Florida Museum Environmental Archaeology Baptizing Springs Zooarchaeological Data
The data in this occurrence resource has been published as a Darwin Core Archive (DwC-A), which is a standardized format for sharing biodiversity data as a set of one or more data tables. The core data table contains 452 records.
1 extension data tables also exist. An extension record supplies extra information about a core record. The number of records in each extension data table is illustrated below.
This IPT archives the data and thus serves as the data repository. The data and resource metadata are available for download in the downloads section. The versions table lists other versions of the resource that have been made publicly available and allows tracking changes made to the resource over time.
Download the latest version of this resource data as a Darwin Core Archive (DwC-A) or the resource metadata as EML or RTF:
The table below shows only published versions of the resource that are publicly accessible.
How to cite
Researchers should cite this work as follows:
Emery K (2021): Florida Museum Environmental Archaeology Baptizing Springs Zooarchaeological Data. v1.11. University of Florida Environmental Archaeology. Dataset/Occurrence. http://ipt.vertnet.org:8080/ipt/resource?r=baptizing_springs&v=1.11
Researchers should respect the following rights statement:
The publisher and rights holder of this work is University of Florida Environmental Archaeology. To the extent possible under law, the publisher has waived all rights to these data and has dedicated them to the Public Domain (CC0 1.0). Users may copy, modify, distribute and use the work, including for commercial purposes, without restriction.
Occurrence; Specimen; Occurrence
Who created the resource:
Who can answer questions about the resource:
Who filled in the metadata:
Who else was associated with the resource:
Near Luraville in Suwannee County, Florida.
|Bounding Coordinates||South West [29.993, -83.167], North East [30.307, -82.716]|
All zooarchaeological specimens identified to phylum, class, order, genus, or species.
Baptizing Spring (08SU65) is a Spanish Mission village archaeological site located in Suwannee County, Florida. The site was excavated in 1976 by Jerald T. Milanich (Florida Museum) and again 1978 by L. Jill Loucks (Florida Museum). Baptizing Springs was the focus of Loucks’ 1979 dissertation at the University of Florida. The site was occupied from approximately 1655 and 1656. While the exact founding date is unknown, the site was occupied by at least 1655 and likely abandoned around 1656 during the Timucuan uprising. The zooarchaeological specimen record data associated with this work are curated in the Environmental Archaeology Laboratory at the Florida Museum, Gainesville.
|Title||Baptizing Spring (08SU65)|
|Funding||Research at Baptizing Spring was funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (Dr. Charles Fairbanks, principle investigator).|
|Study Area Description||Also known as Convent- Spanish Baptizing Springs Location: Suwannee County, FL, near Luraville From the Florida Master Site File: Per the Florida Master Site File, the site landform is described as Gulf Coastal Lowlands with an elevation of 40-50 (units not listed) and Blanton, High Lakeland and Blanton Fine Sand soil types/associations. Vegetation is listed as “2; Forests of Longleaf pine and xerophytic oaks”. A spring is adjacent to the site. The culture or phase classification is Leon/Jefferson. Information and excerpts from Loucks (1979): During excavation, “stratification indicated a considerable amount of water deposition lenses and sheet erosion throughout the depth of the excavated unit (an average of 45 cm deep)” (page 104). Loucks describes local people describing the site area flooding “during the high water flood stage of the Sante Fe Suwannee Rivers in the spring of 1973” (page 104). At the time of excavation the property was owned by Owen-Illiois Inc. and used for planting pine seedlings. Therefore, in terms of vegetation, Loucks notes “To what extent modern vegetation associations approximate former conditions is impossible to say” (page 105). See Table 2 for list of flora local to the Baptizing Spring vicinity. Loucks, L.J. (1979) Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Perspectives of the Mission System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.|
|Design Description||Information and excerpts from Loucks (1979): The Baptizing Spring site was a Spanish mission village. The site was investigated to learn more about the Spanish-Indian interactions in Florida. Artifacts recovered included both aboriginal and Spanish types: lithics, projectile points, Spanish ceramics (See Table 7), lead shots, glass beads, metal objects, aboriginal ceramics (e.g., St. Johns Plain, Miller Plain, and Jefferson Ware) (See Table 9), Colono-Indian Ceramics. Two Spanish structures/activity areas were identified at the site, Structures A and B. The features associated with each were heavily impacted by modern land clearing and planting activities. Located on a rise, Structure B was composed of the remains of a “packed red clay floor, some charred wood, five charred posts, and sections of two wall ‘trenches’ (page 130). The structure was roughly 10m by 8m, and possibly a “church” (See Figure 3). There were several features (e.g. “pits”) associated with Structure B. Structure A was smaller than Structure B and “structural evidence had been severely disturbed by plowing” (page 135). The structure was composed of red sandy clay and two postholes, and was approximately 7 m by 7.5 m (See Figure 9). Unlike Structure B, a clay floor was not present, but the walls “were probably wattle and daub” (page 135). A large (1.35 x 1.38m) hearth was located inside the structure. The majority of Spanish artifacts were recovered from this structure. Artifact concentrations were larger in Structure A than Structure B. Spanish artifacts included ceramics, nails, and spikes. The Spanish structures did not contain an abundance of faunal remains (as compared to the aboriginal structures described below). Three areas of aboriginal structures/activity areas were located at the site. The areas included “concentrated features, postholes, and smudge pits (small pits packed with charred wood)” (page 138). Based on 5 large postholes, Structure D was likely a 6m circular structure (See figure 10). Eight features were associated with Structure D, including a “rectanguloid, deep pit that was probably used for storage and later filled with refuse. A partial, articulated pig skeleton was recovered from within the structure boundaries. Other features included conical pits and postholes. The aboriginal pits contained relatively large amounts of well-preserved faunal remains. Five “game pieces” shaped out of gopher tortoise shell were also recovered from Structure D (See Figure 35). The other aboriginal structure/activity area is Structure C (Figure 11). Pits, postholes, smudge pits, and fire pits were associated with Structure C. Similar to Structure D, faunal remains were recovered from the area, including ample white tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). The majority of “food bone” was recovered from a large trash pit. Although aboriginal-associated postholes and pits were located, they were not explored as thoroughly as the site areas with Structures A, B, C, and D due to time constraints (e.g., Figure 14). However, one trash pit contained “well-preserved faunal material (including fish vertebrae), sherds, and lithic artifacts (page 146). Loucks, L.J. (1979) Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Perspectives of the Mission System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.|
The personnel involved in the project:
Information and Excerpts from Loucks 1979, see also Appendix A (Excavation Data and Detailed Feature Descriptions) 1976 Excavations: Site limits were determined via “ ‘posthole’ testing and surface observations” (page118). “A total of 346 square meters was excavated in four portions of the site: (1) Group A, (2) Group B, (3) Group C, and (4) two two-meter wide trenches south and southeast of Group A” (page 119). Structure A was in Group B, and Structure B in Group A. Group C was the “Indian sector” of the site and included four 3x3 m square test units. In an effort to locate a cemetery, 180 posthole tests and a trench were excavated north of Structure A. “All excavated dirt from Structures A and C were sifted through mechanical shaker screens outfitted with wide gauge (3/8” by ¾”) diamond mesh. Trench and Structure B materials were not screened. Contents of Structure C features were screened through 1/8” by 1/8” fine screen or were simply troweled carefully” (page 120-121). (See also Heath 1977) 1978 Excavations: Based on 1976 excavations, additional units and a one meter wide trench were excavated (See Figures 6, 7). “A total of 197 square meters were investigated across the site. With some exceptions, all excavated soil was screened through ¼” by ¼” hardware cloth over expanded diamond mesh on mechanical shaker screens. Parts of Trench #1 and all of Trench #6 (Figure 7) were screened through 3/8” by ¾” expanded diamond mesh [on a stand when the mechanical shaker was not working]…Bagged contents from five features were water screened through fine mesh (1/1” by 1/16”) during later analysis.” (page 122). Three Zones were established (pages125-126): Zone I: IA) litter/root zone, IB) grey, greyish tan or tan with grey and brown mottling, IC) leaching zone from IB to Zone II Zone II: culturally sterile zone with features extending into sterile soil, dark to light tan Zone III: clay or clayey sand that was not excavated Zone IV: only located in a deep feature in one specific square 443N 547 E, almost white sand and no cultural materials, was between Zone II and a limestone/clay substrate Loucks, L.J. (1979) Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Perspectives of the Mission System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.
|Study Extent||From Loucks 1979: “The Baptizing Spring site covers an estimated 2.83 HA which includes Baptizing Spring in the northeast corner” (119). (See Figure 6) Loucks, L.J. (1979) Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Perspectives of the Mission System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.|
Method step description:
|Collection Name||Baptizing Spring (08SU65). Accession #0221, Environmental Archaeology, Florida Museum, Gainesville|
|Collection Identifier||Environmental Archaeology|
|Parent Collection Identifier||Florida Museum|
- Heath, C.M. (1977) A Comparative Study of Spanish and Indian Subsistence at the Baptizing Spring Site, 8-Su-65. Unpublished undergraduate honors thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville.
- Loucks, L.J. (1978) Suwannee County Survey Report, Fall 1977: An Account of Sites Located on Property Owned by Owens-Illinois, Inc. Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville.
- Loucks, L.J. (1979) Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Perspectives of the Mission System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.
- Loucks, J.L. (1991) Spanish-Indian Interaction on the Florida Missions: The Archaeology of Baptizing Spring. Florida Anthropologist 44(2-4):204-213.
- Loucks, L.J. (1993) Spanish-Indian Interaction on the Florida Missions: The Archaeology of Baptizing Spring. In the The Spanish Missions of La Florida (B.G. McEwan, ed.) 193-216. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Information and excerpts from Loucks (1979): Zooarchaeological Analysis (from Loucks 1979: 221-232; Tables 11, 12) Cynthia Heath analyzed the 1976 sample. Arlene Fradkin analyzed the 1978 sample. Loucks also analyzed for evidence of butchering and “some re-identification” (page 221). Overall, the faunal remains are described as fragmentary and demineralized (page 212). The majority of faunal remains are from vertebrate taxa, followed by a few identified invertebrate specimens (Table 11). Screening of faunal materials was not consistent across site areas or features. “There is little doubt that failure to screen the 1976 trenches and all materials from Structure A introduced some bias into the sample even if no bone was missed in the excavation since the possibility always exists that some was. Additionally, only fine screening of features would have recovered very small bones, fish scales, etc. Fortunately, the majority of the features were fine screened although portions of large 1978 features were only screened using regular mesh (1/4”by ¼” on 3/8” by ¾” expanded mesh). Even using this larger sized mesh, minute bone fragments were recovered (about .25 square centimeter). If small bones such as fish vertebrae were encountered when reaming out features, the entire feature contents were bagged and returned to the lab for water screening through fine mesh. It is fortunate, however, that recovery techniques were inconsistent with the goal of recovering all faunal remains.” (Loucks 1979: 121). Zooarchaeological specimen identification took place at the Florida Museum using the zooarchaeological comparative skeletal collection. When possible, bones were identified to the level of genus or species, or the next ascending category. “Miscellaneous bone” was used for fragments not identifiable to finer taxonomic resolution. Heath (1977) calculated weight via “contributions of different faunal groups as well as raw numbers of fragments, relative frequencies, and MNI” (page 222). The bone from the 1978 excavations were not weighed. Loucks, L.J. (1979) Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Perspectives of the Mission System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.
|Purpose||Description of the zooarchaeological analysis of specimen records from the Baptizing Spring site.|