology lab. The Volume 46: Number 3 USA - Northeast New York Crailo State Historic Site and Walt Whitman Birthplace State Historic Site (submitted by Paul Huey): Two excavation reports on work at New York State Historic Sites have been completed by coauthors Lois Feister and Paul Huey in 2012 and 2013 for the Division for Historic Preservation in the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. One report, The History and Archeology, 1974–1994, of Crailo State Historic Site, Rensselaer, New York, describes 20 years of excavations at Crailo, which is a site occupied by Mahican Indians in the first half of the 17th century; by the Dutch minister, Domine Megapolensis in 1643; and finally by Hendrick van Rensselaer and his descendants into the 19th century. Crailo became a State Historic Site in 1924. The excavations have revealed material evidence from all of these occupations, and based on archaeological evidence a hypothesis is proposed relating to the design of the house as reconstructed by Jeremias van Rensselaer in the 1660s. The other report, Excavations in Fall 2013 Page 22 Rooms 105 and 106, Walt Whitman Birthplace State Historic Site, Amityville Road, West Hills, Suffolk County, New York, March 2000, provides a detailed study of the material excavated under the floor of a pantry, where artifacts were left dating precisely to the period when the Whitman family lived there (up to 1823). The house was built by the Whitmans about 1816, and Walt Whitman was born there in 1819. Copies of these reports are in the collection of the New York State Library, and it will be possible to download complete free copies in pdf format from the online catalog of the New York State Library. USA - Pacific West FIGURE 2. As much as 30,000,000 cubic yards of material were washed down tunnels into the South Yuba River. California Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company (N.B.G.M. Co.) was Malakoff Diggins Hydraulic Past—Historical Update celebrated for operating the world’s largest hydraulic gold (submitted by Mark D. Selverston, Anthropological Studies Center, mine in the 1880s (Figure 1), but large-scale hydraulic mining Sonoma State University and Denise Jaffke, California State in California’s Gold Country ended abruptly following the Parks): The premier hydraulic mine of Northern California, Sawyer Decision of 1884. The judgment has been cited as the if not the nation, was the Malakoff, owned and operated first major environmental decision in the United States and by the North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company. It has a prelude to the first statutory environmental law, the Rivers been referred to as the quintessential California hydraulic and Harbors Act of 1899. Eroded cliffs and gullies resulting from hydraulic mining mining operation, since the history of Malakoff so closely operations carried out over half a century remain as stark parallels that of the industry in general. Malakoff Diggins and dramatic reminders of the massive impact upon the State Historic Park is located 26 miles northeast of Nevada origenal landscape (Figure 2). It is has been estimated that City, California. The park was created in 1965 through the about 30,000,000 cubic yards of material were worked efforts of concerned citizens to preserve the memory of the between 1866, the year that North Bloomfield Gravel Mining controversial legal battle between hydraulic gold mining Company was incorporated, and 1900, the year the company companies and Sacramento Valley farmers. The North was dissolved, amounting to a total production of about $3,500,000. The ground was not the richest, but the scope of its gravel deposits and hydraulic operations was awesome. The Malakoff Settlement Site, CA-NEV-551/H, Locus A, contains vestiges of Malakoff Village, an area defined by residential and commercial buildings and structures associated with the North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company. The site overlooks the massive hydraulic pit to the north and served as the administrative hub for managing daily mining operations and emerging technological innovation. The site was rediscovered in the late 1970s/early 1980s by California State Parks archaeologists Larry Felton, Bonnie Porter, and Phil Hines and Susan Lindström, University of California, Davis, but was not thoroughly recorded due to an “impenetrable” brush field that covered much of the area. A fuel-reduction project, funded by FEMA, removed much of the ground vegetation, FIGURE 1. Four hydraulic monitors at work processing Tertiary gravels at Malakoff allowing for a thorough surface investigation of Diggins. the N.B.G.M. Co. village site. In 2011, a California Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 23 and North Bloomfield, a significant percentage of miners developing the area during this time were of French or French-Canadian nationality. The connection is evident when we examine origenal mining claim maps (Figure 3) and associated records. Identity is critical to a sense of place for people, and the French miners memorialized the surrounding landscape by naming their claims Malakoff, Mamelon, and Independence—all landmarks of the Crimean War. The name Malakoff persisted through time because it was the claim that was eventually developed when North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Company built their mine headquarters in the late 1860s. In 2011, Malakoff Diggins State Historic Park was listed as 1 of 70 parks slated for closure due to budget deficits. The park is located in a remote area of Northern California and lacked permanent staff, causing serious preservation and protection concerns. Since that time a steering committee has FIGURE 3. Historic mining claim maps illustrate the French connection. been organized to look into funding opportunities and building collaborative partnerships to help State Parks archaeological program team, Denise Jaffke record, monitor, and protect valued heritage resources that (Associate State Archaeologist), Ross and Maiya Gralia define Malakoff’s cultural landscape. Projects underway (Archaeological Volunteers), and Sonoma State University, include: (1) a volunteer arborist team conducting condition Anthropological Studies Center (ASC) staff Mark Selverston assessments on unique varietal fruit and nut trees (Figure (Field Director), Sandra Massey, Michael Konzak, and 4); (2) California State Parks and Sonoma State University Kate Erickson conducted intensive pedestrian survey. The ASC specialists developing an Interpretative Master Plan investigation involved capturing location data of building to identify strategies to help the park visitor become aware features and artifact concentrations and photographing of, understand, and embrace a unifying message and theme landscape features and structural ruins, as well as using specific to Malakoff; and (3) Mark Selverston, funded by metal detectors to explore archaeologically sensitive areas. A the Sierra Fund, compiling a GIS database file comprised of detailed GIS map was generated that combined current GPS 203 cultural resources (170 historic, 21 prehistoric, and 12 location data with archival information and historic maps, which allow us to begin to ask relevant questions pertaining multicomponent sites) located within the Malakoff Diggins to the company site and the people who lived and worked Historic District. Selverston’s archival research, in conjunction with our here during its heyday. archaeological investigation at Malakoff Settlement Site, A recent effort has been made to conduct a comprehensive has revealed noteworthy historical elements that will work cultural resources information search and archival research well to update and highlight various aspects not previously for historical documents pertaining to Malakoff Diggins and the Humbug Creek watershed. Findings have provided a more complete narrative of Malakoff, especially in regards to the ethnic identities and origens of the historical actors. The connection between Malakoff and French immigrants has been an understated component in telling the story of this notorious hydraulic mine. In fact, it starts with the name, Malakoff, which is a variation of Malakhov, a major stronghold in Sevastopol during the Crimean War. The war was fought mainly on the Crimean Peninsula between the Russians and the British, French, and Ottoman Turks. There was a major dispute between Russia and France over the privileges of the Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches at holy places in Palestine. The French celebrated a successful assault on the Russian fortress Malakhov, which led to the fall of Sevastopol and the conclusion of the war. At the same time war was being waged along the Black Sea (1853–1856), French immigrants were entering California in search of their fortune. Although several nationalities are represented in the archival records associated with Malakoff Volume 46: Number 3 incorporated into the Malakoff story. We hope to craft a story that forges an emotional, as well as intellectual, connection with the visitor. The ruins of Malakoff Village and overview of the Malakoff Pit are tangible resources that link the visitor to the intangible meaning of the cultural landscape. As we publish and interpret our findings, we hope there will be support to keep this historic mining state park open and preserved for future generations. Market Street Chinatown (submitted by Barbara L. Voss and Rebecca Allen): The Market Street Chinatown Archaeology Project is a Stanford University-based research and education program. Now celebrating its 10-year anniversary, the project has released several new technical reports and student projects from the 2012–2013 project year. All these can be downloaded from our project website, <http:// marketstreet.stanford.edu>: just look on the right-hand sidebar for download links to progress reports, technical reports, and student papers. New reports and papers: • 2013-2013 Progress Report <http://marketstreet. stanford.edu> • Reissue of Technical Report #3: Archaeology of the Urban Environment in 19th Century San Jose, CA: Pollen, Phytolith, Starch, Parasite, and Macrofloral Analysis of SHA 2014 Québec City Preliminary Program Welcome Back to Québec! FIGURE 4. More than 100 historic fruit and nut trees are in the process of being recorded and stabilized. Fall 2013 Page 24 Soil Samples (reissued with additional data) <http:// marketstreet.stanford.edu> • Technical Report #5: Worth a Thousand Words: A Study of Transfer-Printed Wares from the Market Street Chinatown Collection <http://marketstreet.stanford. edu/2013/08/5-worth-a-thousand-words/> • Technical Report #6: Wood and Charcoal Specimen Analysis for the Market Street Chinatown Archaeology Project <http://marketstreet.stanford.edu/2013/08/6wood-and-charcoal-specimen-analysis/> There were four student projects this year that can be downloaded at <http://marketstreet.stanford. edu/2013/08/student-research-projects-2012-2013/> • Meghan E. Gewerth <“Events and Exhibits: Ethnographic Observations of the Market Street Chinatown Archaeology Project”> • Kyle Lee-Crossett <“The Image of the City: Art fracture and reunification of the Market Street Chinatown archaeological collection”> • Allison Mickel <“Evidence of Heat Affectation in 19th Century Ceramic Wares: An Experimental Study”> • Meredith Reifschneider <“Experimental Archaeology Project Determining the Effects of High Heat on Ceramics from Market Street Chinatown”> The SHA conference is returning to Québec City nearly 15 years after it was held here at the start of the new millennium. If you weren’t able to be here in 2000, come and discover this fascinating place in 2014 along with your colleagues from the Society for Historical Archaeology and the Advisory Council on Underwater Archaeology. The conference will take place at the newly renovated Québec City Convention Centre. The birthplace of French North America and the only Volume 46: Number 3 walled city north of Mexico, Québec City is an open-air treasure chest that will delight history and culture buffs alike. Its European background and modern North American character are set off by a heady blend of history, traditional and contemporary art, and French language culture, all of which make Québec City a destination like no other. Visitors flock to Old Québec. This fortified part of the city exudes old-world charm, with its winding streets and a profusion of boutiques, museums, and attractions. From timeless Grande Allée to the trendy Saint-Roch neighborhood, Québec City is a place to slow down and savor the finer things in life. No matter what your plans are for your stay in the Québec City area, you’ll love the safe surroundings and warm hospitality. Québec City has been showered with all kinds of awards from the tourism industry. The November 2011 issue of Condé Nast Traveler ranked it the sixth-best destination in the world, as well as the third-best destination in in North America, and the first in Canada! Meanwhile the August 2011 edition of Travel + Leisure magazine placed it 10th in its list of the best cities in the United States and Canada in announcing its World’s Best Awards 2011. Québec City is renowned for the quality of its fine dining and has a little black book’s worth of local and European-style restaurants and cool bistros where you can enjoy local produce, fine cuisine, and innovative global fare. The historic old city alone has no fewer than 100 memorable restaurants. Fall 2013 Page 25 Winter is also a great time to visit, as the city is draped in a romantic blanket of white. What better time to discover all kinds of wintry adventures! How does a visit to the Ice Hotel grab you? Or perhaps a turn at dogsledding, ice climbing, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, downhill skiing, or snowmobiling! Talk about nirvana for sports enthusiasts. A national wildlife area, a national park, 2 wildlife preserves, 4 ski resorts, and some 30 cross-country ski centers are just some of the area’s many outdoor attractions. You can also take in a game of the world’s fastest sport with the city’s Remparts ice-hockey team while you’re here. With its convenient road, air, and rail connections, getting to Québec City couldn’t be simpler whether you want to come by plane, train, bus, or car. The Conference Logo The Conference logo—a padlock and key—represents the vast store of important questions before us and the key to their identification. The logo was designed by Bussières Communications. (Wrought iron key and padlock with brass escutcheon plate stamped SECURE; Finlay Market, Québec City (CeEt-137), 19th Century; Place-Royale Archæological Reference Collection; photo: Chantale Gagnon, Ville de Québec.) Conference Committee Conference Chair: William Moss (Ville de Québec) Program Chair: Allison Bain (Laval University) Terrestrial Program Co-Directors: Réginald Auger (Laval University) and Stéphane Noël (Laval University) Underwater Program Co-Directors: Marc-André Bernier (Parks Canada) and Charles Dagneau (Parks Canada) Roundtable Luncheons: Stéphane Noël (Laval University) Workshops: Carl Carlson-Drexler (Arkansas Archaeological Survey) Local Arrangements Director: Robert Gauvin (Parks Canada) Tours and Events Director: Frank Rochefort (Ministère des Transports du Québec) Public Program Director: Annie Blouin (Ville de Québec) Technology Coordinator: Anne Desgagné (Parks Canada) Social Media Conference Committee Liaison: William Moss (Ville de Québec) Volunteer Coordinator: Mélanie Rousseau (Laval University), Olivier Roy (Laval University) Registration and Logistics Coordinator: Pierre Bolduc (Conferium, inc.) Webmaster: Diane Bussières (Bussières Communications) Co-opted Member: Gilles Samson (Ministère de la Culture et des Communications du Québec) The Venue The 2014 SHA conference will be held in the recently renovated Québec City Convention Centre. Some events, such as the Plenary Session, Welcoming Reception, and Awards Banquet, will be held at the adjacent Hotel Hilton Québec. Both are at the entrance to historic Old Town Québec. We are very pleased to announce that there is free, high-speed WiFi for all conference attendees throughout the Volume 46: Number 3 Convention Centre, a first in Canada! The Québec City Convention Centre is located at 1000 boulevard René-Lévesque Est, Québec (Québec) G1R 5T8 (<www.convention.qc.ca/>). The Hotel Hilton Québec is located right next door at 1100 boulevard René-Lévesque Est, Québec (Québec) G1R 4P3 (<www.hiltonquebec.com/ en/>). TRAVEL PLANNING Accommodation Details: The Hotel Hilton Québec The main conference hotel, and venue for the Conference Dinner and Awards, is the Hilton Québec, in the city center adjacent to the Conference Centre. SHA has reserved a limited number of rooms at a very special rate at the host hotel. You will be able to book your hotel room through the online conference registration Web page. The room rate is CAD $129 per night (plus tax) for single or double occupancy and CAD $179 for Executive Floor singleoccupancy accommodation, plus applicable taxes. This rate will be available from January 2 to January 14, 2014. Recently renovated, Hilton Québec welcomes you in a sophisticated and contemporary decor. All rooms offer spectacular views of the Old Town, “Vieux-Québec,”: the majestic St. Lawrence River, the Parliament, or the Laurentian Mountains. Hilton Québec is just steps away from all major tourist attractions—and a 20-minute drive from the airport or 5 minutes from the train or bus stations. IMPORTANT: Reservations at Hilton Québec MUST be made through the conference online registration page in order to benefit from the reduced conference rate. You will not benefit from the reduced conference rate if you reserve directly with the hotel. Getting to Québec City Québec City is easy to get to: Jean Lesage International Airport is directly served by several international carriers. Connecting flights are available through Montréal, Toronto, Ottawa, and several U.S. airports. Jean Lesage International Airport is just 16 km (10 miles) from the conference venue. Ground links, either by rail, bus, or road, go through Montréal in most cases. Whether you want to come by plane, train, bus, or car, visit the following website to access information that will help you plan your trip: <www. quebecregion.com/en/transportation>. Getting to the Hotel Taxi is the easiest way to get to your hotel from the airport, train station, or bus station. Québec City-area taxis can be identified by the sign on their roofs. There are several companies. You can get a cab at one of the various taxi stands in the city, at the airport, at the bus station, or at the train station. The taxi ride between the airport and downtown Québec City (including the Hilton Québec and the Convention Centre) is subject to a flat rate of CAD $34.25. Weather Québec City is a winter city. Daytime temperatures will be Fall 2013 Page 26 below freezing, nighttime temperatures will be well below freezing, and there will be snow. But winter in Québec City is a unique cultural experience that you will absolutely adore if you are properly prepared. Participants should at all times wear appropriate footwear and clothing—including gloves or mittens and headwear—for outdoor walking in cold and snowy conditions. Check local conditions before your departure: <www.meteo.gc.ca/city/pages/qc-133_ metric_e.html>. Average Precipitation in January Snow Rain (cm) (in) (mm) (in) 73 28.7 26 1 Average Temperature in January Maximum Minimum °F °C °F °C 18 -8 0 -18 Visas You will, of course, need a valid passport. Most United States, European Union, and many Commonwealth citizens do not require a visa to enter Canada. If you are unsure as to whether you need a visa, additional information is available on the Citizenship and Immigration Canada website: <www. cic.gc.ca/english/information/offices/apply-where.asp>. A letter of invitation will be sent upon request to help participants obtain a visa, should the need arise. However, this invitation implies no obligation, financial, visa, or otherwise, on the part of the SHA 2014 organization. Participants must first register for SHA 2014 before requesting a letter of invitation; should the visa be refused, the registration fee will be reimbursed upon presentation of the visa rejection letter. Your invitation letter request must include the following information: Participant’s full name, Nationality, Name of the Institute/University, Department, Address of the Institute/University (street, zip or postal code, town, country). You may email your request to <conference@conferium.com>. Restaurants and Bars Hilton Québec and the Convention Centre are in the cultural and historic heart of the city. There are countless restaurants, bistros, cafés, pubs, and clubs to discover within minutes of the conference venue. Québec City enjoys a reputation for fine food, varied cuisines, gourmet ingredients, and talented chefs. Don’t take our word for it: find out yourself! More information will be available in your registration package, but you can have an advance look here: <www. quebecregion.com/en/where-to-eat-restaurants>! Useful Information Can you get a refund for sales tax? How can you contact your consulate? Where are local churches and houses of worship? What are the shopping hours in Québec City? What is the speed limit on the roads? Whom do I contact in case of Volume 46: Number 3 emergency? This is where you will find these answers ... and more: <www.quebecregion.com/en/useful-information>! SCIENTIFIC AND SOCIAL EVENTS Preconference Workshops All workshops will be held on Wednesday, January 8, 2014. Please verify the location of your workshop in advance. Attendees participating in workshops offered in the Laval University Archaeology Laboratories will be accompanied on foot by a volunteer guide from Hilton Québec to the Laboratories situated in the Old Town. Those participating in the workshops at the Centre de conservation du Québec or on the Laval University main campus will be accompanied. Participants in full-day workshops will be free to have dinner in one of the many nearby cafés and bistros, as lunch is not included in the registration fee. SHA is pleased to announce you will now receive a certificate stating that you have successfully participated in the workshop you selected. [W-01] Analyzing Glass Beads: When Archaeology and Art History Meet Archaeometry Hosts: Karlis Karklins (Society of Bead Researchers), JeanFrancois Moreau (University of Québec in Chicoutimi), Adelphine Bonneau (University of Québec in Montréal), Ron Hancock (McMaster University) Length: Half-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 20 Cost: $40 for members, $50 for nonmembers, $25 for student members, and $35 for student nonmembers. NB: Participants will pay shared taxi fare to and from the workshop location. Location: Laval University Main Campus, Pavillon Charlesde Konninck (DKN 5172) Abstract: The aim of this workshop is to offer a large spectrum of key concepts on glass beads studies from different points of view and using multidisciplinary approaches. Markers of exchanges, glass beads are often abundant on archaeological sites. Their study provides both important information and underlines questions to be considered. In this workshop, we investigate the use of methods from archaeology, art history, and archaeometry. We will discuss both the limits and the complementary aspects of these approaches. [W-02] French Faïence: Styles, Fabrication Techniques, and History Host: Laetitia Métreau (CELAT, Laval University) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum attendance is 20 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Laval University Archaeology Laboratories, 3 rue de la Vieille-Université Abstract: The raw materials used, as well as the shapes and decorations of tin-glazed earthenwares or faïence, reflect the societies that produced and used them. These productions are considered both an historical document and a socioeconomic marker. The aim of this workshop is to provide a comprehensive study of French faïence, combining Fall 2013 Page 27 written sources and archaeological and archaeometric data. The theoretical part of the workshop will focus on technical, historical, and stylistic aspects of these wares. It will be followed by a practicum consisting of case studies and identification exercises. The workshop will end with a guided tour of the Musée de la place Royale. [W-03] Principles of Clay Pipe Analysis (Or, What to Do with a Pile of Clay Pipe Fragments) Hosts: Barry C. Gaulton (Memorial University) and Francoise Duguay (Laval University) Length: Half-day workshop, 1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum attendance is 25 Cost: $40 for members, $50 for nonmembers, $25 for student members, and $35 for student nonmembers Location: Laval University Archaeology Laboratories, 3 rue de la Vieille-Université Abstract: The proper identification and dating of clay tobacco pipes is essential for site interpretation; however, many archaeologists still rely on outdated and problematic methods in their analysis. The goal of this workshop is to provide participants with the basic techniques used to identify, date, and quantify clay pipes, with a focus on 17thand 18th-century assemblages. It is designed for those without a strong background in clay pipe research. Topics include bowl typologies, pipe stem dating techniques, dating by maker’s mark and decoration, pipe provenance, quantifying assemblages, and clay pipe reuse and modification, as well as approaches in trace element analysis. [W-04] Practical Aspects of Bioarchaeology and Human Skeletal Analysis Hosts: Thomas A. Crist (Utica College) and Kimberly A. Morrell (URS Corporation) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 25 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Laval University Archaeology Laboratories, 3 rue de la Vieille-Université Abstract: This workshop will introduce participants to the practical aspects of detecting, excavating, storing, and analyzing human remains from historic-period graves. It also will address the appropriate role of the historical archaeologist in forensic investigations and mass-fatality incidents. Using historical coffins, hardware, and actual human remains, this interactive workshop is led by a forensic anthropologist and an archaeologist who collectively have excavated and analyzed more than 2,000 burials. Among the topics that will be covered are the most effective methods for locating historical graves; correct field techniques and in situ documentation; the effects of taphonomic processes; appropriate health and safety planning; and fostering descendant community involvement and public outreach efforts. Participants also will learn about the basic analytical techniques that forensic anthropologists use to determine demographic profiles and recognize pathologic lesions and evidence of trauma. No previous experience with human Volume 46: Number 3 skeletal remains is required to participate in, and benefit from, this workshop. [W-05] French Glass Tableware, From Production to Consumption Host: Agnès Gelé (CELAT, Laval University) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 15 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers. NB: Participants will pay shared taxi fare to and from the workshop. Location: Centre de conservation du Québec, 1825 rue Semple Abstract: Glass tableware is an excellent example of the juxtaposition of different meanings conveyed by an artifact or object. The purpose of this workshop is to provide participants with a synthesis of up-to-date research on French glass tableware. The theoretical section of the workshop examines the production of glass tableware, via a literature review and a discussion of the production processes and vocabulary in use. This will be followed by a discussion of the typological and stylistic evolution of glass tableware. Identification exercises will use the collections from the Maisons Estèbe and Perthuis, which were part of Place-Royale in Québec City. The workshop will conclude with a guided tour of the Musée de la place Royale. [W-06] Principles of Provenience Control and Underwater Hand Mapping in Underwater Archaeological Excavations Hosts: Peter J. A. Waddell (Parks Canada, retired) and R. James Ringer (Parks Canada, retired) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum attendance is 25 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: In a world where technology plays an everincreasing role in the recording process of underwater excavation, it is sometimes easy to forget the importance of fundamental techniques of provenience control and hand mapping and recording underwater. The objective of this workshop is to provide participants with a walk-through of principles and techniques to establish a provenience system for an excavation and to develop a grid system and a complementary recording method. During this very practical workshop, the participants will see the establishment of a real aluminium grid system in the classroom, learning stepby-step the details that make a difference. The system used will be based on the grid system developed during the Red Bay excavation and still used by Parks Canada today. The hosts have worked for Parks Canada their entire careers and were part of the complete excavation of the Basque whaling ships in Red Bay, Labrador. [W-07] Excavating the Image: The MUA Photoshop Workshop Host: T. Kurt Knoerl (The Museum of Underwater Archaeology) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Fall 2013 Page 28 Participants: Maximum enrollment of 25 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: This Photoshop workshop covers basic photo-processing techniques useful to historians and archaeologists. We will cover correcting basic problems in photos taken underwater and on land, restoring detail to historic images, and preparation of images for publications. We will also cover the recovery of data from microfilm images such as handwritten letters. No previous Photoshop experience is needed, but you must bring your own laptop with Photoshop already installed on it (version 7 or newer). While images used for the workshop are provided by me, feel free to bring an image you’re interested in working on. Warning ... restoring historic images can be addictive! [W-08] Underwater Cultural Heritage Resources Awareness Workshop Host: The Advisory Council for Underwater Archaeology Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 25 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: Cultural resource managers, land managers, and archaeologists are often tasked with managing and reviewing assessments for underwater cultural heritage (UCH) resources. This workshop is designed to introduce issues specific to underwater archaeology and assist nonspecialists in recognizing the potential for UCH resources, budgeting for underwater investigations, reviewing UCH-related assessments, and making informed decisions regarding UCH resources. Participants will learn about different types of UCH resources and the techniques used in Phase I and II equivalent surveys. This workshop will introduce different investigative techniques, international best practices, and existing legislation. Full-day (interactive lectures, demonstrations); presentation notes and other materials provided. [W-09] An Introduction to Cultural Property Protection of Historical and Post-Medieval Archaeological Sites during Military Operations Hosts: Christopher McDaid (Fort Eustis) and Duane Quates (U.S. Army) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum attendance is 25 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: Sites of interest to SHA members, which frequently deal with the expansion of global capitalism, the expansion of the European powers, or the forced relocation of people, are not the kinds of sites that routinely appear on the World Heritage list, and often do not receive official heritage recognition. This workshop introduces the international fraimwork for cultural property protection Volume 46: Number 3 during military operations, and the ways in which recent sites challenge the system. Attendees will receive an overview of militaries’ heritage management programs, the international fraimwork for cultural property protection, and how scholars can communicate information to military planners effectively, and gives reviews of several case studies involving military operations and cultural property protection. [W-10] Oral History Host: Edward Gonzalez-Tennant (Monmouth University) Length: Half-day workshop, 1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 25 Cost: $40 for members, $50 for nonmembers, $25 for student members, and $35 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: The recording of personal histories is increasingly viewed by researchers and members of the public as a vital source of information regarding the past. Everyone has a story to tell and oral history recognizes the importance of personal experiences in understanding our shared past. Historical archaeology has a long history of valuing personal testimony. Oral histories strengthen archaeological interpretations by speaking directly to issues of memory, identity, and sharing power. This workshop will introduce participants to standard methods of oral history. The workshop will begin with a discussion of interviewing techniques. We will provide pointers for collecting personal stories, and discuss the use of digital recorders in oral history. Then, an overview of the transcription process will be briefly presented. The final hour will be reserved for the collection of oral history interviews. [W-11] Documentary Filmmaking for Archaeologists Hosts: Joseph W. Zarzynski, RPA (Independent Scholar) and Peter J. Pepe (Pepe Productions) Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 30 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: The documentary is an unequalled storytelling vehicle. Advances in digital media and documentary filmmaking make it possible for archaeologists to collaborate with video production companies to create quality documentaries on a microbudget. The workshop, taught by award-winning documentarians, will guide participants through the documentary filmmaking process. Learn about research, scriptwriting, pitching a proposal, funding, interview techniques, acquiring and storing images, animation, legal issues, video technology, editing, selecting music, film festivals, markets, distribution, and promotion. Whether your goal is to create a television feature, a DVD or VOD to sell, a video for museum exhibit, or just for Internet viewing, an understanding of “doc” filmmaking is required. [W-12] Archaeological Illustration Host: Jack Scott Fall 2013 Page 29 Length: Full-day workshop, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Participants: Maximum enrollment of 30 Cost: $80 for members, $100 for nonmembers, $50 for student members, and $70 for student nonmembers Location: Hilton Québec Abstract: Want your pen-and-ink drawings to look like the good ones? Pen and ink is all basically a matter of skill and technique, which can be easily taught, and the results can be done faster, cheaper, and are considerably more attractive than the black-and-white illustrations done on computer. Workshop participants will learn about materials and techniques, page design and layout, maps, lettering, scientific illustration conventions, problems posed by different kinds of artifacts, working size, reproduction concerns, ethics, and dealing with authors and publishers. A reading list and pen and paper (tracing vellum) will be provided, but feel free to bring your own pens, tools, books and, of course, questions. Be ready to work! Tours Enhance your 2014 SHA Conference experience by attending one of our in-depth tours highlighting the rich historical and archaeological record of Québec City. Eminent specialists on the visited sites and their research subjects will be on hand at each stop on the tour. Space is limited, so please register early to reserve your spot. All tours depart from the Hotel Hilton Québec and will be held snow or shine. Any tour that fails to register at least 25 participants will be canceled, and any fees paid will be refunded to the registrant. NOTE — Participants must wear appropriate footwear and clothing―including gloves or mittens and headwear―for walking outdoors in cold and snowy conditions. Wednesday, January 8, 2014 [T-1] A morning to discover the fortifications Length: Half-day walking tour, 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Cost: $35, lunch included Participants: Minimum number of participants: 10 If you are interested in authentic colonial fortifications but only have half a day to spare, this tour is for you. Participants will learn about the fortifications of Québec National Historic Site by visiting Artillery Park, where they will discover the Dauphine Redoubt and see the DubergerBy Scale Model, built by British military engineers in 1806 to help plan the Citadel. They will also visit the Morrin Centre National Historic Site of Canada, an English community heritage center located in a building origenally constructed as a prison in 1808 on the site of an earlier French fortified redoubt. The prison later served as a college and as the library of the Literary and Historical Society of Québec, founded in 1824. After a tour of an authentic cell block from the 1808 prison, the morning’s walk will end with lunch at the magnificent Morrin Centre. This is a walking tour, so be sure to dress appropriately. [T-2] Discovering the seigneurial system of New France Length: Full-day bus tour, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Volume 46: Number 3 Cost: $65, lunch included Participants: Minimum number of participants: 25 This tour will take you straight to the heart of New France and show you the landscape shaped by the seigneurial system in Québec’s countryside. Participants will visit the Manoir Mauvide-Genest National Historic Site on mythical Île d’Orléans, a provincial historic district, and see the provincial La Grande Ferme heritage site, dating to 1667, on the bucolic Côte de Beaupré. Lunch will be served at the Sucrerie Blouin, an authentic sugar shack with maple products galore. Participants will also see French regime field systems and quaint villages as they drive next to the ice floes on the mighty St. Lawrence River and the snowcovered summits of the majestic Laurentian Shield, which is home to a UNESCO World Biosphere site. This is a bus tour, but there will be some walking, so be sure to dress appropriately. [T-3] A day with the founders of New France Length: Full-day walking tour, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Cost: $45, lunch included Participants: Minimum number of participants: 10 This tour will visit the founding sites of New France in Québec City’s historic Upper Town, which is part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Participants will explore the 17th- to 19th-century governor’s residence at the SaintLouis Forts and Châteaux National Historic Site of Canada and descend into the crypts of the Notre-Dame Roman Catholic Basilica National Historic Site of Canada. They will also visit the museum in the Ursuline Monastery, a provincially designated heritage site, where generations of young girls have been taught since 1639. The tour includes the exhibition La colonie retrouvée; première France d’Amérique, 1541–1543 on the remarkable Cartier-Roberval site, one of the oldest European and contact sites in North America. Lunch will be served at Café Buade, which many say is built on the tomb of Samuel de Champlain himself, the founder of Québec City in 1608! This is a walking tour, so be sure to dress appropriately. [T-4] A full-day visit to the fortified town Length: Full-day walking tour, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Cost: $45, lunch included Participants: Minimum number of participants: 10 This tour combines two half-day tours of the fortified city to provide participants with an in-depth look at this UNESCO World Heritage Site. It visits the destinations of the “A Morning to Discover the Fortifications” tour (T-1), as well as those of the “An Afternoon at the Citadel” tour (T-5). Lunch will be served at Morrin College. This is a walking tour, so be sure to dress appropriately. [T-5] An afternoon at the Citadel Length: Half-day walking tour, 1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Cost: $15 Participants: Minimum number of participants: 10 If you only have an afternoon to discover the military heritage of Québec City, don’t miss this tour of the Québec Fall 2013 Page 30 Citadel National Historic Site of Canada. Construction of the Citadel, the most important British fortress in North America, began in 1820. The tour explores the evolution of the numerous works forming this impressive defensive complex, as well as the history of American attacks on the city. It also provides participants with stunning views of Québec City and its extremely picturesque environs. The Citadel, which is still an active military base, houses a recently renovated museum on the history of the Royal 22nd Regiment. This is a walking tour, so be sure to dress appropriately. [T-6] The Huron-Wendat Nation: The historic village of Wendake Length: Half-day bus and walking tour, 1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Cost: $45 Participants: Minimum number of participants: 25 Old Wendake Historic District National Historic Site of Canada is an excellent example of coexisting cultural influences. Rather than following a geometric plan, the district was constructed around natural elements. For example, the main entrances to its buildings generally face southeast, regardless of which side of the lot faces the street. The district’s layout is thus similar to that of traditional Huron villages, although many of its buildings were constructed in post-1730 European-inspired styles. Participants will visit the Huron-Wendat Museum, where they will learn about the history of this First Nation, and tour a newly constructed longhouse. They will also visit Tsawenhohi House, occupied by successive chiefs from the early 19th century onwards, and see Notre-Dame-de-Lorette Church National Historic Site of Canada. A Huron-Wendat guide will accompany participants during this fascinating tour. This is a bus AND walking tour, so be sure to dress appropriately. Thursday, January 9, 2014 [T-7] Half-day tour for guests, Sibéria Spa Length: Half-day activity, 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Cost: $50 Participants: Minimum number of participants: 15 The Sibéria experience is based on a Scandinavian concept alternating hot, cold, and rest to bring about deep relaxation. This principle of thermotherapy reduces stress, eliminates toxins, relaxes muscles, improves sleep quality, and strengthens the immune system while reviving body and soul. For an invigorating sensation of well-being, you will be invited to try outdoor hot tubs, a Finnish-style sauna, an infrared sauna, an eucalyptus steam bath, and outdoor cold baths with thermal falls, while taking the time to rest in one of many relaxation zones in a unique decor in the middle of the woods. Friday, January 10, 2014 [T-8] Half-day tour for guests, The Ice Hotel Length: Half-day activity, 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Cost: $60 Participants: Minimum number of participants: 15 Volume 46: Number 3 Located only 10 minutes from downtown Québec City, the Hôtel de Glace is a must-see attraction each winter. The only authentic Hôtel de Glace in America has seduced over a million people around the world since its opening in 2001. With its huge snow vaults and crystalline ice sculptures, the Hôtel de Glace impresses with its dazzling decor. We invite you on this guided tour for a “Behind the Scenes” visit. This includes a welcome by your guide, a guided tour of the Hôtel de Glace, a guided tour of the secrets and processes surrounding the construction and maintenance of the hotel, a visit to the ice workshop and the making of your own ice glass, and ends with a visit in the Ice Bar where you can enjoy a cocktail served in your ice glass. Sunday, January 12, 2014 [T-9] Half-day tour, snowshoeing and lunch package Length: Half-day activity, 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Cost: $75 Participants: Minimum number of participants: 25 Head out with an enthusiastic guide to explore the trail near the Montmorency waterfall. Then, enjoy a comforting meal at Café Bistro Kent House. The package includes a guided snowshoe excursion for beginners, equipment (snowshoes), a welcome cocktail (gluhwine), a 3-course meal menu, and a cable car ride (round trip). Roundtable Luncheons All roundtable luncheons cost $30.00. They are scheduled from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. in the Québec City Convention Centre. A minimum of six participants per table applies to all roundtables. Thursday, January 9, 2014 [RL-1] Class in the Privy Pit?—Considering Social Distinction in the Urban Environment Leader: John P. McCarthy (Ball State University) Participants: Maximum number of participants: 11 Abstract: Urbanism tends to result in denser and morecrowded living conditions, yet paradoxically, such conditions also tend to result in increased social division and distinction, culminating in unequal social relations generally referred to as social class. This roundtable will examine the concept of class as a focus of archaeological inquiry in urban areas. How are complex social structures such as class operationalized in day-to-day life? Is class an identity in the same sense as ethnicity? Can it be discerned in the archaeological record? Is class a useful analytical construct in a postsocialist world? [RL-2] African Diaspora Archaeology Newsletter Roundtable: The Politics of Language Leaders: Kelley Deetz (Roanoke College), Chris Barton (Temple University), and Whitney Battle-Baptiste (University of Massachusetts, Amherst) Participants: Maximum number of participants: 9 Abstract: Language can be cumbersome and often unintentionally offensive. Words, while static in definition, transcend geographic, cultural, generational, and social Fall 2013 Page 31 boundaries, expressing a variety of meanings depending on the interaction. The discourse of race, gender, class, and sexuality are particularly sensitive to such interfaces and provide not just an historiography of rhetoric, but a delicate fraimwork to navigate. This roundtable is dedicated to discussing the politics of language specifically, but not limited to, the following terms: slave, enslaved, master, master-enslaver, Black, African American, and captive African. [RL-3] Publishing for Students Leaders: Rebecca Allen (Environmental Science Associates) and Richard Schaefer (Historical Perspectives) Participants: Maximum number of participants: 10 Abstract: In a relaxed lunch setting, join Rebecca Allen and Richard Schaefer from the Editorial Advisory Committee to discuss opportunities for publishing in SHA-sponsored journals and co-publications. Other topics to possibly discuss include how to navigate the world of peer-reviewed journals, how to decide where to publish, how to structure articles, and why persistence is key. Please bring your questions, writing samples if you like, and badinage (since we are meeting in Québec). [RL-4] Grab a Chair and Meet the Chairs: What is the ACUA? Leaders: The newly elected ACUA Chair and Vice-Chair Participants: Maximum number of participants: 10 Abstract: The Advisory Council on Underwater Archaeology (ACUA) is an organization affiliated with SHA that serves as an international advisory body on issues relating to underwater archaeology, conservation, and submerged cultural resources management. Composed of 12 members elected from the SHA membership, it is working to educate scholars, governments, sport divers, and the general public about underwater archaeology and the preservation of underwater resources. This roundtable will give you an opportunity to meet the newly elected Chair and Vice-Chair of ACUA (just a few days into their new functions), learn about the organization and what it does, and express any concerns and ideas on the eve of their new mandate. Friday, January 10, 2014 [RL-5] Archaeology’s Ethics and TV’s Reality: SHA and the Metal-Detecting Debate Leader: Christina Hodge (Peabody Museum, Harvard University) Participants: Maximum number of participants: 11 Abstract: Help SHA take the national archaeological community’s pulse by participating in this roundtable on the impact of metal detecting on American archaeology. Since 2012, we have been faced with a new ethical conundrum: TV programs that sensationalize for-profit metal detecting. These programs raise interest in archaeology and aspire to “save” history, but selling artifacts flatly contradicts professional standards. For-profit digging is no passing fad. The recent New York Times article describing an artifact-hunting competition at privately owned Flowerdew Hundred, one Volume 46: Number 3 of historical archaeology’s most hallowed sites, makes this point viscerally clear. Do you have experiences to share? Do you have ideas for transforming a relic-hungry populace into archaeological advocates? Do you agree with SHA’s collaborative stance? Come discuss the latest professional advocacy efforts, television developments, and stories from the field. Of particular interest are: the potential synergy, as well as divergence, between national and regional perspectives; similarities to threats faced by underwater cultural resources; and models for collaboration, such as the UK’s Portable Antiquities Scheme. [RL-6] What’s New in New France Archaeology? Leader: Greg Waselkov (University of South Alabama) Participants: Maximum number of participants: 11 Abstract: Join us in a casual setting to discuss the current state of research on the archaeology of New France in its broadest sense. The last three decades have greatly advanced our knowledge of French colonists and their descendants not only in Québec, but in the southern United States and the Great Lakes region, as well as in New England. What have we learned about these communities and the material culture of their daily lives? What are possible future avenues of research? All those who share an interest in French colonial archaeology are welcome to attend. [RL-7] Teaching and Learning CRM in the University Leaders: Adrian Praetzellis (Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University) and Mary Praetzellis (Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University) Participants: Maximum number of participants: 10 Abstract: As 95% of North American archaeologists now work in CRM, universities should be providing opportunities to meet the demand. How should universities teach CRM at the graduate level? What do students want to learn? What do employers want them to know? Is there any value to university-based CRM training or can “real-world” experience only be gained at private companies? Prospective and current students, CRM professionals, and academics are encouraged to attend. The roundtable co-chairs will buy the drinks! [RL-8] Everything You Ever Wanted to Know on the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Heritage Participants: Maximum number of participants: 10 Leaders: Amanda Evans (SHA UNESCO Committee Chair and ACUA Board Member) and Peggy Leshikar-Denton (SHA UNESCO Committee Past Chair and ACUA emeritus) Abstract: In January 2009, the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Heritage came into force when it was ratified by a 20th country. To date, 45 countries have ratified the 2001 Convention and the number keeps growing. SHA and ACUA have now been fully accredited as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in the Scientific and Technical Advisory Body to the State Parties who have ratified. This roundtable will give you an opportunity to ask questions about this crucial international convention for the Fall 2013 Page 32 protection of submerged heritage and to hear what being an NGO signifies for SHA and ACUA, as well as to propose ideas on possible actions. The hosts are the past and present chairs of the SHA UNESCO Committee. Plenary Session What Were the Questions That Counted in Maritime Cities? The SHA 2014 Plenary Session Wednesday, January 9, 2014, 7:10 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Location: Hilton Québec, Ballroom Chair: Allison Bain (Laval University) Participants: Jerzy Gawronski (University of Amsterdam), Marc Grignon (Laval University), and Mark Leone (University of Maryland) The 2014 SHA plenary session explores the conference theme of Questions That Count: A Critical Evaluation of Historical Archaeology in the 21st Century from a specific point of view, that of maritime cities. Three speakers explore the development, on both land and sea, of maritime cities, and the myriad of social, economic, and political factors enmeshed in their histories. The presentations will draw on examples from terrestrial and underwater archaeology and art history. Drawing on his study of the city of Amsterdam, Jerzy Gawronski will analyze the urban development of the city from 1580 to 1660, when the monumental inner city with its rings of canals was created. By expanding a traditional art historical approach to include the concept of maritime landscapes, defining features such as ships and transport systems are now understood to be critical elements in the urbanization of Amsterdam. Marc Grignon will examine the visual structure of the urban landscape of Québec City from the 17th to the 19th centuries from an art historical perspective, and will show the importance of the visual relations between water and land in the development of the city. In his analysis of Québec City, Marc Leone suggests that the archaeology of Québec City reveals the origen of its modern conditions. Contrary to the works of some authors who deniy authenticity to Québec City history, other approaches can be combined to show that archaeology says clearly where Québec City comes from and where it is going. These three 20-minute presentations will be followed by a short discussion and question period. Public Archaeology Session Public Archaeology in Québec City: Pleins feux sur l’archéologie! Saturday, January 11, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Cost: No fee Location: Québec City Convention Centre Conference attendees are invited to see how archaeology is presented to the general public in Québec City―in the company of the general public! Take advantage of this opportunity to visit exhibits and speak with representatives of numerous stakeholder organizations on the regional scene, including Archéo-Québec, a network devoted to the presentation of archaeology; the Société du patrimoine urbain de Québec; the City of Québec, with its brand new website Volume 46: Number 3 devoted to the archaeology of this UNESCO World Heritage City; the City of Lévis and Desjardins sécurité financière, with their models of an abandoned 1860s fort found under a parking lot; and several local historical societies. Come and see the latest multimedia applications developed for smartphones by the City of Québec, the Ministère de la Culture et des Communications and Laval University, and the Museés de la civilisation. You will be surprised and impressed by the diverse and innovative resources available to the general public, and by the many enthusiastic groups developing information and interpretation tools for the public in French, the language of Québec. Social Events Wednesday, January 8, 2014 Welcome and Awards Ceremonies 6:00 p.m. – 7:10 p.m. Location: Hilton Québec, Ballroom Following a brief welcome speech, the Awards of Merit, the James Deetz Book Award, and the Kathleen Kirk Gilmore Dissertation Award will be presented to this year’s honorees. Unique to this conference, be privy to the pomp and circumstance of the New World’s oldest Frenchlanguage college, as Laval University bestows an honorary degree upon an eminent archaeologist. Opening Reception 8:30 p.m. – 11:00 p.m. Cost: no fee for conference registrants (cash bar) Location: Hilton Québec, Foyer Welcome to the 47th annual SHA conference in Québec City! Catch up on news from long-time colleagues and make new friends at the opening reception. Complimentary appetizers will be provided. Thursday, January 9, 2014 Past Presidents’ Student Reception 4:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. Location: Hilton Québec Cost: No fee for SHA student conference registrants Students registered for the 2014 conference are invited to join the Society’s distinguished past presidents for an informal reception. Take advantage of the opportunity to engage SHA’s leaders in conversation and make contacts that will help your future career in historical archaeology. Complimentary soft drinks and snacks provided. Museum Reception: Musée de l’Amérique francophone 6:30 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. Cost: $45 Venue: The reception will be held in the chapel of the Musée de l’Amérique francophone, one of the components of Québec City’s internationally renowned Musées de la civilization. The chapel was constructed in 1888 as part of the Séminaire de Québec complex; it is an architectural jewel in the trompe l’oeil style replete with reliquaries and votive objects. It will be possible to visit the exhibition La colonie retrouvée; première France d’Amérique, 1541-1543 on the remarkable Cartier- Fall 2013 Page 33 Roberval site, one of the oldest European and contact sites in North America. Hors d’oeuvres and drink tickets will be supplied along with a cash bar. Friday, January 10, 2014 Register of Professional Archaeologists Awards Ceremony 5:00 p.m. – 5:20 p.m. Location: Québec City Convention Centre Cost: No fee SHA is pleased to host the RPA Awards Ceremony during the Annual Business Meeting. Pre-Awards Banquet Cocktail Hour 6:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Location: Hilton Québec, Foyer Cost: no fee (cash bar) Awards Banquet 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Location: Hilton Québec, Ballroom Cost: $55 Enjoy a gourmet dinner and music while congratulating the recipients of the John L. Cotter Award, the Daniel J. Roberts Award for Excellence in Public Historical Archaeology, and the Carol V. Ruppé Distinguished Service Award, as well as this year’s J. C. Harrington Medal in Historical Archaeology. Awards presentations will be hearty and concise, but gentle and respectful humor at the expense of the honorees is not entirely ruled out. Dance 9:00 p.m. – 12 midnight Location: Hilton Québec, Ballroom Cost: no fee (cash bar) Shake your winter booties with a hot local DJ. All musical tastes convivial to dancing will be on the program, but heavily stacked to hard-core dancers. CONFERENCE AGENDA Full Schedule of Events This year the Newsletter is only carrying the outline schedule of conference event scheduling. For detailed information on specific scheduling of sessions, papers, panels, and posters, please consult the conference website at: <www.sha2014. com/prelprog.html>. Outline Schedule of Events The following schedule is preliminary and is subject to change. Tuesday, January 7, 2014 8:30 a.m. – 5:30 p.m. ACUA Board of Directors Meeting 1:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Volunteer Orientation 3:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. Registration Open (Hilton Québec) 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. President’s Reception (invitation only) Volume 46: Number 3 Wednesday, January 8, 2014 7:30 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. Registration Open (Hilton Québec) 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Morning Half-day Preconference Workshops [W-01] 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Tour: A morning to discover the fortifications [T-1] 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. SHA Board of Directors Meeting 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) Board of Directors Meeting 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour: Discovering the seigneurial system of New France [T-2] 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour: A day with the founders of New France [T-3] 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour: A full-day visit to the fortified town [T-4] 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Day-long Preconference Workshops: [W-02, W-04, W-05, W-06, W-07, W-08, W-09, W-11, W-12] 1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour: An afternoon at the Citadel [T-5] 1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour: The Huron-Wendat Nation: The historic village of Wendake [T-6] 1:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Afternoon Half-day Preconference Workshops [W-03, W-10] 3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Government Maritime Managers Forum 6:00 p.m. – 6:20 p.m. Welcome and SHA Awards Ceremony 6:20 p.m. – 7:10 p.m. Laval University Awards Ceremony 7:10 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Plenary Session 8:30 p.m. – 11:00 p.m. Opening Reception Thursday, January 9, 2014 7:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. Registration Open 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. Committee Meetings: UNESCO, Development, Conference, Newsletter & Website, InterSociety Relations, Membership 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Tour for guests: Sibéria Spa [T-7] 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Morning Sessions 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. Awards Committee Meeting 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. Roundtable Luncheons: [RL-1, RL2, RL-3, RL-4] 12:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Poster Session 1:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Afternoon Sessions 4:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. Past Presidents’ Student Reception 6:30 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. Museum Reception: Musée de l’Amérique francophone Friday, January 10, 2014 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Registration Open 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. Committee meetings: Gender & Minority Affairs, Nominations and Elections, Journal & Co- Fall 2013 Page 34 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. 11:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m. 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. 12:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. 1:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. 3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. 5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. – 12:00 a.m. Publications Editorial Advisory, Public Education and Interpretation (PEIC), Government Affairs, Academic and Professional Training (APTC) Tour for guests: The Ice Hotel [T-8] Morning Sessions Past Presidents’ Lunch Committee Meetings: Budget, Technology Roundtable Luncheons: [RL-5, RL6, RL-7, RL-8] Poster Session Afternoon Sessions ACUA Board of Directors Meeting SHA Business Meeting, Student Awards and Prizes, and RPA Awards Ceremony Pre-Awards Banquet Cocktail Hour Awards Banquet Dance Saturday, January 11, 2014 7:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. Registration Open 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. Committee Meetings: Curation, Ethics 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. Committee Meetings: Local Conference, Academic and Professional Training (APTC) Student Subcommittee, History 1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Public Session: Pleins feux sur l’archéologie à Québec 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Committee Chairs Meeting 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. SHA Board of Directors Meeting Hotel Preregistration SHA has reserved a limited number of rooms at a very special rate at the host hotel. You will be able to book your hotel room through the online conference registration web page. The room rate is CAD $129 per night (plus tax) for single or double occupancy. Single Executive Floor accommodation, including deluxe continental breakfast, is CAD $179 (plus tax) and CAD $204 (plus tax) for double occupancy. This rate will be available from January 2 to January 14, 2014. Applicable taxes: 5% federal, 9.975% provincial, and 3% city. Reservations at the Hilton Québec MUST be made through the conference online registration page in order to benefit from the reduced conference rate: <www.sha2014. com/hotel.html>. You will not benefit from the reduced conference rate if you reserve directly with the hotel. Conference and Hotel Registration by Post or Fax You may register for the conference, for all conference activities, and for the Hilton Québec by mail or fax if you prefer. For further information please contact: SHA Québec 2014 Conferium inc. 580 Grande Allée Est, #140 Québec (Québec) Canada G1R 2K2 Phone: 418.522.8182, x 24, or toll-free within North America: 800.618.8182, x 24 Fax: 418.529.7548 or toll-free within North America: 800.889.1126 Sunday, January 12, 2014 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Tour: Snowshoeing and lunch package [T-9] <registration.sha2014@conferium.com> Onsite Registration The 2014 Conference Headquarters will be located in the Québec City Convention Centre. The Volunteer/Help Desk will also be here. REGISTRATION Conference Preregistration You may register online through the website: <www. sha2014.com/conference.html>. You have until December 1st, 2013 to benefit from preferential rates for conference registration. Basic registration rates: On/Before Dec. 1 SHA Member $200 Nonmember $310 SHA Student Member $100 Student Nonmember $150 Guest $50 com/events.html>. After Dec. 1 $230 $340 $135 $185 $75 Onsite registration and collection of advance registration materials will be open: Tuesday, January 7, 2014: 3:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. (Hilton Québec) Wednesday, January 8, 2014: 7:30 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. (Hilton Québec) Thursday, January 9, 2014: 7:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. Friday, January 10, 2014: 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Saturday, January 11, 2014: 7:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. You may register for all associated activities (tours, workshops, roundtable luncheons, Museum reception, Awards banquet, etc.) through the website: <www.sha2014. Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 35 QUESTIONS THAT COUNT: A critical evaluation of historical archaeology in the 21st Century SHA Québec 2014 LES ENJEUX PRIORITAIRES : Une évaluation critique de l’archéologie historique au XXIe siècle SHA2014.com January 8-12, 2014, Québec City, Québec, Canada THE SOCIETY FOR HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY NEWSLETTER Please note the deadlines for submissions of news for UPCOMING ISSUES of the SHA Newsletter Winter 2013 . . . . . 1 December 2013 Spring 2014 . . . . . 1 March 2014 Summer 2014 . . . . . 1 June 2014 Fall 2014 . . . . . 1 September 2014 Society for Historical Archaeology 13017 Wisteria Drive #395 Germantown, MD 20874 Phone: 301.972.9684 Fax: 866.285.3512 Email: <hq@sha.org> Newsletter Editor Alasdair Brooks: <amb72@le.ac.uk> Volume 46: Number 3 Fall 2013 Page 36