Abstract

One of the prehistoric Caddo sites represented in the Buddy Calvin Jones Collections at the Gregg County Historical Museum (GCHM) is the Three Mounds Creek site in Gregg County, in East Texas. The site is GC-68 in the Jones site numbering system (68th site he discovered in Gregg County). The available information about the site in the GCHM records is sketchy at best. The site had three mounds along Spring Creek, near its confluence with the Sabine River, in the Longview area. A search of Gregg County 7.5' USGS topographic quadrangles failed to disclose a Spring Creek in the Sabine River basin, so it is likely that the Spring Creek appellation is an informal one used by Jones at the time. Jones' notes also fail to describe the mounds in any fashion, nor their relationship to each other or the landform they were built on, and no map is available that shows the location of the three mounds with respect to where he collected artifacts from the site.

Highlights

  • One of the prehistoric Caddo sites represented in the Buddy Calvin Jones Collections at the Gregg County Historical Museum (GCHM) is the Three Mounds Creek site in Gregg County, in East Texas

  • The one fine \van: shcrd is notable in light of Lh~ possibility that th~ Three Mounds Creek site was occupied beginning in tht: Middle Caddo pt:riod

  • The available notes are skimpy, and the information they provide is not substantive, it appears that Buddy Calvin Jones identified and investigated a Caddo mound site in Gregg County, Texas, baL:k in 1956

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

One of the prehistoric Caddo sites represented in the Buddy Calvin Jones Collections at the Gregg County Historical Museum (GCHM) is the Three Mounds Creek site in Gregg County, in East Texas. (2.9 x 3.6 m) unit at the site, in an old cotton field.lt is unknown if this unit was placed in one of the three mounds, or what the vertical, horizontal, or depositional context of the artifacts from the site in the GCHM collections was In this work, he recovered 264 artifacts, predominantly ceramic sherds (Table 1), along with a few chipped lithic tools and debris, as well as animal bone and mussel shell fragments. He recovered 264 artifacts, predominantly ceramic sherds (Table 1), along with a few chipped lithic tools and debris, as well as animal bone and mussel shell fragments The recovery of these fQO

Decorative Method
Findings
CONCLUSIONS
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call