Summary of the 2015 Field Season at Singer-Moye

Q Q Summary of the 2015 Field Season at Singer-Moye Birch and Brannan Q 95 SUMMARY OF THE 2015 FIELD SEASON AT SINGER-MOYE (9SW2) by Jennifer Birch and Stefan Brannan, University of Georgia ganization, interaction, and the relationships beSinger-Moye (9SW2) is a multi-mound tween populations in the valley and the wider late Mississippian center located in the lower Chatta- prehistoric southeast. hoochee River valley of southwest Georgia. The site’s occupation has been estimated to span ca. PROJECT GOALS A.D. 1100-1450 (Blitz and Lorenz 2006). The site Our conceptual and methodological apcore comprises a mound-and-plaza complex cov- proach to this project is inherently multi-scalar. In ering some 14 ha and includes five flat-topped order to understand large-scale, long terms patterns earthen mounds, three dome-shaped mounds, in human prehistory, we need to understand how and two plazas (Figure 1). Brannan’s (2016) shovel people enacted the daily practices, relationships, test survey of adjacent UGA-owned lands, includ- and decision-making processes which contributed ing the site core, indicates that the total site area to those histories. As such, this project seeks to uncomprises some 31 ha. Future surveys of adjacent derstand the occupational history of Singer-Moye, landforms and lands upstream on Pataula Creek with the expectation that processes taking place at would almost certainly reveal additional evidence the community and household levels influenced, of Mississippian-period occupation. and were in turn shaped by, the wider regional and The presence of multiple civic-ceremonial historical context in which they were situated. mound centers in the lower Chattahoochee River valley (LCRV) suggest that this region formed a cul- RESEARCH QUESTIONS tural core for populations inhabiting those centers The 2015 field season at Singer-Moye was and perhaps smaller loci lacking mounds in the the first in a multi-year project aimed at answering region. Most archaeological investigations in the the following questions: valley have focused on mound contexts at major centers, including Cemochechobee, Rood’s Land- Internal site chronology and occupational history ing, Cool Branch, and Singer-Moye (e.g., Blitz and 1. What was the gross occupational history Lorenz 2006; Caldwell 1955; Husher 1959; Schnell at Singer-Moye? This includes outlining the spatial et al. 1981). Blitz and Lorenz (2006) have provided extent and temporal duration of settlement in the an excellent summary of current knowledge about site core and on adjacent landforms and an evaluthe settlement history and socio-political integra- ation of Blitz and Lorenz’s suggestion that there tion of the valley. However, substantial questions were hiatuses in mound-building at the site—did remain about the nature of social and political or- INTRODUCTION 96 Q Early Georgia Q volume 43, number 1 & 2 Q Figure 1. Singer-Moye site plan, locations of 2015 excavation units indicated. Q Q Summary of the 2015 Field Season at Singer-Moye Birch and Brannan those hiatuses occur and did they include residential abandonment? 2. What does a ‘household’ look like at Singer-Moye? e.g., Single structures, multiple structures occupied by related family groups? Did occupational components include corporate groups, disarticulated households, or both? Does this change over time or between phases of occupation? If there are changes in household size, how does that relate to changes in political organization at Singer-Moye and within the wider region? 3. Were houses rebuilt in place (or on the same “footprint”) over multiple generations? Does this change in different parts of the site? Were some sub-groups more stable than others? Regional Interaction 4. What were the a) chronological and b) socio-political relationships between Singer-Moye and other major and minor centers in the Lower Chattahoochee River Valley? Q 97 above, collect and interpret geophysical data, decide on placement of excavation units, conduct excavations, map and interpret the results, analyze artifacts, and report on their findings. With the assistance of project staff, they prepared posters detailing the results of our research which were presented at the 2015 Annual Meeting of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference. Those posters are cited in the sections that follow and are available by contacting the senior author. RESULTS 0.81 ha of the site’s south plaza were surveyed with a Bartington Grad 601 single-axis fluxgate gradiometer. The summits of mounds A, C, and F were also surveyed using gradiometry and limited GPR transects. The geophysical data from the plaza were subject to basic processing and evaluated with respect to potential anomalies to be subject to test excavations. Teams of field school students assisted in interpreting the geophysical data and selection of anomalies to be investigated with test units (see Figure 1). Interregional Interaction 5. What was the extent and directionality of interregional interaction? How do material con- Linear anomaly and palisade trench nections to places outside the valley vary between Two 1-x-2 m excavation units (XU1 and different phases of occupation? Do interaction pat- XU5) were placed over a linear magnetic anomaly terns vary within sub-community groups? which ran southeast-to-northwest 15 m north of the face of Mound A and approximately the same distance north of Mound H (Russell and Gordy AIMS OF THE 2015 FIELD SEASON One of the aims of the 2015 field season 2012). Those excavations revealed a trench feature was to determine the utility of two geophysical some 1 m in depth (Figure 2). This trench appears techniques, magnetic gradiometry and ground- to have been excavated twice, and was intentionpenetrating radar, to identify residential structures ally filled with a mix of clay-rich soils, including and activity areas. Singer-Moye is characterized by patches of white and yellow clays. A series of post deep deposits of clay-rich soils. Iron-rich soils and molds were identified in the fill, located at varipockets of concretions may interfere with magnetic able depths, suggesting a complicated construction techniques. Strategies for addressing the research history. The base of the trench intruded into an questions above will vary depending on which earlier occupational layer. A series of AMS dates from the pre-trench techniques are the most productive for identifying layer and feature fill suggest that the feature was settlement remains. Another aim of the 2015 field season was excavated around ca. A.D. 1300 and discontinued to ensure that field school students were involved around the 1360s (Kilgore et al. 2015). The lack of in all stages of the research process. They helped to shell-tempered pottery in levels above the feature define research questions, within the constraints also suggest that it was filled in prior to ca. A.D. of the overarching goals of the project outlined 1400, when shell-tempering falls out of common 98 Q Early Georgia Q volume 43, number 1 & 2 Q Figure 2. East profile of the trench feature encountered in XU5_2015. practice throughout the lower Chattahoochee River valley (Kilgore et al. 2015). Data on ceramic distributions (Brannan 2016) suggest that the trench’s use-life corresponds to the period in which the site’s size and population reached its greatest extent. The lack of evidence for bastions, and the small diameter of identified posts (>15 cm) suggest that the palisade was not intended for defense, but to segment social space, possibly demarcating an elite precinct (Kilgore et al. 2015). Differentiating plaza and residential spaces Two excavation units (XU3 & 4 and XU7) were placed over geophysical anomalies in the plaza and in an area of suspected habitation, respectively, in order to test anomalies and help understand variability in land use within different parts of the site (Reichert et al. 2015). Units XU3 and XU4 formed a contiguous 1-x-3-m unit. The ceramics recovered from the unit consisted of a low density of sand\grit tempered plain ceramics and sterile soil was encountered at a depth of 30-40 cm. No cultural features were encountered in the unit. The lack of complex stratigraphy and lower artifact density in XU3/4 provides evidence that this space was a prepared plaza which was kept relatively free of refuse. XU7 is a 1-x-2-m unit located 15 meters north of Mound A. Here, magnetometer data revealed a highly magnetized circular anomaly surrounded by an area of low magnetism, suggesting the presence of a structure with a central hearth. This unit contained a higher ceramic density than the unit placed in the plaza, as well as several archaeological features that suggest intermittent habitation. Excavations found three postholes at a depth of approximately 50 cm, a thick layer of culturally sterile red clay separating two occupational floors and semi-circular clay mottling surrounded by possible postholes, which has been filled with white clay (Figure 3). This arrangement of posts may prove to encircle a hearth feature from which the organics have been leached by the acidic, clayrich soils at the site. The ceramics recovered from Q Q Summary of the 2015 Field Season at Singer-Moye Birch and Brannan Q 99 Figure 3. Plan view, XU7. Clay mottling in east end of excavation unit tentatively interpreted as the remains of a hearth feature, pending future investigation. the unit consisted of a variety of types which date to between A.D. 1100-1450 (Richert et al. 2015). Future excavations will be focused on expanding the horizontal exposure of the possible structures encountered in this unit. Anthropogenic landscape modification A final 1-x-2-m excavation unit (XU2) was placed 10 m northwest of Mound A, between an area tentatively identified as the mound “apron” and what appeared in the magnetometer data to be the south edge of a prepared plaza. This unit revealed consistent artifact counts at every level and multiple distinct changes in soil texture, including thick layers of alternating red clay and sandy red clay and one thin layer of white clay. The unit was excavated to 120 cm below surface without hitting subsoil. The ceramic types and a single radiocar- bon date from a thin charcoal lens at the unit’s deepest level suggest that this portion of the site was heavily altered by anthropogenic landscape modification associated with mound and/or plaza construction between ca. A.D. 1300-1450 (Blank et al. 2015). Additional excavations will be required to determine if the area was occupied and/ or modified prior to ca. A.D. 1300. GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS MOUND USE OF TERMINAL Finally, three of the site’s five platform mounds (Mounds A, C, and F) were surveyed using magnetometry and ground-penetrating radar to explore terminal mound surfaces (Birch et al. 2015). Each exhibited different combinations of anomalies and magnetically ‘quiet’ areas representing, respectively, structures and open spaces. Our 100 Q Early Georgia Q volume 43, number 1 & 2 Q interpretations suggest a final use for each mound summit as the setting for an elite or sacred precinct (Mound A), open or public space (Mound C), and a combination of paired structures and open space (Mound F). It is our intent to survey the remaining mounds we are able to access (Mounds B and F) in future field seasons and report on our results in a comprehensive manner. FUTURE RESEARCH Caldwell, Joseph 1955 Investigations at Rood’s Landing, Stewart County, Georgia. Early Georgia 2(1):22-49. Huscher, Harold A. 1959 Appraisal of the Archaeological Resources of the Walter F. George Reservoir Area: Chattahoochee River: Alabama and Georgia. River Basin Surveys. Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Excavations at Singer-Moye are planned to resume in the 2016 field season. Our goals will Kilgore, Eli, Emily E. Lew, Justin N. Lynch, Adam remain in keeping with the research questions out- C.S. Kazmi, and Jennifer Birch. lined above. Field school students will continue to 2015 Palisades and the Segmentation of Space at Singer-Moye. Poster presented at the 72nd be involved in the planning, execution, interpretaAnnual Meeting of the Southeastern Artion and reporting on the project’s outcomes. chaeological Conference, Nashville. REFERENCES CITED Birch, Jennifer, Stefan Brannan, Michael Walters, Schnell, Frank T., Vernon J. Knight, Jr., and Gail S. Schnell and Michael Lukas 2015 Geophysical Characterization of Terminal 1981 Cemochechobee: Archaeology of a Mississippian Ceremonial Center on the Chattahoochee Mound Functions at Singer-Moye. Poster River. University Presses of Florida, Gainespresented at the 72nd Annual Meeting of ville. the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Nashville. Reichert, Jamie, Maria Munoz, Marcus Allen, SaBlank, Andrew, Aspen Kemmerlin, Taesoo Jung, rah Hendriksen, and Stefan Brannan 2015 Dynamic Uses of Space at Singer-Moye: Samuel Dilidili, and Gretchen Eggiman Delineating Plazas and Habitation Areas. 2015 Studying the Space Between Mounds and Poster presented at the 72nd Annual MeetPlazas. Poster presented at the 72nd Aning of the Southeastern Archaeological nual Meeting of the Southeastern ArchaeoConference, Nashville. logical Conference, Nashville. Russell, Margaret C., and R. Donald Gordy Blitz, John H., and Karl G. Lorenz 2006 The Chattahoochee Chiefdoms. University of 2012 The Archaeology of Mound H, SingerMoye Mound Center, Stewart County, Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Georgia. Early Georgia 40(2):127-154. Brannan, Stefan 2016 [forthcoming] New Trends and Traditions in the Southeastern United States: The Settlement Archaeology of Singer-Moye. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Georgia, Athens.