3. The 2004 Field Season at High Bank
Works, Ross County, Ohio
by N’omi B. Greber Cleveland Museum of
Natural History
| Introduction
The High Bank Works (33Ro60) are located
southeast of Chillicothe on a glacial outwash
terrace about 17 meters above the active
flood plain of the Scioto River. They are
one of the more complexly designed sets
of enclosures among the numerous enclosure
sites found in the central Scioto region.
The major sections include a relatively
rare octagonal enclosure, small and large
circular features, and linear walls (Figure
1).
As recorded in the mid-nineteenth century,
the walls of the Octagon were about twelve
feet (ca 3.7 meters) high and enclosed 18
acres (ca 7.3 hectares). The attached Great
Circle walls surrounded a slightly larger
space but were only about five feet (ca 1.5
meters) high (Squire and Davis 1848:Plate
XVI ).
|
|
click on image to enlarge |
| |
 Figure
1. Ground plan of High Bank Works as drawn
by Squire and Davis (1848:Plate XVI).
|
| |
|
click
on image to enlarge |
By the end of the century
the walls were much degraded
and the easterly side of the
Great Circle was not easily followed
on the ground. Also, by this
time, a farm lane was in use
that cut across portions of the
octagon, circle, and the short
neck that joined them. This wagon
path has been enlarged and is
now used by modern vehicles including
trucks and large farm equipment (Figure
2).
Field work this past season
continued studies that are part
of long term research aimed at
placing enclosure sites into
the context of both other types
of structural remains such as
buildings and mounds, and the
well known artifacts. Since 1994
a combination of geophysical
surveys and limited excavation
and coring has produced details
of the design and construction
of the Great Circle wall (Greber
1998, 1999, 2002). |
|
 Figure
2. Aerial view of the High Bank
Great Circle and Octagon. View
taken in 1938. Note the farm
lane that crosses the walls.
|
| |
|
click
on image to enlarge |
|
Field Work
During June and July 2004 geophysical
survey was undertaken over the
segments of the Octagon walls north
of the farm lane, a portion of
the site currently part of Hopewell
Culture National Historical Park
(Figure 2). A goal for the short
season was to obtain geophysical
data from the Octagon walls for
comparison with geophysical and
excavation records of the Great
Circle wall and 1972 excavation
profiles of the Octagon (Greber
and Shane 2003).
The geophysical survey blocks
were located in the CMNH site grid
and labeled S through X in a continuation
of the practice of previous surveys
(Figure 3). In each sub-block
(i.e. S1, S2,...) transects were
set at one meter intervals. Magnetic
readings were taken in zig-zag
fashion using a FM 36 gradiometer
(Figure 4).
Figure 5, based on data from the
recent survey, a magnetic map of
portions of the remnant walls north
of the lane. As a control, Block
S was set to overlap portions of
Block H recorded in the1999 magnetic
survey. The 2004 results completely
reproduce the earlier data.
John Weymouth combined data from
1999, 2001, and 2004 (Figure
6) that
show the distinctive usual trace
of the Great Circle wall.
The signals from the outer edges
of the wall are more pronounced
than those from the inner side.
This contrast apparently represents
the contrast in the composition
of the inner and outer lowest strata
that extend along major sections
of the Great Circle wall. These
strata were identified in small
scale test trenches (Greber 1999,
2002).
|
 Figure
3. A stylized circle wall superimposed
on the location of geophysical study
areas, Cleveland Museum of Natural
History, 1994-2004.
|
|
click
on image to enlarge |
|
 Figure
4. The FM 36 gradiometer owned by
the University of Akron and used
in the 2004 survey. Held here by
CMNH Kirtlandia Intern Stuart Neilis.
|
|
click
on image to enlarge |
|
 Figure
5. Geoplot map of 2004 survey area.
|
|
| |
|
click
on image to enlarge |
| The easterly side of the two
short parallel walls that join
the Great Circle and portions
of two segments of the Octagon
are also visible. The pattern
seen in the data from the Octagon
walls differs from that of the
major portion of the Great Circle.
There is not as great a contrast
in the signals from the outer
and inner sides of the segments
and the internal signals are
more “jumbled”. This
pattern is consistent with the
wall profiles recorded in the
three test trenches excavated
in 1972 across two separate wall
sections of the Octagon south
of the lane (Greber and Shane
2003). |
|
 Figure
6. Compilation of 1999, 2001,
and 2004 magnetic survey data
prepared by Dr. John Weymouth,
University of Nebraska.
|
|
An anomaly, located
between the ends of the two wall
segments, is at the point where
lines extending from the ends
of the wall segments would cross.
Thus, the anomaly may indicate
a corner point of a regular octagonal
shape marked by the original
builders as part of the original
design and possibly used in planning
the construction of the Octagon
walls.
|
|
|
|
Comments
This season’s field work continues to
demonstrate the usefulness of intertwining the
results of geophysical surveys and the ground
truth obtained in small scale excavations. The
new geophysical maps appear to be consistent
with the results of the early 1972 excavations.
They also provide new information suggesting
a direction for possible future work. The apparent
existence of an anomaly between the ends of the
Octagon walls should be corroborated by additional
geophysical surveys. This is a significant point
in the ground plan design. Future studies of
the area might answer questions concerning the
original construction methods and possibly reveal
features that would be of particular interest
in astronomical research such as that Ray Hively
and Robert Horn have begun at High Bank (1984).
Acknowledgments
Dean Alexander, Superintendent of Hopewell Culture
National Historical Park, gave access to Park
land at High Bank. As always the entire Park
staff welcomed and supported our work. In particular,
Jennifer Pederson arranged for living accommodations
and helped with other practical matters, Kathy
Brady-Rawlins gave instructions in the use of
a total station, Dawn Walters was a gracious
and hard working addition to the field crew.
The total station, FM 36 gradiometer and lap
top computer used by CMNH Kirtlandia Intern Stuart
Nealis for the magnetic survey were loaned to
the project by Dr. Timothy Matney, University
of Akron. Dr. John Weymouth, University of Nebraska,
continues to share his expertise in explaining
theoretical geophysics to archaeologists and
his time in putting together data from separate
surveys. I thank them all.
References Cited
Greber, N’omi B.
1998. Geophysics and Archaeology: A Case Study
from the High Bank Earthworks, Ross County,
Ohio. Invited paper presented at the Fryxell
Symposium, Annual Meeting of Society for American
Archaeology, Seattle, March 1998
1999. Combining Geophysics and Ground Truth at
High Bank Earthworks, Ross County, Ohio. The
Ohio Archaeological Council Newsletter,11(1):8-11.
2002. A Preliminary Comparison of 1997 and 2002
Limited Excavations in the Great Circle Wall,
High Bank Works, Ross County, Ohio. Hopewell
Archeology: The Newsletter of Hopewell Archaeology
in the Ohio River Valley, Volume 5, Number 2:1-6.
Greber, N’omi B. and Orrin Shane III
2003. Studies of the Octagon and Great Circle,
High Bank Works. Paper presented at 68th Annual
Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin April 2003.
Hively, Ray and Robert Horn
1984. Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy at High
Bank. Supplement to Volume 15, Journal
for the History of Astronomy: S85-S100.
Squier, Ephraim and Edwin Davis
1848. Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley:
Comprising the Results of
Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge 1. Washington,
D.C.
1.Print this Page
 word
.doc (360K)
 pdf (347K)
|
