NISI I Summer

2022 Report

Antonio J. Waring Archaeology

Sarah Grace Rogers, GRA NISI I Semester Report
15 August 2022
Lab
 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Institutional Overview 3
Introduction 4
Ninety-Six National Historical Site (NISI) I Summer 2022 Report 4
Overview of the NISI Site 4
Project Overview 5
NISI Team 5
Previous Work 5
Summer 2022 Plan 5
Summary of Accomplishments 5
Summer 2022 7
Original Directory List 7
Notes and Correspondence—Considerations Sarah Rogers Keeps in Mind 9
Re-Integrating TMPLs 9
Corrections 11
Mass Corrections 12
ICMS Directory Reports 18
The Future 20
Moving by Collection 20
Assessment 20
Revitalization 20
 3

INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW
The Antonio J. Waring, Jr. Archaeological Laboratory
University of West Georgia, Carrollton, GA 30118
Phone: 678-839-6303
Email: ajwlab@westga.edu

The Antonio J. Waring, Jr. Archaeological Laboratory is a research facility dedicated to the
scholarly pursuit of knowledge about past cultures within Georgia and nearby areas. The laboratory
supports the archaeological research and instructional activities of the faculty in the Department of
Anthropology and is a resource for visiting scholars from across the United States.
The Waring Laboratory also serves as a repository for the University of West Georgia’s (UWG)
research collections, those from state and federal agencies with responsibilities for archaeological
resources management, and for collections resulting from the compliance research projects
undertaken by private archaeological firms.
Furthermore, the laboratory provides unique learning and directed-research opportunities for
students at UWG, as well as educational outreach and interpretation programs within the local and
regional community.
The Antonio J. Waring, Jr. Archaeological Laboratory and its related activities have had the
pleasure of serving multiple constituents since the early 1970s. Today, the Waring Laboratory strives
to enhance its contributions to Georgia’s academic, governmental, private sector, and public
archaeological community.

Written by April Boatwright, GRA

2017 Semester Report: Ninety-Six National Historic Site
15 May 2017
 4

INTRODUCTION

Ninety-Six National Historical Site (NISI) I Summer 2022 Report

The purpose of this report is to outline progress made in the Revitalization of the NISI I Project.
During Summer 2022, the team consisted of Sarah Grace Rogers, the Graduate Research Assistant
(GRA) leading the project at Waring Lab starting Summer 2022.

Overview of the NISI Site

Though some work at the NISI Site was completed in the early 1960s, NISI was largely
excavated in the 1970s. The Ninety-Six Site is located in Greenwood County, South Carolina and has
a history dating back to the 1751 Trading Post belonging to Robert Goudy (38GN1). The original
Ninety-Six fort was constructed in 1759 around Robert Goudy’s barn. Goudy’s house was burned by
Cherokee in 1760. In 1761, the already existing fort was likely enlarged by Moultrie. In 1780,
Lieutenant Colonel John Harris Cruger built a fort above the town known then as Ninety-Six on land
that, at the time, was owned by Holmes; the primary purpose of the fort (Holmes’ Fort, 38GN2) was to
protect the water supply. Harry Lee unsuccessfully besieged the stockade in June 1781.
The Star Fort (38GN3) was constructed late 1780 and into 1781 by Lieutenant Henry Haldane;
it was built in the shape of an eight-pointed star. It was besieged in May to June 1781 by General
Nathaniel Greene, though he was not able to take it.
The town of Ninety Six (38GN4) was likely settled in the 1960s, considering the timeline of
Goudy’s trading post. A courthouse and jail were constructed by 1775. The town was surrounded by a
stockade fort (38GN5).
After Greene lifted the siege of the fort in 1781, Cruger burned the fort, and it eroded for two
years. In 1983, a school by the name of Cambridge was constructed. The town of Ninety Six soon took
on the same name (Cambridge). Cambridge intersects with the previous Williamson and Holmes’
Forts. Upon railroad movement, unhealthy water, and other issues, the town died and was replaced by
what is presently known as Ninety Six in the 1850s.
The curation and storage history of the NISI collection after excavation presented certain
challenges that the Waring Lab Student Assistants and Graduate Research Assistants worked
through over the past several years to bring up to National Parks Service and Waring Lab standards.
 5

PROJECT
OVERVIEW

NISI I Team – Summer 2022

GRA: Sarah Grace Rogers

Previous Work
Work on NISI began in 2016. Up to
Summer 2022, all artifacts and their
data had been input into ICMS, and all
artifacts have been bagged and
tagged. However, due to changes in
staff, there were several discrepancies Figure 1: Sarah Rogers works in the Waring Processing room on making
mass corrections to NISI I directories within ICMS.
between the physical artifacts, the
information connected to them, how this information was entered into ICMS, and how they were
organized in their bags and boxes. Because of this, Sarah Grace Rogers was brought in to head a
project in revitalizing the NISI I collection.

Summer 2022 Plan

The original plan for NISI I for June and July 2022 was to complete correcting post-cataloging final
catalog discrepancies. Sarah Rogers was to work with the Curator of Waring Lab to create an
assessment form for NISI I. This plan, however, was contingent upon starting work in the spring as
well.

Thus, the project was a little behind. However, Sarah Rogers’ goal was to gain a more complete
understanding of the project, pull reports, complete any large-scale (mass) corrections she could in
them, re-import the data in to ICMS, and use the reports to start integrating reports into an Access
database to start assessment in the Fall. Along the way, however, Sarah Rogers found that the best
course of action was to make corrections within ICMS and then pull reports for assessment. She
wanted to move by collection for the Assessment phase so as not to become overwhelmed with work,
so her goal was to have the Siegeworks directory reports integrated into Access by the end of
Summer.

She planned to keep detailed notes and a running report in the W Drive in the event that someone
else needed to take on the task or be added to her team before fall.

Summary of Accomplishments
Of the above goals, Sarah Rogers completed all except integrating the reports into Access due to
scheduling complications at the lab. This, she planned to start at the beginning of the Fall Semester.

At the end of the Summer 2022 semester, Sarah Rogers had a thorough knowledge of the NISI I
collection, its history, and the contents within each site and directory within ICMS.
 6

She reintegrated the correct TMPLs into each directory in ICMS that originally held TMPLs; made
mass corrections in fields that could be completed in this fashion for all the relevant directories in
ICMS; and pulled reports of each directory that was corrected.

Sarah Rogers organized her work in the W Drive under NISI: NISI I: Collection Catalogs: ICMS
Catalog Records. This file included:

a) Archaeology Worksheet
a. Catalog worksheets that detail the type and format of data that should be entered into
ICMS fields, including a highlighted version that shows the types of data that would be
input
b) Assessment Forms
a. Copies of the ICMS reports (Excel Sheets) for each directory and will be the location of
the integrated Access databases during the Fall
c) Information
a. Draft Reports that were used as a
“practice” round of pulling the NISI I
directories from ICMS
b. Export Templates used to pull
reports from ICMS
c. How-To Guides on creating and
uploading templates, importing
data, making mass edits, and
pulling reports (exporting data)
d. NISI I Sites sorted and categorized
with their site and accession
number, directories in ICMS, P.I.,
and year
d) NISI I Reports
a. Copies of Sarah Rogers’ working
(for notes) and final reports on the
NISI I project
e) Nomenclature
Figure 2: A view of the file within the W Drive containing all
a. Standardized typology and lexicon the information and work completed on NISI I.
documents for ICMS data entry
f) Pulled reports
a. The reports of each directory that were exported from ICMS in July 2022 by Sarah
Rogers with the up-to-date mass corrections

Sarah Rogers organized a physical binder with the How-To Guides and nomenclature documents as
well.
 7

SUMMER 2022
Original Directory List
Sarah Rogers started by exploring the directories to gauge an understanding of the data in each. She
sorted each directory by the NISI I site:
a) Dozier Cemetery– 359
b) Holmes Fort– 360, 3601, HTAGS, TEST1
c) Jail– 358, TAGS
d) Restroom– 684
e) Siegeworks– 356, 359S
f) Southwest Village– 358S, 3581, SWTAGS
g) TEMPLATES– 358B, TEMPL

Each of these belongs to NISI I. Not included, but in ICMS, are 38GN2 (NISI II) as well as TEST,
UWG, and UWGA.

Figure 3: A view of the Rediscovery (ICMS) window open to the list of directories.

Sarah Rogers used her time exploring ICMS to create a detailed outline of what each directory held.
(This list was created prior to reintegrating TMPLs or making mass corrections.) They were color-
coded based on patterns and discrepancies she found:
a) Dozier (1 directory)
a. 359 (825 ct)
i. NISI 6798-6824 c (27 ct)
ii. TMPA 200101-203001 nc (27 ct)
iii. TMPL 101-9040 c (771 ct)
b) Holme’s Fort (4 directories)
a. 360 (2095 ct)
i. NISI 5827-6796, 12299-12306, 13145-13148 nc (663 ct)
 8

ii. TMPA 4595, 4596, 281004, 2540001-9998002 nc (660 ct)

iii. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct), 9990118 (1 ct) (772 ct total)
b. 3601 (9 ct)
i. TMPA 4595, 2690403, 2690601, 2720402, 2721307, 2740101, 2740201,
9990014, 9990118 (9 ct)
1. All in 360
c. HTAGS (671 ct)
i. NISI 5827-6796 nc (663 ct), 12299-12306 c (8 ct)
1. Mostly matches 360 but there are additions and subtractions
d. TEST1 (771 ct)
i. TMPA 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
1. Match TMPL numbers but labeled as TMPA??
c) Jail (2 directories)
a. 358 (10838 ct)
i. NISI 7266-13144 nc (5028 ct)
ii. TMPA (1000-31218 nc (5038)
1. Almost matches NISI numbers but 10 off
iii. TMPL 101-9040 nc (772 ct)
b. TAGS (5027 ct)
i. NISI 7266-12292 nc (5027 ct)
1. Almost matches 358 but missing some (including 13142-13144)
d) Restroom (1 directory)
a. 684 (805 ct)
i. NISI 5810-5826 c (17 ct)
ii. TMPA 1001-1017 c (17 ct)
1. Matches NISI exactly
iii. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
e) Siegeworks (2 directories)
a. 356 (854 ct)
i. TMPA 101, 30101-9300201 nc (83 ct)
ii. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
b. 359s (166 ct)
i. NISI 6825-6907 c (83 ct)
ii. TMPA 101, 30101-9300201 nc (83 ct)
1. In 356
2. Match NISI numbers
f) SW Village (3 directories)
a. 358s (1490 ct)
i. NISI 6908-7260, 12293-12298 c (359 ct)
ii. TMPA 10001-10366 nc (360 ct)
iii. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
b. 3581 (6 ct)
i. TMPA 10304, 10362, 10363, 10364, 10365, 10366 nc (6 ct)
1. All in 358s
c. SWTAGS (359 ct)
i. NISI 6908-7260, 12293-12298 c (359 ct)
1. All in 358 s
g) Templates (2 directories)
a. 358B
 9

i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)

b. TEMPL
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (774 ct)
COLOR CODES:
- Yellow highlight refers to TMPLs that are in other directories.
- Pink highlight refers to matches exactly within directories and sub-collections.
- Green highlight refers to similarities within directories and sub-collections, but not exact
matches.
- Blue is a match but a different type of number.
- “nc” means not consecutive numbers.
- “c” means consecutive numbers.
- “ct” means count, as in quantity.

Notes and Correspondence—Considerations Sarah Rogers Keeps in Mind

Sarah Rogers also utilized her time to take note of things she did not understand and write out
questions and answers for anyone in the future that may have similar questions. This was also to
solidify little pieces of information in her mind. These points are listed below:
a) TMPLs are templates. The original Template directory in ICMS is “TEMPL.” Not also
directories contain the TMPLs (or the correct TMPLs) because they were created by Waring
Assistants later on. The TEMPL directory is the most up-to-date copy of all of these.
b) TMPAs are the original “names” and “numbers” for each artifact. They get assigned NISI
numbers by Hank. We leave both the NISIs and TMPAs to keep a record of what they
originally were in case something is ever lost. When doing revitalization, NISI numbers and
TMPAs will both need to be corrected to keep an accurate record.
c) Consolidation: There are several directories that have partial collections from a “main”
directory belonging to a collection. For example, Holmes Fort originally had four directories:
360, 3601, HTAGS, and TEST1. 360 contained everything, while the others contained pieces.
The NISI I team will move forward with correcting everything and merge or consolidate later to
ensure maximum accuracy.
d) Restroom (684) was used to explore processes like importing and transporting. All the
information is the same, but the updated time signature for some artifacts is now by Sarah
Grace Rogers in July 2022. It was also imported using the Complete Catalog Worksheet
Template.

Re-Integrating TMPLs
Exploring the directories led Sarah Rogers to realize she needed to re-integrate the correct TMPLs
into each directory that originally held them using the most up-to-date TMPLs from the TEMPL
directory in ICMS.
 10

Figure 4: A view of the TEMPL directory within ICMS.

Originally, the directories with TMPLs were as follows:

a) Dozier (1/1 directory)
a. 359
i. TMPL 101-9040 c (771 ct)
b) Holmes’ Fort (2/4 directories)
a. 360
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct), 9990118 (1 ct) (772 ct total)
b. TEST1 (771 ct)
i. TMPA 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
1. Match TMPL numbers but labeled as TMPA with TMPA content
c) Jail (1/2 directories)
a. 358
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (772 ct)
d) Restroom (1/1 directory)
a. 684
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
e) Siegeworks (1/2 directories)
a. 356
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
f) SW Village (1/3 directories)
a. 358s
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
g) Templates (2/2 directories)
a. 358B
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct)
b. TEMPL
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (774 ct)
1. Matches others but has three more (300, 301, 9012)
 11

The TMPLs were then Re-Integrated into each of the above directories by exporting the TEMPL
directory from ICMS using the ARIMPORTS template and re-importing them back into each directory
as Updates, not as Duplicates. This worked for most directories, but there were a few that Sarah
Rogers had to thoroughly scan and rework to ensure all TMPLs from the TEMPL directory were
present. She was successful but made notes on those that were not re-integrated or contained extras:
a) Holme’s Fort (2/4 directories)
a. 360
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (774 ct), 9990118 (1 ct) (775 ct total)
1. 1 extra: TMPL 9990118
b. TEST1 (771 ct)
i. TMPA 101-9040 nc (771 ct) DID NOT UPDATE
1. Match TMPL numbers but labeled as TMPA
b) Jail (1/2 directories)
a. 358
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (776 ct)
1. 2 extras: TMPL 3227, 3237
c) Templates (2/2 directories)
a. 358B
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (771 ct) DID NOT UPDATE
b. TEMPL
i. TMPL 101-9040 nc (774 ct) DID NOT UPDATE

Corrections
After ensuring the correct TMPLs were in place, Sarah Rogers proceeded to examine the types of
problems within ICMS. She found that many directories contained data that was the same across all
directories or the same within sites. She used the Catalog Worksheet to create a color-coded
Highlighted Archaeology Worksheet (available on the W Drive) that outlined the types of data in each
directory/report and how they would need to be corrected during revitalization. This is outlined below:
a) Information that is the same across all directories/sites (was corrected on a mass level)
a. Included in mass corrections
b. Green on Archaeology Worksheet
b) Information that is the same within a site (was corrected on a mass level)
a. Include in mass corrections
b. Blue on Archaeology Worksheet
c) Individual or case-by-case information
a. Must be evaluated on a case-by-case/individual basis during revitalization
b. Yellow on Archaeology Worksheet
d) Fields that have data in some entries in some directories but not all and are indicated to not
have info on the original catalog worksheet provided
a. Must be evaluated on a case-by-case/individual basis during revitalization
b. Red on Archaeology Worksheet
 12

Figure 5: A copy of the Highlighted Archaeology Worksheet that details the fields and types of data that are input into ICMS.

Mass Corrections
Mass corrections were made within ICMS in three separate waves:
a) First Wave
a. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
b. Accession #: NISI-00###
c. Center #: SEAC-00###
d. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
e. Object Status: STORAGE
f. Condition: FRAGMENTED/POOR
g. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
h. Catalog Folder: N
i. Origin
j. County: GREENWOOD
k. State: SC
l. Country: USA
b) Second Wave
a. Ctrl Prop: N
b. Collector: blanked out
c) Third Wave
a. Other numbers: blanked out
 13

Figure 6: A view of the "Modify All" window open in ICMS that allows a user to make mass edits within a directory.

These corrections were made to NISI and TMPA numbers in the following directories:
a) 356- Siegeworks
b) 359S- Siegeworks
c) 358S- SW Village
d) 3581- SW Village
e) SWTAGS- SW Village
f) 360- Holmes Fort
g) 3601- Holmes Fort
h) HTAGS- Holmes Fort
i) 358- Jail
j) TAGS- Jail
k) 359- Dozier
l) 684- Restroom

Corrections were NOT made in the following:

a) TEMPL and 358B (Templates)
o Do not require correcting because they are templates
b) 38GN2
o A part of NISI II and thus not relevant for this project
c) TEST, UWG, UWGA
o Do not hold actual information
d) TEST1 (Holmes Fort)
o Was not corrected because it is all TMPAs that seemingly appear to match TPMLs exactly
save for the information entered into its fields

The following is a detailed outline, organized by site, of the total corrections made up to date:
a) SIEGEWORKS
 14

a. 356- Siegeworks
i. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
ii. Accession #: NISI-00###
iii. Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
viii. Catalog Folder: N
ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, SEIGEWORS
xi. Ctrl Prop: N
xii. Collector: blanked out
xiii. Other numbers: blanked out
b. 359S- Siegeworks
i. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
ii. Accession #: NISI-00###
iii. Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
viii. Catalog Folder: N
ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, SEIGEWORS
xi. Ctrl Prop: N
xii. Collector: blanked out
xiii. Other numbers: blanked out
b) SOUTHWEST VILLAGE
a. 358S- SW Village
i. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
ii. Accession #: NISI-00###
iii. Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
viii. Catalog Folder: N
ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, SOUTHWEST VILLAGE
 15

xi. Ctrl Prop: N

xii. Collector: blanked out
xiii. Other numbers: blanked out
b. 3581- SW Village
i. All TMPAs—no center # on these templates/worksheets
ii. Center number not there
1. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
2. Accession #: NISI-00###
3. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
4. Object Status: STORAGE
5. Condition: FRAG./POOR
6. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
7. Catalog Folder: N
8. Origin
a. County: GREENWOOD
b. State: SC
c. Country: USA
9. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, SOUTHWEST
VILLAGE
10. Ctrl Prop: N
11. Collector: blanked out
12. Other numbers: blanked out
c. SWTAGS- SW Village
i. Tags; no center #
1. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
2. Accession #: NISI-00###
3. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
4. Object Status: STORAGE
5. Condition: FRAG./POOR
6. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
7. Catalog Folder: N
8. Origin
a. County: GREENWOOD
b. State: SC
c. Country: USA
9. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, SOUTHWEST
VILLAGE
10. Ctrl Prop: N
11. Collector: blanked out
12. Other numbers: blanked out
c) HOLMES FORT
a. 360- Holmes Fort
i. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
ii. Accession #: NISI-00###
iii. Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
 16

viii. Catalog Folder: N

ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, HOLMES FORT
xi. Ctrl Prop: N
xii. Collector: blanked out
xiii. Other numbers: blanked out
b. 3601- Holmes Fort
i. All TMPAs—no center # on these templates/worksheets
ii. Center number not there
1. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
2. Accession #: NISI-00###
3. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
4. Object Status: STORAGE
5. Condition: FRAG./POOR
6. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
7. Catalog Folder: N
8. Origin
a. County: GREENWOOD
b. State: SC
c. Country: USA
9. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, HOLMES FORT
10. Ctrl Prop: N
11. Collector: blanked out
12. Other numbers: blanked out
c. HTAGS- Holmes Fort
i. Tags; no center #
1. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
2. Accession #: NISI-00###
3. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
4. Object Status: STORAGE
5. Condition: FRAG./POOR
6. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
7. Catalog Folder: N
8. Origin
a. County: GREENWOOD
b. State: SC
c. Country: USA
9. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, HOLMES FORT
10. Ctrl Prop: N
11. Collector: blanked out
12. Other numbers: blanked out
d. TEST1- Holmes Fort
i. Was not edited at all
d) JAIL
a. 358- Jail
i. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
 17

ii. Accession #: NISI-00###

iii. Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
viii. Catalog Folder: N
ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, JAIL
xi. Ctrl Prop: N
xii. Collector: blanked out
xiii. Other numbers: blanked out
b. TAGS- Jail
i. Tags; no center #
1. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
2. Accession #: NISI-00###
3. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
4. Object Status: STORAGE
5. Condition: FRAG./POOR
6. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
7. Catalog Folder: N
8. Origin
a. County: GREENWOOD
b. State: SC
c. Country: USA
9. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, JAIL
10. Ctrl Prop: N
11. Collector: blanked out
12. Other numbers: blanked out
e) DOZIER
a. 359
i. Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
ii. Accession #: NISI-00###
iii. Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
viii. Catalog Folder: N
ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, DOZIER CEMETERY
xi. Ctrl Prop: N
xii. Collector: blanked out
 18

xiii. Other numbers: blanked out

f) RESTROOM
a. 684
i.Class 1: ARCHEOLOGY
ii.Accession #: NISI-00###
iii.Center #: SEAC-00###
iv. Location: UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA
v. Object Status: STORAGE
vi. Condition: FRAG./POOR
vii. Reproduction: ORIGINAL TO SITE
viii.Catalog Folder: N
ix. Origin
1. County: GREENWOOD
2. State: SC
3. Country: USA
x. Site Name: NINETY-SIX NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, RESTROOM AND
SEPTIC TANK
xi. Ctrl Prop: N
xii. Collector: blanked out
xiii. Other numbers: blanked out
g) TEMPL and 358B (Templates)
a. Do not require correcting because they are templates
h) 38GN2
a. A part of NISI II and thus not relevant for this project
i) TEST, UWG, UWGA
a. Do not hold actual information
j) TEST1 (Holmes Fort)
a. Was not corrected because it is all TMPAs that seemingly appear to match TPMLs
exactly save for the information entered into its fields

ICMS Directory Reports

Upon the mass corrections being completed, Sarah Rogers pulled the reports (as Excel sheets) of all
of the directories belonging to NISI I, except for TEST1, UWG, UWGA, TEST, and 38GN2.

Reports were pulled prior to any consolidation or merging that may be required in the future and
before any further corrections were made.
 19

Figure 7: A view of the report pulled from ICMS for the 356 (Siegeworks) directory. There were 39 fields pulled, but only the
first few are display here.

The following reports are located in the W Drive:

a) SIEGEWORKS
a. 356
b. 359S
b) SOUTHWEST VILLAGE
a. 358S
b. 3581
c. SWTAGS
c) HOLMES FORT
a. 360
b. 3601
c. HTAGS
d) JAIL
a. 358
b. TAGS
e) DOZIER
a. 359
f) RESTROOM
a. 684
 20

THE FUTURE
Sarah Rogers plans to start the fall by proceeding forward into the assessment stage of the NISI I
project. She plans to put together and train a team in the work she has completed over the summer to
ensure an accurate and efficient project that brings the NISI I collection up to standards.

Moving by Collection
All work will be completed by collection to prevent overwhelming those working on the project. It will
move forward in the following order for each collection:
➢ Siegeworks
➢ SW Village
➢ Holmes Fort
➢ Jail
➢ Dozier
➢ Restroom

Assessment
Assessment will begin by integrating the reports pulled from ICMS into a Waring “dummy” Access
database to create assessment documents for each site within the collection.

Revitalization
Once the team completed the Assessment stage, they will move forward to physically complete the
changes and corrections they found needed to be addressed in the Assessment stage. The project is
set to be complete in Summer 2023.