New Perspectives on Mississippian Occupations in Western Tennessee and Northwestern Mississippi: Recent Chronological and Geophysical Investigations at Chucalissa (40sy1), Shelby County, Tennessee

Investigating Construction History, Labour Investment and Social Change at Ocmulgee National Monument's Mound A, Georgia, USA, Using Ground‐penetrating Radar

“…Recent work in the American Southeast by McNutt et al . (), allowed the identification of possible buildings on successive mound summits utilizing GPR time‐slices. Flat‐topped earthen mounds often have complicated histories where the function, size, orientation and summit architecture varied through time.…”

“…Archaeologists have often investigated flat-topped earthen pyramids throughout the American Southeast, commonly called mounds, using a variety of geophysical prospection techniques. Investigators have traditionally used vertical two-dimensional GPR profiles (Garrison, 1998;Welch et al, 2006;Pluckhahn et al, 2010;Thompson et al, 2011), and more recently electrical resistivity pseudo-sections (Monaghan and Peebles, 2010;Kassabaum et al, 2014) and down-hole magnetic susceptibility (McNutt et al, 2012;Rodning et al, 2013;Kassasbaum et al, 2014) to understand internal mound structure and to interpret the sequence of mound construction episodes. Others have demonstrated the utility of magnetic gradiometry in locating subsurface structural remains on a mound's final summit (Butler et al, 2011;King et al, 2011).…”

“…Some investigators in other parts of the world have experimented with GPR time-slices to create horizontal maps of successive mound-use episodes, identify buried tombs and reconstruct mound manufacturing techniques, with varying degrees of success (Kamei et al, 2000;Campana et al, 2009). Recent work in the American Southeast by McNutt et al (2012), allowed the identification of possible buildings on successive mound summits utilizing GPR time-slices. Flat-topped earthen mounds often have complicated histories where the function, size, orientation and summit architecture varied through time.…”

Radiocarbon Data, Bayesian Modeling, and Alternative Historical Frameworks

“…Advances in statistical analyses used to interpret radiometric data are beginning to have a substantial impact on the archaeology of eastern North America (e.g., Barrier 2017; Birch et al 2016a; Cobb et al 2015; Cook et al 2015; Krus 2016; Krus et al 2015; McNutt et al 2012; Monaghan et al 2013; Pluckhahn et al 2015; Rick and Waselkov 2015; Schilling 2013; Thompson et al 2015; Turck and Thompson 2016). The ability to formally incorporate knowledge about the archaeological record into the analysis of radiometric dates within a Bayesian framework has facilitated the construction of detailed community and regional histories through which the timing, pace, and tempo of social and cultural change can be precisely tracked at resolutions not previously accessible.…”

Contemplating the history and future of radiocarbon dating in the American Southeast

“…Archaeologists in the southeastern United States (and other regions of North America [see Bayliss 2015;Hamilton and Krus 2017]) have been slow to adapt Bayesian chronological modeling methods (although there are some slightly earlier uses [Buck and Bard 2007;Kennett and Culleton 2012;Kennett et al 2011;Kidder 2006;Kidder et al 2009Kidder et al , 2010McNutt et al 2012]). Instead, they have chosen to use legacy culturehistoric chronologies and often statistically ill-informed interpretations of chronological data.…”