Late-Quaternary Stratigraphy and Geoarchaeology of the Upper Neosho River Basin, East-Central Kansas
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Late-Quaternary Stratigraphy and Geoarchaeology of the Upper Neosho River Basin, East-Central Kansas To be submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Andrew Stefan Gottsfield Department of Anthropology Advisory Committee: ______________________ Dr. Rolfe D. Mandel (Chair) ______________________ Dr. Jack L. Hofman ______________________ Dr. Xingong Li Date Issued_____________________________________ Date Approved___________________________________ Approved for the Department________________________ UMI Number: 1474428 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. UMI 1474428 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 The Thesis Committee for Andrew Stefan Gottsfield certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: LATE-QUATERNARY STRATIGRAPHY AND GEOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE UPPER NEOSHO RIVER BASIN, EAST-CENTRAL KANSAS Advisory Committee: ______________________ Dr. Rolfe D. Mandel (Chair) ______________________ Dr. Jack L. Hofman ______________________ Dr. Xingong Li Date Approved_____________________ ABSTRACT In this study, a geoarchaeological approach was used to assess the potential for buried and surficial prehistoric cultural resources in the upper Neosho River basin of east-central Kansas. Specifically, lithostratigraphy (e.g. the DeForest Formation) and digital Soil Survey data (SSURGO) were used to estimate the relative ages of landform sediment assemblages (LSAs) in the study area. Surface-soil morphology was selected as a key indicator for predicting where the different members of the DeForest Formation occur, thereby providing estimated relative ages for LSAs. Field-truthing this hypothetical relationship between surface soils and members of the DeForest Formation included stratigraphic and geomorphic investigations. Numerical ages of alluvial deposits and associated buried soils were determined by radiocarbon dating. Some problems were encountered. For example, mapping late-Holocene members of the DeForest Formation is problematic based on SSURGO distributions because the data oversimplify the floodplain. Also, SSURGO data do not systematically or consistently map specific soils on alluvial/colluvial fans. Nevertheless, the results of this study suggest that surface soils are reliable indicators of the relative ages of early and middle Holocene LSAs, thereby providing archaeologists with a powerful tool for locating Paleoindian and Archaic cultural deposits in complex alluvial settings. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The University of Kansas Odyssey Research Fund provided the majority of funding for this study. Support for this investigation was also provided by the Kansas Geological Survey, the Archaeological Research Center at the University of Kansas, the U.S. Department of the Fish and Wildlife Services, and the Carlyle Smith and Carroll Clark Research Grants. This research would not have been possible without the guidance, support, and instruction provided by Dr. Rolfe D. Mandel. Dr. Mandel went above and beyond what I expected from an advisor. A special thanks goes to Dr. Mary Adair who provided me with support, friendship, advice, an office throughout most of this research and a pro bono macrobotanical identification. I would also like to thank the members of my committee Dr. Jack Hofman and Dr. Xingong Li. I would like to recognize and thank the landowners and land stewards that allowed me access for this study: Leland Parker, Jim Cosgrove and the Cosgrove family, Mr. and Mrs. Kellum, Philip Matile, Jim Sholin, Danny Mathews (city of Council Grove), Gale Lee, and Meg VanNess and Pat Gonzales of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Meg VanNess deserves a special thanks for facilitating the payment of two radiocarbon assays through the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife service. Numerous people assisted me with aspects of this project. In the field, I was aided by Rolfe Mandel, Laura Murphy, Nick Kessler, James Dougherty, Kris West, John Johnson, Konstantin Pustovoytov, and Elsie (my dog and field companion). Dan Hirmas, Laura Murphy, Ashley Zung, Mark Bowman, Daniel Keating, and Luke Struckman helped me in the lab. A special thanks to Brendon Asher for analyzing the chipped stone, to Mark Volmut for identifying faunal remains, and to Nick Kessler for doing the flotations. John Charlton and Jon Miller graciously took some photographs for me, so thanks to both of them. Dr. Steve Bozarth is conducting a phytolith analysis for me at a reduced rate (results are pending and not presented here). Jon Smith (KGS) provided me with some much-needed supplies and also helped me with printing a poster related to this research. Thanks to Dr. Donna Roper for her thoughts and expertise in Kansas archaeology. I would like to thank Xingong Li, Eileen Battles (DASC), Dave McDermott, and, Andy Hilburn for their help with the GIS aspects of this study. In addition, thanks to Dr. Robert Hoard and the Kansas State Historical Society for providing me with the archaeological site location polygons and giving me access to the KSHS database throughout this project. My parents Bob and Lois both deserve my sincere thanks for all they have done for me during the last three-plus years (not to mention the years prior). To Henry, my son, thanks for keeping me grounded and goofy. My final expression of thanks is reserved for my wife Becky. Your patience, support and love keeps my motor running and my head above water. I could not have completed this study without you. iv ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................ iv Figures .......................................................................................................................... vii Tables ..........................................................................................................................viii Chapter I ......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Research Objectives .................................................................................................... 3 Significance of Research ............................................................................................. 3 Thesis Outline ............................................................................................................. 4 Chapter II ........................................................................................................................ 5 Setting ............................................................................................................................. 5 The Study Area ........................................................................................................... 5 Physiography and Bedrock Geology .......................................................................... 10 Quaternary Geology .................................................................................................. 13 Pleistocene Stratigraphy - Loess ............................................................................ 13 Holocene Stratigraphy – The DeForest Formation ................................................. 17 Soils .......................................................................................................................... 20 Vegetation ................................................................................................................. 24 Climate ...................................................................................................................... 24 Modern Climate ..................................................................................................... 24 Late-Quaternary Climates ...................................................................................... 26 Chapter III ..................................................................................................................... 28 Archaeological Context ................................................................................................. 28 Paleoindian and Archaic ............................................................................................ 29 Early Ceramic/Woodland .......................................................................................... 31 Middle Ceramic ......................................................................................................... 32 Late Ceramic/Protohistoric ........................................................................................ 33 Historic Period .......................................................................................................... 33 Chapter IV .................................................................................................................... 36 Previous Research