Hist Arch DOI 10.1007/s41636-017-0034-2

INTERVIEW

An Interview with Kathleen Deagan Charles R. Ewen

Accepted: 30 March 2017 # Society for Historical Archaeology 2017

Kathleen Anne Deagan was born in Portsmouth, Virginia, but did not stay there long. She was the eldest of four children in a Roman Catholic, navy family. Her father was a meteorologist with a specialization in tropical storms, so she lived mostly in

C. R. Ewen (*) Department of Anthropology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, U.S.A. e-mail: [email protected]ecu.edu

places that suffered from typhoons and hurricanes. This would prepare her to endure the maelstrom of academia later on. Her family followed the storm seasons to a great many naval bases, including ones in New Jersey, Taiwan, England, Guam, Rhode Island, the Philippines, and Florida. By her own estimation, she attended 22 schools, most of them Catholic, before she started college, which may account for her disciplined approach to research. Of the four high schools she attended, her most formative years were spent at the Academy of Our Lady of Guam, where there were no boys and the sisters dedicated themselves to training young ladies to become either nuns or mothers. This certainly explains her penchant for grabbing errant grad students by the ears when they do not pay attention. In 1966 her father was transferred to the Navy Hurricane Squadron in Jacksonville, Florida. Technically she had finished high school, although her classes had not included algebra, geometry, trigonometry, chemistry, or biology. Nevertheless, she matriculated at the University of Florida (they have since raised entrance requirements) and began to consider her career options. Archaeology was not one of them because it was not considered to be either a pragmatic or reasonable occupation for daughters of middle-class American families in the mid-1960s. She began college with the assumption that she would study something “practical” that could lead to an actual job in the event that she did not find a husband. She was soon advised that an early interest in genetics was out of the question because of her lack of background in science and math, so she

Hist Arch

majored first in journalism, then social work, and then counseling. By the late ‘60s, however, most traditional expectations were out the window. The Vietnam War and the American public’s response to it changed all assumptions and many of the rules. Kathy took her first anthropology course in 1968, perhaps, like many of her peers, influenced by a new interest in non-Western values, traditional societies, and alternative lifestyles. That year she enrolled in Charles Fairbanks’s archaeological field school at a prehistoric, St. Johns period, sand burial mound near Gainesville, Florida. After graduation she took a "gap year" to figure out what she wanted to do and in 1971 found herself back in Gainesville in the graduate program in anthropology. At that point she did not necessarily identify herself as an “historical archaeologist.” All of the “historical” archaeologists who would serve as her mentors and role models––Charles Fairbanks, Hale Smith, John Griffin, Stanley South, Jerry Milanich, and, posthumously, John Goggin––were also equally active as prehistoric archaeologists. Like most archaeology graduate students in the Southeast during the early 1970s, Kathy’s first professional experiences and interactions were at the Southeastern Archaeological Conference (SEAC) meetings, which took place concurrently with Stan South’s Conference on Historic Site Archaeology (CHSA) from 1960 to 1979. For many years they were held at the Dutch Pantry Motel in Macon, Georgia, where at night there were riotous parties that professors and grad students alike attended (not unlike today). Not only were leading archaeologists at those parties, but they also gave papers at both the SEAC and CHSA sessions, and few of them (until the publication of South’s mean ceramic dating formula in 1972) thought of themselves specifically as “historical” archaeologists. Kathy started graduate school at the peak of planning for the impending U.S. Bicentennial, a time when public funds were being made available for all kinds of projects related to American history, including archaeology. As a result, many graduate students took advantage of summer jobs excavating historical sites around the country. Even though she was already interested in the Timucua, Kathy found it hard to resist the archaeology on the Florida missions and in St. Augustine, which was reinvigorated by the Bicentennial. She found historical archaeology deeply engaging and fun—and who can deny that fun has been a compelling factor in our decisions to pursue archaeology as a career? From the

beginning, she was drawn to the close-knit social connections generated by shared fieldwork and laboratory experiences, which, in the Florida program, were strong, enduring, and centered around Charles Fairbanks. The legacy of Fairbanks’s influence is symbolized for many by the annual Charles H. Fairbanks Armadillo Roast. The first one was in 1971, organized by Rochelle Marrinan and Kathy, half-jokingly in commemoration of Fairbanks’s birthday. By the time Kathy was ready to start doing dissertation research, she was clearly no longer committed to Timucua prehistory, but was instead drawn to the complexities and challenges of textaided archaeology. She was particularly fascinated by the process of mestizaje (European and American Indian intermarriage and cultural admixture) and decided to follow up on a project that Fairbanks had begun in St. Augustine with a field school, working on a site occupied by an Indian woman married to a Spanish soldier. Her graduate committee included Fairbanks (as chair), Ripley Bullen, Jerry Milanich, historian Michael Gannon, and Latin Americanists/cultural anthropologists Paul Doughty and Theron Nunez. The early 70s were the crest, not only of the scientific, processual, or “New Archaeology” approach, but also of the feminist movement, and Kathy won a National Science Foundation dissertation improvement grant to study the influence of Indian women on adaptive changes in Spanish colonial society. By that time she was fully engaged in historical archaeology and deeply committed to the archaeology of St. Augustine. She received her Ph.D. in 1974 and, much to her parents’ relief (since she still didn’t have a husband), secured a faculty position at Florida State University (FSU), continuing the work of Hale Smith, who was then in failing health. She stayed nearly a decade at FSU, cultivating a model program for the long-term study of a community. Two-dozen M.A. theses resulted from the work at St. Augustine and were ultimately incorporated into her volume Spanish St. Augustine: The Archaeology of a Colonial Creole Community (Deagan 1983). She also initiated a citywide augertesting program to delineate the 16th-century core of the town (Deagan 1981), a technique that has since been utilized at many sites across the country. Meanwhile, FSU became a magnet for graduate students interested in pursuing a career in the nascent specialty of historical archaeology. In 1981 her mentor, Charles Fairbanks, retired from the University of Florida, and she was actively

Hist Arch

recruited to take his place and continue the tradition he had nurtured. The larger institution, with its doctoral program, allowed Kathy to expand her interests in Spanish colonial archaeology beyond St. Augustine into the Caribbean. Over the next three decades Kathy mentored dozens of students (including seven who completed doctorates) and excavated Spanish colonial sites in St. Augustine, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. During this time she authored or edited a dozen books and monographs, four-dozen articles, more than two-dozen book chapters, and over a hundred papers and presentations. Notable among these were Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500–1800 (Deagan 1987) and Puerto Real: The Archaeology of a Sixteenth-Century Spanish Town in Hispaniola (Deagan 1995). Her publications have earned her recognition for outstanding contributions to the study of history as well as archaeology. These include book awards from the Florida Historical Society for Fort Mose: Colonial America’s Black Fortress of Freedom (Deagan and MacMahon 1995) and from the Society for American Archaeology for Archaeology at La Isabela: America’s First European Town (Deagan and Cruxent 2002). She also received lifetime-achievement awards from the Florida Anthropological Society, the Florida Department of State, the Society for American Archaeology, and the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, and was awarded the J. C. Harrington Medal for distinguished lifetime contributions to historical archaeology by the Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA) (McEwan 2004). For her work with avocational archaeologists in Florida, Deagan received the Florida Anthropological Society's Ripley P. Bullen Memorial Award. In 2007 she was admitted into the City of St. Augustine’s Order of La Florida for extraordinary contributions to St. Augustine, of which she is very proud, even though it does not make her an actual knight! An additional accolade was her receipt, in 2011, of an honorary doctor of laws degree from Flagler College. Today, Kathy is a distinguished research curator emerita at the Florida Museum of Natural History at the University of Florida, where she is the recently retired Lockwood Professor of Florida and Caribbean Archaeology. She is still excavating sites in St. Augustine, but she has dialed back her efforts a bit and is taking time to enjoy the more contemporary diversions of America’s oldest city.

Interview EWEN: When did you become interested in archaeology? Was it your first career choice? DEAGAN: I didn’t even take a class in archaeology till I was a junior at the University of Florida. I was fascinated by the subject, but still never seriously considered it as a career path. I continued to pursue various “practical” majors with real job opportunities, sneaking in anthropology courses whenever they fit. Toward the end of my junior year, I had snuck into so many that I was informed by the university registrar that I could either major in anthropology or spend another year taking the core courses for my then-current major [it may have been psychology—Kathy was a little vague on that memory]. By then I was thoroughly enamored with Professor Fairbanks and took the plunge to switch my major, one last time, to anthropology. What did you do that cemented your interest in archaeology? DEAGAN: I volunteered in the archaeology lab, serving as an unpaid intern washing potsherds, drawing maps, organizing boxes of artifacts, cleaning baskets, and cross-mending pots. One of my duties involved changing the distilled water in the desalination tanks and brushing artifacts in the electrolysis tanks. They were being used to treat materials from the State of Florida’s shipwreck excavations; this was before the state underwater conservation lab had been established in Tallahassee. That was my first exposure to Spanish colonial artifacts. And then what? DEAGAN: I graduated, and, as my parents had feared, there were no jobs in archaeology for people with a B.A. My first job as a college graduate was working for the Stanford Research Institute, testing children in Project Head Start programs around the Southeast. I eventually left Florida to seek my fortune in California, where I briefly enrolled in the graduate program at UC Davis and then drifted to San Francisco to spend nearly a year as a cocktail waitress and part-time mandolin player. A year later I returned to Florida and started graduate school with the intention of studying Timucua prehistory. I attended another field school, this time at a

Hist Arch

Woodland Period village site, and, by virtue of being a “girl archaeologist,” landed a summer job with the Girl Scouts doing archaeology on a barren prehistoric burial mound in the Ocala National Forest.

that included Jerry Milanich, Rochelle Marrinan, Nick Honercamp, Ray Willis, Carl McMurray, Jill Loucks, and Betsy Reitz. Ah, the first wave of the “Florida Mafia.”

So how was graduate school? DEAGAN: Excellent! I was awarded an assistantship at the Florida State Museum working with Tom Hemmings, a paleoarchaeologist interested in Pleistocene Florida. As part of the assistantship, I helped excavate two sites slated for development in northeast Florida: a late prehistoric burial mound and a mission period Indian village site. Hemmings had no interest in the historic period, so much of the work for the mission period site was delegated to me. With Fairbanks’s guidance, I integrated the historical data and material culture, and became deeply engaged in the research. The following semester, at Fairbanks's suggestion, I took a graduate statistics seminar. My project for the class was to refine the unilinear regression pipe-stem dating formula proposed by Binford by applying a curvilinear regression formula to documentarily dated assemblages. I was able to parlay that class project into my first publication, “A New Formula for Dating Kaolin Clay Pipestems,” published in the 1972 Conference on Historic Site Archaeology Papers (Heighton and Deagan 1972). One of my own students, in her M.A. thesis (McMillan 2010), tested your formula against those of Harrington, Binford, and Hanson, and found it worked best on sites in the Mid-Atlantic. Anyway, so is that how you came to settle on historical archaeology? DEAGAN: I was already developing the label as an “historic type” and was given such assignments in my assistantship at the museum. In the run up to the American Bicentennial, there was a lot of funding available to study colonial sites. I was put to work reanalyzing some of John Goggin’s underreported excavation collections from Fig Springs in Florida, and this soon led to another publication (Deagan 1972). Now that is the sort of thing that makes graduate students sit up and pay attention. By the second year of graduate school I thought of myself as focusing on historical archaeology. I stayed at Florida for graduate school along with a solid cohort

DEAGAN: Later would come Teresa Singleton and Tim Kohler, among others. For mentors, besides Fairbanks, there was Ripley Bullen, Theron Nunez, M i c h a e l G a n n o n , P a u l D o u g h t y, a n d Ly l e McAllister. So it was all work and no play back then in the department? DEAGAN: Hardly! The major fun/professional event that lingers in my memory was the sixth annual meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology in 1972. It was held at the Holiday Inn in Tallahassee, Florida. It was my first SHA meeting, and while the papers were not memorable, the parties were. The entire SHA happily fit into a standard double room for parties. Today that wouldn’t accommodate the SHA Board of Directors! DEAGAN: Don't interrupt! These parties have since become legendary. Fairbanks dazzled me by knocking a particularly boisterous participant out cold. Those were the days. DEAGAN: Shush! Jim Deetz and Marley Brown went skinny-dipping in the hotel pool, and the banquet was cheese grits and mullet somewhere out in the woods, where most everyone became hopelessly lost either coming or going. The meeting that year also happened to share the Holiday Inn with Democratic presidential candidate George Wallace and his entourage, who were campaigning in Tallahassee. Confused reporters interviewed Wallace supporters and archaeologists alike, and Stan South was so compelling that they aired his interview that night on network television. I was thrilled by the whole thing and said: "Sign me up for historical archaeology!" I was able to meet and actually talk with influential historical archaeologists from other parts of the country, such as Jim Deetz, J. C. “Pinky” Harrington, John Cotter, and

Hist Arch

Bernard “Bunny” Fontana, and saw, firsthand, different kinds of historical archaeological traditions. How influential was Charles Fairbanks to your career? DEAGAN: I can’t overstate it. He inspired my interest in archaeology and was my mentor in grad school. The data collected during his 1972 field school at the Maria de la Cruz site served as the basis for my dissertation.

woman hired in the anthropology department at Florida State, though. My interview at FSU was arranged at the cocktail reception of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference meeting in 1973, where, being a graduate in the job market, I was lurking around the faculty. To my horror, Fairbanks spotted Hale Smith across the room and bellowed: “Hey, Hale, I’ve got a girl archaeologist here and she needs a job!” As embarrassing as it was, I did get an interview and ultimately got the job. I actually think that race, more than gender, has been an obstacle for some.

Did being a woman (and a petite one at that) present any particular issues when building your career? Any advantages?

Why do you think that is?

DEAGAN: I have always been a “girl” archaeologist, but my focus has always been on the archaeology. There were challenges, but my Ph.D. worked to confer authority, so I never considered it really an issue.

DEAGAN: Jobs. It is hard to attract underrepresented groups into the profession when there are not many high-paying positions. It’s ironic, since the question of race has directed much of the work in historical archaeology.

Wasn’t there an issue with your gender on an early hire? DEAGAN: Well, yes, one of the Bicentennial projects that I wanted to work on was the fort at Ninety-Six, South Carolina, which Stan South was excavating. I was actually more interested in working with Stan in the field than any particular interest in forts. When he found out I was a small woman he offered me a job in the lab. Stan was interested in moving a lot of dirt and didn’t think I was up to the task. He also didn’t want to dig more than one latrine. I was disappointed, but it really pissed off Dr. Fairbanks. He contacted the American Civil Liberties Union, which in turn contacted the Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology in South Carolina. They ultimately relented, but not until the summer was nearly over, and by then I was working for the National Park Service [ironically, in a lab] on collections from Frederica, Georgia. There were no hard feelings, and I have worked with Stan many times since then and considered him a great colleague. Yes, you always assigned his publications in class, and I don't recall you ever criticizing him personally. Did you have any similar problems with your career positions? DEAGAN: Again, I didn’t really have a problem. The old-boy network was on the decline, and there were opportunities when I finished my degree. I was the first

Speaking of race, that has become quite the issue among the SHA leadership of late. There have been a couple of antiracism workshops held for the board and also for the membership at the conferences. Do you think this will address the issue of underrepresentation of minorities in historical archaeology? DEAGAN: I think it certainly can’t hurt, but probably won’t by itself bring about a major change in the profession’s composition. It seems to me that “minorities”––which today usually means people who are not of European heritage and people of color, but used to also include women––will not be attracted to the field without strong, visible role models in place. In my opinion, that is what turned the field around with respect to women’s participation between the 1960s and the 1980s. And it seems that the most effective role models in that sense were often in teaching positions where you engage with younger students who have unconscious assumptions about what they can and can’t do, but are still intellectually flexible. I haven’t yet decided whether the postcolonial trend in historical archaeology will help correct that underrepresentation. Programs that are committed to using archaeology to break down Eurocentric thought and value systems (including scientific archaeology), and recasting the field as an instrument of social justice for minorities are so far overwhelmingly carried out by White archaeologists working in European-style academic

Hist Arch

institutions. We’ll just have to wait to see if that will inspire or inhibit the emergence of a more socially diverse community of historical archaeologists. You’ve been involved in historical archaeology since its beginnings. Has it developed the way you thought it would? Should? DEAGAN: It started out as “tin can” archaeology, studying modern material culture. The early work wasn’t critical analysis, but the field has evolved theoretically. However, we should be careful. There are many who think that historical archaeology can answer any and all of the questions we have. I often think that writing on such topics as the archaeology of attitude, belief, and sexuality is going beyond the data and context. We need to be realistic on what we can know about the past. It seems like much of the purpose of postmodern archaeology is to combat colonial injustice. That is, using the present to combat the past. There are limitations. If you're going to write stories about the past, read a real one by a real writer! Novelists do a better job. What about the SHA? Is it on the right course? DEAGAN: I think so. We are doing a good job reaching out to the public. Working with descendant communities has been helpful. I think that the SHA has done a great job in recent years by being acknowledged internationally as the leading professional force in historical archaeology. You say that historical archaeologists are doing a good job reaching out to the general public lately? What, in your mind, are examples of good public-outreach efforts? DEAGAN: Naturally, being in Florida, I am perhaps biased about the successes of public outreach here. The Florida Legislature, thanks largely to some very persuasive lobbying by past SHA president Judy Bense, funds the Florida Public Archaeology Network. It has offices statewide that articulate with local archaeologists and are devoted exclusively to archaeology outreach programs for schools and the general public. Another publicarchaeology success here is St. Augustine. The city program is staffed largely by citizen volunteers who were instrumental in achieving passage

of a city ordinance that requires an archaeological permit fee funding archaeological mitigation for any project (private or public) that impacts the ground more deeply than 4 in.! The town is obsessed with archaeology, and literally not a week goes by without media coverage of excavations. Jamestown is a gold standard in public archaeology––from the way fieldwork and lab analysis are conducted in public, to exhibits, volunteer participation, and a great website. In general, social media has transformed our public engagement, and I am sure it will continue to do so. I cannot think of any major historical archaeology program that does not have a public component, at least online. What are the advantages of being a member of the SHA? DEAGAN: Probably the biggest is getting to know the professionals in the field and networking at the conferences. It was really easy when I was a grad student because the field was so small, but you can still do it today at the conferences. Going to the business meetings at the conferences may seem dull, but you get to know who the players are, and that helps when you are starting your career. The journal is also essential for knowing what your colleagues are up to and the trends in research. For the established archaeologist, membership is making a visible commitment to the goals and ethics of site preservation and public action. What do you see as the issues facing historical archaeology today? DEAGAN: Working with the public is probably one of the biggest issues. Grad-student training provides the knowledge to confer to the public, but we need to work on the delivery. Television is probably the biggest influence on the public, but the content is uneven. The tourists’ questions are getting better, so the television they are watching is not all bad. So it’s not just, “Found any gold, lately?” Television is good for archaeology? DEAGAN: Yes and no. For example, the public doesn’t understand why treasure hunting is bad, due mainly to what they see on television, and we really haven’t done a good job countering some of these shows.

Hist Arch

That’s been a source of some controversy of late. Ivor Noël Hume is on record supporting the sale of “redundant” artifacts if it helps support research. DEAGAN: I have a problem with selling “redundant” artifacts. I am also suspicious of using treasure salvors’ data because of the lack of good context in many cases. However, if those data exist, you can’t ignore them. Refusing to acknowledge those sites and the artifacts recovered by treasure salvors and collectors would restrict the development of the discipline and does a disservice to the historical record and our interpretation of it. Speaking of television, your colleague Jerry Milanich once said that one article appearing in the New York Times reached more people than all his published articles and books put together. The same could be said for current reality television shows. I know you’ve been approached by many, but done few. How should archaeologists handle such requests? Should we attempt to be the skeptical voice of reason, or should we avoid them lest we give them credibility? DEAGAN: Milanich, as usual, was right, but it is a tough question. It is essentially the same dilemma we faced in our first steps down from the ivory tower to work with avocational archaeologists (then called pothunters). As then, I think the possibilities for engagement differ with each reality show. Some, like “American Diggers” or Indiana Jones, are not intended to be educational, but simply ratings based. Given everyone’s time demands, I think there is less hope for a voice of reason to prevail in cases like those. But others, like National Geographic, Nova, and the Discovery Channel, do have an educational as well as an entertainment commitment, so I do think it is really important to be involved there, as SHA has been with National Geographic when you were president of the society. I have actually worked from time to time (in the background) with those shows and have come to realize that a great many of the best-educated non-archaeologists really have no knowledge of archaeology’s ethical concerns or the reasons for them. On the whole most seem to be glad to learn and compromise. Maybe ethics and why we have them is where more public outreach effort should be aimed.

I have also found, in public lectures, that when I counterpoint images of faux archaeology with the real thing the audience chuckles and nods knowingly. I think using those exploitive efforts to let the general public in on the real thing gives people a sense of belonging and alignment with real archaeology. Have you accomplished most of the academic and professional goals that you set for yourself when you started out? DEAGAN: I’m not sure I had a goal when I started out. I took advantage of opportunities that presented themselves. Lately my goal has been to build a usable research database from the collections at the Florida Museum of Natural History, . I think that has been pretty successful, and it gets a lot of use, especially the online database. Well, that’s most recently. You have accomplished a lot over the years. What are you proudest of? DEAGAN: The Fort Mose Project, I think. It was the least exciting archaeology, while being the most logistically and politically difficult project I have taken on. We had to cross swamps, schmooze politicians, scramble for funding, but it was worth it. That project has had a profound impact on the local community. It really changed their thinking about the past. What were the challenges, and how has the local community been changed? DEAGAN: The site is a marsh island on the coast surrounded by a tidally inundated marsh, which at low tide has a thick mud base and at high tide has thigh-deep water. It was impossible to drive there in a vehicle, and by the time the crew got there every morning we were already cold, wet, and mud-covered. We had to carry the wheelbarrows in and out to transport samples and gear. In 1985, when we were working there, St. Augustine still had some residual racial tension from the 1965 race riots. Fort Mose was not a particularly popular project, and there was some resentment about it. Challenges of revisionist history and scams to get state funds, like that. But over the years the African American, Hispanic American, and Anglo-American communities of St. Augustine have come to embrace the site and what it

Hist Arch

represents. Today the Ft. Mose Historical Society is a very active, publicly visible, and completely racially integrated group that has achieved amazing grassroots political success. What has been your favorite archaeology book to read? DEAGAN: Oh, there have been many. I guess if I had to pick one it would be Martin’s Hundred (Noël Hume 1982). Hume writes so well. I remember you once called it “guilt-free” reading. What did you mean by that? DEAGAN: It’s just a great story that just happens to be true and is based on archaeology. It is a fun book to read, even if you aren’t being required to read it for class; just getting lost in the pleasure of reading a book and not having to remember everything. Unfortunately, that reading is usually what I remember best. We all need to do more of this if we are going to reach the general public. How about your favorite book to write? DEAGAN: My books on the Isabela Project. The site was different from my previous work. The site was so medieval in nature. The fieldwork was challenging as well—the remoteness, getting students in and out, the dysentery. I think it is important to stretch oneself to accomplish anything worthwhile. You had accomplished so much before you took on Isabela. How could it be any more challenging than the fieldwork in, say, Haiti? DEAGAN: Well, it was challenging in a different way, as you know well. Haiti had major infrastructural and cross-cultural challenges, but once we made it to the site, it was great archaeology. And we could take showers once we got back to Cap. In La Isabela, we lived (well, camped, actually) in the local village with no water or electricity or phones. La Isabela was a large international project with researchers from several countries, and we did not always agree on protocols. It was politically very complex, with lots of government agencies involved.

What is next for you? DEAGAN: Doing my laundry (just kidding). I’ll probably never really get around to that, but I am working on the initial settlement site of St. Augustine of 1565–1566 and trying to rethink and write more synthetically about the Taíno materials we excavated in Haiti; and have more fun. References Deagan, Kathleen A. 1972 Fig Springs: The Mid-Seventeenth Century in Florida. Historical Archaeology 6:23–46. Deagan, Kathleen A. 1981 Downtown Survey: The Discovery of SixteenthCentury St. Augustine in an Urban Area. American Antiquity 46(3):626–634. Deagan, Kathleen A. 1983 Spanish St. Augustine: The Archaeology of a Colonial Creole Community. Academic Press, New York, NY. Deagan, Kathleen A. 1987 Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500–1800: Volume 1: Ceramics, Glassware, and Beads. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Deagan, Kathleen A. 1995 Puerto Real: The Archaeology of a SixteenthCentury Spanish Town in Hispaniola. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Deagan, Kathleen A., and José María Cruxent 2002 Archaeology at La Isabela: America’s First European Town. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Deagan, Kathleen A., and Darcie A. MacMahon 1995 Ft. Mose: Colonial America's Black Fortress of Freedom. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Heighton, Robert F., and Kathleen A. Deagan 1972 A New Formula for Dating Kaolin Clay Pipestems. Conference on Historic Site Archaeology Papers 6(2):222–229. McEwan, Bonnie G. 2004 J. C. Harrington Medal in Historical Archaeology: Kathleen A. Deagan 2004. Historical Archaeology 38(4):5–7. McMillan, Lauren 2010 Put This in Your Pipe and Smoke It: An Evaluation of Tobacco Pipe Stem Dating Methods. Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC. Noël Hume, Ivor 1982 Martin’s Hundred. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY.