The Shoshone Move North
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2001 Limits of migration: The Shoshone move North James Rodgers Free The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Free, James Rodgers, "Limits of migration: The Shoshone move North" (2001). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 5348. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/5348 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY The University of Montana Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in. its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. **Please check "Yes" or "No" and provide signature Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission__________ Author's Signature: Date: 2 >,7 2<sc> / Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author's explicit consent. 8/98 Limits of Migration: The Shoshone Move North by James Rodgers Free, Jr. B.S. The University of the State of New York, 1980 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts The University of Montana 2001 Approved by: Chairman, Board oTExaminers Dean, Graduate School (. 1 - ~ l~ 7 - O ( Date UMI Number: EP40812 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT UMI EP40812 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 Free, James Rodgers, Jr., M.A., December 2001 Anthropology Limits of Migration: The Shoshone Move North Chairman: Thomas A. Foor 7 f t p Abstract Hypotheses regarding the migration of the Shonshone and other Numic speakers have been grist for the anthropological mill for nearly 150 years. Historians, ethnohistorians, ethnographers and archaeologists have all contributed to the picture of the Shoshone on the Northern Plains. Their arguments are supported by personal observation, oral histories and the archaeological record. This thesis is primarily concerned with information derived from the archaeological record. In the following thesis, I begin by reviewing ethnohistorical records that document the Shoshone presence from the Great Basin to the Plains as far North as southern Saskatchewan and Alberta. I then examine the distribution of carefully selected artifact types (tri-notched projectile points and Intermountain ware pottery), which manifest a different geographical distribution. In an effort to corroborate the ethnohistorical view I unexpectedly find an archaeologically supported argument for the limits of the Shoshonean northern population movement that is significantly different than that indicated in ethnohistorical accounts. Acknowledgments There is an extraordinary group of people who provided the professional guidance, inspiration and encouragement that was necessary in order for me to complete this thesis. My committee members, Dr. Thomas A. Foor, Dr. John Douglas, and Dr. John J. Donahue are to be commended for their exceptional patience in dealing with this non-traditional student. Dr. Foor was especially helpful in keeping me pointed in the right direction despite my tendency to stray at the slightest provocation. Janene Caywood and Milo McLeod have been unflagging in their support, both as professional archaeologists and as good friends who understood the unwritten rules of the game and were willing to explain them to the newest player. Margie Lubinski, Derek Beery, Russ Raschkow and Mark Sant have all earned my sincere appreciation for their suggestions and assistance. Rounding out my support group are Jennifer Eberlien, Matt Thomas, the Brothers Light, and Ken and Catherine Duce. Their collective sense of humor bore me through the darker days. To my wife Dian, words are totally inadequate to express my gratitude for her patience, support and tolerance throughout the process that finally brought this thesis to completion. Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments ...................................... iii Table of Contents ................................................................................... iv List of Figures ........................................................................................ v List of Tables ......................................................................................... v Chapters 1 Introduction ................................................. 1 2 Method ....................................................................................11 3 Analysis ............................................................................... 21 4 Conclusions ......................................................................... 27 References Cited .................................................................................... 32 Appendices A. Shoshone Ware Description ............................................... 39 B. Site Summaries .................................................................... 41 C. Steatite Artifact Provenience ............................................... 57 List of Tables Table 1. Montana Archaeological Sites Bearing Tri-notched Projectile Points 21 Table 2. Montana Archaeological Sites Bearing Shoshone-ware Pottery .... 23 List of Figures Figure 1. Distribution of Ethnohistoric Observations ......................................... 8 Figure 2. Examples of Tri-notched Projectile Points ....................................... 14 Figure 3. Examples of Shoshone or Intermountain ware ................................17 Figure 4. Distribution of Tri-notched Projectile Points ......... 22 Figure 5. Distribution of Shoshone or Intermountain Ware .............................24 Figure 6. Archeological Sites Compared With Ethnohistoric Observations ....25 Figure 7. Examples of Steatite Artifacts ...........................................................29 Figure 8. Distribution of Steatite Artifacts ........................................................ 30 Figure 9. Overall Distribution of Archaeological Sites Compared With Ethnohistoric Observations ........................................................................ 30 1 Chapter One: Introduction In 1968, Carling Malouf posited, “it is not possible to trace the prehistory of the Shoshoni into very remote times" (1968:1). He believed that the Shoshone peoples “migrated northward into Alberta, and Saskatchewan, through Montana and Wyoming” (1968:1) and that the ethnohistorical record supported his conclusion. In this study it is my intent to reevaluate the data available to Malouf in 1968 and to examine the distribution of relevant artifactual materials in space controlled for time. The data pertaining to the presence of the Shoshone in Montana will then be analyzed in concert with that available subsequent to 1968, with a view towards determining the extent or limit of their northward migration. The goal of this study is to test Malouf s thesis in light of more current data. Prior to examining the data it might help if we knew why a study of this nature is necessary. It has been my observation that boundaries or limits, whether physical or intellectual, have always been held in some degree of fascination by the majority of humankind. Fascination aside, when the boundary in question is used to define the limits of migration of a particular group or cultural entity, the level of interest and importance becomes much more than academic. In our contemporary, litigious society, knowing the boundary of a particular Native American ethnic group may very well determine the limits of their well being and continued existence. Without understanding ethnic boundaries legislative efforts such as the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990, despite the controversy attending its genesis and implementation, would be essentially meaningless. After all, how does one determine “the most probable descendants” of a particular group using, in part, the archaeological record, if the original geographic limits of the cultural entity are not known? Although the pragmatic example referred to above may be important to the archaeologist’s public constituency, it is only one part of a much larger universe of discourse. Migration, one of the primary cultural processes, “involves the movement of a people and is based on a deliberate decision to enter new areas and leave the old“(Fagen 1998:16). The assumption that we can infer Northern Shoshone population movement and hence, territorial