ARCH NOTES

Access to Archaeology: The O.A.S.'s Educational Resource Kits

Ellen Blaubergs 22

The 1994 O.A.S. Symposium

Isernia - La Pin eta

newsletter published byThe Ontario Archaeological Society Inc.

126 WilIowdale Avenue, North York, Ontario, M2N 4Y2

ARCH NOTESPublished six times per annum by

THE ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETy126 Willowdale Avenue, North York

Ontario M2N 4Y2

Canadian Publications Mail ProductSales Agreement Number 167797

Return Postage Guaranteed

is published with theassistance of the Ontario Government

through theMinistry of Culture, Tourism & Recreation

The views expressed in thispublication do not necessarily

represent the views of theEditor or of

The Ontario Archaeological Society

P.O. Box 579Markdale, Ontario

NoC lHoPhone or fax: (519) 986·4026

Welcome back after the summer of '94. Ihope it has been productive for all thearchaeologists out there, as well as pleasantfor everyone. As you were informed inthe last Arch Notes, the OAS was prettybusy in the early part of the summer, butthings have slowed down somewhat sincethen.

The next event is our Symposium 1994,which will be held in Toronto this year.The Registration Form was mailed as anenclosure in the last issue of A rch Notes.If you have not yet mailed in your pre-registration by the time you read this,now is the time to do it. You should finda program elsewhere in this issue.

Other events will take place during theSymposium. The Emerson Medal will be:lwarded this year to an eminently deserv-ing avocational archaeologist. Come andhelp celebrate. Several Twenty-five Yearpins will also be distributed.

Nominations for election to the Board ofDirectors close at the Annual BusinessMeeting (ABM). Two persons are re-quired to nominate a candidate, as well asthe written consent of the candidate.These should be sent to the NominatingCommittee as soon as possible.

Chapters have all received material per-taining to the Strategic Plan. Hopefullythe members have been able to discuss thisand return some comments before theSymposium so that we can prepare asummary for discussion at the ABM.

Very soon after the Symposium, on N 0-

vember 2, you will have the opportunityto attend a FREE lecture on a majorpalaeolithic (Homo Erectus) site in Italy.

Flyers have already been sent.

1'i..ssoon as one problem is solved anotherraises its head. No sooner had we relaxedafter the announcement that staff handlingarchaeological concerns at MCTR wouldnot move out of Toronto, than we findthe context of Fort York is being threat-ened. Although the site itself would notbe touched, proposed development veryclose to the fort would destroy its ambi-ence. More meetings of protest to attend!

A notable event occurred on September 11when the William E. Taylor ResearchGallery was dedicated at the Museum ofCivilization in Ottawa. The William E.Taylor Research Award Fund is also beingset up, the interest from which will beused to present an annual award for "out-standing achievement in museology". Dr.Taylor is an eminent Canadian archaeolo-gist, who was the Director of the NationalMuseum of Man, and instrumental indeveloping the Mercury Series as well asthe new Museum of Civilization.

Elsewhere in this issue, you will find ashort article addressing concerns raised ina recent letter from a member. Perrhapsothers have as difficult a time as I doreading a financial statement. What do allthose numbers mean? I am sure othermembers also wonder just where theirmembership fees go. Comments that Ihave heard from time to time indicate thatmembers believe they are "paying for"items which are, in fact, specifically cov-ered by other sources of revenue. Al-though this article does not really answerthe question as to exactly where all yourmoney goes, it may clear up some miscon-ceptions. This discussion could open up

a whole philosophical debate. Beyond thequestion of "what am I getting for mymoney?" are others: "What do I expect

this organization to do (presumably forarchaeology)?", and "What is my committ-ment to the aims of this organization?"

The Archaeology and Heritage PlanningUnit has had a busy summer. Several staffmembers have been hard at work develop-ing a guideline for addressing heritageconcerns under the proposed new Plan-ning Act. Meanwhile our marine officehas been conducting education workshopsfor our underwater heritage. Bernice Fieldhas now accepted the position of LicenceOfficer on a permanent basis. For anyquestions regarding licences she can bereached at 314-7158. Finally, the licenceoffice is still issuing a few licences for thisyear. They are as follows:

LIST OF LICENCES ISSUED JULYAND AUGUST 1994

The following list consists of the type oflicence, name of licensee, licence numberand site location

Consulting:

Ms. Patricia D. SutherlandNorthlands Research94-105Province of Ontario

Mr. Ken Swayze94-113Province of Ontario

Underwater:Mr.Ron Beaupre, Ms. Allison Hooperand Ms. Susan Palmer94-109Yankee and J. F. Card and areaof Douglas Point inside Baie Dore

Mr. Kenneth A. Cassavoy94-101Atherley Narrows Fishweirs SiteTown of Orillia

Mr. Randy Sullivan94-107Whitefish Bay, Lake Superior

Conservation· surface collecting only:

Mr. Andrew J. Stuart94-104Northern shore of Lake Superior betweentown of Nipigon and Thunder Bay

Mr. Clayton Barker94-114Brant County

Mr. Robert von Bitter94-115Thorah Township (concession 3, lots 5)

Field School:

Dr. Christopher ]. EllisUniversity of Western OntarioDept. of Anthropology, Social ScienceCentre94-116The Brian (AfHh-lO)Middlesex County, London

Excavation:

Mr. Charles Garrad94-112McQueen-McConnell (BcHb-31) Site

Introduction

In Arch Notes 94-3, Robert Mayer pre-sented some research notes relating toPeter Dorni tobacco pipes. In his paper,a range of views and data on Peter Dornipipes collected by Mayer from a variety ofsources are laid out in a clear and concisemanner.

In my ongoing work with the WhitefishIsland (CdIc-2) site collections, I have hadthe opportunity to review the Europeanclay pipes from the site. The CdIc-2collection holds numerous varieties of pre-and post-1850 pipe styles, including repre-sentatives of the Peter Dorni type, andrelated variants. While I have recentlysubmitted a paper on the pipes fromWhitefish Island to the Wisconsin A rchae-ologist, I felt that it would be useful topresent the Whitefish Island Dorni andDorni-style pipe data, as well as a fewpersonal observations, to A rch Notes, tocontinue the dialogue that Mayer hasinitiated.

Whitefish Island

Whitefish Island is situated in the StMary's River, immediately south of SaultSte Marie, Ontario. The island is recordedas a transitional native fishery centre inearly historic records, and these recordsgenerally concur that the island was with-in the territory and control of the Batch-ewana peoples. This control was furtheracknowledged in the Robinson treaty of1850,which included both reserve lands atBatchewana Bay and Whitefish Island aspart of the treaty settlement (Canada 1964,5). Post-1654 fur trade developments inthe upper Great Lakes saw the Sault Ste

Marie area as a principal focus of tradersseeking connections to the west, with thearchaeological consequence that a consider-able density and variety of European, andsubsequently Euro-Canadian and UnitedStates, trade goods are present on surviv-ing sites at the Sault. At Whitefish Islanditself, the once-abundant fishery withwhich it is principally associated attractedthe attentions of various 19th century andearly 20th century interests in addition tothe ongoing native occupations, furthercomplicating the pattern of artifact intro-duction and deposition.

Who is Peter Dorni?

It is, perhaps, apt that the bowls of Dutchpipes of the mid to late 19th century,including Dorni-style pipes, are plain savefor a fine "rouletted" band around the rim(Walker 1977). For, as a close reading ofMayer's paper will allow, arguments con-cerning the origin and dating of the Dornipipes are as circular as any roulette wheel,with the solution to the question seem-ingly as evasive as a successful run of luckat any game of chance. The name Dornipresent on a pipe stem has become inextri-cably linked in the minds of many with aman, Peter Dorni, whom no researcherhas demonstrated to have been alive, welland employed as a pipe maker at any timein the past.

Weare told firmly by H G Omwake'sDutch informant, G C Helbers, that Piet-er Van Doorne, a deft potter present inHolland in 1759, had nothing to do withthe Peter Dorni pipes of the subsequentcentury (Mayer 1994, 10). Omwake alsoinforms us that a certain Peter Dorniershortened his name, perhaps for the sake

of symmetry, and began making pipesaround the north of France around 1850(Mayer 1994, 12). This time, the informa-tion is provided without recourse to anysource, even the esteemed Helbers. Walk-er accepts Dorni's account of his ownname, placing him in the north of Francearound 1850 to 1880, again without refer-ence to a primary source (Mayer 1994, 12).While Walker's communication withForma (see below) regarding the identityof the makers of Sparnaay pipes suggeststhat he may have had recourse to docu-ments listing pipe makers in the France-Holland region from this time period, inturn of possible relevance to the discussionof Peter Dorni the man, he does notidentify these sources. The source of thisinformation may have been a publicationcited by E A Wylie (1969,1), prepared byHelbers and Goedewaagen (1942), whichpartially reconstructs a pipe makers' listfor Gouda using legal records. Hauser andWilkins (Mayer 1994, 17) also refer to thecirca1850date for Dorni without citing orsearching for an original source, all thewhile lamenting the absence of data on theterminal date of Dorni's activities. I my-self reiterated this story recently (Hinshel-wood, in press) and did not pause toconsider the implications until readingMayer's paper. Perhaps the most glowingreport of the unproved Mr Dorni comesfrom Alexander who states that "his pipeswere of the finest quality and earned agood reputation in Europe and America;so much so that they were copied" (Mayer1994, 17).The puzzle over the originator of theDorni pipe is mired in the concurrentproblem of multiple imitations of theDorni style. As with the initial date ofDorni manufacture, the variety, qualityand dating of the imitations is not clear.Finding plagiarists of any sort irretrievably

repugnant, Omwake suggests that amongthe several styles of lettering present onotherwise similar Dorni pipes, the "moreclearly formed, slightly larger letters andthe more carefully executed decorations"reflect the original product, while the"smaller letters and more slovenly orna-mentation" characterise the plagiarizedforms (Mayer 1994, 12). Oddly, the soleDutch researcher whose work has contrib-uted to the discussion seems to be suggs-ting exactly the opposite. The originalDorni example Don Duco provides forconsideration "is a little smaller than aGouda pipe, and with the kind of clay andfinishing it has, is of poorer quality"(Mayer 1994, 19). Depiction of the imita-tors reaches a height of hyperbole withRusden's discussion of a New Zealandexample. Rusden seems almost overcomewith the thought of "unscrupulous" imita-tors jumping on the Dorni bandwagonand their foul spawn "creeping onto themarket" (Mayer 1994, 19). In this frameof mind, it is hardly surprising that theimprobability of Dutch pipe makers pro-ducing pipes from different molds forNew Zealand than for the United States,especially in the light of their relative sizeas markets, is overlooked. It is moreprobably the United States McKinleyTariff Act of 1891, the dating device notedearlier in Mayer's paper (Mayer 1994, 14),than some urge to be caught in their crimethat caused the Dutch manufacturers ofDorni-style pipes to add Gouda Holland tothe reverse side of their Peter Domi marks.

Whitefish Island Dorni and Dorni-stylepipe stems

Decorated English and European pipestems in the Whitefish Island collectionmay be grouped into four descriptivecategories. The first are the box and dotmotifs (Figure 1b-D, a style of stem that is

::..~ ..

8-6~~ A I Z· H 0•..... ~\Q

\Q-I>.

B lID J 1Bi~ Ic UJ K aJI;D m=J L ~H:~XID]i! I \Q

f'v,

E mID M I m:f:~~mF N §ii ...~~M~G I 0

~ ~::.. 6..~8-•.....~ Figure 1. Decorated Stems Cdlc-2\Q\Q~ -I>.

thought to be primarily English (Hansen1971). The second category of decoratedEnglish pipe stems are the Ring/Bristol"barber pole" motif stems (Figure Ih).The raised encircling bar and raised encir-cling leaf motif stems, including all of theDomi and Domi-style stems in the collec-tion (Figure Ij-m) form a third category.The Dorni-style stems are generally con-sidered as Dutch products, although, andthe manufacture in Germany (Gifford1940,125: cited in Mayer 1994, 16), and inScotland (Sudbury, 1980: cited in Mayer1994, 17) after 1870 is recognized. WhileFigure In/o shows a decorative motifreminiscent of the box and dot forms, thisstem has been grouped with the Dorni-style stems on the basis of its presumedDutch manufacture. The final categoryincludes the miscellaneous decorated stemsof the collection, including the spiralimpressed stem (Figure la), discussedbelow.

Peter/Dorni. The two stems bear partsof a Peter/Domi mark. Both showslightly different decorative treatment.The basic motif includes open panels oneither side of the stem, with Peter andDomi appearing on opposite sides inraised serif capitals within. The panels areframed above and below by a series ofraised bars running across the stem. Atboth ends of the panels are four raisedencircling bars followed by two encirclingrows of raised leaves. Decorative treat-ment varies with one stem showing hatch-ing between the four raised encircling barsat either end of the panels (Figure Ij) withthe other showing the hatching alternatingwith smooth sections (Figure lk).

If Omwake's definition of the 'true' Dorni(Mayer 1994, 12), which includes thepresentation of the name in raised block(sans seriQ letters, rather than the serif

letters noted here, then the Whitefishstems are not original Dorni. Whetherthis assumption holds or not, future re-search will determine. In the meantime,the style of lettering appears to be a po-tentially useful observation to record. APeter/Domi recovered at ErmatingerHouse, in close proximity to WhitefishIsland, is illustrated in Reid (1977, 61: Fig.37). This stem bears alternating hatchingbetween raised encircling ribs and blocklettering. The stem fragment recovered byKenyon near Binbrook, Ontario andillustrated in Mayer's paper (Figure 2c)shows alternate hatching and raised seriflettering. In a similar fashion, both thePeter/Domi and Mullenba-/-ewald.Hohrstems illustrated in Gifford's report onFort Ticonderoga and illustrated in Mayer(1994, 15) are also similar to the secondDorni stem illustrated. A stem withidentical decoration, but marked] & GPRINCE/IN GOUDA is illustrated inWalker (1971, 34). Bradley adds to thecomplications inherent in the imitations ofthe Dorni-style, noting that the Dorni-style pipe recovered from the Farewellshipwreck bore a registered mark of J &G Prince on the bowl, with the Peter/Domi mark on the stem, a combinationwhich he suggests as proof that the pipewas a German imitation (Mayer 1994, 16).A complete Domi pipe of the second styledescribed above is illustrated in a pagefrom an 1875 Wm DeMuth and Co cata-logue reproduced (poorly) in Sudbury andPfeiffer (1983, 72), and (clearly) in Sud-bury (1986, viii). This complete pipeshows the roulette line, but not the bowlfinish. It is interesting to note thatDeMuth & Co was an importer of pipesin New York City, not a manufacturer,allowing the illustrated pipes to have comefrom any number of foreign and domesticsources (Sudbury and Pfeiffer 1983, 73). It

is of further interest that the Glasgow/-"Home Rule" pipe illustrated next to theDorni pipe also shows an apparent rou-lette bowl finish.

A Sparnaay / Gouda. One stem fragmentfrom Whitefish Island bears a clear ASparrulay/Gouda mark (Figure 11 and 1m).A smaller fragment shows a similar designand the raised serif letters Gou- within anopen panel. The decoration on bothstems is identical to the second Peter/Domi (alternating hatching) discussedabove.

Walker notes that a number of late 19thcentury Dutch makers produced pipesunder variations of the name A. Sparnaay.In turn, the style of the pipes places themwithin the large trade in imitation Dornipipes (1977, 683: n.81). Sparnaay pipeshave been recovered from Longlac Post(Dawson 1969,46) and Michipicoten Post(Forma 1971, 50) in northern Ontario, thelatter being similar in decoration to thesecond Dorni (alternating hatching).Again, the similarities between the Dorni,Sparnaay and Prince stems, the latterillustrated by Walker (1971,34), are noted.

One well-worn stem fragment from CdIc-2bears a complex decorative motif com-bined with the letters -echt on one side and-amp-, -am! or possibly -amb- on the other(Figure 1n and 10). The stem decorationis based on a series of raised horizontallines overlain by both raised encirclingbars and patterns of dots. It is temptingto complete the maker's name as Gambier,a well known French pipe manufacturer,but the name on the obverse is almostcertainly Utrecht, a Dutch city. Walkerrecords a Gambier factory in Givet andParis (1971, 30: 1977,292), but makes nomention of Utrecht. Duco (1986), in anoverview of Gambier marks, shows nomarks resembling this stem. It is possible

to assume, therefore, that this stem repre-sents yet another imitation of an unidenti-fied but popular style, or the applicationof a well known maker's name on a pipemanufactured by a less well known maker.

A single stem fragment, shown in Figurela, bears an unusual design produced withan impression similar to the roulette lineof the bowls described below. A design inthe form of a line of small, regular rectan-gles is impressed in a spiral fashion aroundthe stem. While the impressions are simi-lar to those found on one of the rimfragments, there is no proof that rim andstem are from the same pipe or manufac-turer.

Plain (Dutch?) bowls from WhitefishIsland

Roulette impressions at the rim and strokeburnishing of clay pipe bowls is typical ofearly English pipes (Hamilton and Lunn1984,2; Wylie 1969; Walker 1977, 1408;1446; 1448), and of Dutch pipes of allperiods (Hamilton and Lunn 1984, 4).The presence of stroke burnished bowls inassociation with Domi-style stems is there-fore an association which may be useful infuture research into the Dorni-style pipe.The appearance of stroke burnishing isclearly illustrated on a bowl fragmentfrom a site in the Canadian High Arcticby Ritchie (1978, 126: Fig. 3). At White-fish Island four fragments representing atleast three pipes show a roulette impres-sion immediately below the rim. TheCdIc-2 pipes are probably Dutch andcomtemporary with the Dorni and Dorni-style stems and possibly the spiral rouletteimpressed stem.

Mayer's illustrations of the Dorni piperecovered from the Farewell shipwreck byHugh Wyatt (Mayer 1994, 12-13) led meto reexamine one complete (reconstructed)plain bowl and one plain bowl from the

Whitefish Island collection. Prior toseeing Wyatt's pipe, I had focused princi-pally on the impressed circles, 0.50 cmdiameter, with an abstract design in relieffound on the backs of the bowls, that Itook to be maker's marks. These marks(Figure 2) have not been interpreted, andI did not see any like them in the litera-ture I reviewed. However, in lookingagain at the bowls with the thought thatthey may be related to the Dorni-stylestems from the collection I see that theybear the faint vertical marks typical ofstroke burnishing and that there is aslight, intermittent impressed line aroundthe top of the more complete bowl.

In light of the relatively distinctive finish-ing of Dutch pipe bowls by stroke bur-nishing and occasionally by roulette im-pressions, it would seem important tonote this in the analysis of complete pipesand bowl fragments. Dorni-style pipeswhich lacked stroke burnished finish onthe bowls could indicate a different regionor date of manufacture, as highlighted byBradley (cited in Mayer 1994, 14). Itwould also serve as a more objectivemeans of identifying "good" and "poor"quality, a judgment often used in sortingDorni-style pipes. It is also important toallow stroke burnishing to take precedenceas an analytical variable over rouletteimpressions in light of the apparent appli-cation of a roulette band to a Glasgowpipe, as noted above (Sudbury and Pfeif-fer, 1983, 73). It is unfortunate in thiscase that Bradley was not able to analysethe specimen recovered by Wyatt. UnlikeDorni-style stems, there appears to be atleast a few instances in which stroke bur-nished bowls are dated to reasonably shorttime periods. A stroke-burnished bowlfragment was recovered from an 1830-1840deposit at the Marina site (Salzer andBirmingham 1981, 139; fig. 39d). Salzer

and Birmingham also note the presence ofstroke-burnished bowl fragment from OldSacramentao, dating to 1852 (Humphrey1969, 20).

Dating Dorni-style pipes

Dating the Dorni-styles pipe must proceedfrom solid data. Presently, such dataappear to be lacking for the initial date ofDorni-style manufacture, although someclear temporal landmarks are availablewithin the range of manufacture. Theaddition of country of origin informationon the stem separates post-McKinley TariffAct pipes from earlier examples. Sudbury(1980, 36) has indicated that his ownresearch has placed the earliest McDougall/Glasgow Dorni-style pipes at about 1870(see list reproduced in Mayer 1994, 18),and other lists may surface over time toprovide initial dates of other Dorni pipes.The initial date of Dorni manufacture inFrance or Holland will in turn require theanenions of researchers in those countries.Stroke-burnished bowls have been foundin well dated archaeological context at theMarina site and Old Sacramento, and itmay only be a matter of time beforeDorni-style stems are also reported fromwell- dated contexts and in associationwith stroke-burnished bowls.

Future directions

Continuing research into the nature of the"Dorni-style" pipe in North America maybenefit from the relaxation of the require-ments for inclusion within this class ofartifacts. Certainly, there may yet besome dusty tome or family history of theDorni clan awaiting discovery in thenorth of France or Holland, which onlythe consistent ferreting of a researcher likethe late Walker or Robin H Smith mightrecover. In the meantime, I would like tosuggest that the origin of the Dorni-stylepipe be set aside, along with the discussion

--_. r-1

1,--~~•.....,

94-5

of the identity of Dorni himself, and thatall of the pipes bearing stems decoratedwith encircling rows of raised encirclingbars and/or raised leaves, with or withouthatching between the bars and with orwithout panels bearing a maker's name beincluded for consideration. In this way,the range of artifacts under considerationwill be greatly increased to include the'true' and 'imitation' Dorni pipes, as wellas the true and imitation Prince, Sparnaay,Gambier and other French, Dutch andGerman pipes of similar design. In thislatter regard, I note the personal commu-nication of lain Walker to Gary Forma inwhich he notes that "there was no Spar-naay with the initial A known at presentto have been manufacturing pipes in Hol-land" (1971, 50), which in turn suggeststhat imitation of the Sparnaay type wasalso occurring. By expanding the discus-sion beyond the limits of the undefined'true' Dorni pipes, we may recover dataon distribution (and perhaps more speci-mens from datable contexts), motif varia-tion and patterns of trade that could ulti-mately lead to a solid base for the resolu-tion of the Dorni dilemma.

Mayer's excellent paper summarizingpublished and unpublished data on thedistribution and form of Peter Dorni pipesin northeastern North America provides avery useful starting point for identifyingand addressing several important questionsabout Dorni-style pipes. Within his paperas well, there are indications that many ofthe research directions taken previouslyhave led to the development of fairlycircular arguments about what constitutesa 'true' or 'imitation' Dorni pipe. I feelthat the importance of the origins of thePeter Dorni are less pressing than the needto devleop consistent formats for reportingon the distribution, dating and decorativevariations within the overall Dorni-stylepipe industry. A series of research ques-tions is presented below, in no particularorder, which may help to focus the re-search into the Dorni-style pipe.

• what documentary evidence is therefor Peter Dorni, pipe maker, andwhat dates for Dorni may be derivedfrom these records?

• what range of motifs is present onDorni-style pipe stems?

• what manufacturers made Dorni-stylepipes, and during what periods?

• what motifs are associated with spe-cific manufacturers or dates?

• what is the distribution of Dorni-stylepipes in archaeological context?

• How well are the archaeological speci-mens dated?

• What range of bowl forms and stylesare associated with manufacturedDorni-style pipes, and is the strokeburnished bowl the only associatedform?

• Is there an actual relationship be-tween the quality of Dorni-style pipesand the age or place of manufactureof the pipes?

• How does the quality of the piperelate to the concept of a 'true' Dornipipe?

Conclusion

The Peter Dorni pipe stem is one of themore popular among archaeologists be-cause of its remarkable rococo stem.Encountering a highly-decorated stem is apleasure when hundreds of plain-stemfragments are being washed and catalog-ued, when it has heen a long day walkingotherwise sterile fields or when it is neces-sary to make some passably interestingcomment about an otherwise unremark-able site in a report. The wide range ofmotifs and makers of Dorni-style pipessuggests that they were equally well re-ceived during their period of manufactureand sale. The fact that they are prettyartifacts, and readily identified, does not inturn mean that they are useful indexfossils for site dating or interpretation.Insecure dating of the style, dispute overthe 'true' Dorni decorative motif and therange of later variants, the number of

manufacturers producing these pipes, andlimited reports of pipes from tightly-datedarchaeological contexts has restrictedoverall understanding of style. It has beenargued in this paper that debate over theorigin and imitation of Dorni-style pipeshas distracted researchers from addressingmore basic questions. The class of Dorni-style pipes should be expanded to includeall of the Dutch, German, French, Scot-tish and other pipes of the mid- to late-19th and early 20th centuries which bearvariations of the basic motif. Then aseries of simple, direct questions regardingthe style may be addressed without thedistractions of earlier discussions. Thediscussions concerning the origin anddating of the Peter Dorni pipe have manyparallels in the discussions concerning theTD pipe and variants (Walker 1966). Inthis case, the failure to identify a historicalpipe maker "T.D." to the satisfaction of allresearchers has not interfered with thedetermination of datable variants withinthe overall range of T.D. pipe styles. It ishoped that the discussion initiated byMayer will ultimately bear similar fruits.

References

Note: referencescited in the text have largelybeen taken from the excerpts presented byMayer (1994). Rather than reproduce hisbibliography here, J refer readers to thatpaper for bibliographic details.

Canada (Government of Canada)

1964 "Copy of the Robinson TreatyMade in the Year 1850 with theOjibewa Indians of Lake HuronConveying Certain Lands to theCrown" reprint, Queen's Printerand Controller of Stationery, Ot-tawa.

Dawson, K C A

1%9 "Archaeological Investigations atthe site of the Longlac HistoricTrading Post, Thunder Bay Dis-trict, Ontario." Ontario A rchaeol-ogy No. 12.

Duco, D

1986 "Pipemarks from the GambierFactory" in Historic Clay TobaccoPipe Studies, Volume 3, B Sudbury(ed). Ponca City, Oklahoma.

Forma, G

1971 "Michipicoten Archaeology 1971:Investigations at the Hudson's BayCompany Fur Trade Post." On-tario Department of Lands andForests, Parks & Recreation Ar-eas. Manuscript on file, Ministryof Culture and CommunicationsField Services Branch, ThunderBay.

Hamilton, F A and K Lunn

1984 "Three Centuries of Clay TobaccoPipes from London, England."Research Bulletin No. 227, ParksCanada, Ottawa.

Hanson, Lee H, J r

1971 "Pipes from Rome, New York."Historical A rchaeology V, pp 92-99.

Helbers, G C and D A Goedewaagen

1942 Goudsche Pijpen. N V Uitgevers-Mij Atlantic, Amsterdam (cited inWylie, 1969).

Hinshelwood, A

III press "Descriptive Analysis of 19thCentury European Clay Pipesfrom the Whitefish Island Site(CdIc-2), Sault Ste Marie, On-tario." Wisconsin Archaeologist.

Mayer, R G

1994 "Some Research Notes on Pe-ter Dorni Tobacco Pipes inOntario." Arch Notes 94-3:10-22.

Reid, C S Paddy

1977 "Mansion in the Wilderness:the Archaeology of the Erma-tinger House." Research Report10, Ministry of Culture andRecreation, Historical Planningand Research Branch, Toronto.

Ritchie, C

1978 Nineteenth-Century Clay To-bacco Pipes from the HighArctic. Canadian Journal ofArchaeology 2:123-137.

Salzer, Rand R Birmingham

1981 "Archaeological Salvage Exca-vations at the Marina Site (47As 24) Madeline Island,Wisconsin." Manuscript re-port submitted to InteragencyArchaeological Services,National Park Service. Con-tract No. C3543(75).

Sudbury, B

1986 "Preface." in Historic Clay To-bacco Pipe Studies, Volume 3, BSudbury (ed), Ponca City,Oklahoma.

Sudbury, Band M A Pfeiffer

1983 "Clay Pipes in an 1875 WmDeMuth & Co Catalogue." inHistoric Clay Tobacco PipeStudies, Volume 2, B Su bury(ed), Ponca City, Oklahoma.

Walker, I C

1966 "TD Pipes: A PreliminaryStudy." Quarterly Bulletin ofthe A rchaeological Society ofVirginia 20(4):86-102.

1971 "Nineteenth Century ClayTobacco Pipes in Canada."Ontario Archaeology 16:19-35.

1977 "Clay Tobacco Pipes, withparticular reference to the Bris-tol Industry." History andArchaeology 11 (a-d), National

Historic Parks and SitesBranch, Parks Canada, Depart-ment of Indian and NorthernAffairs, Ottawa. Wylie, E A

Research on Clay Pipes. Paperpresented at the Second An-nual Meeting of the CanadianArchaeological Association,Toronto. Manuscript on filewith the National HistoricSites Service.

Archaeologists find out the most about ancient people from the stuff they left lyingaround. Busted utensils, chewed bones, etc. Richmal Compton's William complainedabout the stupidity of the Romans: "They just went around smashin' pots and throwin'money away". And he had a good point; you see, Man's basic untidiness is all thatarchaeologists are able to document-all that digusting busines of prodding around inGrey Owl's privy, for example (which they did a few years ago, by the way) andfinding his Aspirin bottles. If he hadn't needed to use a privy, presto! no Aspirinbottles, or any other muck either.

The point is, there are doubtless many races, tribes, breeds and even whole species ofancient Man about whom we know absolutely nothing because, unlike the slobs whobecame the dominant Homo sapiens,they took the trouble to keep things neat and tidy.No burnt sticks littering their caves, no smashed bone scrapers, no half-consumedhaunches of venison. "Ug! Be a good sub-boy and tidy your corner of the cave." No,it's thanks to this breed of anal retentives of the far distant past that Homo invisibilisleft nothing behind. He disappeared into the damp, writhing mists of prehistory ascompletely as this cliche ought to have done.

And as I will too ...

CENTRAL LIBRARY HAS COLLECTION ON ABORIGINALS

The North York Public Library has a native people's collection of more than 2,000items on land rights, self-government, government programs, medicine, religion, the artsand more. Video and audio tapes are included in the collection, located on Level 3 atthe North York Central Library. For more information call 395-5666.

94·5

Dear Mike,

It is with understandable interest that Icomment on the first Ontario Archaeologyto appear under Alex von Gernet's editor-ship. Both in terms of the attractiveformat and the quality of the contents,OA 57 sets a high standard for futureissues, contributors and editors. VonGernet's editorial essay in particularshould be read and digested by all who areconcerned about archaeology's role at thefin de siecle. Von Gernet reminds us thatwhat we commit to writing no longerentertains a few cognoscenti before vanish-ing into the depths of a university library;rather it has a potential impact on thelives of our fellow citizens. His recom-mendation that we use care in handlingour evidence, especially documentaryevidence, should be taken to heart.

Since he advocates that our disciplinefoster internal diversity, von Gernet willforgive me if I dispute one or two of hiscontentions. My review of Pendergast'sThe Massawomeck cannot be viewed as less"pertinent" than Fitzgerald's "since it isbased primarily on an evaluation of.. .ideology." If" ...theories of knowledgeare as much a part of archaeologicalresearch as are field...procedures" thenscholars are as much responsible for their"ideologies" as they are for their data andit is as "pertinent" in a review to discussthe former as the latter. That I showedmyself" more interested in generalizationsabout human behaviour than in the

particulars of native history and prehis-tory ..." is not a mere "ingrained ism" ofmine, but part of the "theory of knowl-edge" to which I subscribe, that is, thatthe particulars of archaeology and historyare less important than the generalizationsfor which the particulars provide evidence.In this I am in good company, as a glanceat the literature coming out of the USAand elsewhere will show. It is quite truethat "...many Ontario researchers neverdid quite get the hang of..." "...an episte-mology...fashionable in American graduateschools in the 1960s and 1970s." This isnot the cause for satisfaction that vonGernet imagines it to be. It means thatOntario archaeology continues in its intel-lectual isolation from the rest of theworld. Under such a condition can wethen fulfil the mandate which von Gernetrightly advocates in his thoughtful andthought-provoking article?

Ontario Archaeology's editor has doneinvaluable service by putting together aGuide for Standardized Manuscript Produc·tion. I earnestly conjure all prospectivecontributors, be they eager undergraduatesor jaded professors emeriti, to read andfollow von Gernet's instructions. It willnot only sustain the standards of thejournal, but also make the editor's difficultjob significantly easier. Towards thislaudable goal I also heartily endorse thestatement in the current A rch Notes (94-4:35): "In fairness to authors, manuscriptreviewers should return their assessmentspromptly". Fellow archaeologists, an

editorial request to review an MS is not anunwarranted intrusion into your scholarlylife. It is an accolade from your peers, arecognition that you are part of a commu-nity of scholars that values your judgment.Please respond to these requests with thepromptness and care which they merit.Only thus will OA continue to be what itis now and has been in the past, a greatarchaeological journal.

Sincerely yours,Dr Peter ReidUniversity of WindsorDept. of Sociology and Anthropology

Dear Editor,

With or without our help, the metaphysi-cal wheel has rolled round a few moredegrees since the publication of Dr Alexvon Gernet's thoughtful and thought-provoking essay in the recent OntarioArchaeology (von Gernet 1994). In thattime I have had time to chew thoseknuckles a little more, especially in thelight of some of his observations on '....Metacarpals' (Adams 1994). It came asa bit of a surprise to find out that I had aWeltanschauung, but I am beginning torealize that in this expanding universe onemust always expect the unexpected.

Since he asked (albeit rhetorically), I havebeen trying to assess what exactly I domake of the article by Fox and Molto onthe Shaman burial of Long Point (see vonGernet 1994:7). As one would expect ofan article by researchers of their calibre,the data and interpretations laid out byFox and Molto (1994) are impressive andstimulating. I am not equipped to com-ment on the physical anthropology so Iwill restrict my comments to Fox's inter-pretations. Following descriptions of theartifacts found accompanying the burial,Fox uses archaeological and ethnographic

evidence from a wide variety of sourcesagainst which to evaluate the findingsfrom the Long Point Burial. He lays outhis data in the following manner:

a) marten/otter skulls have been found innumerous archaeological mortuary con-texts and these have been interpreted byarchaeologists as the physical remains ofmedicine bags, similar, if not identical to,those used by contemporary medicinemen.

b) bear teeth, face and jaw bones havebeen found in association with humanburials from Archaic, Woodland, Proto-Historic and Historic sites throughout theGreat Lakes region.

c) bear and otter are historically known tobe strong medicine animals among theIroquoians and Algonkians (as well asfurther afield); thus the presence of bearfacial elements can be interpreted a evi-dence of shamanistic practices, either asmasks or as a source of 'bone dust'.

d) the other artifacts found with the burial(stones, 'whetstone', bone tube) are consis-ent with and similar to the kinds of ob-jects contained within contemporarymedicine bags.

The assumption one is left to draw, eventhough it is not explicitly stated, is thathistorically-documented shamanistic prac-tices have remained essentially unchangedover the last three thousand years.

So far so good. Up to this point theinterpretatons, implied and explicit, arewell supported by the evidence presented.Fox's assumption that the material re-mains represent evidence of shamanism isneither more bold, nor inherently moreconjectural, than suggesting that someoneburied in a wooden box with a gilt cruci-fIx and a string of rosary beads was proba-bly a Christian. We have been asked to

'buy' Fox's extrapolation of a set ofhistorically-documented practices into thedistant past, but he has given us goodreason to accept his deal.

Using the isolated location of the burialaway from the village as supporting evi-dence, Fox then concludes that the re-mains at Long Point are those of a sha-man, that he was a special member of hisband and that his passing may have beengreatly mourned. Up to this point, wehave been on a fairly secure footing.Interpretations have been largely based onphysical evidence, or reasonable extrapola-tions therefrom. These final statements,while they may well be true, are neitherpossible to demonstrate nor necessarilyvalid conclusions to reach from the evi-dence. They do, however, raise someinteresting points.

If we refer back to the numerous archaeo-logical examples cited in the article, wefind that burials with bear, otter andmarten bits, interpreted here as shaman-istic articles, are frequently found in multi-ple burial mounds or in cemeteries. In-deed, some of the most lavish burials, suchas Burials 1, 2, 6 and 7 at Serpent Mounds(Johnston 1968) and Burial 15 at the HindSite (Ellis, Kenyon and Spence 1990:117)complete with bear masks, bear jaws andmodified small carnivore mandibles, havebeen found in multiple burial sites. Theonly factors which would seem to distin-guish the Long Point burial from thosecited are its isolated location and its age.Should we, therefore, interpret all burialswith these items as those of shamans, oronly as evidence of shamanistic practice?Should only isolated burials with therequisite grave goods be interpreted asshamans' burials? Or can only isolatedMiddle/Late Woodland transition periodburials of this nature be considered in this

light? Can we archaeologically distinguishbetween those whose world view is shapedby shamanism from those who practiceshamanistic arts? Can we even legitimate-ly assume that the things which accom-pany us to the grave provide some indica-tion of our status, societal function orbeliefs? Can we attach too much signifi-cance to the location of a burial? Clearly,it is possible to come up with plenty ofquestions for which we have only limited~r partial answers.

The reasons for burying someone awayfrom everyone else are legion. The indi-vidual in question may have been anoutcast, despised, rejected, perhaps feared.He may have been visiting from anothercommunity or simply travelling through.Or, who knows, he may simply haveliked to sit and cogitate on the infinitemysteries of the universe under a particu-larly large and shady oak treel at the lakeshore; so fond, in fact that his familydecided that it would be fitting to buryhim where his spirit could continue itsmeditations.

It is possible that Bill Fox is right and thatthe person whose remains were buried atLong point was a shaman. He hasn't hadto climb too far up the conez from Cer-tain Knowledge to reach that conclusion.I probably even believe him. But if hehad argued that this man did practise soulflight, or was a medicine man who trans-formed i'nto a bear, I would have to as-sume that he was getting his informationfrom beyond what the archaeologicalremains can provide.

As Dr von Gernet has indicated, to acertain extent 'generalizations observablein the present may be persuasively relatedto an unobservable past' (1994:7). WhileI believe that generalizations about ideol-ogy are inherently more conjectural than

other forms of archaeological reconstruc-tion (indeed I most definitely do), it doesnot mean that we should not try, thatsuch attempts are not valuable, and it doesnot mean that we should be any the lessrigorous in our approach. However, wealso need to recognize that human experi-ence and human perceptions are as variedas we are numerous. We may share basicideologies, sets of values, even symbols,but the ways in which we understand andinterpret them is personal and unique.Ask a Pentecostal about Christianity-youwould be hard pressed to accept that theywere talking about the same religion,although they share the physical symbolsand the mythological characters. Are weto assume that such variety of interpreta-tion and understanding did not exist dur-ing the last 3,000 years? Frankly, I findthat hard to accept. Such varieties need tobe considered before we get too enthusias-tic about describing the way in whichpeople(s) thought and believed in the past.

In the title and abstract of 'The Shaman ofLong Point' we are left in no doubt thatthe authors believe that the burial at LongPoint was that of a shaman. Fortunately,in the body of the report, their interpreta-tion is less dogmatic. Such statements as"What remains are suggestive of magic andcuring" and "...his possessions and isolatedgrave suggest that he was a special memberof his band." are interpretive. They arepossibilities, perhaps even probabilities,not certainties. The authors have pro-vided us with the wherewithal to come toour own conclusions-to agree or disagreeas we see fit. And that is how it shouldbe.Nick Adams

Adams Heritage Consultants3 Main Street, POBox 150Newboro, Ontario, KOG 1PO

Notes

1. Obviously a predecessor of the one thatblew down exposing the burial!

2. I was unaware that I was plagiarizingChristopher Hawkes. I though I wasadapting E F Schmachers' Levels of Being,which he, in turn got from ...well, you getthe picture.References

Adams, N

1994 Gnawing Gently on theMetacarpals. Arch Notes94(1):9-15.

Ellis, C J, I T Kenyon and M W Spence

1990 The Archaic, IN The A rchaeol·ogy of Southern Ontario to A D1650. Occasional PublicationNo 5 of the OAS LondonChapter, London.

Fox, W A and J E Molto

1994 The Shaman of Long Point.Ontario Archaeology 57:23-44.

Johnston, R B

1968 The Archaeology of the Ser-pent Mound Site. Royal On-tario Museum A rt and A rchaeol-ogy Occasional Paper 10, To-ronto.

von Gernet, A

1994 Archaeology as Discourse: AnEditorial Essay. Ontario A r-chaeology 57:3-22.

Dear Editor:

I would like to correct, if I may, a slighterror concerning the presence of littlebarley (Hordeum pusillum) in Ontario, asreported in the recent article "The Olm-stead Site, A Middle Iroquoian Village in

the City of Hamilton" published in ArchNotes 94-4, Jul-Aug 1994, pp 11-34.

The authors state that little barley "hasnot been found elsewhere in Ontario" (p30). This particular species has been re-covered previously from two prehistoricNeutral Ontario sites. Two seeds werefound in the middens of HarrietsvilleVillage (AfHf-10), Middlesex County, andreported in 1986 (Ounjian 1986). (Inciden-tally, these two seeds now have the partic-ular distinction of sitting encrusted in goldin the Smithsonian where they were sentfor examination using scanning electronmicroscopy!)The second instance of little barley comesfrom the Pincombe 5 site (AfHh-71), alsoin Middlesex County, and consists of 8seeds recovered from one midden (Oun-jian, in progress). There may be moreinstances of little barley in Ontario sitesthat I am not aware of; I invite furtherinformation on this subject.

It is interesting to note that historicallyboth the Chippewa (Densmore 1928) andthe Potawatomi (Smith 1933) used theroot of little barley for medicine, indicat-ing another possible use for this plantbesides subsistence.

Yours sincerely,Glenna L Ounjian16 Larchwood PlaceBrampton, Ontario, L6S SV3

Densmore, Frances

1928 Uses of Plants by the ChippewaIndians. Smithsonian Institu-tion: Bureau of American Eth-nology Annual Report No44:273-379.

Ounjian, Glenna L

1986 Subsistence Patterns of theOntario Indian: ThePaleoethnobotany of the GlenMeyer-Neutral: A PreliminaryReport. Report to the On-tario Heritage Foundation,Ministry of Citizenship andCulture.

n d Glen Meyer and NeutralPaleoethnobotany. Ph.D dis-sertation thesis in progress,Department of Anthropology,University of Toronto.

Smith, Huron H

1933 Ethnobotany of the ForestPotawatomi Indians. Bulletinof the Public Museum ofMilwaukee 7:1-230.

Dear Editor:

Please find enclosed a cheque for mymembership renewal. I have just receivedthe May/June issue of Arch Notes andOntario A rchaeology and have thoroughlyenjoyed both. In particular, I was ex-tremely pleased with Dr von Gernet'seditorial essay and look forward to futureissues containing significant contributionsto Ontario archaeology. My complimentsto the chef, or editor in this case, for sucha splendid essay and issue of OntarioArchaeology.

In the same vein, could you please pass ona sincere thanks to Nick Adams for hisarticle "Gnawing Gently on the Metacar-pals" and Colin Varley for "Meditationson Time, Mind and Manufacture: Excerptsfrom the Notes of William Russell". Bothof these articles in A rch Notes were high-light 'reads' during the past year.

All is well in France. This summer I'mbusy helping excavate a Roman/Visigoth

villa, reconstructing an 18th century stonewindmill, plus organizing the first system-atic survey of our commune (township)for this coming winter.

On a final note, I've met a young archae-ologist (Gallo-Roman speciality) whowould be interested in gaining an archaeo-logical experience in Canada for a fewmonths (minimum), plus the opportunityto improve her English. Although asalary is desired to offset expenses, she iswilling to work for room and board. Ifany consulting firm, director of a researchproject or other organization is interestedin providing a post to a skilled and enthu-siastic worker, broadening their ownFrench language skills and learning aboutanother region of the archaeologicalworld, they can write to me for her coor-dinates. She is available as of October1994.

Best wishes for the next year.Sincerely,D Barry Gray2 rue de l'Ecole Maternelle34440 Nissan lez EnseruneFrance

Dear Mr Kirby,

I am writing to thank you for includingarchaeological 'licences issued' in ArchNotes. As a museum curator, I feel it ispart of my role to ensure that the generalpublic has an understanding about theimportance of issuing archaeologicallicences for land and underwater work.Frequently we see individuals who feelthey may conduct their own 'archaeologi-cal survey', and the current list of licenceholders will be a good tool for advocatingthis issue. Thank you.

Sincerely,Tracy MarshDirector/Curator, Collingwood Museum

Dear Mr Garrad:

I am writing to thank you for the oppor-tunity to participate as a volunteer on theSeed-Barker AkGv-1 site, for the June 1-5period.

As a retired person (ex-geologist in themining industry), I enjoyed very much theopportunity to learn something about anarcheological dig and the associated labora-tory work. The enthusiasm of BobBurgar and his supervision was inspiringand I hope I shall be able to participateagain in this, or some other of the Soci-ety's excavations.

Some years ago, I went as a volunteer toa dig in Jerusalem but found this one, justa short drive from home, just as interest-ing, with the added fillip of digging intoour own heritage.

I am looking forward to the Open Houseat Kortright on June 26th.Yours sincerely,Alan Warburton3454 Burning Oak CrescentMississauga, Ontario, L4Y 3L5

Dear Charlie:

This is a belated, but nonetheless sincere,note of appreciation for the extremelyenjoyable and instructive week I spent atthe Kortright Centre excavation from June15 to 19.

The excavation site is fascinating, even tosomeone like me whose archaeologicalinterests are far more oriented to Mycen-aean, Archaic and Classical Greek civiliza-tions.

The week was very well organized andrun by Bob Burgar and his assistants,Glen, Tom and Sherry. There were all adelight to work with and learn from. Bob

and his crew were patient, instructive,easy to get along with and, in sum, a joyto work (if you can call it that) with.

I only wish I had the time to go backagain for another week or more. Unfortu-nately, my business has become muchmore active (that's not all bad) thus de-priving me of the free time I would like tohave.

My thanks to all for a great week!

Sincerely,Bob Miller36 Fernwood Park AvenueToronto, Ontario, M4E 3G1

Dear Editor:

This past June I had the opportunity toparticipate in the OAS field school at theSeed-Barker site. It was a great opportu-nity to learn or brush-up on the propertechniques of excavating an archaeologicalsite.

The site is Late Iroquoian. There werenumerous longhouses situated on a ridgeoverlooking the Humber River. Unfortu-nately, a large portion of the site had beendestroyed in the 1950swhen it was dug upto get to gravel for use in highway build-ing. The government allowed this to bedone!!

Our mornings were spent in the field,shovelling the topsoil, trowelling to thesubsoil, screening, mapping features andcross-sectioning features. The afternoonswere spent in the lab sorting and cleaningthe various artifacts that were found.Some afternoons we had lectures thathelped explain the types of pottery, pipesand lithic points found and how theywere made, and we learned about faunalarchaeo-osteology.

We also had the opportunity to showvisitors what we were doing in the field

and in the lab. The children were fun towatch, especially when their faces lit upbecause they saw an interesting object oreven participated in cleaning some of theartifacts. Perhaps we helped to get somefuture archaeologists started!

I ~ould like to thank the OAS for arrang-ing this opportunity for us. Thank youto Bob Burgar for heading up this fieldschool. I would also like to thank Bob'screw for all of their help: Thomas Carr,Glenn Kearsley and Sherri Hodgkins.

This was a great experience and I hope tobe able to participate in something likethis again. I'm sure there are others whowould be interested, too.

Lynne Wheller

SCREENS FOR

ARCHAEOLOGISTS

Well made sieving screens, any

size and mesh, can be ordered

from Wilf Weisensee, 41 Dundas

Street, Dundas, Ont, L9H 1Al.

Telephone: (905) 628-6705

THE THEATRE OFPIETRABBONDANTE andTHE SAMNITE CULTURE

(Pre-Roman)

Monday, October 31, 1994at the Columbus Centre901 Lawrence Ave. WestToronto at 7.30pm.

ACCESS TO ARCHAEOLOGY: THE ONTARIOARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY'S

EDUCATION RESOURCE KITSBy ELLEN BLAUBERGS

The Ontario Archaeological Society, Inc.Paper Presented at the Canadian Archaeological Association

27th Annual MeetingEdmonton, Alberta

May 7,1994Session 16: The Access to Archaeology Programme: Project

Examples

In 1991, the Ontario Archaeological Soci-ety received an Access to ArchaeologyProgram grant in the amount of$33,615.85 from the Federal Departmentof Communications to develop a series ofeducation resource kits for schools. Amost positive and productive alliancebetween the Region of Peel Museum andthe OAS resulted in a series of kits whichfeature an overview of Aboriginal prehis-tory and contact with Europeans, as un-derstood from archaeological investigation.The kits are distributed to schools andother groups by participating local On-tario museums in partnership with theOAS.

This paper will outline the various phaseswhich led to the official launch of the"Discovering Ontario Archaeology" kit in1992: design and assembly; promotionand administration; and distribution andmaintenance. I will be referring to theactual "DOA" kit sitting here next to me,throughout this paper and hope that youhave a chance to examine the reproductionartifacts, cultural booklets, teachers' direc-tory, activity sheets and lesson plans afterthis session. By the way, the actual kithousing is a "Pelican Protector Equipment

Case", guaranteed to be indestructible. Itis the Pelican Pro model, which retailedfor $148.00 in 1992. The Society pur-chased 11 of these and 11 of a smallerversion at $125.00. The smaller versionwill house a community speaker kit, atopic I will discuss later.

The grant money was intended to coverthe first two of the project's three phases:Phase I: Design and Assembly, Phase II:Promotion and Administration.

Phase I - Design and Assembly.

This was probably the most lengthy anddifficult stage. In fact, although a kit wasofficially launched in October 1992, anumber of others were still in the assem-bly process.

The OAS Education Committee wasmandated to complete the many differenttasks covered under Phase I. Fortunately,the Committee was composed of a groupof extremely dedicated and professionalvolunteers who logged thousands of hoursduring the many aspects of the process.The original committee of myself (at thetime OAS Secretary and an archaeologistwith the Toronto Board of Education'sArchaeological Resource Centre), the OAS

President Christine Caroppo, and OASTreasurer, Michael Kirby were soon joinedby Josie Holden, Curatorial Assistant, In-House Education and Janice Calvert,Curatorial Assistant, Outreach Education,of the Region of Peel Museum. Twoother competent committee membersincluded Jeff Bursey, an archaeologist withthe Ontario Ministry of Transportation,and Janie Ravenhurst, an elementaryschool teacher with an archaeologicalbackground.

As an aside, when the Thunder Bay chap-ter of the OAS learned that the Societywas developing these kits, one of theirfirst comment was, "for heavens sake,don't forget the North this time. Severalyears earlier, the Society had produced amagnificent poster entitled "Ontario'sArchaeological Past". At that time addi-tional panels which focused specifically onNorthern Ontario's archaeological pastwere not included. With this in mind, theEducation Committee immediately choseto include several kits with a NorthernOntario focus. In terms of the actualreproduction artifacts, this mandate wasfairly easy to accommodate.

After an intensive hiring process in thespring of 1992, Haig Bedrossian, a graphicartist, was hired to produce original graph-ics, layout the format of the culturalbooklets to be included and assist in as-sembling the kits. Over the course of thatsummer and into the fall and winter, Haigworked incredibly long hours producingthe Education Resource Kits and his con-tributions were most impressive.

The kits feature a series of booklets focus-ing on the major archaeological timeperiods of Ontario's past, well illustratedby original colour graphics. Separatebooklets were written for northern andsouthern Ontario. The text for the book-

lets was derived from the regional prehis-tory submissions written by HughDaechsel, Andrew Hinshelwood, CarlMurphy and Jeff Bursey. The difficulttask of working these sections into book-lets for the target age groups was accom-plished by Josie Holden, Janice Calvert,Christine Caroppo and myself. A sectioncontaining the methods of archaeology, aresource book and numerous activitysheets were also included. In each kitthere are three reproduction projectilepoints made by avocational archaeologist,Fred Moerschfelder. Also, reproductionpots, net sinkers and bannerstones weremade and provided by Dr. Dean Axelson,an exotic bird veterinarian and enthusiasticOAS member. Interestingly, Dr.Axelson's pots began to show evidence ofspalling shortly after delivery. When heexamined this unfortunate deterioration, itwas revealed that he had been experiment-ing with an alternative temper whichobviously was not working. A new set ofpots was provided and these seem to befine. Other artifact forms such as cere-monial axes, chevron trade beads, ceinturefleche and traders' sashes were purchasedat Iroqcrafts. These were added, both todemonstrate the nature of different arti-facts and for use in artifact-oriented activi-ties. All artifacts are housed in ethafoam,a non-toxic, inert material recommendedby artifact conservators.

A prototYpe kit was "field tested by HelenArmstrong of the OAS's Ottawa Chapterand Janie Ravenhurst of Toronto. Bothare teachers (high school and elementary)who have added archaeology to theircourses of study over the years. Theircomments were incorporated into theactivity sheets, teacher's directory, lessonplans and a section entitled "What isArchaeology? .

DiscoveringOntarioArchaeologv

EducationResourceKit

During this Design and Assembly phase,the Education Committee also decided tochange the rather cumbersome name ofthe original project working title whichwas "Participation in Archaeology: Todayand Tomorrow's Heritage (PATH), to"Discovering Ontario Archaeology"(DOA). It was felt that this new namewas more appealing, dynamic, and that itwas easier to recall the name behind theacronym, an important element in productrecognition.

It was impossible to find a qualified trans-lator to create a French-language versionof the kit and remain within budget. Westill hope to achieve this but are extremelydoubtful. We may have been overlyambitious at the outset with this aspect ofour goal. Our current thinking is to aimfor separate project funding for Frenchtranslation of the text once the Englishversions have enjoyed more circulation.In this way, any alterations based on theinitial user response may be incorporateddirectly into the French version. Mean-while, the OAS still has available itsFrench-language educational poster on thearchaeological history of the province.

Budget

While the committee was able to staywithin budget, funds were reallocatedsince the initial proposal to the Depart-ment of Communications. The Commit-tee found it impossible to find appropriatevolunteers or co-op students willing towork over the summer to execute the artwork and design phases of the project.After deliberation, we decided to reallocatefunds from the co-ordinator and co-opstudent positions and hired an OntarioCollege of Art senior student to performthe art, design and kit assembly tasks.

Phase II - Promotion and Adminstration

Our original proposal calculated that apaid cooordinator would mange the day-to-day function of kit loans. After investi-gating offers to enter into co-operativepartnerships with educational and heritageinstitutions across Ontario to manage theday-to-day function of kit loans, the com-mittee decided to by-pass the educationalinstitution route completely. Previousexperience had revealed that the incrediblecumbersome bureaucracy within the On-tario Education Ministry was difficult topenetrate.

It was originally intended that one copyof the Society's "Ontario ArchaeologicalPast" poster (produced several years ago),be shipped to each school in the province.The Education Ministry agreed to do thisonly if the Society produced a Frenchlanguage poster as well. This was fairlyeasy to accomplish because the Ministryprovided inhouse services for the transla-tion of the five written cultural panels. Abilingual archaeologist employed by theToronto Board of Education providedadditional translation services, gratis.When all was said and done, the posterreceived extremely limited and poor distri-bution and to date, most Ontario schoolsdo not have a copy.

An alternative solution to the distributionproblem was actually right under ournoses. The Peel Museum was alreadyinterested in using a kit in their program-ming and it was decided that the kit couldbe distributed to schools and other groupsby participating local museums. To date,four museums have entered into partner-ship with the OAS: the Region of PeelMuseum, the St. Catherines Museum, thePeterborugh Centennial Museum andArchives, and the Timmins Museum.Although several other museums haveexpressed interest in using the kits, con-

tracts remain unsigned. It is hoped thatthese 1nstitutions, who have felt the effectsof declining school field trip budgets, willuse the kit in their advertising to attractthose "strapped for cash" schools to theirfacilities.

Phase III - Distribution and Maintenance

At present, the period of loan to museumsincludes a provisional first-year contractperiod from January 10, 1994 to June 30,1994. During this 24 week period the kitshould be circulated to approximately tenschools (or other groups), each for two-weeks. The OAS recommends that acharge of $30.00 per school (or $3.00 perschool day) be made by the Museum, plusany distribution costs. The museum isresponsible for promoting and circulatingthe kits. Museums are encouraged tocirculate it as much as appears necessaryand reduce or increase the recommendedfee per school as they see fit.

The museums' net income should wellexceed their costs. During 1994 (theprovisional 'start-up' period), the OAS ischarging museums 50% only, of the rec-ommended $30.00 per school. Even ifthey achieve many more than the expected10 'turnarounds', their total cost will notexceed $150.00

An evaluation form in the kit will helpthe Society maintain statistics re lengths ofloan, fees charged, numbers of users, etc.

All museums are requested to arrange forthe return of the kit, along with evalua-tion sheets, to the OAS office by the lastweek of June 1994. Eventually, withsufficient funds being generated, the Soci-ety can replace or repair broken artifacts,loose or missing booklet pages, etc.

During our initial research into producingthese kits, a visit to the Royal OntarioMuseum's Education and Outreach De-

partment, revealed that this institution hasits own kits (covering all kinds of topics)which go directly to schools all over theprovince. It was strongly suggested by theROM staff, that any kits we produce hadto look top-notch and professional. TheROM, over the past 20 years has had toreplace relatively few artifacts in theirmyriad of kits. They feel that this posi-tive relationship between kits and users isbecause most students and teachers willhandle something with much more care ifthe items are part of a slick-looking pack-age. We will see as the kits are returned ifthe ROM's experience holds true for theOAS as well.

The OAS has started to promote theEducation Resource Kit and the names ofparticipating museums in all of its appro-priate publications and meetings. It willcirculate specific information on the kit,and the names of contact people at theparticipating museums, to school boards inOntario. Support for the Museums isalways available from the main OAS officein North York. Minor changes in the kitsmay be made in the 'off-season' basedupon evaluations received from the teach-ers and the museums.

The value of the DOA kit and contents,for insurance purposes, is $1,250.00.Replacement costs for individual items areas follows: Case and lock - $350.00 Arti-facts - total - $450.00 Booklets, ActivitySheets, Binders - $45C.00

A Second Kit-type

A second type of kit entitled "communityspeaker kits" was in simultaneous produc-tion with the Education Resource ver-sions. Although not yet completed, thecommunity speaker kits will be aimedprimarily at an adult audience but couldbe adapted for children. They contain acarousel with a standard set of slides, such

as distribution maps of sites by periodacross Ontario, speakers notes on presenta-tion, and an overview of the archaeologi-cal history of the province. It is intendedthat the OAS speakers will provide arti-facts and additional slides appropriate tothe region in which the talk is beinggiven. It is also intended that these speak-ers will work closely with the Society'sproposed network of archaeological volun-teer stewards. We hope that these kitswill be available in 1995.

In general, the DOA kit project has re-ceived very enthusiastic reviews. As withso many projects, the original amount oftime projected as being necessary to com-plete this project was vastly underesti-mated. All of the OAS volunteers andemployees involved in this project wereasked to keep a log of personal time spenton any aspect of the kits. Several crucialvolunteers are "burned-out" and wouldlike to pass their aspects of the projectonto someone with more energy. Oncethe Community Speaker kits are com-pleted and in circulation, I envision atleast one part-time employee administeringso many crucial elements related to all ofthe kits including delivery, return, enqui-ries, updating, additional kit production,finance etc.

I would be pleased to answer any ques-tions about the kit after this session orsometime today. Before closing, I wouldlike to express the Ontario ArchaeologicalSociety's sincere appreciation to the Ac-cess to Archaeology Program for provid-ing the funding to foster more enhancedawareness and appreciation for Ontario'spast through archaeology.

Acknowledgements

Thank you Jeff, Janice, Christine, Josieand Michael. The information in yourvarious reports over the past few years

added much to the accuracy and detail ofthis presentation.

The Toronto Society of theARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF

AMERICAannounces lts

MONTHLY LECTURE SERIES FOR1994-1995

1994

October 26Balloon Archaeology: Ancient Crete fromthe AirJ Wilson Myers, American School ofClassical Studies at AthensNovember 16Archaeology in Nepal: An EmergingDisciplineNancy Wilkie, Carleton College1995

January 25Augusta Emerita (Merida, Spain): FromRoman Colony to Provincial CapitalJonathan Edmondson, York University

March 1The Greeks and the Body Beautiful: TheConstruct of Self in Art and on the StageRichard Green, University of SydneyTo be followed by our annual Members'BanquetMarch 29The Sanctuary of Demeter and KorelPersephone in Cyrene, LibyaSusan Kane, Oberlin College

All lectures to be held in the lecture roomof the McLaughlin Planetarium, RoyalOntario Museum, 100 Queen's Park, withthe exception of the March 29 lecture inUniversity College. Lectures start 5:15pm and admission is free. Non-membersare most welcome. Further information:(416) 978-3290, 247-0886 or 489-0209.

All events take place at the Primrose Hotel, Toronto111 Carlton Street at Jarvis

$30 by pre-registration$35 at the doorStudents: $15 by pre-registration only

(Proof of status required to pick up ticket)

Friday Evening: Social Gathering at 8 p.m., with finger food, cashbar - and who knows what. ..The Presidents' Meeting also takes place on this evening.

Saturday, and Sunday Morning: Registration desk opens 8: 15 a.m.Papers, displays, sales, door prizes - and at 4:00 p.m. the AnnualBusiness Meeting, including the last opportunity for nominations tothe 1995 Board of Directors.

Saturday Evening: Banquet at 7:30 p.m. (cash bar opens at 6:00),and presentation of awards. To be followed by a presentation byChief Jacob Thomas from the Six Nations Reserve in Brampton.Tickets $35.00 each by pre-registration only. Cash bar open to all.

To pre-register, call the OAS Office at (416)730-0797. VISAaccepted.

COORDINAMENTO DEI MOLISANINEL MONDO, ONTARIO

ISTITUTO ITALIANO

~tYl01 CULTURA

!IL,I THE ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL,_",::,:::=,~'~ SOCIETY INC.

-II I~ _ PRESENT-.." .-:---~~ A FREE PUBLIC LECTURE1-.. ~-:-

is a 730,000 year old humanhabitation site in Central

Italy, occupied by Homo Erectus.It has the highest concentration

yet found of fossil remains(rhinoceros, elephant, lion,giant elk, etc.), all found in

conjunction with a largenumber of stone toolsscattered through the

old living floors.

Come and find out whatthis important sitetells us about ourdistant ancestors.

Royal Ontario Museum Theatre100 Queen's Park, TorontoWednesday, November 2, 1994at 8 p.m.

NOTICE FROM NOMINATINGCOMMIlTEE

A Nominating Committee of three mem-bers is appointed to prepare a slate ofseven or more candidates for office asDirectors of The Ontario Society duringthe business year 1995. Bob Burgar ischair of the Committee and now solicitsnominations of consenting candidatesfrom members.

Written nominations with evidence of thecandidate's consent may be forwarded tothe Nominating Committee in confidencecare of the OAS Office, the envelopebeing marked "Attention - NominatingCommittee". Bob can be reached at homeat 905-856-0270. The NominatingCommittee will present its slate and reportto the Board of Directors and generalmembership at the Annual Business Meet-ing in October, at which time nomina-tions may be made from the floor beforeclosure. An election, if necessary, will beheld by mailed ballot accompanying theNovember-December 1994 issue of ARCHNOTES.

This notice is intended to comply withArticle VI of the Society's Constitution.

PASSPORT TO THE PASTPROGRAM UPDATE

Only five Volunteer Opportunity Bulle-tins have been mailed this year to datecompared with ten last year. But our"Access to Archaeology" series of fourback-to-back field schools on the seed-

Barker Site under Bob Burgar was a hugesuccess, with all schools filled. Somefunding in support of this major event hasbeen received from the Ontario HeritageFoundation. The federal Access to Ar-chaeology Program also sent funds toadvertise the wrap-up Heritage Day at theKortright Centre, but after the event. Ifyou are not receiving Volunteer Opportu-nity Bulletins but believe you should be,please contact the office.

1994 OVERSEAS TRIP UPDATE

Forty OAS members and guests departedto Greece and Turkey on September 9.The OAS owes a debt of gratitude to itstravel agent for exceptional care and con-cern for us, and recommends to anyonearranging for single or group travel tocontact Nick Smith, Upper Canada StudyHoliday Limited, 80 St. Clair Avenue East#2209, Toromo, Ontario M4T 1N6,tel:(416)92Q-0159fax:(416)920-1674. Thankyou, Nick Smith and Christiane Lock.

AVAILABLE - CHAMPLAINSOCIETY MEMBERSHIP

The object of The Champlain Society isthe publication of works pertaining toCanada. Members receive volumes as theyare published and also may purchase backissues. Individual Membership costs $40annually + GST. Right now there areavailable some really exceptional backpublications. For details enquire by tele-phone at (416)693-2693.

As the letter which goes to every newmember states, OAS membership fees arekept very low by the financial support ofboth levels of government and the donatedefforts of volunteer members. In additionwe create interest income from endow-ments, make sales, solicit donations, un-dertake revenue-producing activities (e.g.trips), and receive other contributions.How effective the Society is at this isrevealed in the 1993 Financial Statementsto be presented at the ABM and partincluded in this issue of ARCH NOTES.

[1] the total income from membershipdues in 1993was less than $20,000, grantsobtained from government agencies ex-ceeded $70,000.

[2] with a total membership of 737 and atotal expenditure of $108,892, the Societyspent $147.75 for every member.

[3] individual and family members contrib-uted 14% of the Society's income. Anindividual member who paid $28 received$147.75 in benefits, a ratio of more than5:1.

[4] fees have not gone up since 1991 butsince that time some costs have risendramatically. Postal rates for examplehave not only gone up but the specialfavourable Printed Rate and Second Classwere abolished.

[5] the direct cost of ONTARIOARCHAEOLOGY in 1993 was matchedwithin $50 by SSHRCC funding, with theresult that the two 1993 issues cost mem-bers only 31;2 ¢ each. Nevertheless anEndowment Fund was begun to createinterest income for the future. In 1994the size of ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGYwas increased by 60%.

CHARLES GARRAD

[6] The expenses of the OAS Office aretightly controlled. The largest item, the~alary paid to our one employee, wasmainly covered by the Ministry supportgrant. The remaining costs, rent, photo-copier, fax machine, telephone and so on,are essential to allow the volunteer Boardand other officers to perform their tasks,which range from producing ARCHNOTES to representing archaeology to thegovernment, and procuring those grantswhich have so far enabled the fees toremain so low. Without this activity theIndividual 1993 fee would have been not$28 but $148. Some projects, such asPassport-to-the-Past, are almost entirelysubsidized by the OAS, the cost of opera-tion being far in excess of the dues paidby members.

[7] About 34% of Society members alsobelong to Chapters to enjoy additionallocal benefits. A support grant is availableto every Chapter from the Society. In1993this resulted in one Chapter receivingmore from the Society than from its ownmembers. In addition the Society contrib-utes towards Chapter costs of being repre-sented at the annual Chapter Presidents'Meeting.

[8] In summary the 1993 Board can takesatisfaction in that the Individual memberwho paid $28 to the OAS received inreturn more than five-and-a-half times thisamount in services. Should the fundingagencies at some future time view themembers' contribution as disproportion-ately low, then an increase in the fee, oran adjustment of what services are in-cluded in the fee, will be necessary. Untilthen it is hoped the present level of out-side funding can be sustained.

The Ontario Archaeological Society Inc.126 Willowdale Ave., North York, Ontario M2N 4Y2

Cash in BanksTerm Deposits, GlC'sTotal Current Assets

EquipmentAccumulated DepreciationTotal Fixed Assets

1992

$7,430.63 Provision for:$169,350.85$176,781.48

$21,396,11 Total Liabilities$10,466,99 EQUITY$10,929.12

O.A.Endow.FundField ManualEduc. Kits

$4,4 16.27$168,387.37$172,803.64$20,711.36$13,851.09

$7,060.27Awards FundOAS 'Future" FundRetained Earnings

Total EquityLIABILITIES AND EQUITY

PRESIDENT~ TREASURER' ~

AUDITOR,

I have examined the above Balance Sheet and the attached statementof receipts and expenditures together with the accounting records of TheOntario Archaeological Society Inc. In common with similar organizations,donations and other funds received from the public cannot be properly verifiedbecause of their nature, and my verification of revenue from these sources waslimited to a comparison of membership and donation records with bank deposits.Subject to this observation, in my opinion these accounts present fairly, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition of the Society at December 31, 1993 andthe receipts and expenditures for the year ended December 31, 1993.

$90,000.00$3,245.40

$15,535.07$108.780.47

1992

$82,997.95$0.00

$21.471.45$104,469.40

$3,000.00 $3,000.00$30,000.00 $27.000.00$38,083.35 $53.241.20

\0.•..$71,083.35 $83,241.20 '"$179,863.82 $187,710.60

~:l:....

The Ontario Archaeological 9-d Society Inc. ~•• 126 Willowdale Ave., North York, Ontario M2N 4Y2 ~....Ci\C

\C~STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS & EXPENDITURES for the year ended December 31,1993

RECEIPTS EXPENDITURES1992 1992

Membership Dues $19,792.64 $22.048.55 Publications $25.778.92 $24,667.42Government Grants $72,803.00 $53.326.00 Symposia $268.20 $115.30

less to be spent in 1994 $3.245.40 $69.557.60 Passport Pr ogram $837.24 $2,000.00Donations $1,793.00 $67,750.85 Educational Kits $5.936.38 $11.528.55Interest & U.S. Exchange $8.632.54 $10,364.73 Chapter Support $200.00 $1,069.46PublicatIOns $1.373.85 $2,517.54 Awards $202.87 $167.95Passport- T- T - Past Programme $480.00 $506.00 Executive Travel $1.816.16 $1.411.93Tours, lectures etc. $664.03 Admin./Rent/Utilities $46.385.59 $53,517.46 \CGST Rebate $1.666.62 $987.03 Supplies/Phone/Insurance $6.356.11 ..$6,206.59 ~

'"W Strategic Planning $446.10 $4.332.43WDepreciation $4.277.92 $5,419.75Outreach $16.899.10 $1.048.60Tours, lectures etc. $251.71A.S.P. Manual $5.424.60

Total $103.960.28 $157,500.70 Total $114.829.19 $111.737.15Less Gov'l, Grants

carried forward $5.936.38 $13.528.55

TOTAL RECEIPTS $103.960.28 $157.500.70 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $108.892.81 $98.208.60

It is not often that Arch Notes gives youan editorial. Perhaps twice in the lasttwenty years. However, there are occa-sions when one would appear to be due.In September, 1974 I agreed to take overas editor of Arch Notes, at the request ofour then president, Charles Garrad, andfor the last ten years of that twenty I havebeen desperately trying to find someone tohand it over to. Not that I haven't en-joyed being editor, for which I thank theSociety, but in the belief that one can betoo long in anyone job. I think one tendsto get into a routine and lose, perhaps,some of the original enthusiasm and cre-ativity. I hope I haven't but I suspect Ihave.

At last, we have found somebody to takeover as editor of Arch Notes - not perhapsfor twenty years, but at least for three andmaybe more. Editorship of Arch Notes isan appointed position, not an elected one,and is entirely voluntary. For the lasttwenty years, at least, the editor has sat inon every executive/board meeting of theO.A.S.( albeit for the last eight as a direc-tor as well) and this certainly gives one anunderstanding of what the OAS is aboutand what it is doing. I hope this willcontinue. The Arch Notes Committee(usually just the Editor!) will I hope cooptme to its membership, for the period oftransition, anyway.

As I start, and finish, my 21st year asEditor with this issue I should like tothank those who have helped me andArch Notes to achieve what we have:

of Directors and the Administrator! Exec-utive Director of the OAS; JanetTIlingworth Cooper - our main reporter inmy early days, my favourite typist (andthis before we began paying for typing)and occasional designer for the subtlechanges that have sporadically appeared onour front page; Sharon Hick for help inthe 1970swhen we still used our gestetner-like machine and had to collate our pagesby hand; Jock McAndrews for suggestingour 'half- size' format back in 1977; AnnieGould of the Toronto Chapter ( before itbecame a Chapter) for the numerousreports of all the meetings; Heidi Lenznerfor lots of free typing; our main typist ofrecent years, Lilias Brown-Little, displacedby technology and its diskettes; and ofcourse all our contributors without whomwe should not be. And last, but not least,my wife Christine, who, before I foistedthis lot onto the new OAS office in 1988,helped me with the labelling, stamping,stuffing, sealing and mailing of ArchNotes as well as with many other things.

And who is the new editor? Come to theannual business meeting at the symposiumand I'll introduce you there. Suffice to sayfor now that the editor-to-be is a Ph.Dstudent in archaeology, has the necessarycomputer-literacy and equipment to pro-duce Arch Notes "camera-ready" for theprinter, understands that regularity ofissue is the abiding principle of newslettersuccess, and has been a member of theOAS for 4/5 years. See you there.

Once again, I thank the OAS for allowingme to be the editor of Arch Notes.The OAS presidents since 1974 (eleven, I

believe), the Executive Committee/ Board Michael W. Kirby

GRAND RIVER/WATERLOO President: Marcia Redmond (519) 894-5807Vice-President: Ken Oldridge Treasurer: Jack RedmondSecretary: Lois McCulloch, 23 Caledonia St.; Guelph, Ontario, NIG 2C4Newsletter: THE BIRDSTONE - Editor: John D. A. MacDonaldFees: Individual $7 Meetings: Usually at 8.00 pm on the 3rd Wednesday of the month, except June -August, at the Adult Recreation Centre, 185 King Street W., Waterloo or the John F. Ross Collegiate.

HAMILTON President: Joseph Muller (905) 525-1240Treasurer/Secy.: Jacqueline Fisher, Box 57165, Jackson Station, Hamilton, Ontario L8P 4XlNewsletter: Editor: John TriggsFees: Individual $10. Meetings:Usually at 8.00pm on the 2nd Wednesday of the month, except June -August, at Dundurn Castle, Hamilton.

LONDON President: Pat Weatherhead (519) 438-4817Vice-President: Chris Ellis Treasurer: Harri MattilaSecretary: Lorelyn Giese, Grosvenor Lodge, 1017 Western Rd., London, N6G IG5Newsletter: KEWA - Editor: Neal Ferris Fax (519) 645-0981Fees: Individual $15 Meetings: Usually at 8.00 pm on the 2nd Thursday of the month, except June -August, at Grosvenor Lodge, 1017 Western Rd.

OTIAWA President: Jim Montgomery (613) 730-2377Vice-President: Treasurer: Jack EarnshawSecretary: Lois King, Box 4939 Station E, Ottawa, ON KIS 511Newsletter: THE OTTAWA ARCHAEOLOGIST - Editor: Rachel PerkinsFees: Individual $15 Meetings: Usually at 7.30 pm on the 2nd Wednesday of the month, except June -August, at the Victoria Memorial Building, Metcalfe & McLeod Streets, Ottawa.

THUNDER BAYVice-President: Scott Hamilton

President: Frances Duke (807) 683-5375Secretary/Treasurer: Andrew Hinshelwood331 Hallam St., Thunder Bay, Ontario, P7A IL9

Newsletter: WANIKAN - Editor: A. HinshelwoodFees: Individual $5 Meetings: Usually at 8.00pm on the last Wednesday of the month, except June -August, in the Board Room, M.C.T.R., 1825 East Arthur Street, Thunder Bay.

TORONTO President: Greg Purmal (905) 880-4481Vice-President: Wayne McDonald Treasurer: Eva MacDonaldSecretary: Annie Gould, Box 241, Station "P", Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S8Newsletter: PROFILE - Editor: Valerie SonstenesFees: Individual $10 Meetings: Usually at 8.00pm on the 3rd Wednesday of the month, except June -August, at Room 561A, Sidney Smith Hall, St. George Street, Toronto.

WINDSOR President: Suzanne Gero (313) 393-9309Vice-President: Treasurer: Ilinka TemerinskiSecretary: Sandra Lesperance, 3461 Peter St. #507, Windsor, On. N9C 3Z6Newsletter: SQUIRREL COUNTY GAZETTE - Editor: Peter ReidFees: Individual $12 Meetings: Usually at 7.30pm on the 2nd Tuesday of the month, except June -August, at the Third World Resource Centre, 125 Tecumseh W., Windsor

The Ontario Archaeological Society Inc.126 Willowdale Ave., North York, Ontario M2N 4Y2

Phone, Fax or Modem - (416) 730-0797

Mr. Henry H. van Lieshout81 Overbank Crescent

Don Mills, OntarioM3A IW1

(416) 446-7673

Directorof Professional Services

Ms Lise A. Ferguson32 Bonnyview DriveEtobicoke, Ontario

M8Y 306

Ms Norma E. Knowlton418 Bouchier 51.

P.O. Box 13Roches Point, Ontario

LOE 1PO(905) 476-4747

Directorof Public Services

Mr. Tony Stapells39 McKenzie Ave.Toronto, Ontario

M4WIK1(416) 962-1136

Directorof Member Services

Ms Anne La Fontaine100 Quebec Ave. #1502

Toronto, OntarioM6P 4B8

Mr. Charles Oarrad103 Anndale Drive

North York, OntarioM2N 2X3

(416) 223-2752

Scientific Journal: ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGYNewsletter: ARCH NOTES

Special Publications: (As advertised)

Directorof Publications

Mr. Michael W. KirbyP.O. Box 579

Markdale, OntarioNOC 1HO

(519) 986-4026

Directorof Chapter Services

Mr. Stewart R. Leslie187 Delmar DriveHamilton, Ontario

L9C 118(905) 389-2394

Individual: $28Family: $34

Institutional: $55Life: $400