Over the next year or so a diverse group of researchers led by Dr. Bill Romain will undertake a comprehensive sub-surface survey of Serpent Mound located in southern Ohio. The primary focus of the survey will be to derive a definitive date for the mound’s construction as well as locate features such as hearths or refilled pits within the mound or in its immediate vicinity. It is hoped to also gain a better overall understanding of the structure of the landform upon which Serpent Mound was built. The multidisciplinary survey will involve taking a series of soil cores from along both the “spine” of the mound and adjacent areas coupled with remote sensing surveys using both electrical resistance and ground penetrating radar. In the event any subsurface features are encountered during the coring opera
tion the material will be carefully removed from the soil core and analyzed by an archaeo-botanist for content such as charcoal, seeds and/or other plant remains. For future reference each coring hole will be refilled with a soil of a slightly contrasting color and texture than that of the mound soils. Further investigation of subsurface features or other anomalies detected during the remote sensing surveys will require a separate research proposal.
As a matter of historical context, Serpent Mound is located in Adams County, Ohio and is the largest surviving and well documented example of a prehistoric effigy mound in the world. It is composed of a sinuous earthen embankment 411 meters long that includes
a 37meter by 18 meter oval embankment at the northwest end that has been variously
described as the eye of the Serpent or an egg in the process of being swallowed. It has also been mentioned that the entire effigy may represent some long ago astronomical event. The effigy is laid out in an overall crescent-like plan on a slightly undulating and sloping narrow bluff above the confluence of East Creek and Ohio Brush Creek in northern Bratton Township. It ranges in height from 1.2 to 1.5 meters and from 6 to 7.6 meters in width at its base. Near the effigy are three previously explored burial mounds. These include a small elliptical shaped mound located approximately 250 meters southwest of the effigy and two circular based conical mounds, one about 9’ high and the other about 4’ high more immediately adjacent to the Serpent.
Serpent Mound was first formally documented in 1848 by Ephraim Squier and Edwin Davis in Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, the inaugural publication
of the Smithsonian Institution. At that time the mound was virtually pristine although there was some indication of indiscriminate digging at various locations around the effigy. In 1859, a tornado passed over the site, uprooting a number of trees growing on the mound and throwing the site into a general state of disarray. Not long afterwards much of the site, including parts of the effigy, began to be plowed for crop cultivation and by the 1880’s most of the available open land, including the mound and its surroundings, was used mainly for livestock grazing.
The earliest scientific investigations at Serpent Mound were conducted in 1886 by Frederic Ward Putnam, of Harvard University's Peabody Museum. Putnam first visited Serpent Mound in 1883 and his photographs from then indicate that in just the few decades since the time of Squier and Davis the mound had been reduced appreciably in height although its outlines were still intact and clearly discernable. Upon his return to Serpent Mound in 1886, Putnam found that indiscriminate digging continued to be a problem with the unfilled holes often causing erosional problems. In order to protect what was left of the effigy he successfully led the way for the Peabody Museum to acquire the property in1887in order to both preserve it and to make it available for future researchers. Over the next couple of years he conducted systematic investigations of portions of the effigy by excavating a number of shallow trenches across the effigy at several locations. He also investigated the nearby burial mounds and other parts of the surrounding landscape. In summarizing his work he attributed the creation of the effigy to the builders of the two adjacent conical burial mounds, now referred to by archaeologists as the Adena culture (ca 800 BC-AD 100) and for more than 100 years this remained the standard view for the age of Serpent Mound. Putnam also explored the elliptically-shaped burial mound as well as a substantial habitation site southeast of the effigy’s tail. The elliptical mound as well as materials recovered from the habitation area has since been determined to belong to the Fort Ancient culture (ca AD 1000-1550). After concluding his research, he carefully restored both the effigy and the bur
ial mounds to their original dimensions. The Peabody Museum converted the property into a public park and operated it as such until 1900, when it was deeded to the Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society (now the Ohio Historical Society). In 1908, an observation tower was built and during the 1930’s a museum and other visitor facilities were added by the Civilian Conservation Corps. Serpent Mound was listed as a State Historic Site in Ohio in the 1960’s and in the 1970’s it was added to the Registry of National Historic Landmarks.
In 1991 Robert Fletcher, Terry Cameron and a small crew of professional archaeologists conducted limited excavations into what was thought to be one of Putnam's old trenches in order to obtain charcoal samples to use for radiocarbon dating. This investigation resulted in radiocarbon dates that indicate the effigy mound was built between 990 and 850 years BP (cal AD 995 and 1265). These dates more precisely link the effigy to the later Fort Ancient component at the site rather than the earlier Adena occupation. Radiocarbon dates on other effigy mounds in eastern North America, including Ohio's "Alligator" Mound as well as possible stone serpent effigies reinforce these findings.
Just when and by whom the Serpent Mound was constructed has been a point of controversy, or so it would seem, from the time the site was first recorded. Radiocarbon dates derived by Fletcher et al in the 1990’s are the only scientifically obtained dates so far but these are not as widely accepted as it would seem. Among Putnam’s observations was that in the places he conducted his exploratory excavations the mound structure was underlain by what seemed to be a prepared surface of ash and small cobble stones. Charcoal derived from
Putnam’s ash layer could provide material for a suite of C-14 dates to help determine exactly when the mound was constructed. Unfortunately Putman failed to leave any record of exactly where he made his test excavations in the 1880’s and soil coring is the most efficient and non-invasive method of locating undisturbed mound strata.
Coring work was scheduled to begin over the weekend of April 9 and 10. It is the most labor intensive phase of the project and will account for most of the time actually in the field. The coring device is hydraulically operated and mounted to a small tractor. The cores are extracted in 4 foot sections using 2” diameter steel tubes lined with 1.5” plastic sleeves. After the first steel tube is pushed to depth the plastic sleeve liner is removed, capped and labeled as to its location and number in the sequence and most importantly, which end is up
. Another plastic liner is inserted into the primary steel tube, another length of pipe added and the entire assembly again pushed to depth. The process is repeated until the desired depth is reached. In some cases, such as testing on the flood plain of a large river or other areas of thick sedimentation, this particular machine is capable of taking a 60 foot or longer core but because the Serpent Mound is constructed almost immediately above bedrock such potential depths aren’t a factor. What should be considered when working at a site as prominent and as important as the Serpent Mound are the aesthetic disruptions the machinery might cause at the surface. In a cornfield or on a floodplain tire tracks and surface abrasions caused by the operation of the coring machine aren’t of particular concern. On Saturday April 9 it rained about 1.5 inches leaving the surface somewhat soggy to say the least. The next day was bright and sunny but after taking the first two cores it was plainly evident that the ground was still wet and to proceed further would cause major disruptions to the surface of the mound. Because the overall appearance of the mound was of primary concern, both during and after the project is completed, the coring operation was put on hold until conditions were more conducive to the use of machiner
y on the surface of the mound. The two cores that were taken still provided some insight as to the nature of the mound construction and to how to proceed when the ground is more stable. There is an old saying that when dealt lemons make lemonade. In that the ground was too wet for taking cores it was nearly idea for the electrical resistance survey. Electrical resistivity measures how resistant a particular soil structure is to the passage of an electrical current. Solid bedrock is absolutely resistant to the passage of an electrical current. The electrical resistance of other sub-soils varies depending on a number of factors including the level of soil compaction, particle size and soil moisture content. A 70 meter +/- transect line was laid out across the coils of the effigy, covering about half its length. Probes wired together in sequence were inserted into the ground at 1 meter intervals along this line and very low voltage applied. Resistance is measured between the probes and can be combined to create an overall pattern several feet deep. Once the data is collected it is dumped into a computer where it can be processed into a v
ariety of images. The data collection period for this method is relatively long (2 hours or more) but it provides a detailed image of the subsurface along the transect line including how the bedrock and sub-soils interface on that particular strike. Preliminary results indicate that the bedrock/sub-soil interface along that transect is more undulating than expected with large pockets of weathered bedrock in several places under the mound structure and pockets of different fills within the mound itself. While these are not quite earth shattering revelations every bit of new data contributes to the bigger picture and an overall better understanding of the site.
The work is scheduled to continue when the ground conditions are more favorable. In the mean time please try to find time in your busy schedules to visit Serpent Mound. It’s 100 miles from Columbus and centuries removed from everyday life. The site is presently under consideration as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, placing it on par with sites and places as diverse as Stone Henge, Chartres Cathedral, The Great Barrier Reef, The Great Wall of China and other natural and cultural wonders of the world. It’s an honor it richly deserves.
Bill Pickard
me in the ancient past the branch had been chewed on by a beaver or muskrat or some other semi aquatic mammal. Only the basal portion of the point was visible so an exact identification of the point wasn’t possible. X-ray images of the wood fragment in question revealed that the projectile point was more typical of an Early Archaic Dalton point than an earlier Clovis style point. The X-ray further revealed that by looking at the way the wood fibers were damaged and displaced it could have only become lodged in the branch when the wood was green or nearly green, that is about 8,000 to 10,000 years ago. The circumstances of how it became lodged in the beaver chew will probably never be known. Perhaps an ancient hunter missed his mark on the very animal that had been gnawing on the tree trunk. Who’s to say?
n individual walking along a sand bar in the Arkansas River near Tulsa, Oklahoma came across a large fragment of a buffalo skull. It so happened that this skull was different than others commonly found in the region. Instead of curving sharply upward as is common to the modern North American Bison these horn cores extended laterally somewhat before curving upward indicating that it was from the prehistoric species Bison occidentalis, a subspecies of the ice age Bison antiquus. Both of these species are ancestral to today’s smaller and more familiar North Arerican Bison or Bison bison that still roam portions of the Great Plains today. In turn these species are themselves all descended from Bison latifrons, an eight foot tall Pleistocene giant whose horns could have easily spanned seven or more feet.
ight eye. Further examination by X-ray and other imaging processes showed it to be a fragment of what’s known as a Calf Creek point, a point type common to Texas, Oklahoma and northeast into Arkansas and Missouri, possibly dating to as early as 5,000 to 6,000 years before present. Calf Creek points (sometimes referred to as Andice points especially in Texas) are thin, broad points with a long stem and deep basal notches. What is most unusual is that for a long time these types of points were typically thought to be used as hafted knives and not spear points per se. At first glance they don’t appear nearly robust enough to tip a spear or atlatl dart. I guess it just goes to show you that the experts don’t always know what they are talking about.
Posts
