Open-Air “Adena” Paired-Post Ritual Features in the Middle Ohio Valley: A New Interpretation

Circular paired-post structures have been recognized as a quintessential trait of the “Adena” concept. Although once thought restricted to ritual contexts beneath burial mounds, work over the last 30 years has identified several open-air structures in contexts apart from burial mounds or ditches. Uncluttered by overlapping features, open-air examples present a unique opportunity to document the initial roles played by these features. Currently, no unequivocal evidence for mortuary processing has been found directly associated with open-air paired-post structures. This fact calls into question the prevailing belief that most of these features were used to process, or prepare, the dead. Instead, a more reasonable interpretation is that these structures were involved in rituals minimally related to, or entirely devoid of, mortuary activity.     

The Case of the Caldwell Mound: A Woodland Period Mound in the Central Scioto River Valley

ABSTRACT

This article presents a reconstruction and analysis of the Caldwell Mound located in the central Scioto River valley of southern Ohio. The mound contained a log tomb, at least four burials, and associated funerary objects. Four AMS radiocarbon dates place the Caldwell Mound within the last century BC and first century AD, and the mound contains evidence of practices historically associated with “Adena” and “Hopewell.” Few other records exist from this period in the region despite it experiencing perhaps some of the most dramatic socioreligious transformations in precolumbian North America. This analysis documents early evidence for the diversification and segregation of leadership roles based on the interpretation of three buried individuals. It also demonstrates the utility and efficacy of working with amateur-produced records and collections, even when incomplete, to reconstruct and glean insight from important Woodland period sites.     

Rejoinder to Lepper Concerning Serpent Mound

In this article we address comments made by Bradley Lepper concerning our previously published article, “Radiocarbon Dates Reveal Serpent Mound is More than Two Thousand Years Old” (Romain, Herrmann, Monaghan, and Burks 2017). Further we offer commentary on the new radiocarbon dates provided by Lepper (this volume).     

Serpent Mound: Still Built by the Adena,and Still Rebuilt During the Fort Ancient Period

Radiocarbon dates from the base of Serpent Mound in Ohio demonstrate that it was built 2,100–2,300 years ago during the Adena period but was subsequently rebuilt or repaired about 900 years ago during the Fort Ancient period. We describe the basis for supporting the chronology of this building sequence, why it is the best and most complete explanation from the data at hand, and discuss the errors and misconceptions that critics of it have put forth. Our interest is in establishing a chronology of mound construction in order to address questions about cultural continuity/discontinuity, appropriation, and reuse of cultural monuments and religious/political symbols. We also plead that researchers jointly collect new data from Serpent Mound to end the back-and-forth questioning of chronological context and research competence.     

Radiocarbon Dates Reveal Serpent Mound Is More than Two Thousand Years Old

Recent radiocarbon dating (Herrmann et al. 2014) found that Serpent Mound was likely built during the Early Woodland period—around 320 BC. Herrmann et al. (2014) also suggested that the effigy was repaired or restored during Fort Ancient times, thereby accounting for the late prehistoric radiocarbon-dated samples recovered by Fletcher et al. (1996). The present article presents new data in support of the Early Woodland construction date. These data include lidar analyses, electrical resistivity ground imaging (ERGI) studies, and iconographic assessments.     

Serpent Mound in its Woodland Period Context: Second Rejoinder to Lepper

The Serpent Mound in Adams County, Ohio, is probably the most widely recognized effigy mound in the world. Opinions differ, however, as to who built the effigy and when. Currently there are two conflicting positions. According to Lepper and colleagues (this volume and elsewhere) the effigy was built by people of the Fort Ancient culture circa AD 1070. According to the present author and colleagues, recently obtained radiocarbon dates and other data indicate that Serpent Mound was built much earlier, by people of the Adena culture, circa 320 BC.

In this article, evidence is presented that corroborates the earlier published radiocarbon dates suggestive of an Adena-era construction. This evidence includes a review of findings that real serpents were sometimes buried with Adena and Hopewell people and consideration of a relational complex reaching back to the Early Woodland—wherein the Great Serpent of Native American legend is associated with the journey of the deceased person’s soul, the star constellation Scorpius, and the Lowerworld. Together, these data provide an Early Woodland cultural and interpretive context for Serpent Mound and further corroborate the Adena-era radiocarbon dates for its construction.