Preliminary Inventory and Appraisal of Archaeological Resources in the Allatoona Review Study Area, in Bartow, Cherokee and Cobb Counties, Georgia

The following constitutes a preliminary inventory, mapping, and evaluation of archaeological resources in the area of the U. S. Corps of Engineers' Allatoona Review Study. The overall study area is broken down into seven project sub-areas. Five of these are proposed subimpoundments and reregulation dams -- Afterbay Reregulation Dam, Allatoona Creek Subimpoundment, Forebay Reregulation Dam, Little River Subimpoundment, and Stamp Creek Subimpoundment. Two additional sub-areas consist of the present Allatoona Reservoir, and a twenty-five mile section of the Etowah River from the proposed Afterbay Reregulation Dam to the Bartow County-Floyd County line (this latter list includes sites on the immediate banks of the river or in the river, such s fish weir sites, that would be affected by the downstream fluctuations of outflow from the reservoir). All of the data included in this report was compiled from sources contained in the Georgia State University Laboratory of Archaeology site data files. Many of the sites are listed in published archaeological reports and in various unpublished manuscripts; others have been located through ongoing surveys on the part of Georgia State University and the University of Georgia. A bibliography at the end of the report contains all of the important resources used in this study. No new fieldwork was initiated for this preliminary inventory. Site numbers used in this report are those of the Laboratory of Archaeology, Georgia State University. In some instances, these numbers correspond to the numbers originally assigned to some of the sites by R. Wauchope in his 1939-41 survey (Wauchope 1966). In order to find the number assigned to a site by other institutions, one needs only refer to the upper right corner of the appropriate site survey form in Appendix I. In the following lists of sites by sub-area, each site is assigned a number (that can be correlated with the accompanying Maps I and II); a description of the nature of the site (large village, small camp, lithic station, mound, etc.); the location of the site (with reference to significant local features and/or other sites); the archaeological provenience of the site (with reference to culture period and/or types of, artifacts recovered); and finally an evaluation of the importance of the site. The determination of importance for each site was based on a number of criteria. These included the size of site, number of archaeological components represented, the extent and density of the remains recovered, presence of important features such as mounds, middens, etc., the condition of the site (intact deposits vs. eroded or disturbed deposits), proximity to other important sites, uniqueness of the site to the archaeology of the area, susceptibility of the site to damage by proposed or existing Allatoona Reservoir facilities, and the opinions of other archaeologists who may have studied the site. For some sites, detailed observations and possibly even excavation records were available; for others, only slight or incomplete records were available. In this regard, completeness of documentation on a site affected its rating, i.e. poorly-documented sites were rated down. With all of the above taken into consideration, sites were assigned a relative rating of "primary," "secondary," or "tertiary" importance. However, it must be remembered that these ratings, for the most part, were compiled on the basis of surface observations, and a site that might appear unimportant on the surface could turn out to be very important when excavated. Sites assigned a primary importance should be nominated for the National Register of Historic Places.