Files
Abstract
This study investigates monumental architecture in the southern Florida interior and how these spaces are tied to the trajectories of cooperation centering on large scale labor constructions over time. This work examines the creation of monumental earthworks to investigate these trajectories and their social relationships regarding cooperative labor. The area of study is Fort Center, a multi-mound monumental site located in the Okeechobee Basin with activity spanning millennia dating at least to the Late Archaic subperiod.
Research regarding monumentality often interprets its emergence as a reflecting social or economic changes but does not focus on its relevance to the individual. Early investment in monumentality signals that it is of intrinsic value at an individual level, and this is significant considering some monumental earthworks require the investment of individuals to be constructed. However, the nature of formative populations at places like Fort Center are frequently difficult to identify and limit our understanding of how large scale labor projects emerge from small communities.
To address this issue, I conducted excavations of depositional spaces associated with communal architecture (the Great Circle) to determine gradual and persistent rates of accumulation through time. I also examined regional settlement patterns as a framework to understand the small resident population in the immediate periphery of Fort Center. Additionally, I examined both the existing radiocarbon assemblage, as well as newly run samples from my excavations at Fort Center, to evaluate the scale and intensity of activity through time. Through these methodologies, I present the case that Fort Center’s persistence stems from its early establishment as a communal space and the continued benefits public architecture offers to individuals and communities alike.
This research presents the case that people in the Okeechobee Basin engaged in cooperative endeavors to meet environmental challenges and strengthen relationships in a sustainable way. Initial investment during the formative period of the site was sustained in part because cooperation in maintaining this space was beneficial to individuals. Through continued investment in public architecture, people nearby were able to solidify social institutions and societal arrangements that would serve as the foundation for community for future generations.
Research regarding monumentality often interprets its emergence as a reflecting social or economic changes but does not focus on its relevance to the individual. Early investment in monumentality signals that it is of intrinsic value at an individual level, and this is significant considering some monumental earthworks require the investment of individuals to be constructed. However, the nature of formative populations at places like Fort Center are frequently difficult to identify and limit our understanding of how large scale labor projects emerge from small communities.
To address this issue, I conducted excavations of depositional spaces associated with communal architecture (the Great Circle) to determine gradual and persistent rates of accumulation through time. I also examined regional settlement patterns as a framework to understand the small resident population in the immediate periphery of Fort Center. Additionally, I examined both the existing radiocarbon assemblage, as well as newly run samples from my excavations at Fort Center, to evaluate the scale and intensity of activity through time. Through these methodologies, I present the case that Fort Center’s persistence stems from its early establishment as a communal space and the continued benefits public architecture offers to individuals and communities alike.
This research presents the case that people in the Okeechobee Basin engaged in cooperative endeavors to meet environmental challenges and strengthen relationships in a sustainable way. Initial investment during the formative period of the site was sustained in part because cooperation in maintaining this space was beneficial to individuals. Through continued investment in public architecture, people nearby were able to solidify social institutions and societal arrangements that would serve as the foundation for community for future generations.