• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

.. - A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE DEF/HEN-24-11.9110.00 .. PROJECT IN ADAMS AND RICHLAND TOWNSHIPS, DEFIANCE COUNTY, OHIO AND NAPOLEON TOWNSHIP, HENRY COUNTY, OHIO (PID 19047) . .. .. omCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Report prepared by: .. Stanley W. Baker Cultural Resources Unit .. Office ofEnvironmental Services Ohio Department ofTransportation .. December 2003 .. .. .. .. Maumee River between Defiance, Ohio and Napoleon, Ohio was considered. This research area was considered to be adequate since it would not only identify previously known resources within the project area (Le. where the alignment is drawn) but would also provide infonuation regarding .. the kinds ofphysiographic situations where sites have been previously recorded. This type of infonuation is helpful to predict the likelihood ofsites within the project area and define areas which might be considered culturally sensitive. In addition, some idea of the potential site significance can be gained in this slightly broader study. Such data is useful in developing field - research strategies and detenuining the adequacy of field data once it is amassed. Site Data/Site Interpretation The tenu site as used in this report represents a discrete area ofhabitation or any previously reported isolated artifact or lithic array. Site boundaries were taken from manuscript site fonus and by their absolute placement based on available topographic mapping. The .. relationship ofthese artifact assemblages to areas conducive to habitation was also considered. It is assumed genuine habitations focused on specific, if not predictable, environmental or geomorphological areas. - Habitat infonuation has been recorded on most site fonus. This infonuation when available was compared to available first-hand data as reported by geomorphologists and/or soil .. scientists. However, it was obvious reported site data versus published soils and Quaternary maps did vary or were dissimilarly designated. Sometimes bluffs and terrace were recognized on fonus. .. At other times they were not. It was also obvious how individual site habitats were defined varied between individual researchers. What was an upland setting to one researcher was a lowland .. setting to another . Previously, ODOT's Ecological Systems unit has used "above headwaters" (i.e. based on low CFS stream flow) to arbitrarily define uplands or non-aquatic situations. However, varying seasonal discharge and other ecological factors found much further downstream would have negatively impacted sustained communities and resource availability as they relate to native inhabitants. Uplands as in the case ofthis report were arbitrarily defined using the following more broadly inclusive criteria. Uplands are any catchment not associated with a stream greater than 30 meters wide having a sustained stream flow. Associated lowland catchments would also include open bodies - ofwater (i.e. penuanent lakes) or any meandering stream with pools and shoals. Major streams in the area include only the Maumee, Tiffin, and Auglaize rivers. Land fonus in association with lowland catchments also include: bluffs, valley walls, floodplains, and one or more terrace surfaces. Such lowland elements are only found one to two miles south ofthe project area. In contrast, vast regions ofDefiance, Henry, and Paulding counties are upland situations. The study - area itself, is solely contained within an area that is profoundly upland in nature. .. 5 - .. The temporal components and the site types used in this study were taken directly from the site forms. In order to manipulate the data each reported component for a site was listed separately. Sometimes, as in the case of some multi-component sites, the temporal period and site type had to be extrapolated or defined during this research (for example an Archaic surface deposit reported around an Early Woodland conical mound). Many recently reported sites were only described as "open" (E. 1 page 4 ofthe OAI) and "unknown" (E. 2 page 4 ofthe OAI). This definition might vary later in the "Description ofSite" where one author might interpret the resource as a camp while another might call it a lithic scatter. Similarly, burial sites might be .. interpreted or reported in a variety ofways. Human bone might simply be listed in the materials collected or the site might be interpreted as a Glacial Kame burial site with little curated evidence. This information was listed under the "Site Type" as it was originally presented. Finalized site interpretations in this report are based on the best evidence available. One should always remember that site interpretations can and do change as more data is collected from a resource. The terminology used and recorded under "Site Interpretation" was designed to be more than just descriptive. The terminology was systematically organized to accept broadly defined, possible case scenarios. Terminology was also designed to have definite but easily .. recognizable functional implications. Site interpretation in this case was something more than just assuming a previous interpretation. It is a systematic reexamination ofraw site data (Le. artifact frequency and artifact function) in a comparative way. The system more than reviews function it addresses implied functional diversity in site assemblages. As treated herein, burials, mounds, earthworks, petro glyphs, etc. imply a ceremonial function. These types ofsites were interpreted as "Ceremonial" manifestations. Obviously burials can also be found on habitation sites. These, more importantly, represent higher functional .. diversity in the total site assemblage in which they are related. At the other end ofthe site spectrum, sites which reflect only individual artifacts or "isolated" finds express low functional diversity (Le. projectile = hunting activity). Similarly, lithic (flake) scatters with a projectile or .. knife) are still only reflective ofa low diversity. One has to keep in mind there is no way to accurately document how an isolated artifact was deposited ifit is superficially disturbed, or ifthe remains are found in a plow disturbed context. Regarding poorly documented or arbitrarily .. defined scatters it is theoretically impossible to demonstrate a single temporal relationship . Typically however, the usual assumption is made that flake scatters are temporally associated with any physically associated diagnostic. Intrinsically, lithic scatters have poor temporal and spacial .., organization. In fact, most site boundaries in these cases are only arbitrary (Le. barely) defined . Such archaeological information was also used in defining lithic scatters from actual localities once used for established habitations. Again, lithic scatters can only be assumed to have low .. functional diversity. Actually habitation sites in contrast should begin to show some spatial organization, an .. implied environmental focus, and at least moderate to high functional diversity. Considering a foraging pattern, a variety ofactivities might be conducted at even a transient camps. The archaeological record should express at least limited functional diversity an any habitation site. When a site assemblage exhibits just a projectile, a knife, or single functioned tool category with 6 .., - only knapping residue, the site is still considered to exhibit only low functional diversity. However, when multiple tool types (i.e. knives, scrapers, ornamental objects, and/or ground stone) are found in conjunction, the assemblage is considered to show at least moderate diversity. A - typical camp site assemblage might be projectiles, scrapers, and flakes or scrapers, an ornament, .. and flakes. If a utilized flake was reported in an assemblage that was otherwise monotonous (flakes and a projectile) it was still considered a lithic scatter with low functional diversity. On the other hand, the occurrence ofmanufactured unifaces and bifacial tools in the form of knives and scrapers was considered to imply moderate diversity when they were found in conjunction with knapping debris (single function) or flakes and projectiles (two functions). In this system, when moderate functional diversity was observed in an assemblage, the site - was interpreted as a camp or stations. High or higher functional diversity was used to define more permanent occupations like base camps, hamlets, and villages. Station, hamlet, and village .. designations were formulated from comparative studies. These terms are designed to imply temporal/organizational relations based on both temporal and functional data. The term "station" was used instead of "camp" in order to imply the patterns ofmore logistically motivated native .. groups utilizing pre-ordained temporary habitation sites. This site type are prevalent particularly during the Middle Woodland Period and later. Similarly, terms like hamlet and village have particular temporal implications (i.e. MW and LW for the former and LP/PH for the latter). These are used to imply or reflect there more unique position within a more involved .. settlement/subsistence system . Low functional diversity is not just an expression in tool or equipment variety. Diversity is also a reflection of: 1) how this supportive equipment was manufactured, used, and discarded; .. plus/or, 2) how the habitation itself physically developed around these activities. Obviously, transient occupations do not have a tendency to exhibit vertical complexity (deVelopment and use of subterranean features, etc.). On the other hand, moderate functionality would be expressed

Load more

  57

Copy Link