Category Archives: Labwork

3D Scanning and Printing in Archaeology

by Bridget Roddy

Since last semester (Fall 2022), for a Museum Methods class, I myself, along with fellow graduate students Laura Broughton and Liz McCreary, have been working on a hallway exhibit, focusing on 3D printing in archaeology; essentially how 3D printing could be used for educational or preservation purposes, and the issues that can occur when using this technology. Although we began this as an attempt to study how 3D printing could be useful in archaeological contexts or for archaeological purposes, the project really turned into how 3D printing is not as simple as it sounds. The exhibit is not done yet but be sure to keep an eye out for it in McElhaney Hall, or on our Instagram page, for when it is finished!

Scanning a sherd!

Initially we set out to scan and print different artifacts such as lithics (flaked versus groundstone), ceramics (incised versus painted), and bone, from two different 3D printers. We wanted to compare prints from both printers and the prints of different materials and decorations, in order to determine which printers were better and which materials printed better and could be of more use to the field of archaeology. However, we realized we needed to incorporate a 3D scanner first, and thus to save time and money for filament, we decided to print from one 3D printer. As scanning was more time consuming and more difficult than anticipated, we had to cut back on what materials we selected to print as well.

So, what is 3D printing? It is defined as being a process that makes a physical object based on a three-dimensional digital model, usually through the use of a machine that places down thin layers of a material in rapid succession.  In archaeological contexts, 3D printing has been used at sites like Çatalhöyük to record phases of archaeological investigation in 3D, to make the excavation process virtually reversible through a virtual simulated environment. 3D scanning has been used to create models of Bronze Age tools and weapons from Ireland, in order to conduct experimental archaeological research as the models undergo use-wear processes and investigate the development of damage on replica objects versus the ancient ones. Some researchers have even suggested using 3D digitization of use for both diagnostic and collection management purposes. While the vast number of artifacts and accessibility to full collections, technical knowledge of how to scan objects, and the cost of the software and machines, have proven to be obstacles in the pursuit of giving more accessibility to those around the world to more collections through 3D printing, it is a valiant attempt at preserving the archaeological record in a new way and format. The Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania has even used a handheld 3D scanner to digitize collection pieces that are printed and used in a museum exhibit. 3D scanners can be used to even restore damaged cultural objects or monuments, to get a better sense of what they looked like while intact. These are just a few of the ways that 3D printing and scanning are being incorporated into the world of archaeology and museums.

The Ultimaker S3 3D printer.

For this project here at IUP we used a NextEngine, Ultra HD, 3D scanner and or 3D printing we used an Ultimaker S3, both found in Indiana University of Pennsylvania’s STEAMSHOP, along with the appropriate corresponding filament which we were able to get from Amazon. IUP’s STEAMSHOP is an interdisciplinary digital fabrication lab that gives students, staff, and faculty alike the opportunity to engage in things like pressing vinyl on shirts and stickers, laser cutting logos, and of course, 3D printing objects. We extend a huge thanks to Maker in Residence, Johnathan Grengs, for assisting us during the undertaking of this project!

The lasers scanning the sherd on the acrylic stand.

We selected several prehistoric artifacts for scanning and printing; these included an incised ceramic sherd, a painted ceramic sherd, an arrowhead, and a quartz pendant. We set most of the artifacts on a clear acrylic stand parallel to the scanner and around ten inches away. The pendant did not require the stand. Each artifact was scanned about three times from different angles (top, bottom/back, front, and sides of the artifact), to pick up as much detail as possible. However, we started to encounter issues right from the start. First, the scans would take around half-an-hour each to complete. If the scan was incomplete or insufficient, we would have to take another, which took more time. We then needed to take of any excess data that made their way into the scan, before, taking all of the scans we had made to combine them and fuse them together.

Scans being fused together.

However, sometimes the system would crash when we tried to attempt this. When it comes to errors, when we fused the scans together, we had to align each scan by placing down three points on each, attempting to put them in the same spots to match the scans together, which essentially means we could have been accidently putting the dots in different spots, thus creating an inaccurate complete scan if the fused scans were incorrectly aligned. When we first started, we also did not realize we needed to save each individual scan, so much data was lost, and many scans had to be repeated. We eventually learned to save each scan separately before bringing them all back together to be fused and then saved as one complete scan. Essentially, it was a trial-and-error process that taught us there were going to be many fluctuations in the quality of the scans taken, causing us to have to take more scans than we initially planned for, which again took up more time.

Printing a sherd to scale.

As we moved on to transfer the scans to the 3D printer, another issue was encountered. The file sizes for the scans were so big that the system processing the scans to print them, was unable to do so. Eventually Mr. Grengs was able to fix this, and we moved on to the printing of the artifacts. Again, this took time, anywhere from at one hour and fifteen minutes or up to two-and-a-half hours. Once we were able to print some of the artifacts, we were able to discern many things about the abilities and accuracy of 3D scanners and printers. For example, one of the printed items had leftover data on top of the artifact scans that we missed as it was barely perceptible on the top. The printed object had some rough lines on top, most likely caused by the acrylic stand that was picked up by the scanner and not removed during the editing and fusing process.

The incised sherd printed at 200% its size!

We positioned all of the scans to be printed with the best side facing upwards, in the hopes that we would get the best representation of the artifacts. The bottoms of each artifact had to be printed on a base, which then had to be pried off once cooled. However, this basically made the bottom side unrecognizable compared to the original artifact. This showed us that the position in which we print the artifact is very important. We noted that the sides always printed very smooth-like, almost beautifully, with great detail, while the top looked almost like a topographic map, showing the last of the layers that were printed. This led me to realize that it might be worth it to try to print the objects standing vertically from one side, in the hopes that we would be able to get even more detail on the top, bottom/back, front, and the sides, as well, while only sacrificing a small portion of the side, rather than the whole bottom. We did this with a sherd blown up to 200%, and it came out beautifully!

We also learned that that the quality of the prints was also dependent on the artifacts themselves. Certain artifacts worked better than others, such as the incised lines decorations showing up on the prints rather than the painted designs. And for some reason, the pendant would not scan completely, despite not needing the acrylic scan to stay upright. We suspect this had something to do with the light fracturing through the quartz pendent, throwing off the scanner. At this point in time, we have not yet been able to print the arrowhead, as the scans will not even align properly, so hopefully we will be able to get over this hurdle and get a good print of the artifact.

For those that don’t have access to the software and technology to conduct 3D printings like we do, it has to be noted that it is an expensive endeavor. While also being time consuming and riddled with the potential for errors or to make a mistake, one has to be careful when deciding whether or not this is something they wish to pursue in whatever sphere they are doing so. For those planning on conducting work with 3D printers and scanners, we want this post to serve as a source for understanding that it is a lengthy process that does not always turn out how you expect. This method could be used to create replicas or scans for the public to use or examine, it could be used by museums in exhibits, it could allow greater accessibility to collections and even allow for a more in-depth analysis of artifact features, and so much more. However, I personally believe that one must use the highest quality of software and technology for the most accurate results, but what is currently available is just not affordable or the best quality. While our replicas were to scale and recognizable as to which artifacts they were of, higher quality of tech would certainly have made a big difference. For now, we hope our exhibit will show those starting out that 3D printing is a process, one that takes many mistakes and hours to figure out.

Follow IUP Anthropology on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Resources:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.5325/jeasmedarcherstu.2.1.0001.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A607eaebc6bad3a18247324a05deef839&ab_segments=&origin=&acceptTC=1

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24327507.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A4b56576788e90abf8501cb4b2f40b66a&ab_segments=&origin=

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26160210.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ab3cde67aaa6637c68a77378d1544c100&ab_segments=&origin=

Green Cabin Quarry Rhyolite Flakes: By Dr. Lara Homsey-Messer

by Bridget Roddy

Several undergraduate and graduate students are working in the IUP Archaeology lab processing thousands to rhyolite flakes excavated from the Green Cabin quarry site, located in Adams County, PA, on the hillslopes of South Mountain, just east of the Carbaugh Run Natural Area. Green Cabin is one of hundreds of quarry loci where rhyolite for making stone tools was quarried prehistorically in the South Mountain region.

The Precambrian-aged rhyolite in South Mountain originated as lava over 500 million years ago. About 250 million years ago, this lava was altered by heat and pressure associated with mountain building resulting from the collision of North America and Africa. This process resulted in a strong, fine-grained, and intergranular texture conducive to knapping into stone tools. Rhyolite varies widely in color and texture, sometimes even within one quarry location. During the Archaic and Woodland cultural periods, Native Americans quarried for high-quality material in pits measuring approximately 6-8 feet in depth and 20 feet in diameter. Today, the quarry pits appear as subtle depressions that have been backfilled prehistorically by the excavation of adjacent pits, as well as historically by erosion and vegetative debris.

What has long puzzled archaeologists is why prehistoric people went to so much work to dig pits down to bedrock when it could have been more easily collected from the surface. The other question of interest is why they quarried in some locations and not others where rhyolite outcrops. In order to help answer these questions, and with a permit from the PA SHPO and DCNR, Paul Marr of Shippensburg University began excavating the Green Cabin site in 2020. Thousands of flakes and debitage were recovered from 3 pits approximately a meter deep each.

Students are conducting a lithic and geologic analysis of the material. This includes measuring the size of the flakes, determining the type of flake, as well as describing the geology in terms of color, texture, volcanic structures and phenocrysts (i.e., large crystals of quartz and potassium feldspar embedded in the fine-grained groundmass).

Usually, quarry lithics exhibit evidence for early-stage reduction:  large flakes with a lot of weathering rind on them—this cortex must be removed in order to evaluate the suitability of the stone for knapping, and to reduce the initial size of cobbles for transport elsewhere for further reduction. But at Green Cabin, we were surprised to find a large proportion of small, later stage reduction flakes, suggestion that more reduction was happening at this quarry then one would expect.

The answer may lie partly in the unique geologic setting of Green Cabin itself. Marr notes several anomalous features: the site sits on a mid-slope bench rather than a ridgetop like most of the quarries; there are no outcrops of similar rhyolite within several hundred meter; and it is covered by a thick layer of colluvium, such that bedrock is very deep here—the prehistoric miners were not digging to bedrock in this location.  Marr argues that this flow of material plucked fractured bedrock from upslope and moved it downhill, making quality rhyolite available near the surface.

Work is ongoing and is expected to continue into the spring semester. We also anticipate comparing the material from Green Cabin to material excavated at ridgetop quarry sites in the region. As we increase our sample size and see a wider array of material from other sites, we hope to be able to answer some of the questions related to selection criteria, quarry location, and why the quarried material was reduced further here than at other quarry locations.

For more information visit: https://www.iup.edu/anthropology/research/antiquity-of-the-south-mountain-landscape.htmlv

3D Archaeology: Tech, Techniques, and Applications for Artec3D Scanners

by Bridget Roddy

On October 5th, the Pennsylvania Archaeological Council held their first in a series of four programs in honor of 2021 Virtual Archaeology Month. This session was titled 3D Archaeology: Tech, Techniques, and Applications for Artec3D Scanners, and was led by Lisa Saladino Haney, Ph.D., assistant curator of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, and Josh Cannon Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh Honors College.

The Artec Space Spider.

Haney started by describing the types of 3D scanners that she is using and that could be applied to future field archaeology projects. These Artec3D scanners are the Space Spider and Eva. The Space Spider is a handheld, portable scanner that uses blue light technology that works best when scanning smaller objects or finer textures or details. It also works well with complex geometry, sharp edges, and incised ceramics. It has internal temperature stabilization, meaning it works well in the winter and summer. The Eva works better with larger objects and is also portable. It uses structured light scanning technology to capture its images. Because of its larger field of vision, it can capture more in less time. Combining both scanners allow for the collection of even more details. The presenters stated that these scanners work much better with shiny surfaces than photogrammetry. Overall, the scanners capture reflective surfaces, have a higher level of accuracy, and work faster in post-processing than photogrammetry.

The Artec Eva.

Dr. Haney and Dr. Cannon are working with University of Pittsburg honor students in a museum internship program to instruct them on how to use this technology, and once trained can hopefully send them to other sections of the Carnegie Museum where needed. Projects the scanners are being used for right now include an exhibition titled From Egypt to Pittsburgh, in which the team are scanning small fragments from a 1922 excavation from an Egyptian city called Amarna, in the hopes that the pulverized royal statuary pieces can be reconstructed and used for future research. Another project, Egypt on the Nile, plans on scanning a model of a Dahshur funerary boat to create both a virtual and physical model. They also plan to use the scanners to scan broken pot pieces to then create magnetic replicas that can be used to “put the pot back together” in a sort of puzzle, increasing accessibility and the chance to interact with ‘artifacts’ for the public.

The 3D models created from the scanners are extremely accurate, with precise and detailed measurements. This allows the data from the models to be of high quality scientifically, making them great for sharing to researchers around the world, especially in times of covid where travel and use of collections is limited. The models also aid with conservation efforts, allowing pieces to be brought out, scanned, and then put safely away, with the data being used for study and public engagement. Aligning pottery sherds with the Artec3D software that are difficult to glue together, was also illustrated as a positive example of the scanners’ possibilities.

The application for scanners to be used in the field during an archaeological excavation is promising. The scanners could be used to record small finds quickly and could also be used to scan things in situ. The models produced are more detailed, more accurate, and can be done faster than hand drawings. For archeological field surveys, battery packs can be attached to belts to make the light scanners portable and give archaeologists the ability to scan in real time. However, a laptop is needed to be attached as well, to upload the scanned data. The scanner captures images instantly, the Eva can do a square meter at a time. Josh Cannon predicted that it could scan a hearth in about ten minutes. While the scanners can handle temperature changes, it might not fare well with elements like sand or dust, but if taken care of can last a long time.

The files of data from the scans are large, and therefore external storage sources are required to remove data from laptops. If files are kept on laptops, processing times will be slowed as the hard drive fills up. The presentation ended with the viewing of a scan of a wolverine skull. It took eight different scans over an hour to create the entire skull. Even the smallest details were visible, and it took up over 1 GB of data.

The presentation was incredibly interesting, and hopefully this technology will be used to aid archaeological excavations in the future. Please consider registering for the other three programs being held throughout the month of October!

Follow IUP Anthropology on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

https://sourcegraphics.com/3d/scanners/artec/eva/

https://www.javelin-tech.com/3d/3d-scanners/artec-space-spider/

 

September Colloquium: What We Did This Summer/Recently

by Bridget Roddy

This Wednesday, the 22nd, six of our Applied Archaeology graduate students at Indiana University of Pennsylvania presented at our monthly colloquium on What We Did This Summer/Recently. We heard from some amazingly talented students, eager to share their adventures and discoveries!

First year graduate student Emma Frauendienst.

First year graduate student Emma Frauendienst.

After a great introduction from Dr. Lara Homsey-Messer, Emma Frauendienst started us off with her presentation about her summer fieldwork at the Poverty Point World Heritage Site. Poverty Point, one of the largest Archaic Period sites in North America, is located in Louisiana. Her work, titled Downhole Geophysical Investigations of the West Plaza Rise at the Poverty Point World Heritage Site, began after receiving a grant, and facing both covid and flooding setbacks. Her team extracted 21 new soil cores, focusing on the West Plaza Rise to determine if it was a natural or constructed feature. After analysis of the cores and magnetic susceptibility data showing heavy cultural fill, it was determined that the West Plaza Rise was culturally constructed!

First year graduate students Mikala Hardie and Richard Farley.

Mikala Hardie and Richard Farley then discussed their experiences as Graduate Assistants during IUP’s Newport Field School. Newport, a small shipping town located along the Conemaugh River, was occupied from around 1790 into the early 19th century. The excavation began with shovel test pits, ground penetrating radar, and several test units, before excavation units were opened. The woods crew, led by Mikala, worked to find the walls of the general store, while also uncovering artifacts such as, porcelain, faunal remains, mochaware, and a builder’s trench, to name a few. The field crew, supervised by Richard, focused on finding the blacksmith shop and hotel, along the way uncovering post holes, slag, redware, pearlware, creamware, and transfer printed earthenware, among other things. The field school utilized photogrammetry, magnetometry, GPS, and a total station to also collect valuable information about the site. If anyone wants to know more about what it’s like as a graduate assistant at a field school, just ask Mikala and Richard, who also filled out forms and logs, took lots of pictures, and organized and supervised those working at the site!

Second year graduate student Ashely Nagle and first year graduate student Sonja Rossi-Williams.

Ashley Nagle and Sonja Rossi-Williams presented next about their time spent as Graduate Assistants in Lower Saxony, Germany at IUP’s Forensic Field School! From July to mid-August, they worked at a World War 2 B-24 aircraft crash site! They used GPR to first define the sides of their 2X2, and then used shovels more than trowels to remove the soil in their units. The team learned about archaeological methods and practices used in Germany and took several excursions across Germany, including to Hannover, Berlin, and Munich, making this an incredible cultural experience as well as archaeological. They did not find what they were looking for, an unaccounted-for soldier, but they did make progress on the site itself. The team were even featured in a German newspaper! In the future, the site will most likely undergo more excavations, hopefully by IUP students!

First year graduate student Luke Nicosia.

Luke Nicosia was the final presenter, recounting his internship in July and August this summer with the Landmark Society of Western New York, a historic preservation agency.  Founded in 1937, it is one of the oldest such societies in the US and seeks to advise property and homeowners on historic preservation planning and awareness, raise funding, and protect local historic sites. Luke conducted fee-for-service survey work and worked on their library projects. He edited site narratives and report drafts, finished reconnaissance on a survey on village properties, did covenant review, and worked in the library scanning and inventorying. He finished a massive slides project after scanning and digitizing over 80,000 slides over the course of many years (this is not his first time interning with the Landmark Society)! He also mentioned that there are many ways one can get involved in the field of historical preservation, many that align with the field of archaeology!

Thank you to all the presenters and everyone who attended our first colloquium of What We Did This Summer/Recently!

IUP at the 83rd Annual Society for American Archaeology Meeeting

by Genevieve Everett

By: Genevieve Everett

Cherry Blossoms around the Tidal Basin

Employers should allow attendees/participants the Monday after the Society for American Archaeology (SAA) conference off. Let me tell you, I’m exhausted, but I’m feeling energized by all the amazing papers that I had the chance to hear, and the poster’s that were exhibited throughout the week.

Wednesday morning, myself, and 6 of my classmates (and luggage) crammed into the Arch Services van, and headed to the 83rd Annual SAA conference held in Washington, DC, in the lovely Woodley Park neighborhood. This was my first ever SAA conference. We arrive mid-afternoon at our small, but cozy Air Bnb that was located about a half hour (walk) from the conference center. After settling in a bit, we all walked to the conference center to register. We walked past yellow daffodils and purple flowers’ cascading down stonewalls, the first real sign of spring. One route we could take to and from the conference was through the National Zoo! After a delicious Lebanese meal (and cocktail), we all headed back to the Air Bnb to prepare for the first day of presentations, posters, and seeing old friends/colleagues.

IUP Ethics Bowl team

Thursday morning was a BUSY day. I was up bright and early to go to Sami’s presentation on her thesis research at Pandenarium, a 19th century Freedman site in Mercer County, PA. This was one of her last presentations before she graduates in May! She did really great! Shortly after I wandered around the poster session, and was particularly interested in the Caves and Rockshelter posters. From there, I headed to watch our Ethics Bowl team debate Cornell University. The point of the Ethics Bowl is to put two teams from different universities in front of a panel of judges, and debate about hypothetical (and in some cases based on real events) ethical issues within archaeology. Our team did amazing, however, they did not make it to the final round. Later I walked around the Expo room browsing books and picking up free “swag”, and from there I stopped by to see Sami and Angie Jaillet-Wentling’s poster. They were presenting the results of the public archaeology days they held this past fall at Pandenarium, which contributed to the assemblage Sami was examining for her thesis.

Sami and Angie at their poster session

The remainder of Thursday I spent alone, going from session to session. This past fall I helped excavate a quarry site in Northern Maine (if you go back to the September blog posts, you can read about it) under the supervision of Nathaniel Kitchel and Heather Rockwell. In the afternoon, Nathaniel presented a paper that the two co-authored on the results of this excavation. Next, I stopped by a talk in honor of Dennis Stanford. I especially enjoyed Ciprian Ardelean’s talk that was partially about working with Dennis Stanford, but also the Chiquihuite Cave in Zacatecas Mexico. Mr. Ardelean talked about being an “outsider” from Romania working in the Americas. He also talked about the importance of working with students. More specifically, the merit and value of getting dirty, working in isolation for so many days, being in nature and cooking and enjoying meals together. I really connect with this notion.

Friday I decided to head toward the Washington monument to see the Cherry Blossoms in full bloom. I did a loop around the Tidal Basin, dodging hordes of school groups. Despite the tourist traffic along the way, it was such a pleasant walk. I wanted to hit up the Natural History Museum, but again, it was swamped with school groups, so I turned around and headed back to the conference. I hit up a few more talks, had a drink with my mentor, and went out to Haikan, an amazing ramen place with some friends. The rest of the night was spent celebrating the fact that our classmate/friend Zaakiyah won the Paul Goldberg Award, a national award, awarded to a single MA student in either the geosciences or archaeology!

Zaakiyah with the Paul Goldberg Award!

On Saturday, my main objective was to attend the symposium, “Wicked Awesome” Archaeology: New Data and Directions In The Archaeological Northeast”. A few friends/acquaintances were presenting during this session, including Dick Boisvert and Zachary Singer. Dick Boisvert is my mentor and is on my thesis committee. He talked about the legacy of the State Conservation and Rescue Archaeology Program (SCRAP). Following Dick, Zach discussed “New Investigations of the Paleoindian Component at the Templeton Site in Western Connecticut”. Much like SCRAP, students and volunteers help excavate the Templeton Site, which to me, is always a wonderful collaboration. After their talk I met up with my family, and we walked through the National Zoo. Later, we met up with my boyfriend, and grabbed dinner at a Mexican restaurant where delicious food and margarita’s were consumed.

The Government, University, and Heritage Stewardship crew!

Sunday, the final day of the conference, and the day of my presentation (at 8 am) in the “Government, Universities, and Heritage Stewardship: A Student and Young Professional Symposium”. I was in this symposium with several IUP classmates, some fellow PennDOT interns, and two graduate students from the University of Montana. My paper was titled, “From Field School to Graduate School: How One Public Archaeology Program Has Made It All Possible”. I discussed the benefits/legacy of SCRAP, and how I am using SCRAP data to complete my Master’s thesis. I also provided some preliminary results/conclusions to my thesis research. As my first time presenting at a conference, I have to say, I don’t think I bombed! I felt pretty confident up there, but that took A LOT of practicing over and over again. Everyone that participated in the symposium did great, and each person had a really interesting topic that related to their collaboration with state or federal government agencies. After our symposium, we jumped in the van, and headed back to Indiana.

Personally, the SAA’s were an amazing experience for me. Roughly 20 plus IUP students, past and present, attended the conference. In addition, three professors in the graduate and undergraduate Anthro department presented papers.  It felt really good knowing that IUP had a strong presence, one that shows that we are a tight knit group, and that we are able to successfully transition from our undergraduate or graduate studies into viable careers in archaeology. Most IUP graduates are working in CRM, while some are getting their PhD’s. I hope that we can continue to show the archaeological community that we have a strong program for years to come. See you all next year in Albuquerque!!!

IUP ANTHROPOLOGY DEPARTMENT

California Love: An Archaeological Survey on Santa Rosa Island

by Genevieve Everett

By: Matthew Bjorkman and Britney Elsbury-Orris

During our undergraduate years at Penn State (2013-2014), we worked in the Zooarchaeology labs sorting shell midden assemblages from the California Channel Islands. The project was a part of Dr. Christopher Jazwa’s dissertation, which involved studying how patterns of human settlement, subsistence, and mobility were influenced by the changing environment and cultural factors. Five years later, we were lucky enough to receive an invite from Dr. Jazwa to participate in a week-long survey on Santa Rosa Island. The goals of the project were to survey new areas of the island, primarily the interior, to identify and record new archaeological sites for the National Park Service (NPS). Our team consisted of four members: Ourselves, Dr. Jazwa, and Kirk Schmitz (a master’s student at the University of Nevada, Reno).

Day 1: Visit to La Brea Tar Pits and Pink’s

View of faunal remains in the Observation PitOn our first day in Los Angeles, we visited the La Brea Tar Pits and its associated museum. The La Brea Tar Pits are located in central Los Angeles, and the world’s most famous Ice Age fossil active excavation site. The museum included a park, which contained sculptures of Ice Age animals, a Pleistocene garden, and ongoing excavations of the tar pits, as well as the George C. Page museum. The museum contains fossils excavated from pits, some dating back to the earliest excavation in 1915. The museum contained a fossil lab (called the “Fish Bowl”) that allowed visitors to view the scientists and volunteers in their ‘natural environment’ while they worked to remove tar from the fossilized remains. For us, the coolest part of the La Brea Tar Pits was the Observation Pit, which allowed us to get up close and personal with an active tar pit that still housed the remains of extinct Ice Age animals. After La Brea, we visited Pink’s Hot Dogs in Hollywood to eat some of the most ridiculous hot dogs humans have ever made. The portions were so enormous that it put us into a food coma, allowing us to rest for our trip to the island the following day.

View of faunal remains in the Observation Pit

Pink’s Hot Dogs

 

Day 2: Traveling to Santa Rosa and Foraging for Dinner

Waking up early is not our thing. Thankfully the jet lag made our 6 A.M. wake-up call much easier. After loading up our gear and supplies into “the Wagon” (as Dr. Jazwa calls it) we departed to the docks in Ventura, Ca. We boarded the Ocean Ranger, a boat owned by the NPS, and we departed on our 3 hour ride to Santa Rosa (Gilligan’s Island anyone??). We arrived at the Santa Rosa dock in the early afternoon and quickly took our belongs up to the park housing. Our first order of business was to travel to the south side of Santa Rosa to collect mussels from the intertidal zone that would be used for isotopic testing…and dinner! The collection process was not as easy as we would have envisioned, since the tide was relatively high that day. Despite taking some unwanted dips in the Pacific Ocean, we were able to collect our sample (approximately 50 mussels and 20 turban snails) and returned back to housing.  Unbeknownst to us, Dr. Jazwa apparently also has his Ph. D. in the culinary arts (not really), as this was the first of many amazing meals he cooked for us during our stay.

Collecting mussels

Midden site along the coast

 

Day 3+4: Rain, Rain, Go Away!

Our survey got off to a slow start. During the first 3 days we were on Santa Rosa, the island received more rain than it had all year! Santa Rosa is primarily made up of sandstone rock, meaning the roads do not handle water very well, making getting to the survey area impossible. Instead of surveying during these days, Dr. Jazwa gave us a tour of closer sites along the coast. Most of these sites were ones that we had analyzed material from while at PSU. Our tour of the island included visiting the historic ranches, coastal shell midden sites, and Cherry Canyon. While walking through Cherry Canyon, Dr. Jazwa pointed out the numerous rockshelter sites that have been identified.

Rockshelter in Cherry Canyon

 

Day 4: Let the Survey Begin!

The rain had ceased and we could finally start our survey! Unfortunately, the roads were still closed due to the rain so we had to hike a few miles to our survey area. The hike was generally nice, except for the stream crossings and climbing over a mountain ridge. The plan for the project was to do a surface survey along ridge tops on the interior of the island to locate possible inland habitation sites. Our luck was good from the start, as we were able to identify and record four sites that day. All four sites contained lithic scatters that were visible on the surface. We found some really interesting artifacts at two of the larger sites , such as a volcanic chopper, lithic cores, a part of a sandstone vessel bowl, and a broken projectile point. For each site, we had to record the site boundary and the location of the most significant artifacts using a Trimble. We created a sketch map of these features and took site overview photos, as well as close-ups of the significant artifacts. On our return trip to housing after surveying we walked through one of the only two Torrey Pine stands in the world (the other is a golf course in San Diego). The detour added a couple more miles to our hike, but it was well worth the extra leg pain.

Sandstone vessel fragment

Recording a site

The massive pinecones from Torrey Pines

 

Day 5: Oh Deer!

We did not have quite as much luck on our second day of survey. We only located one site, but were able to survey a large swath of land. The site we identified was a large shell midden and lithic scatter adjacent to an old road. We found an almost complete chalcedony projectile point (lying in the road!) and two possible groundstone artifacts. While we were not able to locate any other sites, we did find three complete skeletons of deer/elk. We learned that deer and elk populations were brought to the island by humans in the mid 1900s, but were fully eradicated by 2017 to preserve the natural state of the island. With our final day of survey in the books, we headed back to housing to prepare for our departure and the end of our vacation.

View from atop a ridgeline

Chalcedony projectile point

 

Day 6: Island Packers

We arrived at the dock about an hour and half before our ride home arrived. We used this time to explore the Carrington Point Marine Reserve and play in the sand.  We saw previously identified sites on top of the cliffs, and wandered in coastal caves and rockshelters. An Island Packers boat (equipped with a bar!) picked us and some tourists up to take us back to Ventura. The ocean had some large swells making our return trip exciting or terrifying, depending on how you look at it. We got lucky enough to see some dolphins riding the large waves during the ride, and honestly they were handling the waves better than we were! The Packers boat made a short stop at Painted Cave, a large marine cave on the northern side of Santa Cruz Island, and we were able to take some awesome pictures of it. To put a stamp on our trip, we returned to Pink’s (again) before being dropped off at LAX to return to good ole IUP.

This project was one of the greatest experiences we have had in our young career in archaeology. We were able to learn a lot of new information about the islands, as well as pick up on some new techniques and methods for doing archaeology. We would like to thank Dr. Jazwa for inviting us to be a part of the project, and our professors for allowing us to go on the trip. We recommend visiting the islands if you are ever in southern California!

IUP ANTHROPOLOGY DEPARTMENT

Working At the Carnegie Museum: A Love Affair.

by Genevieve Everett

By: Kristina Gaugler

The Carnegie Museum and I have a long history.

Early photograph of the Hall of Architecture

I was born and raised in the North Side of Pittsburgh, and like many a “city kid” I was shuttled by school bus to and from the Carnegie Museum throughout grade school, middle school, and high school. I have vivid memories of sitting at the long wooden tables in the museum cafeteria, under enormous glass windows, scarfing my brown bag lunch so I could get back to exploring. I was the kid who shushed classmates who were interrupting the docents, who asked a thousand questions, read every single word on the exhibit displays, and who didn’t want to leave at the end of the day. When I was an angst-ridden teenager, I would hang out at the museum after school, moping around the hall of architecture or sitting alone in the replica Egyptian tomb. Visiting the museum now, so many years later, I still have the same feelings of comfort and wonder as I did when I was younger. As an archaeologist and general history enthusiast, I love all museums, but the Carnegie definitely holds a special place for me. It feels like my museum.

My purpose in writing this post is to share some of my experiences working and volunteering at the Carnegie. I hope that I also highlight the notion that outreach programs and education within public institutions is valuable, worth our efforts, and fun for people of all ages.

I went to the University of Pittsburgh for my undergraduate in anthropology. While attending Pitt I had a work-study position through the Carnegie at the “Bone Hunters Quarry,” where I taught visitors (mostly school groups) about extinct animals through the excavation of a fake site. I learned that if you gave a small child a chisel and told them to dig wherever they wanted, you were very likely to ignite a spark within them that excited their curiosity in the past. Although, on occasion a spark was ignited within them to throw the chisel, sometimes narrowly missing your own head, those times were fun too. Either way, this was the first time that I really began to discover how much I enjoyed talking to visitors about archaeology and history.

Talking with visitors during Artifact I.D. day at the Carnegie

After graduating from Pitt, I found work as an archaeological field technician. Eventually though, I decided that I wanted to take a break from full time field work to prepare to go back to graduate school. Through a series of fortunate events I began, once again, to work for the Carnegie Museum. This time I volunteered at the Edward O’Neil Research Center, which is the Carnegie Museums off-site collections facility. My supervisor and friend, Amy Covell, allowed me the freedom to work on projects that interested me in the lab. When I started volunteering at the annex, the building was in the process of being renovated and many artifacts were going to be moved to new locations. Thus, I began my time there by helping to build permanent supports for fragile materials, including prehistoric pottery, stone tools, and glass artifacts. I learned proper handling of artifacts in accordance with the most current curatorial procedures, and I learned conservation techniques used in cleaning objects, including removing old plastics, adhesives, and ink that were used in the early days of museum storage and curation.

My favorite task at the museum however, was to be a part of the educational outreach programs. Last June I had the opportunity to speak with visitors about archaeology during the Carnegie’s “After Dark Program,” a monthly series where guests can come to the museum in the evening to explore, eat, drink, and hear lectures on various subjects. Another one of my favorite programs at the museum is “Artifact Identification Day.” This event gives visitors the opportunity to bring in their heirlooms and artifacts to have them identified by staff. It is always amazing, and sometimes humorous (see photo of me holding a Lodoicea) to help identify the items that people bring.

Holding a Lodoicea, or sea coconut, during Artifact I.D. Day. Lodoicea is the largest seed in the world! (And yes, it does look like a butt)

 

I have often thought of the Carnegie as being a museum of a museum. The Carnegie began acquiring artifacts and creating exhibits over a hundred years ago, and many of those early exhibits and artifacts are still on display. Working and volunteering at the museum gave me the opportunity to be a part of the team of people who were helping to conserve and protect these cherished items for future generations. To me, protecting artifacts and archaeological sites begins by showing people why they should care about them. For this reason, programs and institutions that promote stewardship of the past are incredibly important. History is made up of millions of stories. One of those stories is bound to pique the interest of someone! I’m very thankful for my time at the Carnegie, and I look forward to many more years of learning and visiting!

Photo of “Early Hall of Architecture” from: http://carnegiemuseums.org/about-us/our-history/

IUP DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

Drowning in Dirty Dishes: My Thesis Research At Pandenarium

by Genevieve Everett

By: Samantha Taylor

Upon enrolling in graduate school, I had a pretty clear understanding of what aspects of archaeology interested me the most: the African Diaspora and historic ceramics. I never imagined that I would actually be able to pull those two interests together into a thesis topic, but here I am over a year later, waist-deep in artifacts from my thesis site.

The Half-Cellar Foundation at the John and Rosie Allen Residence

My thesis research is on Pandenarium, an antebellum (pre-Civil War) African American diaspora site in northwestern Pennsylvania. In its prime, Pandenarium was home to dozens of ex-slaves who had been freed by their owner, Virginia physician Charles Everett, upon his death. Along with freeing his former slaves, Everett’s will also funded the creation of a modest-sized settlement in Mercer County, Pennsylvania. The freed people of Pandenarium arrived to the settlement in the fall of 1854 to find 24 furnished houses that were built by the local abolitionists. Rosie Allen, a first generation occupant of Pandenarium, was quoted saying that the settlement was “just like heaven.” Despite the economic pull of nearby cities such as Sharon, New Castle, and Mercer, Pandenarium was inhabited until the 1930s.

Excavating Test Unit 2 during the first day of the Public Archaeology Event

My research focuses specifically on a single household at Pandenarium belonging to John and Rosie Allen, the original inhabitants and first-generation freed slaves at the site. In particular, I want to compare the ceramics found around the Allen’s half-cellar foundation to those recovered from a nearby (the Old Economy Village), another antebellum freed African American site (Timbuctoo, New Jersey), and a Virginia plantation that neighbored Everett’s (Monticello, Virginia). The comparative analysis focuses on structures at each of these sites that date approximately to the same time period that Pandenarium was inhabited. By conducting this analysis I hope to determine what types of ceramics the Allen’s were using, how they were using them, and in what ways they were participating in the local and regional economy.

After nearly four months of deliberation and planning with my thesis committee, my thesis fieldwork began on July 14th 2017 and was completed September 17th  2017. Of course there was a month-long break in between those dates in which no fieldwork occurred and my hands (and brain?) were bleeding from all of the washing and cataloging I was doing. Fieldwork consisted of a total of 28 shovel tests around the half-cellar foundation, and two judgmental 1-meter by 1-meter test units.

Both professionals and the interested public were involved in the weekends activities

In order to accomplish this I enlisted the help of my committee, fellow graduate students, and the public. The first weekend of fieldwork went without problem. I was assisted by my amazing mentor, Casey Campetti, and was able to clear the land, lay out my STP grid, and even finish digging the first three STPs. However the next three weekends were riddled with bad weather and poor field conditions, causing me to cancel a total of four days of field work. By the first week of August, 25 of my STPs were completed but we were unable to begin the two test units. Angela Jaillet-Wentling, one of my committee members and the only other person to conduct archaeological research at Pandenarium, and I were able to organize a public archaeology weekend at the site in order to introduce the site to the public and finish up my fieldwork.

Pandenarium’s inaugural Public Archaeology Event occurred on September 16th and 17th. The invitation was extended to the local Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology chapter, graduate students and anthropology professors at IUP, retired veterans, a reporter from a local newspaper, and interested members of the local government. A total of 19 individuals attended the public event, 8 of which participated both days. The event consisted of a site tour, a quick informative speech about the site, the excavation of two test units and three STPs, along with a lunch generously provided by the Jaillet-Wentling clan. The event was also featured on the front page of the Record Argus Newspaper on September 24th, 2017. Overall, feedback from the Public Archaeology Event at Pandenarium was positive and most attendants were interested in attending future public archaeol

A small sample of some of the unique artifacts found at Pandenarium

ogy events. Angie and I hope to assist in hosting more public archaeology events at Pandenarium in the future, as the site is a rare glimpse into a marginalized past.

Following Pandenarium’s Public Archaeology Event, my fieldwork was completed and I have been in cataloging hell. I’m being dramatic, I actually really enjoy cataloging, researching, and analyzing everything that has been unearthed at Pandenarium. To date, I have cataloged and washed 3,226 artifacts from Pandenarium. Also, I currently have a really awesome undergraduate student assisting me with washing! So far this whole “thesis” thing has been a really insane, stressful, and educational experience. I feel as though I’ve really grown as an archaeologist and a person. My future goals for this site are the following: to get Pandenarium listed on the National Register, to track down descendants and get them more involved in archaeology and research at the site, and to hopefully inspire someone *cough* Dr. Ford *cough* to start an undergraduate field school at the site.

In the meantime, if you have questions shoot me an email (TJKW@iup.edu) and keep yourself updated on my research by following the hashtag #Pandenarium2017.

Pandenarium Public Archaeology Day 2017 Article

IUP ANTHROPOLOGY DEPARTMENT

My summer as a PHAST intern

by Genevieve Everett

By: Genevieve Everett

PHAST 2017 Crew (from left to right: Sami, Zaakiyah, Gen)

This is going to sound real cliché, but time flies when you’re having fun! That’s exactly how I feel about this past summer as a PennDOT Highway Archaeological Survey Team (PHAST) intern. Last day of Spring 2017 classes was Friday May 12th, so my parents came to visit me in Pittsburgh that weekend as a celebration for finishing my first year of graduate school. The following Monday, May 15th was our first day of work. Yes, not much of a break, but that’s being in grad school! Our first week was basically orientation where Joe Baker, the PHAST Supervisor told us that if we weren’t feeling lost during our first few weeks of work there was something wrong with us. Well, speaking for myself, I was definitely feeling a bit lost and rusty in the digging shovel test pit department since it had been quite some time, but after a couple of weeks of doing it day after day I was becoming more confident in my work.

A friendly little sheep at one of our projects

We were immersed in CRM life: living out of a suitcase, staying in hotels, and eating out for every meal. Our projects took us to different counties all over the Common Wealth, which was probably one of my favorite aspects about this job. We saw parts of Pennsylvania that I would have otherwise skipped over on the way to other places. Pennsylvania is BEAUTIFUL! Most of the work we were doing was Phase I (bridge replacements/rehabilitation), however, we did do some Phase II work, several GPR surveys, metal detecting, cleaning/cataloging artifacts, mapping in ArcGIS, and writing reports.

Old wooden boxcar at the Muddy Creek Forks project

One of my favorite projects this summer was a Phase I/II at historic Muddy Creek Forks Village in York County. We excavated around the railroad Section House built by the Maryland and Pennsylvania Railroad in the early 20th century for the Section Gang. The Section Gang maintained 10 miles of track year round, storing their track car and tools in the Section House. The Ma & Pa Railroad was an important part of industrial life in early-mid 20th century, making it easier for individuals to travel between York and Baltimore and to ship/receive goods. The Section House is an important resource for understanding what early-mid 20th century life may have been like for railroad workers. Eventually, the Section House will be raised onto a new foundation, and rehabilitated for future generations to enjoy along the walking path at the Ma & Pa Railroad Historic Village. Seriously, if you’re ever in the area, visit this site.

All in all, it has been an incredible and educational summer. As much as I love being out in the field I am definitely ready to start back up with classes and work on my thesis!

Visit the IUP Anthropology Department

 

My thesis fieldwork in Cyprus (by Sarah Henley)

by lmesser

This past May, I traveled to Cyprus to conduct my Masters thesis research. The purpose of my research is to use portable X-Ray Fluorescence (pXRF) analyze the elemental composition of Roman and Late Roman Period (30 B.C. to A.D. 614) Cypriot Red Slip ware (CRS) sherds, which basically provides a chemical “fingerprint” for sherds made from different clay sources.  My original goal was to compare my results to naturally-occurring clay bed samples in order to investigate their origin of manufacture, as well as regional trade patterns across Cyprus and parts of neighboring Turkey.

I traveled with Dr. Robert S. Moore from the IUP History department, and Dr. William R. Caraher from the University of North Dakota History department. We spent the first night in Larnaca, Cyprus, which is located in Larnaca Bay on the southeastern part of the island. Larnaca is a somewhat noisy city, with an oceanfront full of restaurants, an ancient fort at one end, and a marina on the other. There is also a beautiful church located down the road from the fort. Throughout the city there are various types of architecture, which gives the city character. As you make your way down small alleys you can find shops and more restaurants. The beach was also nice, but not as beautiful as other places I have seen in the Mediterranean.

The next day, we traveled to Polis, which is located on the western side of the island, and to give you an idea of the island’s size it took about 3 hours to get there from Larnaca. The inner terrain of Cyprus is beautiful with the Troodos Mountains, and the southwestern coast, which both reminded me of Greece. Polis was a nice small town, and much quieter then Larnaca.  The next 4 days we worked in a small, fairly dirty, basement where all the ceramic artifacts were curated. The first day I spent running tests with CRS body sherds to figure out how to go about collecting my data. I had not anticipated for each ceramic sherd to have concretion, which are limestone deposits that accumulate on artifacts that have been in the ground for long periods of time. Concretion can only be completely removed by acid, which takes a great amount of time to remove.  The next 3 days I spent collecting my data. I tried to test areas on each sherd that had the least amount of concretion.  On May 20th we returned to Larnaca. The last 4 days we worked in a warehouse, which was cleaner then the curation building in Polis. The sherds were in bags, which were in crates that were marked by excavation unit(s). Dr. Moore had e-mailed me a list of the CRS sherds, and I pulled them from the crates, and bags. Fortunately, these sherds had less concretion on them because they were surface finds.

XRF unit (left) and example of concretion on an CRS sherd (right)

A professor from Messiah College’s history department, Dr. David K. Pettegrew, an associate of Dr. Moore and Dr. Caraher’s, brought a group of undergraduate students to Cyprus. On my last day I had the opportunity to talk to the students about pXRF and my thesis. While in Cyprus Dr. Moore showed me the sites in which the sherds I tested came from. In Polis the sherds were excavated from the porch of a Christian basilica dating to the 6th/7th century A.D. In Larnaca the sherds were collected from a Roman Period site that used to be a major southern port town.  Overall, I had a  good experience; the only down side was I was not able to collect clay bed samples as originally planned. Later in June I will be meeting with the Applied Research Lab people at IUP, who will help me to statistically statistically analyze my data.

IUP Department of Anthropology