Point Atomism,Space and God, 1760–80

This paper compares and contrasts the main metaphysical and religious ideas of the eighteenth-century political theorist and chemist Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) with those of his correspondent Ruder Boscovic (1711–1787), astronomer, poet, mathematician, diplomat and Jesuit priest. It points out the theological differences between the two thinkers resulting from the divergent ontological and metaphysical implications of the theory of point atomism that they shared. This theory they placed in a wider context, considering both its limits and its value as a contribution to ongoing speculations concerning the nature of space and time, theological conundrums such as free will and the mind-body problem. Where they differed, however, was that Priestley, a chemist rather than a mathematician, used point atomism mainly to support his campaign to further materialism and discredit Christianity. Boscovic, on the other hand, carefully distinguished the truths of faith and reason and was therefore indignant at Priestley's misuse of his speculations. Boscovic's protest was probably motivated in part by the materialism of atheists such as the Baron d’Holbach (1723–1789). Priestley was no atheist, however. Interestingly, François Arouet de Voltaire (1698–1778), unaware of the works of either Boscovic or Priestley, devised a theistic materialism in his last years that in many respects resembled Priestley's. I begin with brief biographies of the two thinkers, and outline their intermittent relationship.     

Landscape and Social Relations at Charleston Townhouse Sites (1770–1850)

Restoration projects at Charleston townhouse properties, both public and private, have provided opportunities for archaeological exploration on a variety of scales. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, these properties were the homes of wealthy planters and merchants and enslaved African Americans, who lived and worked in the service buildings and work yard. The inter-dependence of these diverse occupants, their daily affairs, and the landscape elements under their purview has been revealed in the research of scholars from a host of disciplines, including archaeology. Townhouse compounds included support structures and activity areas required to meet the range of daily life affairs, from the necessary to the luxurious. While the front of the house, and the formal garden, presented a well-ordered façade, the work yard housed the facilities for the necessities of daily life, in an often dirty, noisy, and unordered space. The deliberate separation of space and placement of specialized service buildings and their occupants created an urban landscape suitable to the social values, as well as physical needs, of the townhouse owners. Thus, owner and slave lived in a compound that was physically close, but socially distinct. Archaeological case studies are used here to explore the racial power dynamics embodied in the urban townhouse landscape. The archaeological mixing of material from master and slave is, however, a material reflection of the racial power dynamics played out in constricted urban spaces.     

Personalities and Institutions in Americanist Archaeology, 1850–1950

Between 1850 and 1950 Americanist archaeology evolved from an inchoate blend of antiquarianism, literature, and field digging undertaken by untrained but enthusiastic amateurs into an increasingly disciplined and institutionalized field of inquiry. While personal speculation and style became less pronounced, institutional (university/museum) support provided financial grounds for long-term research and teaching agendas. At the same time, while institutionalized archaeology certainly did not eliminate strong personality differences and professional disagreements, it did provide channels within which to confront and resolve them. The overlapping generations of Ephraim Squier, Alfred Maudslay, and Byron Cummings clearly demonstrate this trajectory of professionalization.     

Baffles and Stockades: Entryway Construction at Southern Plains Fortifications,A.D. 1500–1850

Southern Plains archaeologists have for years reported piecemeal data suggesting that ancestors of the Wichita Indians periodically built fortifications. Since 2003, we have conducted archaeological and geophysical investigations at multiple Late Prehistoric and European contact era fortified Wichita sites occupied between about a.d. 1500 and a.d. 1811. We seek to better understand the areal extent, timing, and structural changes associated with facilities that appear to have functioned as redoubts (Drass, Perkins, and Vehik 2018). In this article, we focus on how the Wichita constructed and secured fortification entryways. Given the inherent vulnerability of entryways, architects across the globe have designed a variety of defensive configurations to confound attackers. For the Wichita, the introduction of horses and guns beginning in the 1600s magnified these challenges. Our findings indicate that baffled gates, often paired with fenced extended entryways, facilitated quick entry by defenders and dependents while serving as impediments to hostile intruders.