George S. Lewis, a very active member of the Augusta Archaeological Society and the Society for Georgia Archaeology, wrote a history of the AAS in July 1989. Titled “A Brief History of the Augusta Archaeological Society,” this document is now available in PDF form.

In the process of assembling this history of the AAS, then about twenty years old, George also records some of the history of archaeological research of all kinds in the Augusta area.

The seven appendices provide a wealth of useful information, from membership lists to the program for the SGA’s fall meeting in 1976, and more.

Click here to examine this PDF of the history of the AAS, thoughtfully provided to thesga.org by Jerald Ledbetter.

For Archaeology Month in May 2009, the SGA chose the theme Mounds in Our Midst. Georgia’s archaeological landscape features numerous sites with artificial, human-constructed earthen mounds. Created by diverse Native American cultures, mainly between 500 BC-AD 1550, these remarkable monuments are evocative reminders of prehistoric societies that once flourished in every corner of the state.

Archaeology Month 2009 was devoted to a celebration of their survival and a meditation over their purpose and meaning. Long gone are the days when the impressive tumuli were explained away with reference to a lost race of “moundbuilders,” somehow distinct from Native cultures known to the same area. More than a century of archaeological study tells us that indigenous peoples are, in fact, responsible for the mounds. The same work has established that the mounds are not all the same but varied considerably in their design and purpose.

Also long gone are the days when Georgians could take prehistoric Indian mounds for granted. Because knowledge is the foundation for stewardship, Archaeology Month 2009 featured new research that is improving our sense of the place these ancient constructions held in the societies that erected them. And important among these efforts are creative solutions for preserving more mound sites from looting and destruction.

Take a look at a larger version of the poster by clicking here.

On Friday, April 24, the Society for American Archaeology, at their Annual Business Meeting, held this year in Atlanta, presented the Archaeology Month Poster Award to Georgia.

Each state is qualified to submit a poster each year. The deadline for submission is in March, so the posters are from the year before each competition. So, the Georgia poster in the competition was from 2008, and is called “Archaeological Encounters in Georgia’s Spanish Period.” Read more about the poster here.

SGA President Dennis Blanton received the award on behalf of the Society, which produced the poster, during the awards portion of the Business Meeting.

Congrats to all involved for the prize-winning 2008 poster.

SGA’s 2008 poster for Archaeology Month is “Archaeological Encounters in Georgia’s Spanish Period.” In this dramatic and eye-catching presentation, three human figures in outline dominate the poster’s imagery.

The figure on the left is of a Spanish Conquistador. He is identifiable because of the shape of his helmet, and because of his sword.

The figure in the middle is a Native American. He wears a breechclout and carries upward-pointing arrows.

The figure on the right is a Spanish Catholic friar or priest. He wears a baggy garment and a Christian cross.

All these figures are male. Why do you think the poster was designed with only men, and no women and children?

Archaeology Month events in 2007 focused on the theme “Conflict: Georgia’s Expanding Boundaries, 1733-1833.”

Click here to download a copy of SGA’s 2007 poster commemorating this theme.

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.

SGA’s 2004 topic for Archaeology Month revolved around the new edition of Frontiers in the Soil.

The book, with its compelling cartoon images, was the basis of the 2004 Archaeology Month poster.

Read more about the book Frontiers in the Soil here.

This entertaining, colorful cartoon book is about archaeology, particularly in Georgia; it is accurate and amusing. The book features hand-lettered text accompanied by eye-catching, vivid, often humorous artwork. The volume also provides various ideas for archaeological projects. Although oriented toward Georgia and Southeastern archaeology, this volume is useful for understanding general concepts in the archaeology of any geographical area, and is highly recommended for any audience.

Frontiers in the Soil begins with an introduction to the complex field of archaeology, which is often part of multidisciplinary projects and must deal with complicated issues related to chronological dating, and the meaning of the material evidence of past human behaviors. Dickens discusses the major prehistoric eras, and describes important locations occupied in prehistory. Dickens also describes an archaeological project at an imaginary sixteenth-century Native American community, including fieldwork methods, cleaning and analyzing artifacts, and finally authoring a report so that the information the site contained is preserved for the future.

The author of Frontiers in the Soil, Roy S. Dickens, Jr., was a well-known archaeologist who worked in Georgia, and across Southeastern North America. His engaging text is supported by the captivating artwork of James McKinley. The first edition, published in 1979, quickly sold out. SGA now owns the copyright to the book, and published a second edition with the assistance of the University of Georgia’s Carl Vinson Institute of Government.

Concurrently with the second edition, the SGA published a new teacher handbook to assist teachers in instructing students in all aspects of archaeology, including methods and techniques (and advancements in the field since the original edition was published), preservation and stewardship, and archaeological ethics. The new handbook meets Quality Core Curriculum (QCC) standards for the state of Georgia (current at the time of its publication).

Click here for information for ordering this volume through the Carl Vinson Institute of Government online bookstore. The Teaching Handbook is available here.

SGA’s 2004 lesson plan centered on republication of Frontiers in the Soil: The Archaeology of Georgia. The author, Roy S. Dickens, Jr., was a well-known archaeologist who worked in Georgia, and across southeastern North America. His engaging text is supported by the captivating artwork of James McKinley. The first edition, published in 1979, quickly sold out. SGA now owns the copyright to the book, and published a second edition with the assistance of the University of Georgia’s Carl Vinson Institute of Government.

Click here for access to the 2004 lesson plan.

Read more about the book by clicking here.

In 2002, the Society focused Archaeology Month events around prehistoric archaeological sites in southwest Georgia, specifically the famous site of Kolomoki.

Click here to download a copy of SGA’s 2002 poster commemorating this theme.

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.

The 1990 issue of Early Georgia (volume 18) featured Thomas H. Gresham’s article “Historic Patterns of Rock Piling and the Rock Pile Problems.” In the introduction, Mr. Gresham notes:

Rock piles, a term that can be broadly applied to a wide array of prehistoric and historic features, have long been of interest to the archaeologist and the general public. Rock piles occur in many parts of the world and appear to have great time depth. Since rock piles are often one of the most conspicuous aspects of a past society (the great pyramids of Egypt being an ultimate example), they persistently provoke general curiosity and scientific interest. Although I have not attempted even a cursory cross-cultural review of rock piling or archaeological investigation of rock piles throughout the world, I believe it true to say that most rock piles that have provided evidence of function have been determined to be mortuary or funerary.

He adds that the goals of this article are:
1) formally defining categories of piled rock features;
2) discussing uncited or rarely cited studies of rock piles;
3) presenting unpublished archeological data on historic rock piles;
4) presenting documentary and ethnographic data on historic patterns of rock piling;
5) introducing new ideas on the historic origin of rock piles; and,
6) critiquing some prevalent assumptions on historic rock piling.

Mr. Gresham concludes that Georgia rock piles date to at least three major chronological periods, including, Woodland, protohistoric Cherokee, and historical, and some rock pile clusters date to more than one period. He concludes that most rock piles made during the historical period date to the early, frontier days when the land was being cleared and improved to make agricultural fields. He believes that apparent distribution patterns of rock pile in clusters can be subjective and very misleading. Nevertheless, Mr. Gresham thinks most rock piles in Georgia were constructed in prehistory, although some excavated rock piles certainly have firm evidence of historic period construction.

To download a PDF of this article, Historic Patterns of Rock Piling and the Rock Pile Problems, click here.

The Profile Papers: Technical Papers from the First Seventy-Five Issues of the Society for Georgia Archaeology Newletter was compiled by Patrick H. Garrow and George S. Lewis. The SGA reprinted useful and important articles that were difficult to obtain in the days before digital publications and widespread use of the Internet.