DOCSLIB.ORG

Biface Reduction and Blade Manufacture at the Gault Site

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biface Reduction and Blade Manufacture at the Gault Site BIFACE REDUCTION AND BLADE MANUFACTURE AT THE GAULT SITE (41BL323): A CLOVIS OCCUPATION IN BELL COUNTY, TEXAS A Dissertation by WILLIAM A. DICKENS Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December 2005 Major Subject: Anthropology BIFACE REDUCTION AND BLADE MANUFACTURE AT THE GAULT SITE (41BL323): A CLOVIS OCCUPATION IN BELL COUNTY, TEXAS A Dissertation by WILLIAM A. DICKENS Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Co-Chairs of Committee, Harry J. Shafer Michael R. Waters Committee Members, David L. Carlson Vatche P. Tchakerian Head of Department, David L. Carlson December 2005 Major Subject: Anthropology iii ABSTRACT Biface Reduction and Blade Manufacture at the Gault Site (41BL323): A Clovis Occupation in Bell County, Texas. (December 2005) William A. Dickens, B.S., Stephen F. Austin State University; M.A., Texas A&M University Co-Chairs of Advisory Committee: Dr Harry J. Shafer Dr. Michael R. Waters This dissertation is a technological study that deals with those techniques employed by the Gault Clovis people in the manufacture of both bifaces and blades. The materials studied were recovered during the 2000 and 2001 field seasons conducted by the Anthropology Department of Texas A&M University. The study involves an analysis that deals with raw material selection, blank production, reduction methods, and problems encountered, and includes a definitive description and metric calculations for each of the various artifact types analyzed. The results are then compared to similar artifact assemblages from known Clovis sites. The conclusions derived from this analysis show that the Gault Clovis people utilized a number of different strategies in both biface and blade reduction. It was found that some of these strategies, previously felt to be restricted to one reductive procedure, were connected and utilized in both procedures. In addition, it was discovered that some techniques thought to be limited to use only within the initial reduction sequence were, in fact, utilized throughout. iv DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my late father, William Robert Dickens of Cincinnati, Ohio. He was a strong believer in higher education. Without his support and encouragement it would have been much more difficult for me to successfully pursue this level of education. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my thanks and appreciation to those individuals who provided assistance and encouragement of this dissertation study. I am especially indebted to Lynne O’Kelley, James E. Wiederhold, Charlotte Pevny, and Bradley F. Bowman whose for their Herculean efforts in assisting me with the illustrations. I would also like to express my thanks to J. B. (Solly) Sollberger, William B. Carroll, Dwain Rogers, and the rest of the Belton Knap-in who were instrumental in teaching me the skills of flintknapping, an essential aspect of understanding lithic technology. I would like to thank William E. Moore for assisting with the editing of this manuscript. This dissertation could not have been written without the encouragement of Harry J. Shafer and Michael R. Waters who served on my committee. Their interest in the Gault site and their beliefs in my abilities provided the impetus for me to complete this study. I am especially grateful to them for taking time from their busy schedules to answer my many questions and assist me with the technical aspects of this dissertation. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................. iii DEDICATION .............................................................................................................. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................1 The Gault Site................................................................................................2 II BIFACE REDUCTION.....................................................................................13 Clovis Biface Technology...........................................................................14 Gault Bifaces ...............................................................................................25 Specialized Flakes.......................................................................................86 Summary ...................................................................................................110 III CLOVIS BLADE TECHNOLOGY................................................................121 Previous Research .....................................................................................123 Blade Manufacture ....................................................................................127 Gault Blade Analysis.................................................................................137 Blade Analysis...........................................................................................150 Blade Cores ...............................................................................................191 Platform Rejuvenation Techniques ...........................................................209 Refits .........................................................................................................220 Geologic Placement...................................................................................227 Summary ...................................................................................................230 IV CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................245 REFERENCES............................................................................................................265 APPENDIX A BIFACE TABLES..............................................................................278 APPENDIX B BLADE TABLES...............................................................................299 vii Page VITA ...........................................................................................................................359 viii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Location of the Gault Site (41BL323). ............................................................ 3 Figure 2. Geologic Profile............................................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Tabular Forms of Gault Chert........................................................................ 28 Figure 4. Stream Cobbles of Gault Chert...................................................................... 29 Figure 5. Overshot Flakes. ............................................................................................ 33 Figure 6. Refitted Partial Overshot Flakes. ................................................................. 36 Figure 7. Large Flake. .................................................................................................. 37 Figure 8. Overshot Flake with Corner Removal Blade Scars. ...................................... 39 Figure 9. Alternate Blank Forms................................................................................... 41 Figure 10. Stage II Bifaces............................................................................................ 44 Figure 11. Stage III Bifaces........................................................................................... 51 Figure 12. Stage III Bifaces with End Thinning. .......................................................... 52 Figure 13. Stage IV Bifaces. ......................................................................................... 61 Figure 14. Stage V Bifaces............................................................................................ 66 Figure 15. Stage VI Bifaces. ....................................................................................... 70 Figure 16. Stage VII Finished Points ........................................................................... 77 Figure 17. Bifacial Cores. ............................................................................................. 84 Figure 18. Hammerstone/Gouge. .................................................................................. 91 Figure 19. Problem Removal Flakes…………………………………………….….…93 ix Page Figure 20. Sequent Flakes. ............................................................................................ 96 Figure 21. Sequent Flakes II. ........................................................................................ 97 Figure 22. End Thinning Flakes.................................................................................. 106 Figure 23. BladeTypes. .............................................................................................. 139 Figure 24. Blade Ventral Characteristics. ................................................................... 140 Figure 25. Blade Cross-Sections and Lateral Profiles................................................. 144 Figure 26. Dorsal Surface Scar Patterns...................................................................... 145 Figure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identifying Major Transitions in the Evolution of Lithic Cutting Edge Production Rates
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Identifying Major Transitions in the Evolution of Lithic Cutting Edge Production Rates Antoine Muller*, Chris Clarkson School of Social Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia * [email protected] Abstract The notion that the evolution of core reduction strategies involved increasing efficiency in cutting edge production is prevalent in narratives of hominin technological evolution. Yet a number of studies comparing two different knapping technologies have found no significant differences in edge production. Using digital analysis methods we present an investigation a11111 of raw material efficiency in eight core technologies broadly representative of the long-term evolution of lithic technology. These are bipolar, multiplatform, discoidal, biface, Levallois, prismatic blade, punch blade and pressure blade production. Raw material efficiency is assessed by the ratio of cutting edge length to original core mass. We also examine which flake attributes contribute to maximising raw material efficiency, as well as compare the dif- ference between expert and intermediate knappers in terms of cutting edge produced per OPEN ACCESS gram of core. We identify a gradual increase in raw material efficiency over the broad sweep of lithic technological evolution. The results indicate that the most significant transition in effi- Citation: Muller A, Clarkson C (2016) Identifying Major Transitions in the Evolution of Lithic Cutting ciency likely took place with the introduction of small foliate biface, Levallois and prismatic Edge Production Rates. PLoS ONE 11(12): blade knapping, all introduced in the Middle Stone Age / Middle Palaeolithic among early e0167244. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167244 Homo sapiens and Neanderthals. This suggests that no difference in raw material efficiency Editor: Roberto Macchiarelli, Universite de Poitiers, existed between these species.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Evolution Next Factor in Drake Equation: F
    Cultural Evolution Next Factor in Drake Equation: fc • fc: fraction of planets with intelligent life that develop a technological phase, during which there is a capability for and interest in interstellar communication • No significant biological evolution in last 40,000 to 100,000 years • Evolutionary Takeover – Cultural evolution instead of biological – Much shorter timescale 1 Concepts 1. Timescales 2. Origin of agriculture 3. Extra-somatic information storage 4. Tools, technology 5. Interactions: written language, cities, taxes, classes, technology 6. Interest in communication 7. World view evolution 8. Coupling between technology and world view Importance of farming • The rise of civilizations all based on farming • Understand origins of agriculture • How likely to arise? • Did it arise independently more than once? 2 Origin of Agriculture 10,000 years ago within 50-100 miles of Dead Sea Natufian culture - well built houses & signs of rank Harvested wild wheat, barley - used flint sickles, Stone mortars, and hunted Climate becomes hotter, drier Overcrowding, shortages led to need for food source favors annuals over perennials shorter cycle larger seeds in husks - easier to collect Save, plant, harvest Evidence: seeds in settlements of Natufians successors Mutant: fatter, adheres to husk better fi domestication, selection without forethought leads to rapid evolution of wheat and hunting decreases rapidly Domestication (and farmers?) spread northward at ~ 1 km/year Hole & McCorriston American Anthropology ~ April 1991 3 Agriculture leads to higher level political organization 4 Information Genes 1010 bits (or less) Brains 1014 bits 1400 cm3 in humans fl Extra-somatic information leads to communication: information passed between individuals. Allows societies to evolve.
    [Show full text]
  • Prismatic Blade Production in the Lower Cacaulapa Valley, Honduras: Implications for a Late Classic Political Economy William J
    Johnson County Community College ScholarSpace @ JCCC Anthropology Papers and Presentations Anthropology 12-2017 Prismatic Blade Production in the Lower Cacaulapa Valley, Honduras: Implications for a Late Classic Political Economy William J. McFarlane Johnson County Community College, [email protected] Edward M. Schortman Kenyon College Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarspace.jccc.edu/anthpp Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation McFarlane, William J. and Schortman, Edward M., "Prismatic Blade Production in the Lower Cacaulapa Valley, Honduras: Implications for a Late Classic Political Economy" (2017). Anthropology Papers and Presentations. 5. https://scholarspace.jccc.edu/anthpp/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology at ScholarSpace @ JCCC. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Papers and Presentations by an authorized administrator of ScholarSpace @ JCCC. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRISMATIC BLADE PRODUCTION IN THE LOWER CACAULAPA VALLEY, HONDURAS: IMPLICATIONS FOR A LATE CLASSIC POLITICAL ECONOMY William J. McFarlane and Edward M. Schortman Investigations of ancient political economies frequently focus on craft production. How manufacturing is organized can provide critical insights on more than the economy because social interactions and political processes are also involved. Here we consider how the acquisition, fabrication, and distribution of obsidian blades figured in the political strategies of craftworkers and elites within the Late Classic (AD 600–800) lower Cacaulapa Valley, northwestern Honduras. This evidence provides insights into the organization of craft manufacture across southeastern Mesoamerica and suggests that current models do not capture the varied production strategies that may be pursued within the same polity.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio Archaeologist Volume 37 No
    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGIST VOLUME 37 NO. 3 FALL 1987 Published by THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF OHIO The Archaeological Society of Ohio TERM EXPIRESs A.SO. OFFICERS Back Issues President Maitha Potter Otto. Ohio Historical Society, Publications and back issues of the Ohio Archaeologist: Columbus, OH 43211-Tel, 614/297-2641; Ohio Flint Types, by Robert N Converse $ 5,00 Home 614/846-7640 Ohio Stone Tools, by Robert N. Converse $ 4 00 Vice-President Donald A Casto, 138 Ann Ct., Lancaster Ohio Slate Types, by Robert N Converse $10.00 The Glacial Kame Indians, by Robert N Converse $15 00 OH 43130-Tel 614/653-9477 Back issues —black and white —each $ 4 00 Exec Sec. Michael W Schoenfeld, 524 Sycamore Dr.. Back issues —lour full color plates -each $ 4 00 Pickenngton. OH 43147 -Tel 614/837-7088 Back issues of the Ohio Archaeologist printed prior to 1964 Treasurer Stephen J Parker, 1859 Frank Dr., Lancaster, are generally out of print but copies are available from time to OH43130-Tel 614 653-6642 time Write to business office for prices and availability Recording See Barbara Motts, 7050 Refugee Rd . Canal Winchester, OH 431 10-Tel 614/837-4862; ASO Chapters Bus 614 898-41 16 Ininied. Past Pres. Don Gehlbach, 3435 Sciotangy Dr., Aboriginal Explorers Club Columbus, OH 43221 -Tel, 614/459-0808; President: Mark Cline. 1127 Esther, Wellsville, OH 439 Bus 614/888-3572 Blue Jacket Editor Robert N Converse. 199 Converse Dr., Plain City, President: Phil Brandt. 6796 C.R 14, West Liberty, OH 43357 OH 43064 - Tel 614 873-5471 Cuyahoga Valley 1990 Stephen Puttera, Jr., 4696 Hillside Rd., Seven Hills, OH President: Bill Mitchell, 153 Sterling Ave,, Orrville, OH 44667 Meeting Place: Summit Lapidary Club, 244 Chestnut Blvd 44131 -Tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Ain Difla Rockshelter (Jordan) and the Evolution of Levantine Mousterian Technology
    Eurasian Prehistory, 5 (1): 47- 83. QUANTIFYING DIACHRONIC VARIABILITY: THE 'AIN DIFLA ROCKSHELTER (JORDAN) AND THE EVOLUTION OF LEVANTINE MOUSTERIAN TECHNOLOGY Mentor Mustafa' and Geoffrey A. Clark2 1 Department ofAnthropology, Boston University, 232 Bay State Road, Boston, MA 02215; [email protected] 2 Department ofAnthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona; 85287-2402; [email protected] Abstract Typological, technological, and metrical analyses of a lithic assemblage from the 'Ain Difla rockshelter in west­ central Jordan are consistent with the results of previous studies that align 'Ain Difla with the Tabun D-type Levantine Mousterian. Technological and typological affinities are discernible from a direct comparison of tools from this assem­ blage with those found in Tabun layer D, as well as metrical and categorical comparisons between 'Ain Ditla and other well-known Tabun D Mousterian sites. The 'Ain Difla sample is dominated by elongated Levallois points. Blanks were obtained from both uni- and bipolar convergent and predominantly Levallois cores that show evidence of bidirectional flaking. The typological and technological comparisons reported here suggest that the evolution of the blade-rich Mouste­ rian can be viewed as a continuum between the early (Tabun) and late (Boker Tachtit) Mousterian; that (on any index) 'Ain Difla falls somewhere around the middle of this continuum, and that Mousterian laminar technologies develop more or less continually into the early Upper Paleolithic Ahmarian. INTRODUCTION rich technologies
    [Show full text]
  • These Large Cores (Termed "Macrocores" by P. Tolstoy, N.D
    V. NOTES ON LARGE OBSIDIAN BLADE CORES AND CORE-BLADE TECHNOLOGY IN MESOAMERICA Thomas Roy Hester In this paper four very large obsidian polyhedral blade cores from archaeological sites in Mesoamerica are described. The small depleted (ex- hausted) obsidian blade cores abundant at most Mesoamerican sites have been discussed at length in the regional literature (Kidder, Jennings and Shook 1946; Coe 1959; Epstein 1964; MaqNeish, Nelken-Terner and Johnson 1967; Hester, Jack and Heizer 1971; Hester, Heizer and Jack 1971). These worn-out specimens represent the terminal phase of a blade production process which began with the removal of blades from much larger, roughly-shaped cores. These large cores (termed "macrocores" by P. Tolstoy, n.d.) have received little attention, although they, too, are a potential source of information on core-blade technologies in Mesoamerica. It is these cores which repre- sent the initial activities in blade manufacture, activities about which little of substance has been published. The macrocores are discussed in the following pages; one is from southeastern Mexico, and the others are from sites in Guatemala. The Papalhuapa Specimen This large core (Fig. 1,A) collected from the obsidian workshops near the site of Papalhuapa, Guatemala, has been previously described by Graham and Heizer (1968:104). However, a more detailed account of the core attributes seems warranted. Dimensions of this specimen are given in Table 2. The Papalhuapa core is pyramidal in shape. The striking platform is a broad flat surface, created by the splitting of a larger obsidian nodule (concentric force rings are evident on the platform surface).
    [Show full text]
  • Chert Pressure Blade Technology in a Caracol Residential Group
    8 ARTICULATING WITH THE BROADER ECONOMY: CHERT PRESSURE BLADE TECHNOLOGY IN A CARACOL RESIDENTIAL GROUP Lucas R. Martindale Johnson, Maureen Carpenter, Arlen F. Chase, and Diane Z. Chase Ancient Maya domestic economies were varied and complex systems that households depended on for material provisioning. At the site of Caracol, Belize during the Late Classic period (A.D. 550 A.D. – 900) crafters that performed domestic household activities provisioned both markets and households with stone tools and many crafted goods. A recent investigation of one of Caracol’s household groups has shown that lithic blade tools, or “drills,” were intensively produced for the crafting of non-lithic materials – probably shell and/or wood. These chert tools are similar to tools previously reported from Caracol; however, the reduction sequence to produce these tools resembles unidirectional and bidirectional pressure/indirect percussion core reduction used in the production of obsidian blades. We summarize the technological details of some 3,000 chert artifacts with specific attention to the ways in which the production of chert blade tools incorporated both pressure and percussion techniques. We conclude by discussing the implications of household domestic practices in lithic production that included obsidian blade production techniques. Introduction practice, or other related terms because Ancient Maya domestic economies can be reconstructing what households did with certain understood through analyses of household crafts, materials and seeing broader commonalities at crafting techniques, the location of crafting other residences serves as a proxy for how households, and the distribution of finished tools knowledgeable ancient households could interact and associated materials. More specifically, and learn to craft to continually provision the many archaeologists aim to reconstruct past broader economy in specific ways.
    [Show full text]
  • Lithic Debitage Alaskan Blade Cores As Specialized Components of Mobile Toolkits: -·
    5 Lithic Debitage Alaskan Blade Cores as Specialized Components of Mobile Toolkits: -·. CONTEXT, FORM, M-EANING Assessing Design Parameters and Toolkit Organization through Debitage Analysis JEFFREY RA.SIC AND WILLIAM ANDREFSKY JR. Bifaces, used as specialized tools and as cores, were a primary component ofthe mobile tooiJcits employed by prehistoric hunter-gatherer groups in North America. In some toolkits, however, particularly those in the Edited by American Arctic, prepared blade cores were also common. The 'USe of blade core technologies has generally been explained in cultural historical WILLIAM ANDREFSKY JR. terms (e.g., Paleoindian versus Paleo-Arctic) or in.terms ofa simple functional argument-blade cores offer a more efficient means ofutt1izing lithic raw materials. Through analysis ofdebitage assemblages produced from bifacial and prepared blade core reductiott experiments, we show that blade cores and bifacial cores are botlt efficient means ofutilizing lithic raw materials, yet they differ in a variety ofother W!lJS. These differences are discussed in terms ofthe costs and benefits presented to prehistoric toolmakers and users. Given this set ofcosts and benefits, the technological choices favored by prehistoric people·may shed light on the situational and organfzational contexts in which these technologies were used. ithic analysts typically measure a variety of flake attributes and assemblage Lcharacteristics in an attempt t9 understand prehistoric technological behav­ ior. Many of these studies seek to identify processes that prehistoric individuals may have been aware of but to which they gave little attention. For example, orir interest in discovering stages of reduction, types of percussors, or reduction strategies would probably have been quite amusing to a prehistoric knapper.
    [Show full text]
  • Earliest Known Oldowan Artifacts at 2.58 Ma from Ledi-Geraru
    Earliest known Oldowan artifacts at >2.58 Ma from Ledi-Geraru, Ethiopia, highlight early technological diversity David R. Brauna,b,1, Vera Aldeiasb,c, Will Archerb,d, J Ramon Arrowsmithe, Niguss Barakif, Christopher J. Campisanog, Alan L. Deinoh, Erin N. DiMaggioi, Guillaume Dupont-Nivetj,k, Blade Engdal, David A. Fearye, Dominique I. Garelloe, Zenash Kerfelewl, Shannon P. McPherronb, David B. Pattersona,m, Jonathan S. Reevesa, Jessica C. Thompsonn, and Kaye E. Reedg aCenter for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, Department of Anthropology, The George Washington University, Washington DC 20052; bDepartment of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; cInterdisciplinary Center for Archaeology and the Evolution of Human Behaviour, University of Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal; dArchaeology Department, University of Cape Town, 7701 Rondebosch, South Africa; eSchool of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287; fDepartment of Archaeology and Heritage Management, Main Campus, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; gInstitute of Human Origins, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287; hBerkeley Geochronology Center, Berkeley, CA 94709; iDepartment of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802; jCNRS, Géosciences Rennes–UMR 6118, University of Rennes, F-35000 Rennes, France; kDepartment of Earth and Environmental Science, Postdam University, 14476 Potsdam-Golm,
    [Show full text]
  • Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio 1654-1843
    Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio 1654-1843 Ohio Historical Society www.ohiohistory.org $4.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS Historical Background 03 Trails and Settlements 03 Shelters and Dwellings 04 Clothing and Dress 07 Arts and Crafts 08 Religions 09 Medicine 10 Agriculture, Hunting, and Fishing 11 The Fur Trade 12 Five Major Tribes of Ohio 13 Adapting Each Other’s Ways 16 Removal of the American Indian 18 Ohio Historical Society Indian Sites 20 Ohio Historical Marker Sites 20 Timeline 32 Glossary 36 The Ohio Historical Society 1982 Velma Avenue Columbus, OH 43211 2 Ohio Historical Society www.ohiohistory.org Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In Ohio, the last of the prehistoric Indians, the Erie and the Fort Ancient people, were destroyed or driven away by the Iroquois about 1655. Some ethnologists believe the Shawnee descended from the Fort Ancient people. The Shawnees were wanderers, who lived in many places in the south. They became associated closely with the Delaware in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Able fighters, the Shawnees stubbornly resisted white pressures until the Treaty of Greene Ville in 1795. At the time of the arrival of the European explorers on the shores of the North American continent, the American Indians were living in a network of highly developed cultures. Each group lived in similar housing, wore similar clothing, ate similar food, and enjoyed similar tribal life. In the geographical northeastern part of North America, the principal American Indian tribes were: Abittibi, Abenaki, Algonquin, Beothuk, Cayuga, Chippewa, Delaware, Eastern Cree, Erie, Forest Potawatomi, Huron, Iroquois, Illinois, Kickapoo, Mohicans, Maliseet, Massachusetts, Menominee, Miami, Micmac, Mississauga, Mohawk, Montagnais, Munsee, Muskekowug, Nanticoke, Narragansett, Naskapi, Neutral, Nipissing, Ojibwa, Oneida, Onondaga, Ottawa, Passamaquoddy, Penobscot, Peoria, Pequot, Piankashaw, Prairie Potawatomi, Sauk-Fox, Seneca, Susquehanna, Swamp-Cree, Tuscarora, Winnebago, and Wyandot.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio Hopewell Ceremonial Bladelet Use at the Moorehead Circle, Fort Ancient
    Ohio Hopewell Ceremonial Bladelet Use at the Moorehead Circle, Fort Ancient THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Gregory Logan Miller Graduate Program in Anthropology The Ohio State University 2010 Master's Examination Committee: Richard Yerkes Advisor Kristen Gremillion Robert Cook Copyright by Gregory Logan Miller 2010 Abstract In the past twenty years, lithic use-wear studies have been used to determine the function of Hopewell bladelets from the Middle Woodland period in Eastern North America. These studies have uniformly shown that bladelets were multipurpose, utilitarian tools in domestic contexts. Bladelets found in mounds and at earthworks also were used for many different tasks, but some have argued that bladelets took on special symbolic functions in these ceremonial contexts. The question of bladelet function in ceremonial contexts remains unanswered because use-wear studies of bladelets have not been extensively applied to well provenienced ceremonial assemblages. Recent excavations at the Moorehead Circle within the Fort Ancient Earthwork (33WA2) in Ohio provided a sample of 66 bladelets from within a well defined ceremonial feature. A microwear study of these bladelets found that they were used for a wide variety of tasks. Analysis indicates that the Moorehead Circle bladelets represent the same range of tasks as bladelets found in Hopewell domestic contexts. The results are compared to expectations from several theories about Hopewell bladelets. The results of this study best fit the argument that bladelets were given as gifts during aggregations at earthworks. ii Acknowledgments Special thanks to Richard Yerkes of The Ohio State University for patiently teaching me the microwear process as well as granting me access to his lab, equipment, and reference collection.
    [Show full text]
  • An Oldowan Pebble Culture Ofindia
    6. 'Mahadevian': An Oldowan Pebble Culture ofIndia A. P. KHATRI I. INTRODUCTORY The term 'Mahadevian' is applied here to a 'pebble culture' found in a horizon underlying the deposits yielding Chelles-Acheul culture, in the Narmada valley in Central India. The name is derived after the type site, Mahadeo Piparia, situated on the southern bank ofthe Narmada, about twenty miles northwest of Narsinghpur town, Madhya Pradesh (see map, Fig. I). This 'Mahadevian' basal culture consists of crudely flaked water-worn pebbles with rough and jagged cutting edges; among these are also specimens which suggest the form and shape of the crudest type of Chellian hand-axes. This would seem to indicate that the horizon containing them is not only Pre-Chellian in time scale but represents also the ancestral stage of the Chelles-Acheul culture of India, identical to Africa. It is suggested that from this 'root culture' has evolved a hand-axe industry from its crudest types to the advanced Acheulian specimens made by wooden-hammer technique. And indeed, the researches in the Narmada valley appear to show that this is actually the case. This pebble horizon first came to be noticed by the writer, in the field season of 1960, at Hasalpur in Hoshangabad district where chopper-chopping tools were found in situ in a cemented pebbly gravel. The writer was working on a Research Programme, 'T"he Exploration for the Remains of Early Man in India', conducted under the supervision of Dr M. R. Sahni, president of the Palreontological Society of India, and sponsored by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India.
    [Show full text]