Early Georgia publishes papers on the archaeology of Georgia and closely related subjects. While all submissions are subject to editorial review, authors may request to have their papers reviewed through a formal peer review process. Papers accepted for publication through the peer review process will be designated as Peer Reviewed Articles.

All articles submitted for publication should be sent directly to the Editor in electronic format using MS Word or WordPerfect at earlygeorgia@gmail.com. Illustrations should consist of either high quality prints or scans with a minimum resolution of 300 dpi. Style should conform to the guidelines published in American Antiquity(revised 2003). The style guide is located at http://www.saa.org/publications/Styleguide/styframe.html

Technical comments for submittal of graphics: send text and graphics in separate files; do not shrink or compress photos in any way before submitting; convert color photos to grayscale before submitting; diagrams (but not photos) should be saved in formats like PDF or EPS.

In addition, graphics should be sent in jpg or tif format and not embedded in the Word document. Exception: articles for peer review should be sent initially with graphics included in the document to allow easier distribution to reviewers.

A limited number of printed copies of past issues of Early Georgia are available for order. Click here to download an Adobe Acrobat PDF order form.

Site Loss in Georgia is a special issue of Early Georgia, published in Spring 2005.

The first article, “When the Past is Destroyed: Loss of Archaeological Sites Due to Urbanization,” by Stephen Kowalewski, evaluates the state of preservation
of Georgia’s archaeological sites. Here, for the first time, objective lines of evidence useful in assessing the condition and processes affecting archaeological sites in Georgia are gathered together. Kowalewski’s conclusions are sobering. He notes:

An inadvertent consequence of Georgia’s rapid urbanization and economic development has been an equally fast destruction and degradation of its archaeological sites, their artifacts, and their information legacy. Georgia has an outstandingly rich archaeological record that extends back 12,000 years. During that long time, people left more than just a few material remains of their ways of life in places we call archaeological sites. Many archaeological sites also contain human remains—burials. The artifacts and all their relationships and contexts form a legacy that should be better understood and utilized, especially for local community heritage, tourism, recreation, and education.

The land use conversion attendant upon urbanization destroys more archaeological sites in Georgia than any other factor. Archaeological sites are destroyed inadvertently, without anyone knowing that they were present, or in many cases, “accidentally on purpose,” or, knowing a site was there but undervaluing its importance. Normal construction procedures (grading, leveling, digging, bulldozing, and scraping with heavy equipment) are the direct, immediate cause of site destruction. However, heavy equipment operators are just doing their jobs and in most cases cannot see the artifacts and soil features that make an archaeological site. The problem of site loss is not one of proximate causes or smoking guns. It is a broader issue of how to protect archaeological heritage places prior to construction, and if archaeological sites must go, then there have to be ways to salvage their information legacy.

The loss of archaeological sites is staggering. New homes, subdivisions, developments, golf courses, schools, warehouses, roads, reservoirs, waste water treatment facilities, parking lots, restaurants, doctors offices, university dorms—all the things we see around us—obliterate archaeological sites, at a rate of one site every 15 acres in some places, to one site in every 30 or 50 ac in other environments. In most cases the land is graded and construction takes place without any attempt to see if archaeological sites were present or at least to save their information. In the first half of this paper we cite the most reliable estimates, which suggest that over 50,000 archaeological sites have been destroyed by urbanization and development. Since perhaps only a hundred sites have had extensive scientific excavations, this means that the people of Georgia have destroyed 500 times as much information about the past as they have salvaged.

In “Land-Use Change and Impact on Archaeological Sites in Georgia,” Malcolm Jared Wood and Gregory Lucas seek to get a quantitative handle on land development issues in Georgia, and their impact on our hidden heritage. Their estimation is based on the distribution of known sites derived from date held at the Georgia Archaeological Site File (GASF); in 2003 the GASF had already catalogued over 40,000 sites. They close by observing that:

The number of sites destroyed or disturbed due to land development will rise, and most certainly has from 1998 to the present. Major and minor urban centers across the state continue to grow, attracting new suburban development and altering their landscapes in the process. Most of these sites, many of which have multiple occupations spanning hundreds or thousands of years, are lost forever. Undoubtedly, destruction of this magnitude is occurring across the Southeast, and comparable studies should help to quantify development and its effects on archaeological sites in other states. While these statistics may be interesting and possibly surprising to the archaeological community, it is our hope to bring these estimations, and the greater issue of the importance of our past human heritage, to public attention as well, where legislation may provide for better management of development and the conservation of our collective cultural resources.

The third and final article in this volume is by Terry Jackson and Jack Tylor, and lays out a strategy for successful preservation of archaeological resources in Georgia. In “A Strategy for Conservation Archaeology in Georgia, they argue that preservation efforts be aimed at natural areas already targeted for conservation because of their biodiversity and ecological value. They recommend: 1) that planners be educated about biological reserve networks, which by extension means preservation of archaeological resources; 2) that National Register quality sites be targeted for preservation, since they are in better condition; 3) community planners be provided better maps showing the location of significant archaeological resources; 4) that planning legislation and policy be strengthened, including extension to cover any project receiving state funds that will impact a National Register listed property; and 5) stronger promotion of the federal Wetlands Reserve Program.

Click here to download a copy of this important issue of Early Georgia.

Resources at Risk: Defending Georgia’s Hidden Heritage is a special issue of Early Georgia, published in May 2001. The goals of this issue were 1) to expand public perception of what archaeology is and what archaeologists do; 2) to call attention to the urgent need for the preservation and stewardship of archaeological resources, or at least the recovery of basic information before it is destroyed; and, 3) to spur discussion of new ways that Georgians can accumulate more archaeological knowledge and save more resources, and disseminate this new information to the public.

In short, this issue is a primer of Georgia archaeology, with these articles:

• Georgia’s Hidden Heritage at Risk: An Introduction
• What is Archaeology? How Exploring the Past Enriches the Present
• Why is Archaelogy Important? Global Perspectives, Local Concerns
• An Introduction to the Prehistory of the Southeast, or, ‚“They were Shootin’em as Fast as They Could Make ’em” and Other Popular Misconceptions about the Prehistoric Southeast
• Archaeological Resource Protection in Georgia: Federal, State, and Local Legislation and Programs
• This Is Not Your Mother’s SGA
• Sprawl and the Destruction of Georgia’s Archaeological Resources: Transforming Citizens into Defenders
• Jargon Commonly Used by Archaeologists: Glossary of Terms

The articles work in concert as an overview of the besieged state of archaeological preservation in Georgia. Although this publication dates to 2001, its fundamental message about the desperate need for preservation and stewardship of archaeological resources has only become more acute with continued sprawl and land-use changes and forests and fields become become buildings and roads. As Charlotte A. Smith, author of the introductory article, notes:

All around Georgia, archaeological sites are being destroyed or are under threat of destruction. While it can be argued that ‚“development” is the natural progress of things, obliterating the past before it’s been recorded and understood is not ‚“natural,” nor does it have to be an inevitable by-product of progress.

In Georgia we lack sufficient infrastructure to implement a large-scale systematic project to record archaeological resources before they disappear forever. That infrastructure cannot be constructed without public support, and that support will not emerge without public understanding. And public understanding, in turn, stems from outreach by professionals and those committed to archaeological preservation.

Click here to download the entire issue in PDF format (2 MB).

Long-time SGA member Rita Elliott edited this 1992 special issue of Early Georgia; its full title is ‚“Archaeology in the Classroom: By Teachers for Teachers—Used Archaeology: Practical Classroom Ideas for Teachers by Teachers.” Notes Ms. Elliott in the Foreward:

Welcome to a new partnership. The past decade has seen a growing relationship between the world of professional educators and professional archaeologists-a relationship that can be mutually beneficial. The growing crisis in our schools, symbolized by low test scores, high drop-out rates, drugs, violence, and boredom, and fueled by economic problems, decreases in federal and state educational funding, latch-key students, single-parent families, students living below the poverty level, lack of role models, and over-indulgence in television, has thrown educators into a precarious and unenviable position.

At the same time, archaeologists are struggling with major assaults on non-renewable cultural resources throughout the country. Intensive development, particularly in the Sunbelt region of the southeastern United States, destroys countless archaeological sites daily-sites unprotected by federal and state laws. Site vandals and “looters” trash archaeological sites while searching for intact or unusual artifacts that they hope will bring a hefty price in the collectors’ market. An increasingly weak economy has led to major cutbacks in government and private grants supporting archaeological research.

The unpleasant dilemmas faced by both educators and archaeologists have resulted in an amazing revelation. These two seemingly unconnected problems can be addressed simultaneously. Archaeology is a wonderful medium for enticing students to learn because it is exciting, adventurous, and mysterious. Archaeology is the perfect vehicle for educators because its multidisciplinary nature allows it to address many of the Quality Core Curriculum objectives mandated by the state of Georgia, including visual arts, science, English and Language Arts, Mathematics, and Social Studies. It improves students’ skills in logic, interpretation, research, and problem solving while enabling students to become aware and tolerant of other cultures, work together in groups, improve self-confidence, and actually discover that learning can be fun!

Students, however, are not the only beneficiaries of an archaeology curriculum in the classroom. Archaeologists finally will be able to enjoy the rewards of a grass-roots archaeological education. An educated and informed public is a public that will support legislative protection of archaeological sites. It is a public that will slowly turn from artifact collectors to site recorders, from purchasers of illegally obtained artifacts to prosecutors of site vandals. Some in the archaeological community protest the introduction of archaeology into the school system on the basis that “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”. What better rebuttal is there than examining the status quo? Dedicated educators (and everyone who embraces an archaeology curriculum) know and stress the importance of site preservation, ethics, and professional supervision. What better or more numerous heralds could the professional community have than educators throughout the state and the country?

Volume 20, Number 1 of Early Georgia‚ “Used Archaeology: Practical Classroom Ideas for Teachers, by Teachers” has been prepared with the goals of both educators and archaeologists at the forefront. It is hoped that it will help fill a void in the state of Georgia and perhaps be a useful model or stepping stone for others with the same aims.

This issue has two main sections. The first has a series of first-person experiences authored by teachers who have used archaeology in the classroom. The second main section discusses a series of archaeologically-related activities teachers have found successful in their classrooms.

Click here to download a PDF copy of this issue.