-
Title
-
An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Choctaw and Washington Counties in Southwest Alabama
-
Date
-
1986
-
Bibliographic Citation
-
Curren, Caleb. 1986. Archaeological Reconnaissance in Choctaw and Washington Counties, Alabama. Report submitted to the Alabama-Tombigbee Regional Commission for the Alabama Historical Commission.
-
annotates
-
o The fieldwork resulted in the identification of 66 archaeological sites, spanning Paleoindian through 19th-century time periods, with dominant occupations during the Archaic and Woodland periods.
o Site are characterized as quarries, upland campsites, riverine floodplain occupations, and mounds (e.g., Gibson Mound).
• The report includes a detailed discussion of tree farming and mechanized land clearing as major contributors to the destruction of archaeological sites in the region, especially on Tallahatta sandstone ridges.
Choctaw / Ancestral Choctaw Relevance
• While the report does not tie any individual site definitively to Choctaw occupation, its geographic scope, references, and environmental descriptions make it highly relevant for assessing potential ancestral Choctaw landscapes:
o The survey region overlaps the Tombigbee River valley, central to Choctaw ancestral territory, particularly along the upland and ridge systems east of the river.
o Several sites are situated in upland, eroded areas, interpreted as long-used seasonal campsites or stone procurement zones, consistent with Choctaw-era land use patterns known from 18th- and 19th-century sources.
o The author cites other works (e.g., Jenkins and Paglione 1980; Brose et al. 1983) that discuss Mississippian and postcontact Indigenous occupations in the region, implying relevance to Choctaw-affiliated cultural phases.
o The Hutchinson Site Complex (AHC-21 to AHC-46) in western Choctaw County, with multiple lithic and ceramic components and repeated occupation signatures, could hold significance for identifying long-term Indigenous presence in what became Choctaw County after U.S. colonization.
Notable Sites of Potential Choctaw Interest
• 1CW50 (AHC-3, Gibson Mound): Assigned to the Woodland period, but no ceramic typology is detailed. Its position near the Tombigbee and upland ridgelines suggests strategic or ceremonial use.
• AHC-41 (Hutchinson Site U): One of the few sites labeled Archaic/Mississippian, suggesting potential continuity into postcontact periods. Located in an area with known cultural overlap between Mississippian and early Historical occupations.
• AHC-21 through AHC-46 (Hutchinson group): Cluster of Archaic/Woodland sites across ridge systems in Choctaw County. While not directly assigned to Choctaw, the repetitive use of these uplands for camps, quarries, and possibly habitation reinforces the idea of a long-used Indigenous landscape associated with Choctaw identity.
Data Presentation / Decolonizing Commentary
• The report's language reflects 1980s CRM conventions: “prehistoric,” “aboriginal,” and period-based typologies are used.
• The author’s environmental and land use analysis is unusually detailed for the time, especially in discussing erosion, mechanized farming, and tree farming impacts on sites.
• The report demonstrates a clear appreciation of Indigenous land use and mobility, but lacks direct engagement with descendent communities.
• A decolonizing interpretation would:
o Reevaluate the upland and lithic-rich sites as components of Choctaw cultural persistence, not just generic “prehistoric” occupations.
o Suggest that quarry-use ridges and mound sites like Gibson Mound be revisited for ceramic typology and radiocarbon sampling, in consultation with the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.
o Highlight the irony of cultural erasure via pine plantation development in a county named after the Choctaw.
CRM Utility Assessment: High contextual value for identifying patterns of Indigenous site distribution across Choctaw ancestral territory in Alabama.
• Valuable for recognizing areas where resource extraction and land use patterns intersect with archaeological vulnerability (e.g., Tallahatta ridges).
• No tribal consultation, but the documented sites—especially mound and Mississippian-bearing ones—could support updated evaluations under Section 106 or NAGPRA frameworks.
• Recommendation: Use this report to support regional planning, predictive modeling, and prioritization of site revisits in Choctaw County and the Upper Tombigbee region.
-
owner
-
sprice@wiregrassarchaeology.com