LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 3.1
Summary report on the orientations and alignments of the Ohio Hopewell
geometric enclosures, by William Romain.
Table 1. Summary table for Hopewell geometric enclosure alignment data.
Table 2. Comparison of azimuth data obtained by ground survey and analysis
of USDA 1938 aerial photograph of the High Bank octagon.
Table 3. Comparison of azimuth data for the Newark octagon.
Table 4. Comparison of azimuth data for the High Bank octagon.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of solstice azimuths.
Figure 2. Newark Great Circle.
Figure 3. Newark Octagon and Observatory Circle.
Figure 4. Newark Wright Square.
Figure 5. Mound City.
Figure 6. High Bank Octagon.
Figure 7. Hopeton Square.
Figure 8. Hopeton Parallel Walls.
Figure 9. Hopewell Square.
Figure 10. Seal Square.
Figure 11. Seip aerial photograph.
Figure 12. Seip Square.
Figure 13. Baum Square.
Figure 14. Liberty Square.
Figure 15. Anderson Square.
Figure 16. Dunlap Square.
Figure 17. Cedar Banks.
Figure 18. Portsmouth Group A Square.
Figure 19. Portsmouth Group B, U-shaped earthwork.
Figure 20. Marietta Quadranaou Mound.
Figure 21. Marietta Sacra Via.
Appendix 4.1. Radiocarbon dates from the Hopeton, Mound City, DECCO-1, and Marsh Run
sites, Scioto valley, Ohio.
Appendix 4.2. Maps of the (a) rectangular and (b) circular structures at the Madeira-Brown
site, Ohio. Adapted from Ohio Department of Transportation 1993:Figures 26,
29.
Appendix 4.3. Maps and possible interpretations of the post mold patterns at the Marsh Run
site, Ohio. Adapted from Aument et al. 1991: A39-41, Figure 38. (A-D)
Possible single structures. (E-F) Possible multiple structures. (G-H) Possible,
temporally separate, overlapping structures.
Appendix 4.4. Map of the circular structure at the DECCO-1 site, Ohio. Adapted from Phagan
1977. Drawing courtesy of Frank Cowan.
Appendix 4.5. Locations of 14 earthworks thought to have been at least partially
contemporaneous in the Scioto-Paint Creek confluence area.
Appendix 4.6
Areas of Theissen polygons associated with each earthwork when considering
fourteen, ten, and six neighboring sites.
Appendix 5.1. Number of roles per burial, for burials with and without shared artifacts at
fifteen ceremonial centers.
Appendix 5.2. Roles of leadership and importance present at each of fifteen Ohio Hopewell
ceremonial centers and in their spatial clusters of burials.
Appendix 5.3. Percentages of role-marked burials having a particular role, for each of
twenty-one roles at four ceremonial centers through time.
Appendix 7.1. Age and sex distribution of burials under three Scioto Hopewell mounds.
Appendix 7.2. Age and sex distribution of fancy artifacts analyzed by Greber (1979a).
Appendix 7.3. Number of burials with headplates, celts, breastplates, and earspools in Scioto
Hopewell mounds.
Appendix 7.4. Animal power parts within spatial clusters of burials under three Scioto
Hopewell mounds.
Appendix 8.1. Proveniences of clan markers in Ohio Hopewellian sites.
Appendix 8.2. Large clan categories and constituent clans.
Appendix 8.3. Social roles and their artifactual indicators.
Appendix 8.4. Percentage and count deviations from expected values for clan-role pairs.
Appendix 10.1 Hypothesized tool use and MSM patterns.
Appendix 10.2 Proveniences of Turner and Madisonville individuals that were analyzed.
Appendix 10.3 Table 1. Muscle origin sites selected for study.
Table 2. Muscle insertion sites selected for study.
Table 3. Ligament attachment sites selected for study.
Appendix 10.4 Table 1. MSM scores for upper-body muscle origin sites, Turner females,
ranked most to least utilized.
Table 2. MSM scores for lower-body muscle origin sites, Turner females,
ranked most to least utilized.
Table 3. MSM scores for ligament attachment sites, Turner females,
ranked most to least utilized.
Table 4. MSM scores for upper-body muscle insertion sites, Turner
females, ranked most to least utilized.
Table 5. MSM scores for lower-body muscle insertion sites, Turner
females, ranked most to least utilized.
Appendix 10.5. Table 1. MSM scores for upper-body muscle origin sites, Turner males,
ranked most to least utilized.
Table 2. MSM scores for lower-body muscle origin sites, Turner males,
ranked most to least utilized.
Table 3. MSM scores for ligament attachment sites, Turner males, ranked
most to least utilized.
Table 4. MSM scores for upper-body muscle insertion sites, Turner males,
ranked most to least utilized.
Table 5. MSM scores for lower-body muscle insertion sites, Turner males,
ranked most to least utilized.
Appendix 10.6. Largest degrees of difference in rank order between Turner males and females.
Appendix 10.7. Percentage of MSM consistency with hypothesized activities.
Appendix 10.8. A comparison of MSM scores for shamanic practitioners and persons in nonshamanic roles.
Appendix 10.9. Shared highest ranked muscle and ligament sites between Turner
and Madisonville.
Appendix 11
Figurines used in this study but not illustrated in the main text.
Appendix 11.1 (a, b) Drawings of clay figurines from the Mann site, Indiana. (a) After Adams
(1949). (b) Object courtesy of Charles Lacer, Evansville, IN.
Appendix 11.2 (a, b) Drawing of a clay figurine from the Mann site, Indiana. Object courtesy
of the Glenn Black Laboratory, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. See also
Adam (1949:Plate 7).
Appendix 11.3 (a, b) Drawings of clay figurines from the Mann site, Indiana. Objects courtesy
of Charles Lacer, Evansville, IN.
Appendix 11.4 (a, b) Drawings of clay figurines from the Mann site, Indiana. Objects courtesy
of Charles Lacer, Evansville, IN.
Appendix 11.5 (a, b) Drawings of clay figurines from the Mann site, Indiana. Objects courtesy
of Charles Lacer, Evansville, IN.
Appendix 11.6 (a, b) Drawings of clay figurines from the Mann site, Indiana. Objects courtesy
of Charles Lacer, Evansville, IN.
Appendix 11.7 Drawing of a clay figurine from the Mann site, Indiana. Object courtesy of
Charles Lacer, Evansville, IN.
Appendix 11.8 Drawing of a clay figurine from Seip Mound 1, Ohio. Object courtesy of the
Ohio Historical Center, Columbus, OH; Photograph Envelope 52.
Appendix 11.9 (a, b) Drawings of clay figurines from Honey Creek, Oklahoma.
Appendix 13.1. Possible social roles of the honored dead who received large quantities
of artifacts.
Appendix 13.2. Artifact classes included in this study and the social roles they probably
indicate.
Appendix 13.3. Estimates of the sizes and social compositions of gatherings represented by
artifact assemblages in graves with one person and ceremonial deposits.
Appendix 13.4. Estimates of the sizes and social compositions of gatherings represented by
artifact assemblages in graves with more than one person and ceremonial
deposits.
Appendix 14.1. Concentration of 19 elements found by neutron activation analysis to be in
8 samples of 5 pipes from the Tremper mound, 17 samples of raw pipestone
from the Feurt Hill quarry near Tremper, and 10 samples of an unknown
number of pipes from Fort Ancient Period sites in the vicinity of Tremper.
Appendix 16.1 Shamanic healers, patients, and tokens of healing in Scioto Hopewell burials.
Table 1. Possible shamanic healers, patients, and tokens of healing in Scioto
Hopewell burials.
Appendix 17.1. Copper celts from eastern North America for which measurements are known.
Appendix 18.1. Definition of panpipes and description of their morphology.
Appendix 18.2. Histogram of the lengths of complete panpipes from Eastern North America.
Appendix 18.3. Panpipes from Eastern North America and their proveniences, forms,
materials, and bibliographic references.
Appendix 18.4. Panpipe from the Donaldson II site, Ontario. Figure 1, front side. Figure 2,
Reverse side.
Appendix 18.5. Artifact associations and age-sex associations of panpipes in burials and
other ceremonial deposits in archaeological sites with internal provenience
information.
Appendix 18.6. Animal power parts found in graves with panpipes, and the number of graves
with those species, by regional Hopewellian tradition.
Appendix 18.7. Spatial positions of panpipes within graves, where known.
Appendix 18.8. Geographic distribution of panpipes with varying numbers of holes in their
reverse side.
Appendix 19.1 Key to map of sites included in the study (Figure 2), and bibliographic
references for them.
Appendix 19.2 Earspool intrasite proveniences, by site.
Appendix 19.3 Earspool attributes and attribute states as analyzed here and in Ruhl and Seeman
(1998).
Appendix 19.4 Earspool data set: individual earspools and their morphological traits analyzed
here and in Ruhl and Seeman (1998).
Appendix 20.1 Description of archaeological sites from which silver artifacts or pieces have
been recovered.
Appendix 20.2 Analytical data for silver samples.
Appendix 20.3. Photographs of silver artifacts from certain Middle Woodland sites.
Figure 1. Silver artifacts: (a) Lewiston button cover [#21], (b) Serpent Mound
E bead, (c) Cameron’s Point Mound C bead [#6], (d) Lewiston button cover,
(e) Liverpool bead.
Figure 2. Serpent Mound E silver beads (b sampled as #12).
Figure 3. Nicholls Mound button cover (sampled).
Figure 4. Hopewell Group button covers (b is sample #54; c is sample #58; d is
sample #59).