~ t~

ENGINEERING
GEOLOGY
ELSEVIER Engineering Geology 45 (1996) 59-64

Geoarchaeology of the Lower Mississippi Valley

William G. Haag
Department of Geography~Anthropology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
Received 1 September 1994; accepted 17 November 1995

Abstract

The geomorphological description of the Lower Mississippi Valley (LMV) as presented by Harold N. Fisk in 1944
differed from most other representations in that morphogenesis was always implied. The intellectual climate of the
times was highly conducive to the multidisciplinary approach. Then archaeologists were accepting the premise that
the cultural history of the New World involved a few millennia rather than just several dozen centuries. It is fortunate
that some of the most active archaeologists came on the scene with strong backgrounds in geology and related earth
sciences. These prehistorians were sensitive to the role of the environment in shaping the relationships of man and
land. Virtually every archaeologist who worked in the LMV immediately came to respect and utilize the concepts of
Fisk. Because, in part, to the introduction of radiocarbon dating, archaeologists of the last half century have furthered
the refinement of Fisk's chronology but the basic concepts have remained. This is not to say that there have not been
vigorous challenges to Fisk, but they have not destroyed the usefulness of this monumental contribution.

1. Introduction final product (Fisk, 1944). It is beside the point

When the first scientific archaeology was begun
in the LMV, Harold Fisk was not yet an active
voice in the area. Yet no one entered the LMV,
particularly that part called the Delta, without
being profoundly impressed. It so long remained
an impassable wetland of swamp and abandoned
streams that it was not until the second quarter of
the last century that the area was conquered by
roadways and railroads.
Prior to 1927, no complete topographic map
coverage of the LMV was even in place for any
kind of land studies. By 1941 when Fisk began his
field work, complete map files organized his efforts.
In addition, he examined, identified, and corre-
lated over 16 000 borings. Several thousand aerial
photographs completed the database and a compe-
tent staff worked several years to bring forth the
that numerous modifications, corrections, and
re-interpretations of this monograph have been
done in the last half century (e.g., Saucier, 1974).
It is the role of science constantly to provide its
practitioners with more useful models by which to
guide their endeavors. It is the fate of every
conclusion in our theory bank to be replaced by a
better one.
Land-man relationship studies of several persua-
sions have recognized the alluvial valley to be
essentially that area as defined by Fisk (1944).
Subsequently, the area has been more sharply
delineated by individual writers. Archaeologists
welcomed Fisk's careful analysis of the alluvial
valley for it is upon this surface that most pre-
historic sites, early and recent, are to be found
(Phillips et al., 1951, p. 7). In a concise paragraph
these authors show that the alluvial valley consists

0013-7952/96/$15.00 Copyright 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All fights reserved

PH S0013-7952(96) 00007-5
60 I~KG. Haag/Engineering Geology 45 (1996) 59-64
of two parts, namely, the flood plain or that part
that experiences nearly annual flooding, and a
second part that may be called older alluvium that
is not now subject to flooding (Fisk, 1944, Plate 1).
These surfaces were built by the Mississippi River
and some of its tributaries but at an earlier time
than the modern flood plain. In an earlier article
on the LMV, this author did not make this distinc-
tion clear and left the impression that no surfaces
in the valley were older than 5000 years (Haag,
1961). This was corrected by Brain (1970).
2. The intellectual setting
In the late 1920s, the Department of Geology
at Louisiana State University (LSU) was well on
its way to greatness primarily through the efforts
of Henry V. Howe. Howe was an Oregonian who
did his first graduate work at the University
of California at Berkeley along with a native
Californian, Richard Russell. Howe went to
Stanford for his terminal degree while Russell
stayed at Berkeley to be with the brilliant geogra-
pher, Carl Sauer. Then Howe came to Geology at
LSU in 1927 and the following year sent for
Russell to have him establish a Department of
Geography. Russell taught structural geology and
introduced several courses in physical geogra-
phy. It is interesting to note that Russell's first
Louisiana paper was entitled, "Larto Lake, an Old
Mississippi River Channel" (Russell, 1933).
In 1929, Fred B. Kniffen came from Berkeley
ostensibly to expand the geography curriculum but
actually "....in the hope that work on the numerous
Indian mounds would help date both coastal
changes and changes in the course of the
Mississippi" (Howe, n.d., p. 3). Kniffen for several
years taught mineralogy, further demonstrating
the closeness of interests among the new faculty.
A year or two after Kniffen's arrival, the
Louisiana Geological Survey (organized by Howe,
of course) added Harold N. Fisk to its staff. He
immediately launched on the project of mapping
the geology of Grant and LaSalle parishes. Upon
completion of this task, he joined the LSU faculty.
That he was deeply involved with Quaternary
terraces is reflected in his naming several type
localities after Grant Parish communities.
Thus was begun a daily intellectual debate
among Howe, Russell, Kniffen, and Fisk. Because
of their common interests, Fisk and Russell began
sharing field trips, first to attack coastal morphol-
ogy problems where Russell introduced the term
"chenier" for that distinctive coastal structure.
Later the two made extensive tours of various
Mississippi tributaries such as the Ohio and the
Tennessee. When Russell's interest turned to the
Atlantic Coast's so-called terraces, Fisk went along
to explore. It was among such colleagues that
much of the thrust of Fisk's 1944 monograph was
engendered. He was at the right place at the
right time.
3. Early archaeological efforts
The earliest descriptions of the LMV by
Europeans did not totally disregard the natural
landscape but they were most impressed with
Mississippi River flooding. The Gentleman of
Elvas, one of the DeSoto narrators, described a
flood he witnessed somewhere below the site of
present-day Memphis, Tennessee, in 1543. The site,
an aboriginal village, was located on a natural
levee but the swollen river was nine leagues wide
and the town stayed under water for 2 months.
Another description of the same flood paints a
picture of a vast sea but makes it obvious that it
was not a novelty for the aborigines (Phillips et al.,
1951, p. 32). The numerous destructive floods of
the nineteenth and twentieth centuries clearly show
that the modern builders of those years were
neither more acute nor more astute than the prehis-
toric or historic Indians in selecting a safe place
to live (Phillips et al., 1951, p. 5). The modern
student of the LMV, whether geoscientist or
archaeologist, is invited to read Section I, The
Geographic Setting, of the preceding reference. In
the estimation of many, no more understandable
resume of Fisk's 1944 monograph appears in print.
Phillips et al. (1951), p. 6) indicate that had it not
been for Fisk's monograph, such a description of
the valley from an archaeological perspective
would not have been possible.
 IF..G. Haag/Engineering Geology 45 (1996) 59-64
Thus we can see that by the time the first
comprehensive archaeological survey began in
1939, there was little recent literature to guide the
prehistorian. However, before the Phillips-Ford-
Gritfin volume (1951) was begun, Fisk's mono-
graph was usable as a blueprint and handbook to
understanding much of their newly discovered
settlement patterns and cultural dynamics. In the
1930s, the many Federally-assisted archaeological
programs began to mature into full-scale institu-
tionalized programs in the Southeast. Despite this
growth there was still limited literature. It was
seen that much of the Mississippi River valley
remained largely unexplored, hence, in 1939, the
Lower Mississippi Survey (LMS) was formed. It
was a collaboration of the Peabody Museum at
Harvard University, the Museum of Anthropology
at the University of Michigan, and the School of
Geology at LSU. The principal participants were
Philip Phillips from Harvard, James B. Griffm of
Michigan, and James Ford from LSU.
The original charter for the LMS was to investi-
gate and survey the Mississippi River from the
mouth of the Red River to the Ohio. Modest but
enthusiastic survey and limited test excavations
were begun in the spring of 1940 but, as with
many other activities, they were brought to a close
in 1942 by the onset of World War II. It was not
until the spring of 1946 that survey and test
excavations were resumed.
It is appropriate to note that even earlier, in
1932, an invitational meeting on Southern
Prehistory held in Birmingham, Alabama, was
called by the Committee on State Archaeological
Surveys of the National Research Council.
Winslow Walker reported for the State of
Louisiana. After remarking that dendrochronol-
ogy would not work in the Mississippi Valley,
Walker expressed his conviction that:
"....if we only knew the history of such mound
groups as now appear to be some distance from
the large rivers, we would find that at the time the
mounds were built, the rivers ran much nearer
them than they do today. If it were possible to
determine the length of time required for this shift
in the channel, we could perhaps establish the
period of the building and occupation of the
61
mounds. This is a problem the solution of which
we look toward the geologists and geographers for
help." (Walker, 1932, pp. 42-48).
Among the nearly 40 people attending the con-
ference were James A. Ford, S.C. Dellinger, Fred
B. Kniffen, Moreau B. Chambers, and Walter B.
Jones. All claimed the LMV as their research
bailiwick.
It is pertinent to note that the first geoarchaeolo-
gist to document his conviction that aboriginal
peoples lived on the natural levees of various
courses of the ancestral Mississippi and its deltaic
lobes was Kniffen. As early as 1936, he wrote that
midden remains with their distinctive potsherds
were chronologically different from one site to
another (Kniffen, 1936). It was at this time that
Ford came to LSU and carried the ceramic typol-
ogy and the riverine geomorphology a few steps
further. It is not now clearly evident as to who
influenced whom the most - Kniffen, Fisk, or
Ford. It was not just good fortune that brought
these earth scientists together. Rather it was com-
monality of interests and perception of what pro-
duced good results. All later LMV archaeologists
have been grateful for the initial LMS volume and
felt fortunate to have Fisk as well. It is quite
appropriate to consider that Phillips et al. (1951)
is to LMV archaeology as Fisk (1944) is to
LMV geology.
4. Significance of geological studies
The time at which the earliest aborigines entered
the LMV is still debated. It probably was earlier
than 10 000 B.C. When they did appear upon the
scene, their concern was other than choosing per-
manent dwelling sites. We can be sure these earliest
residents were hunters. It is even probable that
they were more occupied with judging how many
persons could be supported by the biota. Buried
beneath modem flood plain alluvium may be many
Archaic or even older sites. One major reason that
Fisk's work was so vital to archaeologists, of
course, is that we are always trying to render order
out of the past, to construct a chronology of at
least regional validity and applicability.
One of the first site reports to draw heavily
62 W.G. Haag/Engmeering Geology 45 (1996) 59-64
upon Fisk was the Jaketown Site (Ford et al.,
1955). The publication has a well-illustrated sec-
tion (pp. 20-21 ) that shows the relation of the site
to an old meander of the supposed C1 stage of
the ancestral Ohio River (Fig. 1). Unfortunately,
later work by Saucier (1974) has eliminated the
Ohio River as having flowed in a channel separate
from that of the Mississippi River in the alluvial
valley. However, this does not negate the attempt
to estimate the age of a site by its relation to a
river channel.
That the cross-disciplinary approach continued
to grow is seen in the addition of another
Californian, James P. Morgan, who came to LSU
directly after World War II with an interest in
geomorphology. After gaining his degree under
Russell, he joined the Geology Department faculty.
In the early 1950s, H.J. Walker, still another
Carl Sauer physical geographer, came to the
Department of Geography and Anthropology.
This author came at this time with a combined
doctorate in zoology and anthropology. It was his
two lesser degrees in geology that made the choice
easier for Kniffen. In addition to everything in
anthropology, he even taught vertebrate paleontol-
ogy for 3 years.
Perhaps the most serendipitous addition to the
LSU School of Geology was W.G. McIntire when
be became a doctoral student of Kniffen and
Russell. Using archaeological middens, he was able
to show that the sequence of deltaic lobes of the
Mississippi differed from that developed by Fisk.
The weight of archaeological evidence was so
convincing that Fisk conceded that Mclntire was
correct.
In recent years a new generation of archaeolo-
gists has carried on the LMS. It began as a small
group led by a direct descendent of Phillips and
Griffin, namely Stephen Williams. There is an
expanded role for the study of prehistoric ceramics
in the LMV. Williams has brought to the valley
and trained a number of students who are continu-
ing intensive research into the relationships of man
and land in the LMV. We do not need to fear that
geoarchaeology will die anytime soon. Rather,
exploitation of all the information that the earth
can yield is consensual.
The largest archaeological excavation program
in the Yazoo Basin portion of the alluvial valley
culminated in an exhaustive report on the Lake
George site. The geological history of the whole
basin is thoroughly delineated because it illumi-
nates the chronological relations of the Lake
George site to all others in the vicinity (Williams
and Brain, 1983, pp. 5-14). Earlier, Robert
Greengo reported on several other Basin sites that
had been surveyed in 1954 and 1955 by Phillips.
Fisk was an important source in the geological
history and dating of these sites (Greengo, 1964,
pp. 105-107). Later, Brain produced a comprehen-
sive report on the Winterville site on the western
edge of the Basin (Brain, 1989). Its geological
history and chronological placement was fully
exploited, perhaps more accurately than some pre-
vious accounts because Brain could profit from
Saucier's re-examination of the earlier Fisk inter-
pretations (Saucier, 1974).
5. Perspective
Geoarchaeology is not co-dependent with sedi-
mentology and geomorphology alone. The whole
environment has become the archaeologist's oyster
and many studies show the totality of the relations
of man with topography, with soils, with vegeta-
tion, and with even the stars. It is not presumptu-
ous to believe that the genesis and perhaps at least
the maturation of this rests in Fisk's monograph.
Archaeologists in the LMV know that their tasks
are easier because they follow in the wake of
Harold N. Fisk. There is much work currently
being done that was not a part of the research
effort in the 1940s. Hence, re-interpretations of
Fisk are inevitable. Perhaps the greatest recent
contributions have been made in studies of soil
genesis. Other fields, such as neotectonics, offshore
mechanics, microstratigraphy, and stratigraphic
correlations with areas outside the LMV disturb
our complacency about our understanding of
LMV geological history. It will not be another
half century before the next multidisciplinary study
of the LMV appears.
 tm
T
DIll

Fig. 1. Block diagram showing the geomorphic context of the Jaketown Site. From Ford et al. (1955).
64 I,E G. Haag/Engineering Geology 45 (1996) 59-64
References
Brain, J.P., 1970. Early Archaic in the Lower Mississippi Valley.
Am. Antiquity, 35(1 ): 104-105.
Brain, J.P., 1989. Winterville, Late prehistoric culture contact
in the Lower Mississippi Valley. Mississippi Dept. of
Archives and Hist., Archaeol. Rept. No. 23, Jackson, MS,
201 pp.
Fisk, H.N., 1944. Geological Investigation of the Alluvial Valley
of the Lower Mississippi River. US Army Corps of Engi-
neers, Mississippi River Comm., 78 pp.
Ford, J.A., Phillips, P. and Haag, W.G., 1955. The Jaketown
Site in west-central Mississippi. Anthropol. Papers Am.
Museum Natl. Hist., 45(1): 1-164.
Greengo, R.E., 1964. lssaquena: An Archaeological Phase in
the Yazoo Basin of the Lower Mississippi Valley. Soc. Am.
Archaeol., Memoir 18.
Haag, W.G., 1961. The Archaic of the Lower Mississippi Valley.
Am. Antiquity, 26(3): 317 323.
Howe, H., n.d. Memorial to Richard Joel Russell. Geol. Soc.
Am.
Kniffen, F.B., 1936. A preliminary report of the mounds and
middens of Plaquemines and St. Bernard parishes, lower
Mississippi River delta, LA Dept. Conservation, Geol. Bull.,
8:407 422.
Phillips, P., Ford, J.A. and Griffin, J.B., 1951. Archaeological
survey in the lower Mississippi alluvial valley, 1940 1947.
Papers Peabody Museum Am. Archaeol. Ethnol., 25: 472.
Russell, R.J., 1933. Larto Lake, an old Mississippi River chan-
nel. LA Conserv. Rev., 3:18 21, 46.
Saucier, R.T., 1974. Quaternary geology of the Lower Missis-
sippi Valley. Ark. Archaeol. Surv., Res. Ser,, No. 6: 26.
Walker, W., 1932. Prehistoric cultures of Louisiana. In: Confer-
ence on Southern Prehistory Held under the Auspices of the
Division of Anthropology and Psychology, National
Research Council, Birmingham, AL~ pp. 42-48.
Williams, S. and Brain, J.P., 1983. Excavations at the Lake
George Site, Yazoo County, Mississippi, 1958-1960. Papers
Peabody Museum Archaeol. Ethnol., 74: 483.