|
Tarlton Cross Mound
| Site Type:
Native American Earthwork |
Age: Unknown |
| Location:Pickaway
Co., Ohio |
Survey Type:
Vertical Magnetic Gradient |
| Instrument:
Geoscan Research FM 36 Fluxgate Gradiometer |
Data Density: 8
readings/meter; 50 cm transect interval |
| Surface Conditions:
Mowed grass, forest undergrowth |
Area Surveyed:
13 10x10-meter blocks (1,300m2) |
By Jarrod Burks, Ph.D., Ohio
Valley Archaeology, Inc.
Map
of Tarlton created by Squier and Davis (1848). Appears as their
Plate XXXVI, No.1
Tarlton Cross is one of the many enigmatic effigy-type mounds
in southern Ohio. Archaeologists, historians, and others have
posited that this mound was built during the Middle Woodland
period (200 B.C.-A.D. 400) by people belonging to a cultural group
referred to as the Hopewell by archaeologists. However, no known
evidence exists to support this claim. Nevertheless, the mound was
likely built during or after the Middle Woodland period, but not
before. Those who came before the Hopewell, archaeologists refer
to them as the Adena, built small-to-large conical mounds and
circular earthen enclosures. Sometimes the mounds were surrounded
by the enclosures. While the Adena were not the first to build
mounds in Ohio (the oldest mounds in Ohio are currently dated to
about 800-900 B.C.), they were the first to build earthen works
other than mounds. Unusually shaped mounds, such as Tarlton, were
first built by the Hopewell, as far as is known today. Recently,
some of Ohio's unusual mounds, such as the Serpent mound and
Alligator mound, were radiocarbon dated to post A.D. 1000,
indicating that they were built by the Fort Ancient, a culture
group in the Middle Ohio Valley known for corn agriculture and
relatively large villages. |
| The cross mound is clearly visible in the data to
the right. The outside edge of the mound is highlighted by a ring
of less magnetic sediments. This ring around the mound corresponds
to a very shallow ditch that surrounds the mound. The dipolar
anomaly (positive and negative) in the center of the mound
corresponds to a depression visible in the mound's surface. The
positive monopolar anomaly to the left of the center is not
evident at the surface and may be the signature of a subsurface
(and submound?) pit feature. In the lower left corner of the data
is the signature of a small mound, which appears in the incorrect
place on the 1848 map. |
 |
|