Mississippi Administrative Code › Title 16 - History, Humanities and Arts › Part 3 - Historic Preservation Division › Chapter 12 - Mississippi Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations › Rule 16-3-12.3.2 - Evaluating Archaeological Sites under Criteria other than D

Current through June 25, 2024
As with any other resource, context is crucial for
				  evaluating archaeological sites under any of the Criteria. The context must be
				  based on the Criteria and areas of significance claimed for the property. The
				  fact that a resource is simply associated with a larger trend is not enough to
				  make it significant under Criterion A (e.g. not every school is significant for
				  education, etc.); the association must be significant. Likewise, under
				  Criterion C, it is not enough for a property to simply exemplify a significant
				  architectural pattern; that pattern must be significant within a particular
				  context and the property must convey that significance. Under Criterion B, a
				  property must be associated with the productive life of the person, or why the
				  person is significant, and the context must demonstrate this association. A
				  comparative context is needed to make these arguments.
Pre-Contact (Prehistoric) Sites
For Pre-Contact archaeological sites (as well as historical
				  archaeological sites and other non-archaeological properties), the National
				  Park Service has been moving in a new direction of late. NPS has been trying to
				  evaluate sites holistically and consider all four Criteria.
Criterion A:
A fully excavated archaeological site would not be eligible
				  under Criterion D because its information potential is gone; however, that site
				  could be eligible under Criterion A if it can be demonstrated that it is
				  associated with important events or trends in the history of archaeological or
				  anthropological theory (see the National Register Bulletin
Guidelines
				  for Evaluating and Registering Archeological Properties
). The resource
				  category would still be site, but in the broader meaning of the term presented
				  in the NR Bulletins. Keep in mind, though, that a site need not be fully
				  excavated to be eligible under Criterion A for association with important
				  trends or events. Type sites could also be eligible for their role in defining
				  a chronology or cultural group. Examples would include Naina Waiya. The context
				  would have to focus on how the site defined the complex or time period and the
				  archaeological materials would still have to have enough integrity to show that
				  connection.
Criterion B:
Archaeological sites could be eligible under Criterion B if
				  they are associated with a significant person. If that person were an
				  archaeologist, for instance, the context would need to examine the sites
				  excavated by the archaeologist and demonstrate why a particular site best
				  represents the archaeologist and his contributions to the field. A good example
				  would be Pecos in New Mexico for its association with A.V. Kidder or Ackia and
				  Jesse Jennings. In general, sites associated with culturally significant
				  pre-Contact persons or deities are evaluated as Traditional Cultural
				  Properties.
Criterion C:
Sites eligible under Criterion C must "embody the
				  distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or
				  represent the work of a master or possess high artistic value or represent a
				  significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
				  distinction." The latter often refers to districts. The first portion of the
				  criterion could refer to a structure or artistic expression associated with a
				  specific cultural period or type (e.g. Late Woodland or Algonquian). The
				  context would need to establish what the distinctive characteristics of the
				  type are or how it possesses high artistic value and why this site is a
				  significant example. For example, mounds could be significant under Criterion C
				  for Architecture because they embody the distinctive characteristics of
				  building traditions during a certain period of prehistory. The remains do not,
				  necessarily have to be visible aboveground; this criterion could refer to a
				  village plan and layout, for instance. In terms of artistic value, petroglyph
				  sites are works of art that can be easily evaluated under Criterion C because
				  they both embody the distinctive cultural traditions of a specific prehistoric
				  period and possess artistic value.
Contact and Historic Sites
For Contact and Historic sites, it may be easier for the
				  layperson conceptually to understand the case for significance under Criteria
				  other than D because they may be more familiar with such resources and, often,
				  may be able to "see" them. Keep in mind, however, that archaeologists often
				  "see" patterns in the archaeological record that can convey significance for
				  events, architectural or artistic features, or persons.
Criteria A and B:
For Criteria A and B, keep in mind that the archaeological
				  record is just another line of historical evidence,
equally as important
				  as
the written record or oral history or historic mapping, and so on;
				  therefore, it can be easily used to support Criterion A or B significance.
				  Documentation and explanation is key to making the case for historical
				  archaeological sites under Criterion A or B. Documentation can take the form of
				  photographs, maps, etc. and the preparer must be able to explain the
				  significance and integrity of the site and make it clear to the layperson.
				  Areas of significance and integrity are also key to evaluating an
				  archaeological site under Criterion A or B. In addition, the site does not need
				  to contain above-ground remains (this will be touched on more in-depth in the
				  next section on integrity). As mentioned previously, as with any property being
				  nominated to the National Register under Criterion A, association with a
				  significant trend or event does not necessarily make a site eligible; the
				  association must be significant as well. Examples would include the
				  archaeological remains of Thomas Edison's laboratory or Jefferson College and
				  the hanging of Aaron Burr. In addition, Native American sites can be eligible
				  under Criterion B if the person associated with the property is individually
				  significant within a particular context. As with all Criterion B properties
				  (not just archaeological), you must demonstrate the strength of the association
				  between the person and property and consider what other properties exist to
				  convey that aspect of the person's significance and discuss why this particular
				  property is the best one to do that (a comparative context). The preparer must
				  evaluate significance first and consider if the property is a rare example or
				  the only property left to convey a certain aspect of a person's productive
				  life. For both precontact and historic properties, archaeological sites are
				  very important to consider under this Criteria if there are no other properties
				  associated with a person.
Criterion C:
The above discussion of Criterion C applies equally here.
				  Again, context is key: identify the distinctive characteristics of the type,
				  period, or method of construction and demonstrate how this site is a
				  significant example of it. Examples of historical archaeological sites that
				  could be eligible under Criterion C include the ruins of a steel mill that
				  clearly embodies the distinctive characteristics of the type (see the National
				  Register Bulletin
Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering
				  Archeological Properties
). Other good examples might be the
				  archaeological remains of industrial sites such as mills, canals, or furnaces
				  where the archaeological remains can clearly convey or represent a significant
				  pattern of building for a class of resources. As with any resource, a
				  comparative context and integrity should be considered. While above ground
				  remains may help strengthen the case for significance (because they are visible
				  and non-archaeologists can "see" them), below ground remains may also be
				  eligible under this Criteria. Some properties were intentionally built below
				  ground (like mining properties, such as the Experimental Mine for instance).
Integrity
When evaluating archaeological sites under Criteria other
				  than D, an important consideration (beyond the area of significance), is
				  integrity as applied to archaeological sites (see
3.3. Assessing the
				  National Register Integrity of Archaeological Sites
). Integrity is
				  relative to significance. Consider what other properties can represent this
				  particular resource under the context. As mentioned previously, an
				  archaeologist must be able to read the significance and be able to communicate
				  it through the National Register nomination. A couple of examples include
				  Windsor Ruins or Bee Lake. Ruins are not required for a property to be eligible
				  under Criteria other than D; however, they may help strengthen the case, or be
				  easier for a non-archaeologist to understand.
If a property was not meant to be permanent (for
				  instance, a WPA-era building that was built for the duration of a project), it
				  cannot be held against a property if the building is no longer standing,
				  particularly if foundations or other archaeological features remain.
Under Criteria A and B, the essential physical features
				  during a site's association with an event or person must be intact. Setting,
				  Feeling, and Association, as applied to archaeological sites, are very
				  important. Would the person recognize the property today? If a property has
				  poor integrity, but it is the only property left associated with that person,
				  however, the property might still be eligible. Likewise, if you are considering
				  an archaeological property and the structure once on the property is no longer
				  standing, the property might still be eligible under Criterion B if the other
				  aspects of integrity (setting, feeling, etc.) are still intact and there are no
				  other properties associated with this aspect of the person's significance that
				  exist.
Under Criterion C, Materials, Workmanship, and Design, as
				  applied to archaeological sites would be paramount. Keep in mind that while
				  Setting and Feeling might require a person to discuss visible surroundings,
				  other aspects of integrity such as materials, workmanship, association,
				  location, and design can easily be represented by below ground or non-visible
				  (to the non-archaeologist) resources.