The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64): New Evidence about a Michaud/Neponset Paleoindian Site in the Champlain Basin

by Francis “Jess” W. Robinson IV and John G. Crock

Abstract from oblique references in letters archived in the Fleming that they came from “sandblows” or de- While conducting archival research as part of a stabilized sand deposits in that town (Loring 1980; thorough reanalysis of the Reagan si te, new see Loring 1978: VT-F R-64 Vermont Archaeo- information about the enigmati c “Fairfax Sand- logical Site Form - Vermont Division for Historic blows” site (VT-FR-64) was uncovered. Although Preservation (VDHP) Archives). not voluminous, the new information provides some While conducting archival research as part of a minimal context to the site and has enabled the thorough re-analysis of the Reagan site, the senior authors to plot its general location. Moreover, the author acquired copies of a number of letters written information has enabled the authors to construct a by or to Fisher from the Ame rican Museum of plausible narrative of the site’s discovery and also Natural History (AMNH), the New York State to tentatively ascribe several additional artifacts to Museum (NYSM), and the Fleming Museum. Con- the site. Interestingly, the research also suggests tained within these letters is a series of references to that the “Fairfax Sandblows” site may have been the Fairfax Sandblows site. Although not volumi- the first Paleoindian site in New England reported nous, they provide enough detail to offer a minimal to professional archaeologists, though interest in context to the site. Moreover, they have enabled the the site never progressed beyond Fisher’s overtures construction of a plausible narrative of the site’s to the American Museum of Natural History. discovery and also the tentative ascription of several additional artifacts to the site. I nterestingly, the Introduction research also suggests that the Fai rfax Sandblows site may have been the first Paleoindian site in New Prior to the early 1990s, the “Fairfax Sandblows” England reported to professional archaeologists, site (VT-FR-64) was one of only a few localities in though interest in the site never progressed beyond Vermont from which more than a single Paleoindian Fisher’s overtures to the AMNH. was known to have been recovered (Loring 1980). As part of his work assiduously A Revised History documenting artifact collec tions from around the of the Fairfax Sandblows Site state, Stephen Loring rediscovered the four fluted projectile points that, at that tim e, formed the Claims involving the discovery of sites produced by “Fairfax Sandblows” assemblage in the Benjamin “Early Man” oc curred fairly regularly during the W. Fisher collection at the University of Vermont early part of the 20th century. None withstood (UVM). The c ollection had bee n donated to the serious scientific scrutiny, however, until the UVM Fleming Museum earlier in the ce ntury discoveries at Folsom were examined by a series of (Loring 1980). No other documentation existed in researchers and proved le gitimate in 1927 the Anthropology Department or Fleming Museum (Boldurian and Cotter 1999; Meltz er 1993). archives to give a pr ecise provenience to the Recognizing the profound significance of the finds artifacts, however. As such, Loring could only at Folsom, Barnum Brown, who had earlier in the surmise from their la beling, “Fairfax, VT.” a nd century made a name for himself as the discoverer

13 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008

of the first Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton, immediately While there are no Paleoindian a rtifacts con- worked to disseminate the discovery and its impli- tained within the portion of the Truax collection at cations to both a scholar ly and g eneral audience the Fleming Museum, and there is no documentary (Boldurian and Cotter 1999:8; see Brown 1928). As evidence suggesting that he identified a Paleoindian Brown was only tangentially involved in the site, it is now reasonably clear that L. B. Truax was excavations at Folsom, however, and failed even to the discoverer of the F airfax Sandblows site. The recognize principal investigator J. D. Figgins in significance of t he site, howe ver, would only be many of his popular pre ss releases, subsequent recognized by Fisher. generations of ar chaeologists have not looked Although Fisher had no context for the material particularly fondly on him (Bolduria n and Cotter Truax collected from the Fairfax Sandblows prior to 1999:8). Nevertheless, it was due to the tireless the dissemination of the discoveries at Folsom, the promotion of the Folsom discoveries by Brown that artifacts were clearly intriguing to him. Upon Benjamin Fisher made the connection between the reading an article profiling Brown and the Folsom projectile points uncovered at Folsom and the ones site in the New York Herald Tribune on October 6, he had earlier seen from Fairfax, Vermont. 1929, however, Fisher immediately recognized their Except for his connection to the Rea gan site, importance. That night he wrote to Brown: little is known about Benjamin Fisher. Judging from his letters, Fisher was a keen, but not particularly In the [New York] Herald Tribune of this date, covetous, artifact collector. As his letters concerning I find pictures of your discov eries in Folsom. Reagan make clear, he was just as eager to under- The arrow head with a c hip taken the entire stand the character of a site and attempt to elucidate length of it, on both sides, after it had been site functions and other details as he was to acquire otherwise finished, is of particular interest to impressive material for its own sake. He likely me. … I have known of about a dozen specimens began artifact collecting with L. B. Truax, one of of this same type, taken from one spot in Vermont’s most prominent early artifact collectors Northern Vermont. Nowhere else in this state, (Huden 1971:70-77). Truax is perhaps best known nor in any collection, have I seen anything like as one of the “discoverers” of the Swanton it. (Fisher to B rown, Oct. 6, 1929, AMNH Middlesex cemetery, but his col lections, some of Archives). which are now housed at the Fleming Museum, contain an abundance of material from a number of Whatever his faults may have be en, Barnum other important Vermont archaeological sites (see Brown was also known for his re gular correspon- Huden 1971:70-77). Fisher admits both his interest dence with myriad artifact and fossil collectors from in sites and his connection to Truax in the following around the country. True to form, a mere eight days excerpt from a letter c ontained in the F leming later Fisher was writing again to Brown, thanking Museum archives: him for his interest and for a copy of an article Brown had wr itten in 1928 about the Folsom My own collection came largely from Addison discoveries (Brown 1928). T he body of F isher’s and Franklin Counties. The material from the October 14, 1929 letter to Brown is quoted in full latter county is similar to t hat of the Truax below: Collection, as much o f it was made in the company of Mr. Truax. Much of it is not suitable Thank you for your interested letter and copy of for exhibition purposes, as I am more interested “Prehistoric Man i n America.” I would have in studying sites and cultures than in making a liked to have been a laborer on this expedition. collection. (Fisher to H. B . Eldred, June 15, 1936, Fleming Museum archives). The fluted points belong to Mr. L. B. Truax. He

14 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64)

found them, if his memory is correct, in a other points of this type were found by another man, chipping bed, with flakes of the same material at the same location, but scattered,” (Fisher to lieing [sic] about, whic h would indi cate that Brown, October 24, 1929, AMNH archives). they were not trade points. W e have always Upon arriving at the AMNH, Brown apparently wondered about them, as the material, form and sent the points to Clark Wissler, then the Curator-in- workmanship are different from any specimens Chief of the anthropology department, for his we have seen. He has nine in all, some broken, advice. This is somewhat ironic, as Brown some pieced together, and only two perfect. purported himself to beone of the central authorities on recently legitimized “Early Man” sites. Neverthe- They were found on a sand deposit near the less, Wissler returned his impressions of the points Lamoille River, about 14 miles from its mouth, to Brown, who was in the field at the time, via a n and 100 feet above the river level. The sand is internal memorandum. The memorandum states in continually shifting, and they may have be en part that: uncovered in this process. We have examined the points accompanying the Mr. Truax has consented to let me send some of correspondence with Mr. Lisher [changed to them to you. He wishes them returned, and I am Fisher in the marg in]. The points are quite taking it for granted that you will do so. He is similar in form to the Folsom specime ns. The an old man, and it will probably be a few days material is different and the chipping not so before they get started. fine. There are indications of weathering which might indicate age but we have no satisfactory I am anx ious to know the result of your way of estimating age in terms o f weathering comparison. Although a novice in the business, (Wissler to Brown, October 30, 1929, AMNH my chief interest is in the traces of early man in archives). the region (Fisher to Brown, October 14, 1929, AMNH archives). Despite Wissler’s acknowledgment of their similarity, when Brown returned from the field and This letter is notable for several reasons. It gives examined the points for himself, he concluded that the approximate location and circumstances of the they were more likely Hopewell in origin. He Fairfax Sandblows site and states that there was a returned them to Fisher with a short reply stating as “chipping bed” or an abundance of lithic debitage in much. Fisher, however, was undeterred. the area of their recovery. The letter also attests to Fisher wrote to Brown again approximately six the fact that Truax was the discoverer of the site and months later, still motivated by his keen interest in of his ownership of nine fluted points, only two of Paleoindian sites (and likely encouraged by a copy which were complete. of Wissler’s memorandum that B rown’s office In a letter written ten da ys later, upon posting assistant forwarded to Fisher in Brown’s absence). two of Truax’s fluted points to the AMNH, F isher He began the letter by acknowledging that he had wrote that debitage recovered from the site was searched the Fairfax locality several times but had weathered a light color, much like the fluted points never found any material there himself, owing to the he was sending. This suggests that the two fluted shifting sands (subsequent letters to Ritchie do points he sent ultimately became two of the four in suggest he eventually found material at the site, but Fisher’s collection from the Fairfax Sandblows site, no additional projectile points; see below). He stated as these ar e made from weathered Mt. J asper/ that farmers of the local ar ea had not f ound any Jefferson rhyolite (Loring 1980; see Pollock et al. fluted points either, but had f ound “other imple- 2008). Fisher also states in the le tter that, “three ments” at the site ( Fisher to Brown, July 7, 1930,

15 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008

AMNH archives). The rest of the letter contains a sites. It is possible that the points were simply never fairly detailed description of a site he had beg un returned to Truax after they were sent back from the collecting over several years before, which he felt, AMNH, but Fisher seems to only have sent two of owing to the sim ilar conditions, elevation, and the four. I n any case, the Trua x collection wa s artifact forms, a lso held the possi bility of g reat donated to the Fleming Museum in 1935, after his antiquity. The latter site would come to be called the death, and none of the nine fluted points Fisher Reagan site by Ritchie (1953, 1957). Unfortunately claimed Truax once had were in the portion of the for Fisher, by the time of the July 7, 1930 letter, collection donated. Moreover, according to the letter museums and other institutions were beginning to Fisher wrote to Ritchie many years later, F isher be inundated with letters from people from across seemed to have been under the impression that the the nation claiming to own or know the whereabouts other fluted points were in the collection donated to of Paleoindian material (Roberts 1936). As such, the Fleming, but merely misplaced by the museum. Fisher’s sites likely became two among many vying In fact, although some what conjectural, the for scholarly attention. authors are now reasonably confident that the five In the cor respondence between Ritchie and missing fluted points from the Trua x collection Fisher over twenty years later, initiated as a result of ended up in the collection of Truax’s son-in-law, Ira Ritchie’s study of the Reagan site, Fisher wrote that, A. Manley of Milton, Vermont, who i n turn left barring Reagan, the only other Paleoindian site he them to his son, James Manley (Huden 1971:70-77; knew of was the one in Fairfax. When Ritchie Loring 1980). I ra Manley was a lso a prominent responded excitedly about the possibility of another artifact collector during the earlier part of the 20 th Paleoindian site in the reg ion in a simil ar century. After the discoveries at Folsom popularized environmental setting, Fisher replied that: fluted points and t heir antiquity, one can imagine that they were in great demand in collector circles, The site where the fluted points were found is on as they are today. It is possible that Truax gave the the Lamoille River. This also has changed, but other five points from the Fairfax Sandblows site to I have found material in this vicinity [referring Manley, just as he may have given the four made to raw material] which resembles that from the from Mt. Jasper/Jefferson rhyolite to Fisher. Cer - Reagan site. The sand shifts rapidly, they are tainly, there was a family connection. Alternatively, learning to stop these sand blows, so our as Truax’s son-in-law, Ira Manley was probably chances of locating anything are not good, but involved in the donation of the Truax collection to it will be a pleasure to go there with you. I UVM, and as such would have been in a position to would like to locate with your help, the fluted procure artifacts he particularly coveted. points that came from there [in the Fle ming The VDHP conducted an interview with Museum] (Fisher to Ri tchie, April 20, 1952, William A. Ross, another prominent Ve rmont NYSM archives). artifact collector, shortly before his death in the late 1970s. In the intervie w, he specifically mentions It is unclear whether Fisher ever took Ritchie to the that the Manley collection actually contains much of Fairfax Sandblows site. the Truax collection. As Ross likely knew Truax Truax died sometime prior to 1935, only a few and both Ira and James Manley, he would have been years after Fisher’s correspondence with the in a position to know and rec ognize particular AMNH. It is unclear how Fisher came to own four artifacts. of the points from the Fa irfax Sandblows site as During an interview with Loring in t he late Fisher’s letters suggest Truax was quite covetous of 1970s, Ira Manley’s son, James, claimed that he did them. Perhaps they were given as a gift to Fisher, not know the location of discovery of seven of the who was obviously passionate a bout Paleoindian fluted points in his collection of nine, as they were

16 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64)

Figure 1. Composite photograph of the Michaud/Neponset projectile points attributed by the authors to the Fairfax Sandblows site (VT-FR-64). Artifacts are referenced in alphabetical order from left to right and from top row to bottom row. Figure 1b, 1c, 1e, and 1i were photographed by Jess Robinson. All other artifacts photographed by James Petersen. Composite photograph designed using Photoshop CS3. inherited from his father (Loring 1980). Based upon of the unprovenienced (or potentially dubiously stylistic affinities, their general similarity to the four provenienced) points from the Manley collection fluted points donated by Fisher to the F leming studied by Loring are in fact the five missing fluted Museum, their overall conformity to a recently re- points from the nine Truax recovered from the cognized Paleoindian projectile point type or modal Fairfax Sandblows site. These projectile points form (Bradley et al. 2008), and details provided by correspond to Loring’s (1980) Figures 1 and 2, and Fisher regarding the Trua x collection from the are depicted in this paper in Figure 1 (1a, 1d, 1f, 1g, Fairfax Sandblows site, the authors propose that five and 1h). The attribution of Figure 1a, corresponding

17 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008 to Loring’s (1980) F igure 2a, is somewhat designated provenience, with the possible exception problematic, however, and will be explored below. of the artifact depicted in Figure 1a of this paper . While the r est of this paper will refe r to the The measurements for these projectile points are artifacts just described as one assemblage (with the taken from Loring’s (1980) Appendix I, and ar e possible exception of Figure 1a), derived from the provided in Table 1. With regard to the projectile Fairfax Sandblows site, no direct evidence has been point depicted in Fig ure 1a of this paper , there identified as yet to confirm the provenience of the appears to be a discr epancy between Loring’s Manley fluted points, the above exegesis (1980) illustration caption within the text, and its notwithstanding. Moreover, the Manley collection designation in his Appendix I. Within the text, the was auctioned and sold in the 1990s and is no caption underneath the artifact illustration indicates longer available for direct study. Thus, whi le the that it was probably recovered from somewhere in authors believe the c onnection is war ranted and Franklin County, while in the appendix the artifact valid, the provenience of the Manley artifacts must is listed as coming from site VT-CH-107. I n the still remain tentative. VT-CH-107 site form (Loring 1978: VT-CH-107 Vermont Archaeological Site Form, VDHP The Fairfax Sandblows Assemblage Archives), Loring also attributes the artifact to VT- CH-107, a site in Chittenden County. The four fluted points originally attributed by Because Loring’s (1980) article was written at Loring (1980) to the Fairfax Sandblows site are still least a year after the completion of the site forms, it housed at the U niversity of Ve rmont, and we re is possible that he r evised his attribution of the therefore available for direct study by the authors location of the fluted projectile point by the time of (see Figure 1b, 1c , 1e, and 1i) . Although the the article. Alternatively, the point may actually not measurements of Figure 1c, 1e, and 1i l argely be attributable to the Fa irfax Sandblows site, but conform to those reporte d by Loring (1980), a n rather to site VT-CH-107 in Mil ton. It must be articulating piece to the projectile point depicted in stated, however, that the circumstances under which Figure 1b has been relocated. This obviously alters Manley claimed he recovered the projectile point the measurements for that projec tile point and are rather suspect. He stated to Loring that he came provides a truer assessment of the projectile point’s across a fire hear th created by a cir cle of fire- total measurements, minus the extreme tip portion. cracked rock with a l arge amount of jasper chips These measurements are provided in Table 1. within it. It was within this immediate area that he Quite fortunately for the pr esent analysis, Dr. found the point. As ringed fire hea rths are not James Petersen analyzed the nine fluted points from generally known from regional Paleoindian sites and the Manley collection in 1998 prior to their auction would likely not be preserved intact in any case, the and sale. He also took severa l high-quality color tale may have been an attempt at obfuscation on the slide photographs. These images were used by the part of James Manley. Moreover, the VT-CH-107 authors to make the composite image depicted in site location is well within the limi ts of the Figure 1. Petersen’s analysis was done fairly quick- Champlain Sea maximum. While tentative, recent ly, and his measurements were not as exhaustive as work by the senior author suggests that this site those conducted by Loring (1980). They proved to location would have been unde rwater during the be important, howe ver, as an additi onal confir- period when this projectile point was likely mation of the raw material types indicated to the produced (Robinson 2008; see Bradley et al. 2008). authors through Petersen’s photographs, and also for Because of the marked morphological simi- cross-referencing with Loring’s notations. larities between the projectile point depicted in The five artifacts from the Manley collection Figure 1a, the other Manley artifacts examined in under consideration in this paper have no previously this paper, and the four projectile points from the

18 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64)

19 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008

Fisher collection, the authors feel reasonably and has obscured the crystal structure of the material confident that the point actually belongs to the somewhat. Ventifactation is al so very common Fairfax Sandblows assemblage (Table 1; see Loring among the Reagan artifact assemblage. 1980:25). Moreover, if one includes this projectile Three of the five projectile points or point point with the morphologically similar projectile fragments from the Manley collection that are under point depicted in Figure 1d, these may have been the consideration here (Figure 1a, 1f, and 1g) macro- two complete pr ojectile points that Fisher scopically appear to be made from Munsung an referenced in his letter. chert, derived from a lakeside quarry source in In addition to providing measurements for all of northern Maine (Pollock 1987, Pollock et al. 1999). the artifacts under consideration in this paper, Table Loring (1980) pr eviously suggested that two of 1 also lists revised raw material attributions for each these projectile points were made from Colchester artifact based upon recent raw material research and jasper, but in lig ht of a lar ge body of re search a better understanding of Paleoindian lithic raw conducted since the publication of Loring’s article, material use since the time of Loring’s (1980) paper. that attribution now seems incorrect. The ascription These raw material attributions are explored more of red chert in Vermont assemblag es to the fully below. Colchester Jasper qua rry source was a re gular Based upon macroscopic examination, all of the practice in the 1970s and 1980s, primarily because projectile points o r point fragments in the Fisher a source seemed so close a t hand (see Lavin and collection at UVM (Figure 1b, 1c, 1e, and 1i) a re Prothero 1987; Thomas and Robinson 1980). Other made from Mt. Jasper/Jefferson rhyolite, derived than anecdotal reports of some woodland scraping from quarries in and a round Berlin, New tools being made from this material, however, there Hampshire. The primary source for the Mt. J asper is little evidence of Colchester jasper being used by material has been known for over a century, as the Native American groups from any recognized adit is prominently positioned near to the summit of precontact period. Since the publication of Loring’s Mt. Jasper in Berlin, New Hampshire (Gramly paper, however, the Munsung an chert quarry has 1977, 1980, 1984; Gramly and Cox 1976; Pollock been geoarchaeologically examined (Pollock 1987; et al. 2008). It was only determined to be the source Pollock et al. 19 99), archaeologically explored of the spherulitic rhyolite common in Paleoindian (Bonnichson 1982), and is now r ecognized as assemblages relatively recently, however (Boisvert perhaps the most heavily utilized chert source in 1992; Pollock et al. 2008; Spiess et al. 1998). More northern New England during the Early Paleoindian recently, Boisvert (1998) discovered similar rhyolite period (Pollock et a l. 1999; Spiess et al. 1998). blocks in Jefferson, New Hampshire, which also Moreover, the mottled red a nd green chert from appears to have been utilized by Paleoindian groups. which the projectile point depicted in Figure 1g is Although Mt. J asper rhyolite and the Jeffer son made is characteristic of Munsungan chert, and is a rhyolite are similar and are likely of a similar noted variation of the material in some Paleoindian geologic age, there are demonstrable petrographic assemblages (e.g., Spiller Farm, Hamilton and differences and a sig nificant geographic distance Pollock 1996). Petersen, in his brief analysis of the between them (Pollock et al. 2008). A s such, the points in t he late 1990s, also sug gested that the authors can only attribute the projectile points to material was Munsungan chert. Therefore, while no one of the two sources until additional petrographic petrographic or chemical sourcing was conducted on or chemical examination has been c onducted on the artifacts in question, nor would it now be them. Moreover, as Loring correctly noted, all of possible, the authors feel confident that the material these artifacts are quite ventifacted or “sand blasted” from which each of the projectile points was made due to p rolonged exposure to a eolian processes. is indeed Munsungan chert. This ventifactation has resulted in excessive polish The final two artifacts, Figure 1d and 1h, are

20 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64) more difficult to classify based upon the available Wright and Roosa 1966), and may be broadly information. Figure 1h appears to be made from a related to Cumberland points in other pa rts of the very fine-grained, greenish gray to darker g ray continent. mottled chert. Petersen suggested in his analysis that The reader is referred to Bradley et al. (2008) for the material was likely Onondaga chert. While the a detailed description of the attributes of Michaud/ authors cannot ascribe a source to the artifact based Neponset projectile points relative to other Paleo- upon the scanty information aggregated here, the indian projectile point forms. The authors do wish overall color and mottling are consistent with to note, however, that Michaud/Neponset points are Onondaga chert. Minimally, the material was likely perhaps most conspicuously identified by their basal derived from a quarry source west of the Champlain ears, which are often significantly flared, and the Basin. pronounced “flutes” or cha nnel flake scars that Figure 1d is a homog enous black chert for usually trend at least half way up the surface of the which a source attribution cannot be a dvanced by point, and often all the way to t he tip. These the authors. The material could have been derived characteristics can be readily observed on all of the from the Champlain Basin, the Hudson Valley, projectile points depicted in Figure 1. Munsungan Lake, or elsewhe re. Loring (1980) Under the broa der Michaud/Neponset rubric, suggested a Champlain Ba sin origin f or the there appear to be several different variations of the material, which may be accurate. With the possible form present in the assemblage. In the top row of exception of the quarries identified by Snow in Ft. Figure 1, all of the projectile points have a general Anne, New York (Snow 1977, 1979a, 1979b), tapered, triangular or “rocket” like shape, with fluid however, the known quarries of this material would lines trending from the widest point at the basal ears likely have been under the waters of the Champlain to the tip. The projectile points in the middl e row Sea during the occ upation of the Fairfax Sand- may also be examples of this style, though Figure 1e blows site, at least as understood thus far. is quite small and is likely the result of reworking or Finally, since the publication of Loring’s article, expediency and Figure 1f is only represented by an researchers in the Nor theast have developed a eared base. Figure 1a - 1c, which can be assumed to Paleoindian projectile point sub-taxonomy with not have been heavily reworked, are still smaller broad but demonstrable date ranges associated with than the average provided by Bradley et al. (2008) each “modal form” or type (Bradley et al. 2008; for the Michaud/Neponset points, though their Newby et al. 2005; Spiess et al. 1998). This taxon- measurements relative to each other are strikingly omy was influenced by an earlier Paleoindian sub- similar. The particular stylistic variation that they taxonomy developed for the Great Lakes region by represent is not common in the Ne w England Deller and Ellis (1992) and Ellis and Deller (1997). region, as far as the authors are aware. Based upon the criteria set out by these The projectile points depicted in the bottom row researchers, all of the points attributed to the Fairfax appear to be much more similar to t he “typical” Sandblows site in this paper cor respond to the Michaud/Neponset form. Figure 1i i s almost Michaud/Neponset “phase” of the Early Paleoindian identical to projec tile points recover ed from the period, ca. 12,000 to 11,600 cal yr BP (10,300 to Michaud site (Spiess and W ilson 1987), and 10,100 C14 yr BP) (Bradley et al. 2008). Figure1g and 1h appear quite similar to projectile Michaud/Neponset points are na med after two points recovered from a Paleoindian site on L ac notable sites in Maine (Spiess and Wilson 1987) Mégantic in Québec (Chapdelaine 2004, 2007). and Massachusetts (Carty and Spiess 1992), Bradley et al. (2008) also note, following work respectively. They are directly analogous to Barnes- by Ellis and Deller (2000), that Michaud/Neponset type points in the Great Lakes region (Deller and points were often manufactured through two distinct Ellis 1992; E llis and De ller 2000; Storck 1997; processes. In many cases, projectile points were

21 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008 formed through the reduction of a larger bifacial did not get the notori ety or attention it deser ved, blank, as is ty pical of e arlier projectile point largely due to misinterpretation by Barnum Brown, manufacturing strategies (Callahan 2000). Some- Benjamin Fisher’s persistent efforts to validate his times, however, Michaud/Neponset projectile points own interpretations of the site’s antiquity stand as were manufactured directly from thin flakes of an early example of the treme ndous contribution suitable dimension (Ellis and Deller 2000). The avocational archaeologists have made to Vermont latter process is read ily observed at the Jackson- archaeology. The history of the collection and its Gore site in Ludlow, and appears in that case to be disposition, however, provide a ca utionary tale a function of material scarcity (Robinson and Crock about the loss to science caused by the fissioning of 2007). once intact private collections and the black market While the a uthors cannot c omment on the sale of artifacts. manufacturing strategies of the projectile points Beyond important histo rical context, and the from the Manley collection, an examination of the tentative addition of five more lithic tools to the projectile points from the Fisher collection suggests Fairfax Sandblows assemblag e, the r esearch has that perhaps Figure 1b was in fact produced from a enabled a more accurate plot of the location of the flake. The tip portion is v ery thin and not fully site. Fisher suggested that the F airfax Sandblows formed. Although the tip itself is missing, the shape, site was 14 miles from the mouth of the r iver, and thickness and break patterns of the tip area suggest approximately 100 ft above the current level of the that it was blunted, and w as perhaps a re mnant river. Using these rough measurements, an approxi- platform of the flake from which it was produced. mate and slightly revised location for the F airfax The orientation of remnant flake pla tforms as Sandblows site is depicted in Fig ure 2. Based on blunted tips is evident on seve ral bifaces at the this revised site location, it falls very close to what Jackson-Gore site (Robins on and Crock 2007) . would have been the shoreline of the Champlain Sea Moreover, it appears that the process of fluting and what would have been the mouth of the caused the breakage of the tip at two places along Lamoille River. the projectile point’s length. These breakage Although Ritchie (1957; 1969) was the first to patterns are also evident on two bifa ces at the propose a connection between the Champlain Sea Jackson-Gore site (Robinson and Crock 2007). and Paleoindian occupations, it was Loring’s (1980) Whether or not Figure 1b was produced from a important paper that first marsha led a significant flake, it at least appears that the tip was blunted in data set in an attempt to correlate these entities. At order to facilitate the fluting process, which in this the time of Loring’s (1980) article, however, infor- case ended in failure. It must be noted that the four mation generated through Quaternary geological points from the Fisher collection all exhibit research was contradictory, and generally placed the lenticular or biconvex cross-sections, though sig- inception and duration of the Champlain Sea at a nificantly altered through the fluting process. time prior to the first dated Paleoindian occupations in the Northeast. Moreover, as Loring (1980) Discussion himself noted, better quantification of p rojectile point styles or types would enhance the resolution of The Farifax Sandblows site is significant both for its the correlation between the Champlain Sea and place in the history of Vermont archaeology and for Paleoindian sites. what it means in terms of ea rly Native American Fortunately, progress has been made in the last settlement. The site’s “story” places Vermont in the 30 years, in refining Paleoindian projectile point ty- mix following the g roundbreaking discoveries at pologies and in dating and mapping the most recent Folsom during one of the most exciting periods of stages of the Champlain Sea (Robinson 2008). American archaeology. While, at the time, the site Although a detailed discussion of this correlation

22 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64)

Figure 2. Map depicting the location of the Fairfax Sandblows site (VT-FR-64) relative to the Champlain Sea maximum. Champlain Sea maximum shoreline modeled from Doll (1970), and from Chapman (1937), Gadd (1988), Loring (1980), and Wagner (1972). Map created using ESRI ArcView 9.2.

23 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008 is beyond the scope of this paper , and will be References Cited explored by the authors elsewhere, a recent suite of Quaternary geological research has r evised the Boisvert, Richard A. inception and duration of the Champlain Sea (e.g., 1992 The Mount J asper Lithic Source, B erlin, Cronin et al. 2008; Ray burn et al. 2005, 2007; NH: National Register of Historic Places Nomi- Richard and Occhietti 2005; Ridge 2003; Ridge et nation and Comment ary. Archaeology of Eastern al. 1999; Rodrigues 1988), and places it squarely at North America: 151-168. a period coeval with Paleoindian occupations (see Bradley et al. 2008; Newby et al. 2005; Spiess et al. 1998 The Israel River Complex : a Paleoindian 1998). As such, the location of the F airfax Sand- Manifestation in J efferson, New Hampshire. blows site likely conforms to a seaside la ndform Archaeology of Eastern North America 26:97-100. that may also correspond to a paleoestuary (Figure 2), though the rate of regression of the Champlain Boldurian, Anthony T., and John L. Cotter Sea from its maximum has yet to be adequately 1999 Clovis Revisited: New Perspe ctives on quantified. Obviously, this demonstrated correlation Paleoindian Adaptations from Blackwater Draw, has important implications with reg ard to Paleo- New Mexico. The University Museum, University of indian subsistence, sea sonality, territoriality and Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. cultural conceptualizations of a r apidly changing landscape, among other factors. Bonnichsen, Robson Finally, the information provided by the letters 1982 Archaeological Research at Munsungan Fisher wrote to the AMNH, the NYSM and the Lake: 1981 Preliminary Technic al Report of Fleming Museum sug gest that the F airfax Sand- Activities. Quaternary Institute, University of Maine blows was one of the first, if not the first, at Orono. Paleoindian site to be reported from New England, followed very shortly thereafter by the reporting of Bradley, James W., Arthur E. Spi ess, Richard the Reagan site. Unfortunately, the early reports by Boisvert, and Jeff Boudreau Fisher would not be seriously pursued by the 2008 What's the Point?: Modal Forms and scholarly community for another twenty years. Attributes of Paleoindian B ifaces in the Ne w England-Maritimes Region. Archaeology of Eastern Acknowledgements North America 36:119-172.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the influence of Brown, Barnum our mentor, the late James B. Petersen, and his 1928 Recent Finds Relating to Prehistoric Man in unfinished efforts to reconstruct the early history of America. Bulletin of the New Y ork Academy of Vermont archaeology and re assemble collections Medicine 4:824-828. from the closely related Reagan site. Thanks to Jim Bradley, Stephen Loring, Art Spiess, and Giovanna Callahan, Errett Peebles for their helpful advice and correspondence 2000 The Basics of B iface Knapping in the and to the American Museum of Natural History, Eastern Fluted Point Tradition: A Manual for Flint- the New York State Museum and the Fleming knappers and Lithic Analysts. Fourth ed. Piltdown Museum for gracious assistance locating a rchival Productions, Lynchburg, Virginia. information. Any and all errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. Carty, Frederick M., and Arthur E. Spiess 1992 The Neponset Paleoindian Site in Massachusetts. Archaeology of Easte rn North America 20:19-37.

24 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64)

Chapdelaine, Claude Gadd, Nelson R. (editor) 2004 Des Chasseurs de la Fin l’âge Glaciaire dans 1988 The Late Quaternary De velopment of the la Region du L ac Mégantic: Découverte des Champlain Sea Basin. Geological Association of Premières Pointes à Cannelure au Qué bec. Canada, Ottawa, Canada. Recherches Amérindiennes au Québec 34(1):1-20 Gramly, Richard Michael Chapdelaine, Claude (editor) 1977 The Mt. Jasper Lithic Source Area. Bulletin 2007 Entre Lacs et Montagnes au Méganticois: 12 of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society 000 Ans d'Histoire Amérindienne. Recherches 38(3):1977. Amérindiennes au Québec 32, Montréal, Québec. 1980 Prehistoric Industry at the Mt. Jasper Mine, Chapman, D.H. Northern New Hampshire. Man in the Northeast 1937 Late-Glacial and Postglacial History of the 20:1-24. Champlain Valley. American Journal of Sciences, 5th Series. 34:89-124. 1984 Mount Jasper: a direct-access lithic source area in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. In Cronin, T.M., P.L . Manley, S. Bra chfield, T.O. Prehistoric Quarries and Lithic Production, edited Manley, D.A. Willard, J.-P. Guilbault, J.A. by J. Ericson and B. Purdy, pp. 11-21. Cambridge Rayburn, R. Thunell, and M. Berke University Press, Cambridge. 2008 Impacts of Post-Glacial Lake Drainage Events and Revised Chronology of the Champlain Gramly, Richard Michael, and Stephen L. Cox Sea Episode 13-9 ka. Palaeogeography, 1976 Reports and Comments: A Prehistoric Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 262:46-60. Quarry-Workshop at Mt. J asper, Berlin, New Hampshire. Man in the Northeast 11:71-74. Deller, D. Brian, and Christopher J. Ellis 1992 Thetford II: A Paleo- Indian Site in the Hamilton, Nathan D., and Stephen G. Pollock Ausable Watershed of Southwestern Ontario. 1996 The Munsungan Chert Utilization and Memoirs, Museum of Anthropology, University of Paleoindians in Southwestern Maine. Current Michigan, No. 24, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Research in the Pleistocene 13:117-119.

Doll, Charles G. Huden, John C. (editor) 1970 The Surficial Geologic Map of Vermont. 1971 Archaeology in V ermont: Some Reviews Vermont Geological Survey, Montpelier, Vermont. Supplemented by Materials from New England and New York. Charles E. Tuttle Company, Rutland, Ellis, Christopher, and D. Brian Deller Vermont. 1997 Variability in the Archaeological Record of Northeastern Early Paleoindians: A View f rom Lavin, Lucianne, and Donald R. Prothero Southern Ontario. Archaeology of E astern North 1987 Identification of "Jasper" sources in parts of America 25:1-30. the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic Regions. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of New Jersey 42:11-23. 2000 An Early Paleo-Indian Site Near Parkhill, Ontario. Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Loring, Stephen Canada, Paper 159. Cana dian Museum of 1980 Paleo-Indian Hunters and the Champlain Civilization, Hull, Quebec. Sea: A Presumed Association. Man in the Northeast 19:15-42.

25 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008

Meltzer, David J. Richard, Pierre J. H., and Serge Occhitetti 1993 Search for the First Americans. Smithsonian 200514 C Chronology for Ice Retreat and Inception Books, Washington, D.C. of Champlain Sea in the St. Lawrence Lowlands, Canada. Quaternary Research 63:353-358. Newby, Paige, James Bradley, Arthur Spiess, Bryan Shuman, and Phillip Leduc Ridge, John C. 2005 A Paleoindian Response to Younger Dryas 2003 The Last Deglaciation of the Northeastern Climate Change. Quaternary Science Reviews : A Combined Varve, Paleomagnetic, 24:141-154. and Calibrated 14 C Chronology. In Geoarchaeology of Landscapes in the Glaciated Northeast, edited by Pollock, Stephen G. David L. Cremeens and John P . Hart, pp. 15-45. 1987 Chert Formation in an Ordovician Volcanic New York State Museum, Bulletin 497, Albany, Arc. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 57(1):75-87. New York.

Pollock, Stephen G., Nathan D . Hamilton, and Ridge, John C., Mark R. Be sonen, Marc Brochu, Richard A. Boisvert Sarah L. Brown, Jamie W. Callahan, Glenn J. Cook, 2008 Archaeological Geology of two F low- Robert S., and Nicholsom and Nathaniel J. Toll banded Spherulitic Rhyolites in New Eng land, 1999 Varve, Paleomagnetic, and 14 C Chronologies USA: their History, Exploitation and Criteria for for Late Pleistocene Events in New Hampshire and Recognition. Journal of Archaeological Sc ience Vermont (U.S.A.). Géographie physique et 35:688-703. Quaternaire 53(1):79-106.

Pollock, Stephen G., Nathan D . Hamilton, and Ritchie, William A. Robson Bonnichson 1953 A Probable Paleo-Indian Site in Vermont. 1999 Chert from the Munsungan Lake Formation American Antiquity 18(3):249-258.. (Maine) in Paleoamerican Archaeological Sites in Northeastern North America: Recognition of its 1957 Traces of Early Man in the Northeast. Occurrence and Distribution. Journal of Bulletin No. 358. Ne w York State Muse um and Archaeological Science 26:269-293. Science Service. 1969 The Archaeology of New York State. Revised Rayburn, John A., David A. Franzi, and Peter L. K. ed. The Natural History Press, Garden City, New Kneupher York. 2007 Evidence from the Lake Champlain Valley for a Later Onset of the C hamplain Sea a nd Roberts, Jr., Frank H.H. Implications for Late Glacial Meltwater Routing to 1936 Recent Discoveries of the Material Culture the North Atlantic. Palaeogeography, Palaeo- of Folsom Man. The American Naturalist 70(729): climatology, Palaeoecology 246:62-74. 337-345.

Rayburn, John A., Peter L. K. Kneupher, and David Robinson IV, Francis “Jess” A. Franzi 2008 The Reagan Sit e: A R eanalysis, Recon- 2005 A Series of Large, Late Wisconsinan textualization, and Reapp raisal of a Formati ve Meltwater Floods throug h the Champlain and Northeastern Paleoindian Site, University at Albany Hudson Valleys, New York State, USA. Quaternary - SUNY, MA thesis. Science Reviews 24:2410-2419.

26 The “Fairfax Sandblows” Site (VT-FR-64)

Robinson IV, Francis “Jess,” and John G. Crock Spiess, Arthur E., Deborah B. Wilson, and J ames 2007 Jackson-Gore: An Early Paleoindian site in Bradley the Southern Green Mountains of Vermont. Paper 1998 Paleoindian Occupation in t he New presented at the 74th Annual Eastern States England-Maritimes Region: B eyond Cultural Archaeological Federation Conference, Nov. 10, Ecology. Archaeology of Eastern North America 2007, Burlington, Vermont. 26:201-264.

Rodrigues, C. G. Storck, Peter J. 1988 Late Quaternary Invertebrate Faunal 1997 The Fisher Site: Archaeological, Geological Associations and Chronolog y of the Western and Paleobotanical Studies at an Early Paleo- Champlain Sea Basin. In The Late Quaternary Indian Site in Southern Ontario, Canada. Memoirs, Development of the Champlain Sea Basin, edited by Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, N. R. Gadd, pp. 155-176. Geological Association of No. 30, Ann Arbor. Canada Special Paper 35. Ge ological Survey of Canada, Ottawa, Canada Thomas, Peter A., and Brian S. Robinson 1980 The John's Bridge Site: VT-FR- 69. Snow, Dean Department of Anthropolog y, University of 1977 The Archaic of the Lake George Region. In Vermont. Report #28. Amerinds and their Paleoenvironments in Northeastern North America, edited by Bert Selwen Wagner, Philip W. and Walter S. Newman. Annals of the N ew York 1972 Ice Margins and Water L evels in North- Academy of Scienc es. vol. 288. New York western Vermont. In New England Intercollegiate Academy of Sciences, New York. Geological Conference, 64 Annual Meeting, edited by Barry L. Doolan and Rolfe S. Stanley. University 1979a Final Report on an Archaeological Survey of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont. of Prehistoric Cult ural Resources in the Lake George region and Preliminary Re port on an Wright, Henry T., and W. B. Roosa Archaeological Survey in the Lake George Region, 1966 The Barnes Site: A Fluted Point Assemblage Phase II. New York State Department of Parks and from the Great Lakes Region. American Antiquity Recreation, Division of (Doc. 31(6):850-860. 9745). - - - - - 1979b Final Report on an Archaeologi cal Survey of the Lake George Region, Phase II. Final Report Francis “Jess” W. Robinson IV received his on an Archaeological Survey of the Lake George bachelor’s degree from the University of Vermont in Region, Phase II. New York State Department of 1999, with a doubl e major in Anthropology and Parks and Recreation, Division of Historic Literature. Following se veral field seasons of Preservation (with Karen McCann). archaeological work, Jess relocated to Canterbury, England, where he received his Master’s degree in Spiess, Arthur E., and Deborah B. Wilson Literature from the University of Kent, focusing on 1987 Michaud: A Paleoindian Site in the New anthropological aspects of Modernist novels. Upon England-Maritimes Region. Occasional Publications returning to the United States, Jess was hired by the in Maine Archaeology 6. Maine Historic Preserva- University of Ve rmont Consulting Archaeology tion Commission, Augusta, Maine. Program and has been a full-time research

27 The Journal of Vermont Archaeology Volume 9, 2008 supervisor since 2002. He is also currently pursuing his Ph.D. at the University at Albany- SUNY. Jess is a previous contributor to the Journal and is a past president of The Vermont Archaeological Society.

John G. Crock is Assistant Professor of Anthro- pology at the Unive rsity of V ermont and t he Director of the UVM Consulting Archaelogy Program. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh in 2000. As a UVM undergraduate in the 1980s, John was first i ntroduced to the mysteries of Vermont Paleoindians by Professors William Haviland and the late Marjory Power.

28