Technical Report Archaeological

TECHNICAL REPORT

ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS HANOVER MARKETPLACE PROJECT AREA AREA 1 SITE (19-PL-749) AREA 2 SITE (19-PL-750)

Hanover, Massachusetts

William Begley Joseph N. Waller, Jr. Suzanne Cherau

Submitted to:

Carpionato Corporation 1414 Atwood Avenue Johnston, Rhode Island 02919

Submitted by:

The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. 26 Main Street Pawtucket, Rhode Island 02860

PAL Report No. 488 February 1998 (revised July 2013)

PAL Publications

CARTOGRAPHERS Dana M. Richardi/Jane Miller GIS SPECIALIST Jane Miller GRAPHIC DESIGN/PAGE LAYOUT SPECIALISTS Gail M. Van Dyke

MANAGEMENT ABSTRACT

PAL conducted archaeological site examinations of the Area 1 (19-PL-749) and Area 2 (19-PL-750) sites and archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site within the Hanover Marketplace in Hanover, Massachusetts. Recovery and analysis of the Area 1 Site’s archaeological content contributed to our knowledge of pre-contact Native American settlement, resource use, and technology in eastern Massachusetts. Archaeological investigations resulted in the recovery of a range of Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, and Transitional pre-contact Native American cultural materials and the documentation of numerous archaeological features that included refuse pits, stone platforms/hearths, and lithic workshops. Cultural features were radiocarbon dated to the Middle Archaic (7740 ± 150 B.P.) and Late Archaic (4600 ± 90 B.P.; 3540 ± 80 B.P.; 3510 ± 90 B.P.; and 3290 ± 80 B.P.) Periods. Limited archaeological data indicates the site was only occasionally occupied for very brief periods of time during the Woodland Period.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT ABSTRACT ...... i

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Project History ...... 1 Archaeological Data Recovery ...... 6 Project Personnel ...... 7 Disposition of Project Data ...... 7

2. RESEARCH DESIGN ...... 8 Site Examination ...... 8 Determining the basic attributes of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites ...... 8 Assessing the age or cultural affiliation of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites ...... 9 Studying lithic raw material use and assessing source areas ...... 9 Examining wetland resource exploitation at the Area 1 and Area 2 sites ...... 9 Data Recovery Program ...... 10 Research Orientation and Questions ...... 10

3. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 20 Current Environmental Setting ...... 20 Bedrock Geology ...... 21 Soils ...... 21 Drainage Patterns ...... 22 Postglacial Vegetative Sequence for Eastern Massachusetts ...... 22 Vegetation Types ...... 23

4. NATIVE AMERICAN LAND USE AND SETTLEMENT ...... 25 PaleoIndian Period (13,000–10,000 B.P.) ...... 25 The Archaic Period (10,000–3000 B.P.) ...... 27 Early Archaic Period (10,000–7500 B.P.) ...... 27 Middle Archaic Period (7500–5000 B.P.) ...... 28 Late Archaic Period (5000–3000 B.P.) ...... 29 Transitional/Terminal Archaic Period (3600–2500 B.P.) ...... 30 The Woodland Period (3000–450 B.P.) ...... 31 Early Woodland Period (3000–1600 B.P.) ...... 31 Middle Woodland Period (1600–1000 B.P.) ...... 31 Late Woodland Period (1000–450 B.P.) ...... 32 Contact Period (450 - 300 B.P.) ...... 33

5. METHODOLOG ...... 35 Fieldwork Data Collection Techniques ...... 35 Archaeological Site Examination ...... 35 Archaeological Data Recovery Program - Area 1 Site ...... 36 Laboratory Processing and Specialized Analyses ...... 37 Processing ...... 37 Cataloguing ...... 37 Specialized Analysis of Cultural Materials ...... 37

PAL Report No. 488 iii Table of Contents

Curation ...... 40 Public Education Component ...... 40

6. RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ...... 42 Results of the Archaeological Site Examination ...... 42 Area 1 Site ...... 42 Area 2 Site ...... 50 Archaeological Data Recovery - Area 1 Site (19-PL-749) ...... 50 S5W10 Concentration Area ...... 53 Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area ...... 66 Charcoal ...... 94

7. RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES ...... 97 Petrographic and Geochemical Analysis ...... 97 Depositional History ...... 98 Early Archaic Occupation ...... 99 Middle Archaic Occupation ...... 100 Late Archaic Occupation ...... 101 Transitional Archaic Occupation ...... 102 Middle Woodland Occupation ...... 103

8. SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT OF THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS ...... 104 Evaluation of Archaeological Data ...... 104 Stated Goals/Data Collection ...... 104 Assessment of Research Questions ...... 106 Research Question 1: What was the extent and nature of Late Archaic Period use of the Area 1 Site? Does the data conform to the general regional model? ...... 106 Research Question 2: What information does the Area 1 Site contain on the transition between the Archaic and Woodland Period? ...... 107 Research Question 3: What is the nature and extent of wetland resource exploitation at the Area 1 Site, and how does this reflect changes in the environment around 4000 to 3000 years ago? ...... 108 Research Question 4: What was the relationship of the site to Late Woodland/Contact Period core areas of settlement to the south at Pembroke Ponds and to the north around the Boston Basin, and did this orientation extend back to the Late/Transitional Archaic Period? .... 109 Research Question 5: How does the lithic assemblage at the Area 1 Site reflect the pattern of resource use and settlement, and what can this reveal about economic systems in the upper North River drainage? ...... 111 Conclusions ...... 112

REFERENCES ...... 115

APPENDICES

A CATALOG OF CULTURAL MATERIAL RECOVERED, AREA 2 SITE, SITE EXAMINATION ...... 125

B CATALOG OF CULTURAL MATERIAL RECOVERED, AREA 1 SITE, SITE EXAMINATION ...... 129

iv PAL Report No. 488 Table of Contents

C CATALOG OF CULTURAL MATERIAL, AREA 1 SITE, DATA RECOVERY PROGRAM ...... 149

D AREA 1 SITE LITHIC METRICS ...... 235

E RADIOCARBON RESULTS ...... 251

F FLORAL REMAINS ...... 257

G PETROGRAPHIC RESULTS ...... 263

PAL Report No. 488 v LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1. Location of Hanover within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ...... 1

Figure 1-2. Hanover Marketplace on the Hanover, USGS topographic quadrangle ...... 2

Figure 1-3. Areas of archaeological testing, Hanover Marketplace (source: Missio and Jones 1992) ...... 3

Figure 1-4. Subsurface archaeological testing, Area 1, Hanover Marketplace (source: Missio and Jones 1992) ...... 4

Figure 1-5. Subsurface archaeological testing, Area 2, Hanover Marketplace (source: Missio and Jones 1992) ...... 5

Figure 2-1. Site examination archaeological testing and limits of the Area 1 Site ...... 11

Figure 2-2. Site examination archaeological testing and limits of the Area 2 Site ...... 13

Figure 3-1. Location of the Hanover Marketplace within the Seaboard Lowland physiographic province of southern New England (source: Fenneman 1938)...... 20

Figure 3-2. Late Pleistocene glacial advance in southeastern Massachusetts ...... 22

Figure 4-1. The Hanover Marketplace in relation to core areas of seventeenth-century Native American settlement within southeastern Massachusetts (source: MHC 1982) ...... 34

Figure 6-1. Plan and profile of Area 1 Site Feature 1 in test pit N45E0 ...... 45

Figure 6-2. Plan and profile of Area 1 Site Feature 2 in test pit N55E0 ...... 46

Figure 6-3. Profile of archaeological site examination EU 3 showing Feature 2 ...... 48

Figure 6-4. Locations of archaeological test units, Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 51

Figure 6-5. Locations of archaeological test units, S5W10 Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 52

Figure 6-6. Contour map showing the relatively densities of Native American lithic materials within the Northeast Quadrant and S5W10 concentration areas, Area 1 Site ...... 54

Figure 6-7. Drills from the Area 1 Site (a. EU 2-SE, 40-45 cmbs; b. EU 9-NW, 25-30 cmbs; c. EU20-NE, 10-15 cmbs)...... 55

Figure 6-8. Arkose biface from EU 2, S5W10 Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 55

vi PAL Report No. 488 List of Figures

Figure 6-9. Atl atl weights from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace (a. EU 1-NW, 30-35 cmbs; b. EU 20-NE, 15-20 cmbs) ...... 59

Figure 6-10. Cobble tool/stone weight from EU 2, Area 1 Site ...... 59

Figure 6-11. Lithic Materials from the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 60

Figure 6-12. Lithic chipping debris by depth from the Site S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 60

Figure 6-13. Depths of cultural features from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace ...... 62

Figure 6-14. Plan of cultural features from the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site...... 64

Figure 6-15. Profile of cultural features from the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 65

Figure 6-17. Representative Middle Archaic Period projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU 9-NE, 30-35 cmbs; b. EU 7-NE, 30-35 cmbs; c. EU 11-North half, 15-20 cmbs; d. EU 7-SE, 25-30 cmbs; e. EU 10-NW, 45-50 cmbs; f. EU 23-SW, 30-35 cmbs) ...... 70

Figure 6-18. Representative Brewerton-eared projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU10-NE, 25-30 cmbs; b. EU11-North half, 50-55 cmbs) ...... 71

Figure 6-19. Small Stemmed projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU19-NE, 10-15 cmbs; b. EU21-East half, 20-25 cmbs; c. EU 9-NW, 25-30 cmbs; d. EU13-North half, 45-50 cmbs; e. EU11-South half, 30-35 cmbs; f. EU10-NE, 25-30 cmbs) ...... 71

Figure 6-20. Squibnocket stemmed projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU 7-SE, 30-35 cmbs; b. EU 7-NW, 15-20 cmbs; c. E 09-SW, 10-15 cmbs; d. EU19-SE, 105-110 cmbs; e. EU14-NW, 20-25 cmbs; f. EU 7-NW, 25-30 cmbs)...... 72

Figure 6-21. Squibnocket triangle projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU21-East half, 10-15 cmbs; b. EU 7-SW, 15-20 cmbs; c. EU15-East half, 20-25 cmbs; d. EU20-NW, 15-20 cmbs) ...... 72

Figure 6-22. Representative Atlantic type projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU20-SE, 20-25 cmbs; b. EU 8-NE, 15-20 cmbs; c. EU 8-SW, 40-45 cmbs; d. EU 8-NE, 20-25 cmbs; e. EU10-SW, 10-15 cmbs; f. EU23-NW, 20-25 cmbs; g. EU 8-NE, 20-25 cmbs)...... 74

PAL Report No. 488 vii List of Figures

Figure 6-23. Representative Susquehanna Broad projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU 6-NW, 20-25 cmbs; b. EU 7-NE, 15-20 cmbs; c. EU12-NW, 10-15 cmbs; d. EU12-NW, 20-25 cmbs; e. EU 8-NW, 20-25 cmbs) ...... 74

Figure 6-24. Wayland Notched projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU14-SW, 5-10 cmbs; b. EU 8-SE, 10-15 cmbs; c. EU14-NE, 10-15 cmbs) ...... 75

Figure 6-25. Orient Fishtail projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU15-West half, 10-15 cmbs; b. EU18-East half, 15-20 cmbs; c. EU19-SE, 5-10 cmbs; d. EU 7-NW, 20-25 cmbs ...... 75

Figure 6-26. Jack’s Reef Corner Notched projectile point from data recovery EU 12 at the Area 1 Site ...... 76

Figure 6-27. Representative bifaces from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU12-NW, 25-30 cmbs; b. EU13-South half, 25-30 cmbs; c. EU11-North half, 35-40 cmbs; d. EU14-NW, 20-25 cmbs; f. EU09-SE, 15-20 cmbs; f. EU10-SW, 15-20 cmbs; g. EU06-SE, 30-35 cmbs; h. EU07-SE, 30-35 cmbs; i. EU10-35-40 cmbs; j. EU19-SW, 25-30 cmbs ...... 77

Figure 6-28. Representative large bifaces from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU17-South half, 25-30 cmbs; b. EU14-NW, 20-25 cmbs; c. EU08-SW, 45-50 cmbs) ...... 77

Figure 6-29. Stone pestle from EU 20, Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 78

Figure 6-30. Lithic chipping debris materials from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site...... 79

Figure 6-31. Lithic chipping debris by depth from the Site Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site ...... 80

Figure 6-32. Plan of Native American cultural features 5, 6, and 8 in EUs 6, 8, and 11, Area 1 Site ...... 82

Figure 6-33. Feature 5 stratigraphic profile of EU 6, Area 1 Site ...... 83

Figure 6-34. Features 6 and 8 stratigraphic profiles in EU 8, Area 1 Site ...... 84

Figure 6-35. Plan of Feature 9 in EUs 12, 14, 20, and 22, Area 1 Site ...... 85

Figure 6-36. Plan of Feature 10 at 20 cmbs in EU 21, Area 1 Site ...... 86

Figure 6-37. Plan of Feature 11 in EU 13, Area 1 Site...... 88

Figure 6-38. Plan of Features 12 and 14 in EU 23, Area 1 Site ...... 89

Figure 6-39. Plan of Feature 2 at 30 cmbs in EUs 18 and 19 and site examination EU3, Area 1 Site ...... 91

viii PAL Report No. 488 List of Figures

Figure 6-40. Plan of Feature 13 data recover EU19 and site examination EU3, Area 1 Site ...... 92

Figure 6-41. East and west profile of EU19 showing Feature 2 and Feature 13, Area 1 Site...... 93

PAL Report No. 488 ix LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1. Native American Cultural Chronology for Southern New England ...... 26

Table 6-1. Pre-contact Native American Cultural Material by Depth, Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace, Site Examination ...... 43

Table 6-2. Radiocarbon Results from Selected Features Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace...... 47

Table 6-3. Pre-contact Native American Cultural Material by Depth, Area 2 Site, Hanover Marketplace, Site Examination ...... 50

Table 6-4. Vertical Distribution of Chipping Debris Recovered during Archaeological Data Recovery of the Area 1 Site...... 57

Table 6-5. Distribution of Chipping Debris by Size Range Recovered during the Data Recovery Program of the Area 1 Site...... 61

Table 6-6. Inventory of Cultural Features Identified within the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site Data Recovery Program ...... 63

Table 6-7. Distribution of Native American stone tools from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace ...... 67

Table 6-8. Projectile and projectile point fragments from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace ...... 68

Table 6-9. Nineteenth and twentieth century cultural materials recovered during the archaeological site examination of the Area 1 and Area 2 Sites, Hanover Marketplace ...... 95

Table 6-10. Post-contact period cultural materials recovered during data recovery archaeological investigations of the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace ...... 96

Table 6-11. Data recovery and site examination radiocarbon dates from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace...... 96

Table 7-1. Lithic Samples and Artifacts Examined by Petrographic and Geochemical Analysis ...... 98

Table 7-2. Trace Element Data for Artifact and Debitage Samples ...... 99

Table 7-3. Results of Petrographic Thin Section Analysis ...... 100

Table 7-4. Vertical Distribution of Diagnostic Projectile Points ...... 100

x PAL Report No. 488 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

PAL (The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc.) conducted archaeological site examinations of the Area 1 (19-PL-749) and Area 2 (19-PL-750) sites and archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site within the Hanover Marketplace in Hanover, Massachusetts (Figure 1-1). The Carpionato Corporation is overseeing the development of the Hanover Marketplace, which is located west of Columbia Road (Route 53) near Hanover Four Corners (Figure 1-2). The 85,000 square foot (ft2) retail center is located on a 15.4-acre parcel of land and includes a 50,393 ft2 Shaw’s Supermarket and an attached 9,800 sq ft2 CVS pharmacy. Development also included construction of a large parking lot, an access drive adjacent to Columbia Road (Route 53), and a landscaped buffer zone.

Figure 1-1. Location of Hanover within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Project History

Intensive (locational) archaeological survey (950 CMR 70) of the Hanover Marketplace was conducted by the Office of Public Archaeology (OPA) at Boston University in 1991 (Missio and Jones 1992). Subsurface archaeological testing was conducted on three knolls designated as Areas 1, 2, and 3, which were considered sensitive for containing archaeological deposits (Figure 1-3). Archaeological testing resulted in the recovery of 205 pieces of pre-contact Native American cultural material from Area 1 and five pieces of stone chipping debris from Area 2 (Figures 1-4 and 1-5). Pre-contact Native American

PAL Report No. 488 1 Chapter One

Figure 1-2. Hanover Marketplace on the Hanover, USGS topographic quadrangle.

2 PAL Report No. 488 Introduction

Missio and Jones 1992). 1992). Jones Missio and nover Marketplace (source: Figure Areas of archaeological 1-3. Ha testing,

PAL Report No. 488 3 Chapter One

Figure 1-4. Subsurface archaeological testing, Area 1, Hanover Marketplace (source: Missio and Jones 1992).

4 PAL Report No. 488 Introduction

Figure 1-5. Subsurface archaeological testing, Area 2, Hanover Marketplace (source: Missio and Jones 1992).

PAL Report No. 488 5 Chapter One

cultural materials recovered from Area 1 within the Hanover Marketplace project area included quartz, argillite, felsite, and chert chipping debris and three lithic cores (Missio and Jones 1992). The Area 1 and Area 2 sites were considered potentially eligible for listing in the State or National Registers of Historic Places and the OPA concluded with a recommendation for archaeological site examination of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites.

PAL conducted archaeological site examination of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites, Hanover Marketplace, in June and July 1992 under archaeological permit No. 1242 issued by the Massachusetts Historical Commission/State Archaeologist. Archaeological site examination of the Area 1 Site resulted in the recovery of pre-contact Native American cultural materials (lithic debitage, chipped and ground/pecked stone tools, and Native American clay pot sherds) and cultural features (hearth and pit feature) from a 2,750 square meter (m2) knoll adjacent and immediately west of Columbia Road within the southeastern limits of the Hanover Marketplace project area. Charcoal collected from two cultural deposits at the site produced Late/Transitional Archaic Period radiocarbon ages of 3290±80 and 3540±80 B.P. (before present). Archaeological data contained at the Area 1 Site indicated the site was eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and D, and PAL recommended to the project proponents that mitigation alternatives (avoidance, preservation in place, or an archaeological data recovery program) be considered to minimize the effects construction would have on this significant archaeological resource. The Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) concurred with PAL’s assessment and recommendations for the Area 1 Site.

The Area 2 Site is located northwest of the Area 1 Site on a sparsely wooded T-shaped knoll, just north of the wetland system associated with Iron Mine Brook (see Figure 1-3). Gentle to moderate slopes are located north and east of the knoll top, while sleep slopes are located to the south and west. Archaeological site examination resulted in the recovery of 41 pieces of chipping debris and the base/midsection of a stone drill from a 375 m2 area. Morphological attributes of the drill suggest that it may be a reworked Neville-like projectile point that dates to the Middle Archaic Period (ca. 7500–5000 B.P.). The Area 2 Site yielded few cultural materials and modest archaeological data and was determined not to be eligible for listing in the National Register. Consequently, no additional archaeological investigations were recommended for the Area 2 Site.

Archaeological Data Recovery

Cultural data contained at the Area 1 Site were determined to have the potential to contribute significant new information concerning pre-contact Native American settlement and land use within the North River drainage area of southeastern Massachusetts. The categories of data recovered from site during the preceding intensive and site examination surveys indicated the site was eligible for inclusion in the National Register under Criteria A and D: the site is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history, and that it would be likely to yield information important to prehistory or history (NPS National Register Criteria for Evaluation [36 CFR 60]).

A meeting with representatives of the Carpionato Corporation, the MHC, and PAL discussed methods for avoiding and mitigating adverse impacts to the Area 1 Site following archaeological site examination of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites. Project proponents determined that construction of the access road and associated grading could not be redesigned to avoid impacts to an approximate 80 ft x 480 ft section of the Area 1 Site. Accordingly, an archaeological data recovery program (950 CMR 71.05(a); 36 CFR 800.9(b)(1)) was developed and implemented at the Area 1 Site to mitigate the adverse effects project construction would have on this National Register-eligible property.

The Carpionato Corporation contracted with PAL to conduct archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site within the Hanover Marketplace project area. Fieldwork for the project was completed in June 1993

6 PAL Report No. 488 Introduction under Massachusetts State Archaeologist’s permit No. 1274 and in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 9, Section 26C-27C, as amended by Chapter 254 of the Acts of 1988 and MEPA (301 CMR 11). Archaeological data recovery involved the excavation and examination of roughly 10 percent of the total site area. Partial excavation is consistent with the MHC’s current policy. Archaeological materials and artifacts were returned to PAL’s laboratory facility in Pawtucket, Rhode Island for cleaning, cataloging, and analysis.

Project Personnel

Archaeological site examination and data recovery of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites, Hanover Marketplace, was overseen by Suzanne Cherau (Principal Investigator) and implemented by William R. Begley (Project Archaeologist) and Laurie Pearce and Dana Richardi (Project Assistants). Craig Chartier, Beth P. Miller, William Brett, Richard Savignano, Mark Feibusch, and Chip Mizelle (Archaeological Technicians) assisted in the fieldwork. Donna Raymond (Laboratory Supervisor) directed laboratory processing and oversaw flotation and the floral/faunal analyses. Lithic analysis was conducted by Daniel Dietch, Steve Willan, and William R. Begley under the supervision of Duncan Ritchie (Senior Archaeologist). Cultural materials were cataloged by Monika Bolino and William R. Begley. University of Rhode Island geologist O. Donald Hermes and Duncan Ritchie conducted petrological and X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) study of lithic materials recovered at the Area 1 Site. Dana Richardi prepared the graphics presented in this report.

Disposition of Project Data

All project information (i.e., field recording forms, maps, cultural materials, photographs) is currently on file at PAL, 26 Main Street, Pawtucket, Rhode Island. PAL serves as a temporary curation facility until such time as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts designates a permanent state repository.

PAL Report No. 488 7 CHAPTER TWO

RESEARCH DESIGN

Collection of archaeological data is guided by theoretical frameworks that define the kinds of data to be recovered, enable the appropriate formulation of research questions, and specify which variables in the natural and social environment have the greatest explanatory value for furthering an understanding of events or larger-scale processes of the past. The archaeological record of any site is the result of a complex interplay between human behaviors, which resulted in the intentional/unintentional discard of artifacts in archaeological contexts, and post-depositional natural processes such as erosion, animal activity, and freeze/thaw cycles that act upon the distributions of discarded cultural materials and the archaeological record of a site. It is expected that systematic excavation of sites, the recovery of artifacts, and the interpretation of the recovered materials based on their spatial arrangements can be used to illuminate and illustrate past human behaviors. Archaeological studies at the Area 1 and Area 2 sites proceeded under the assumption that the material record of the sites and the distribution and types of material remains recovered from them resulted from human behaviors that were patterned by concepts of cultural or social correctness, modified by post-depositional disturbances.

Site Examination

The goal of an archaeological site examination is to evaluate the eligibility of a site or sites for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. This determination is assisted by collecting information on a site’s boundaries, physical integrity, density, structure, complexity, and age and the ability of the site to produce information useful for answering archaeological research questions of regional scientific or historical importance and to place the site in relation to other Native American sites in the area.

Site examination within the Hanover Marketplace was designed to address four aspects of the of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites. The research design focused on assessing the physical attributes (e.g. size, age, content, integrity, function, etc.) of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites and understanding them within the context of local and regional land use models and assess their ability to provide new insights into pre-contact Native American occupation in southeastern Massachusetts. Specific goals and questions addressed by the archaeological site examination included:

Determining the basic attributes of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites

Intensive (locational) archaeological survey of the Hanover Marketplace identified concentrations of Native American cultural materials within the southeastern (Area 1) and northwestern (Area 2) sections of the development. The integrity of cultural deposits recovered from each of these knolls appeared good as neither of the knolls appears to have been historically plowed. The majority (64 percent) of Native American cultural material was recovered between 0 and 25 centimeters (cm) below the ground surface (cmbs) from the A Horizon at the Area 1 Site. Four of the five flakes from the Area 2 Site were also recovered from the A Horizon. A notable concentration of Native American cultural material was identified along the eastern edge of the Area 1 knoll top, just west of Columbia Road.

The initial objective of the site examination was to determine the horizontal limits and vertical extant of the cultural deposits at both the identified Area 1 and Area 2 sites. This was accomplished by excavating test pits organized in a 5 meter (m) coordinate grid across each of the knoll tops. Test pit excavation

8 PAL Report No. 488 Research Design

demonstrated that the Area 1 Site continued south of the knoll (Figure 2-1). Several sizable borrow pits along with associated earth piles were present at the southwestern corner of the site. The knoll atop of which the Area 1 Site was located evidently extended to the northeast prior to being impacted and truncated by the construction of Columbia Road (Route 53). Presently, the northeastern site boundary is characterized by an extremely steep slope downward to Columbia Road. Area 2 Site boundaries were defined by sterile test pits excavated at a 5m interval around intensive pits that produced Native American cultural materials (Figure 2-2). The west side of the Area 2 Site is heavily eroded and has been impacted by gravel mining and grading associated with the construction of the recycling facility to the west (Figure 2-1).

In additional to determining site boundaries, test pit excavation also assisted with assessing site integrity, identifying artifact concentrations, and evaluating whether the sites were structurally simple (few lithic concentration areas) or indicated a more complex set of activities (e.g., resource acquisition, processing and food storage, domestic occupation, etc.).

Assessing the age or cultural affiliation of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites

Prior to archaeological site examination, the ages of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites were unknown. One of the goals of the site examination was recover temporally or culturally diagnostic cultural materials and/or locate carbon-bearing features that would permit radiocarbon dating and assessment of the ages of the two sites.

Studying lithic raw material use and assessing source areas

Stone chipping debris and lithic cores recovered from the Area 1 and Area 2 sites during the intensive survey indicated the majority of the lithic materials used in the manufacture of chipped-stone tools were readily derived from the nearby area. Few pieces of non-locally available chert were also recovered from the Area 1 Site. It was the expectation that additional cores or other lithic artifacts recovered during the site examination would provide information on raw material source area and whether these materials were initially extracted from nearby bedrock outcrops and transported to the sites as quarry blanks or if cobbles derived from local tills served as sources of stone used in chipped stone tool manufacture. It was expected that presumed that the parent material for lithic artifacts recovered from the sites could be determined through comparisons of the Area 1 and Area 2 site assemblages with volcanic materials known to outcrop in eastern Massachusetts (i.e. Boston basin, Blue Hills, Lynn, Mattapan, or Attleboro). Such a study would provide information necessary to understanding the social processes of trade and exchange and/or pre-contact Native American patterns of movement.

Examining wetland resource exploitation at the Area 1 and Area 2 sites

The Area 1 and 2 sites are each located on sandy, well-drained knolls adjacent to wetlands that are part of the large North River drainage area. A large scale survey within the adjacent Taunton River drainage basin demonstrated that numerous Native American archaeological sites dating from about 9000 B.P. to about 500 B.P. tend to be located in proximity to wetlands (Thorbahn 1982). For example, occupation and resource exploitation of wetland areas has been a recognized pattern of Small Stemmed Tradition land use. Nevertheless, while the exploitation of wetland resources appears to have been important through the pre-contact past into the seventeenth century and beyond, archaeological research suggests that wetlands may have been particularly important during the PaleoIndian and Early Archaic periods (Dincauze 1980; Forrest 1999; Jones and Forrest 2003; Nicholas 1991; Simon 1991). Intensive exploitation of these wetland systems during the late Pleistocene/early Holocene may have correlated with a period of exception plant and animal resource diversity.

PAL Report No. 488 9 Chapter Two

Archaeological site examination of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites was expected to locate cultural materials, features, and material evidence for the types of resources being exploited in this wetland setting. The combination of temporal and subsistence data would contribute information on changing land use patterns around freshwater swamps and perhaps provide some insight into what resources were being targeted and for what purposes.

Data Recovery Program

Following the archaeological site examination, the Area 1 Site was determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register. Construction impacts to the Area 1 Site could not be avoided and an archaeological data recovery program was developed to mitigate the adverse effects project construction would have on the site. Dr. Dena Dincauze has stated (1980:31) that the first priority for research in the Northeast is problem definition, followed by selecting the “means” and developing a research design by which to address these problems, and finally implementing the appropriate data recovery strategies to collect these data. This outline remains the basic approach to archaeological inquiry in the region.

Archaeological data recovery is the “systematic removal of the scientific, prehistoric, historic, and/or archaeological data that provides an historic property with its research or data value” (36 CFR Part 66). In the process of carrying out a data recovery program, archaeological sites are excavated, the significant data are collected and analyzed and the important information is disseminated. Because elements of a site are destroyed through the course of archaeological investigation, the data recovery plan included methodologies that would manage anticipated discoveries and provided for the processing and curation of cultural materials after their removal from their environmental and cultural contexts. Cultural materials as well as field notes, drawings, photographs, and other records generated by the archaeological investigation were properly stored to prevent loss of information. Specific field and research strategies were used to carry out the recovery of significant data and to analyze and synthesize the results.

Research Orientation and Questions

The research questions developed for the site examination presented above focused on examining the internal site structure and configuration of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites and began to address archaeological themes of local and regional import. The Area 1 Site was determined to have the potential to contribute significant new information concerning pre-contact Native American settlement and land use within the North River drainage area of southeastern Massachusetts.

The research design formulated for the Area 1 Site data recovery program evolved from those initially developed for the site examination. Issued addressed by the data recovery program focused on studying patterns of Native American land use, resource acquisition, wetland exploitation, and the formation of ancient Native American territories within the combined Indian Head River/North River/Taunton River watershed of southeastern Massachusetts especially for the Late/Transitional Archaic Period (see below).

Research Topic 1: Late Archaic Period Use of the Area 1 Site

Pre-contact Native American archaeological sites in southeastern Massachusetts and nearby Rhode Island are variable in size, content, and internal characteristics. Such variability is likely accounted for by differences in site function, duration of occupation, size of occupying groups, and the frequency of re-use of a location. River margins and interior swamps were typically re-occupied over time sometimes resulting in a broad distribution of archaeological materials and features (Dewar and McBride 1992). Sites that were repeatedly occupied over thousands of years oftentimes contain evidence of changes in Native American land use and resource acquisition within a specific region.

10 PAL Report No. 488 Research Design

Figure 2-1. Site examination archaeological testing and limits of the Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 11-12 Research Design

Figure 2-2. Site examination archaeological testing and limits of the Area 2 Site. Site. 2 Area the of limits and testing archaeological examination Site 2-2. Figure

PAL Report No. 488 13 Chapter Two

The fourth millennium B.P. has long been recognized as a period of environmental stabilization (Dincauze 1974, 1975). The Holocene environment contained supported a variable and diverse natural resource base (small- to medium-sized mammals, reptiles, flora, hard nut species, etc.) available for exploitation. By the Middle Archaic Period (ca. 7500 to 5000) group territory size had begun to shrink with regional Native American territories beginning to be established (Dincauze 1976, 1980). The gradual reduction of territorial range and the circumscription of populations with defined territories may have been partly responsible for the increased re-use of certain productive environmental areas. Changes in the logistical organization of social groups may also have been partly responsible for the re-occupation of those areas having the greatest environmental productivity and the increased visibility of some of those sites (Thorbahn 1982).

Peter Thorbahn’s (1982) work along the I-495 roadway corridor in the Taunton River Drainage of southeastern Massachusetts has demonstrated that river margins and large wetlands were targeted for repeated settlement during the Late/Transitional Archaic period (ca. 5000 to 2500 B.P.) resulting in dense concentrations of cultural materials and features. Archaeological study of the Bay Street I site (19-BR-56) indicated the site was intensively occupied between 4300 and 3200 years ago. Here, Small Stemmed projectile points were recovered along with Vinette 1-type ceramics in a feature radiocarbon dated to 3715±180 B.P. (Cox 1982). Archaeological investigations at the nearby Canoe River West site in Norton unearthed a series of large burnt rock pavements or platforms used in resource processing with associated Transitional Archaic Orient Fishtail and other Susquehanna Tradition artifacts (Simon 1982). Similarly, large, complex pits and hearth features at the Newcombe Street Site suggested several episodes of reoccupation dating to the Late Archaic (Thorbahn 1982). Stemmed Tradition occupations are the most frequently archaeological component on similar riverine and wetland setting campsites in Hanover and the surrounding area. This is evident at such sites as Site 19-PL-549 located on the southern shore of Indian Head River, and Site 19-PL-512 located along the North River in Norwell. Similar patterns of Late/Transitional Archaic resource acquisition and camping along river and wetland margins are known from other drainages in eastern Massachusetts.

The Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace, is located on a broad knoll originally bordered by feeder streams and wetlands associated with Third Herring Brook to the east, Iron Mine Brook to the west, and wetlands that form the headwaters of these streams to the north. Given the environmental situation and condition of the Area 1 Site, patterns of Late/Transitional Archaic Period land use and settlement outlined above were expected to be contained at the site. This position was partially supported by categories of data collected from the site during the preceding intensive and site examination archaeological surveys. Quartz Small Stemmed and Squibnocket Stemmed projectile points and radiocarbon ages of 3290±80 and 3540±80 B.P. from charcoal indicated the Area 1 Site contained a significant Late Archaic Small Stemmed lithic tradition occupation. An absence of Laurentian Tradition artifacts (i.e. Brewerton, Vosburg, Otter Creek) suggested the Area 1 Site was not occupied much before 4000 years ago. Chipped stone manufacturing waste, lithic tools (projectiles and net weight/sinker), faunal remains, burnt rock platform, and disposal pit suggested the occupants of the site engaged in various activities focused on the acquisition and processing of terrestrial and riverine resources.

One hope of the data recovery program was to identify the full range and complexity of human behaviors that occurred on the site by studying the depositional history and patterns of the Area 1 Site. This was proposed to be accomplished through a thorough analysis of stone tools and the distribution of lithic materials and features. Hand excavation and radiocarbon dating would also assist in determining if other, less visible archaeological components were present at the site. For example, additional archaeological study might allow for reconciling whether the two pre-contact Native American clay pot sherds from the site were Late Archaic or Woodland Period in age. The manufacture of ceramic vessels in southern New England is typically attributed to the Early Woodland Period (ca. 3000 B.P.). However, the recovery of Vinette I type ceramic sherds from proximity to archaeological deposits radiocarbon dated to ca. 3700

14 PAL Report No. 488 Research Design

B.P. at the Bay Street I Site (see Cox 1982) necessitates the need to critically evaluate this common assumption concerning the beginnings of ceramic production in the Northeast. The Area 1 Site ceramic assemblage following the site examination was interpreted as representing either early ceramic production and pottery use at the site dating to the Late Archaic Period or represented evidence for subsequent occupation of the site dating to the Woodland Period.

Specific research questions posited for the archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site associated with Research Topic 1 included:

• Was the Area 1 Site recurrently used during the Late Archaic Period like other sites in the greater Taunton drainage basin of southeastern Massachusetts? • Does this occupational/depositional sequence conform to the general patterns of known Late Archaic settlement and resource acquisition in the North River Area (e.g. frequent re-use of riverine/wetland site locations)? • Is it possible to reconcile the age of the Native American pottery recovered from the Area 1 Site?

Research Topic 2: Transition from Archaic to Woodland Period at the Area 1 Site

Quartz was frequently used to manufacture Late Archaic Small Stemmed Tradition and Squibnocket Complex projectile points in southern New England (see Ritchie 1969, 1971). Dr. Kevin A. McBride (1984) argued for the lower Connecticut River Valley of Connecticut that the Small Stemmed or Narrow Point Tradition employed an efficient quartz cobble stone tool manufacturing technology. A quartz Small Stemmed and two quartz Squibnocket Stemmed projectile points and an associated high density of quartz debitage was recovered from the northeast section of the Area 1 Site during the archaeological site examination. These projectile points, in addition to the two radiocarbon dates of 3290±80 B.P. and 3540±80 B.P. from the site during the site examination suggested that the Area 1 Site was most intensively occurred during the Late Archaic Period. The recovery of two Native American clay pot sherds, one of which was recovered in associated with the burnt rock platform Feature 02, suggested however that the site may once again have been occupied during the Early or Middle Woodland periods.

The recovery and identification of Late Archaic and suspected Early Woodland Period cultural materials and features at the Area 2 Site suggested a possibility for studying the Archaic to Woodland transition in Massachusetts. The nature of Native American land use and settlement evidently began to change following the adoption of ceramic technology approximately 3000 years ago (Ritchie 1980; Snow 1980). Early Woodland Period occupations, however, are generally underrepresented in the regional archaeological record. An apparent underrepresentation of Early Woodland sites in the regional archaeological database may stem from a difficulty in determining what constitutes diagnostic artifact assemblages for the period (Juli and McBride 1984). The recovery of ceramic sherds and lithic debitage, as well as, the identification of a burnt rock platform, fire pit, and possible living floor within a localized section of the northeast site area suggested a possibility that additional cultural deposits useful to studying technology and subsistence strategies dating to the Archaic/Woodland Period transition would be unearthed during the archaeological data recovery program.

Specific research questions posited for the archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site associated with Research Topic 2 included:

• Is there evidence for Late Archaic, Transitional Archaic, and Early Woodland occupation of the Area 1 Site? • What does the Area 1 Site data say about land use and resource acquisition for these periods?

PAL Report No. 488 15 Chapter Two

• Do the observed patterns at the Area 1 Site “fit” the observed patterns of Native American riverine use in southeastern Massachusetts?

Research Topic 3: Wetland Resource Exploitation at the Area 1 Site

Regional archaeologists have long recognized a correlation between wetland settings and pre-contact Native American archaeological sites (Hasenstab 1991; Nicholas 1991). Wetlands provide both a home and breeding habitat for mammals, reptiles, fish, and fowl and sources of freshwater. Nicholas (1991) identifies five reasons that explain the correlation between wetland resources and archaeological site selection in the Northeast:

1) Resource Type: a wide variety of consumable or otherwise useable resources are supported by wetland systems;

2) Seasonality: large, heterogeneous wetland areas on average contain a greater number of perennially available resources than either lowland riverine or interior upland settings;

3) Resource productivity: given wetlands are highly productive ecosystems that contain comparatively easy access to the resources supported by them;

4) Species diversity: large wetlands contain a wide range of plant and animal species, while smaller wetlands tend to be more homogeneous;

5) Resource reliability: wetlands tend to provide consistently reliable and predictable vegetal foods, over time.

The study of the relationship between the Area 1 Site and the surrounding wetland ecology had the potential to provide new insight into the cognitive choices that went into Native American site selection during the Late Archaic and Early Woodland periods. Selection of the Area 1 Site for settlement by Late/Transitional Archaic peoples likely was correlated with specific wetland habitat factors such as resource type and diversity. Burnt rock platform Feature 02 partially investigated at Area 1 during the site examination was hypothesized to represent an area where fish, meat, and plants procured from the nearby Iron Mine Brook and associated wetland system were processed. This supposition was bolstered by the recovery of a charred amaranth seed during flotation of soil sampled from the feature.

Other sites in the Taunton River drainage contained burnt rock features dating to the Late/Transitional Archaic Period similar to those exposed at the Area 1 Site. On such feature was recently exposed overlying a deep pit at the Riverside 2 site situated along the west bank of the Nemasket River (Waller 2009). The Canoe River West Site contained at least 26 burnt rock platforms in close proximity to each, some of which were superimposed over deep pits. Burnt rock features suggest that high bulk processing, likely associated with the natural resources available in the wetland and stream setting, repeated occurred at this location (Simon 1982).

The data recovery investigation of the Area 1 Site was designed to further examine the burnt rock platform, locate similar features, examine their spatial distribution, and analyze any associated floral and faunal remains associated with them. The data might provide clues as to what natural food resources were being exploited by the site’s occupants and exploitation of these resources may have changed over time. Food remains could also be used to assess the season or seasons of site occupation and use.

Specific research questions posited for the archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site associated with Research Topic 3 included:

16 PAL Report No. 488 Research Design

• What is the nature and extent of wetland resource exploitation at the Area 1 Site? • What does this say about the environment for the period ca. 4000 to 3000 years ago? • To what degree does the observed pattern fit the general model of Late/Transitional Archaic and Woodland periods wetland exploitation? • Was the Area 2 Site occupied year-round or only seasonally with occupations scheduled around seasonally available resources? • Did this pattern of resource use change over time? • How does the pattern of site occupation, resource use, and social organization in this near-wetland system compare with those at other similar river/wetland and non-wetland environmental settings in the region?

Research Topic 4: Relationship of the Area 1 Site to Late Woodland/Contact Period Core Areas

The Area 1 Site is located along Iron Mine Brook near where the Herring River meets both the Indian Head (southwest) and North (northeast) rivers. Access to the Area 1 Site from the North River would also have been possible via Third Herring Brook. Southeastern Massachusetts’ river systems provided primary avenues for Native American transportation in addition to sponsoring a wide range of plant and animal species readily available for exploitation by the region’s indigenous peoples. The combined Indian Head/Herring/North River system and its tributaries likely provided the occupants of the Area 1 Site with access to larger settlement areas located within the mosaic of ponds in present-day Pembroke and Halifax.

The North River and its tributaries flow generally northeast to empty into Massachusetts Bay at the Scituate-Marshfield boundary. These rivers and streams likely facilitated transportation between the region’s interior (Pembroke Ponds Complex) and the coastal zone located in the North River/Plymouth area. The Pembroke Ponds were a focus of Massachusett Indian settlement and subsistence by the early seventeenth century core with a major native settlement at Mattakeeset. A coastal core of Wampanoag Indians, which extended from the North River south to Plymouth Bay, included a major settlement at Patuxet (MHC 1982). Hanover and the Area 1 Site appear to have been peripheral to the interior and coastal core settlement areas around 400 years ago. On the contrary, the upper North River drainage and Hanover area was included within an area of intense Native American land use during the Late/Transitional Archaic Periods. The database of known archaeological sites however, suggests a sharp decline in occupation and resource use of interior wetland and river settings during the latter Woodland and Contact periods. An apparent shift away from interior systems may be tied to a combination of factors such as increased settlement focused on the coastal and reliance on coastal resources such as shellfish, finfish, and marine mammals, other changes in subsistence strategies (introduction of horticulture), and changes in socio-political and community structure.

Archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site was presumed to assist with understanding the geo- cultural position of Hanover during the Late Archaic, Woodland, and perhaps Contact periods. By examining the site’s age(s), material and feature content, and their densities, patterns of Native American settlement and resource exploitation and an assessment of the site’s situation with a “core” or “a peripheral” territory for the periods between 4000 and 300 years ago might be better understood. Specific research questions proposed for the archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site associated with Research Topic 4 included:

• What is the relationship of the Area 1 Site to established core areas of settlement to the south at Pembroke Ponds and to the north around the Boston Basin? • Was the present-day Hanover vicinity situated in a geographical transition zone between Woodland and Contact Period territories?

PAL Report No. 488 17 Chapter Two

• Does this orientation extend backwards in time to the Late and Transitional Archaic periods?

Research Topic 5: Lithic Resource Use at the Area 1 Site

Archaeological site examination indicated that the Area 1 Site contained a high density of lithic materials most of which was located within the northeastern limits of the site. Lithic materials recovered from the site included chipped and ground stone tools (projectile points, scrapers, drills, net sinker or weight, whetstone), hammerstones or cores, and chipped stone tool manufacturing waste. Lithic materials recovered from the site included volcanics (rhyolites and felsites), quartz, argillite, hornfels and jasper and quartzite. Volcanics dominate the Area 1 lithic assemblage. Area 1 Site volcanic materials included Hingham red, Sally Rock, Saugus jasper, Mattapan, and Attleboro red varieties. Lithic materials were macroscopically identical to parent materials that outcrop at the Mattapan Volcanic and Blue Hills Igneous complex of the Boston Basin and the Lynn Volcanic Complex north of Boston in Massachusetts’ Northshore area.

Quartz was the second most frequent lithic material recovered from the Area 1 Site accounting for 42 percent of the lithic assemblage. Quartz is locally available and occurs as glacially deposited riverine cobbles and in veins of bedrock outcrops. Argillite, which constituted only a minor portion of the Area 1 lithic assemblage at 5 percent, is regionally available from the Boston Basin. The Small Stemmed lithic tradition in southern New England targeted quartz, and to a lesser extent argillite, for manufacturing chipped stone tools in southern New England. Small Stemmed and Squibnocket Stemmed projectile points from the Area 1 Site were all manufactured of quartz consistent with the pattern of observed raw material preference for the Late Archaic Small Stemmed Tradition.

Archaeological data recovery of the Area 1 Site was designed to examine patterns of lithic material preference and use. Examination of stone tools and chipping debris from the site would assist in a determination if a distinct sequence of manufacturing steps in the biface reduction process was practiced at the site. The stone tools, characteristics of the debitage assemblage (e.g. a preponderance of small- and medium-sized flakes over larger flakes and very little blocky shatter), and an absence of Boston Basin volcanic cores and fragments, suggested that only secondary and tertiary lithic reduction of these materials occurred at the site. These data imply that volcanic materials were transported to the site from their source areas as blanks, rough bifaces, or preforms, which were later shaped into formal tools, or perhaps were gathered as beach or glacial cobbles. The presence of numerous, large quartz flakes, an abundance of shatter, the recovery of spent quartz cores, as well as, small- to medium-sized quartz flakes on the contrary is indicative of an entirely different pattern by which quartz was utilized ranging from initial selection of raw material to final stage bifacial tool finishing.

Continued archaeological study of the Area 1 Site was expected to answer whether the complete sequence of quartz tool manufacture was unique to the Late or Transitional Archaic occupants of the site and/or whether volcanic materials were being used by earlier or later occupants and how these materials were being brought to the site, used, and subsequently discarded. Such information might provide clues as to the complexity of the lithic technologies and how they might relate to the socioeconomic organizations of those who used them. An examination of the recovered debitage assemblage along with geochemical and petrological analysis was expected to provide insights into preferences of raw material selection (i.e. locally available quartz versus regionally available volcanics). These data might also provide information on communication and transportation networks via waterways and overland routes and territoriality, particularly during the Late and Transitional Archaic periods.

Specific research questions proposed for the archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site associated with Research Topic 5 included:

18 PAL Report No. 488 Research Design

• What lithic materials are associated with the various archaeological components to the site? • What does the Area 1 Site lithic assemblage suggest about site occupation and use? • What types of lithic materials and how are they distributed about the site? • What does this reveal about pre-contact Native American economic systems in the upper North River drainage?

PAL Report No. 488 19

CHAPTER THREE

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Environmental features were important variables influencing pre-contact Native American and post- contact period settlement, subsistence strategies, and resources exploitation. Natural features and resources such as bedrock geology, soil drainage, vegetation, and location relative to major drainage systems and coastal bodies all affected past settlement location, type, and density, as well as the frequency of resettlement within any given area. Specific environments contained sets of exploitable natural resources, while the cultural and technological subsystems determined which of those resources peoples could or would exploit. Knowledge of environmental data contributes to a clearer understanding of what natural resources were available to human groups and what Hanover’s environment was like in the past.

The Hanover Marketplace project area is located in Plymouth County near the headwaters of the Iron Mine Brook approximately one mile west of the confluence of Third Herring Brook and the North River and one mile north of the confluence of Iron Mine Brook and the Indian Head River. Southeastern Massachusetts interior river valleys and wetland systems supported a rich, varied, and reliable riverine, wetland, and woodland floral and faunal resource base that was periodically exploited and targeted by the region’s indigenous peoples and by later European settlers.

Current Environmental Setting

The Hanover Marketplace is situated within eastern Hanover in northern Plymouth County, Massachusetts. This part of Plymouth County and southeastern Massachusetts is situated within the larger Seaboard Lowland physiographic province of southern New England (Figure 3-1). The 15.4-acre Hanover Marketplace project area contains extremely diverse terrain that includes wetlands associated with Iron Mine Brook in its central portion, a wooded knoll in the south-central area, two smaller knolls to the north, undulating wooded terrain to the northwest, and a graded lot in the project area’s northeastern corner.

The Area 1 Site is located in the southern limits Figure 3-1. Location of the Hanover Marketplace of the Hanover Marketplace project area just within the Seaboard Lowland physiographic west of Columbia Road (see Figure 1-2). The province of southern New England (source: site occupies the southwest side of a broad, Fenneman 1938).

20 PAL Report No. 488 Physical Environment wooded knoll that rises roughly 60 to 90 feet (ft) above sea level. The knoll severely slopes downward toward Iron Mine Brook to the west. Columbia Road forms the current eastern limits of the knoll. The Area 2 Site was located within the northwestern portion of Hanover Marketplace project area. The Area 2 Site occupied a wooded “T-shaped” knoll north of Iron Mine Brook. This knoll is bordered by moderate slopes on the north and east and steep slopes to south and west. Area 2 Site elevations ranged from 80 to 100 ft above sea level.

Bedrock Geology

Knowledge of the underlying bedrock and regional stone outcrops is important in evaluating pre- or post- contact Native American population movements and/or evaluating the extent of previously existing trade and exchange networks at Native American archaeological sites manifest by the physical remains of stone tools and their waste products, since stone and boulder outcrops, as well as cobbles in the glacial drift, were periodically exploited for use in stone tool manufacture.

Hanover is located within the northeastern limits of the Narragansett Basin, a broad depression that extends southerly along the coast of Rhode Island to Newport Bay. The Narragansett Basin is composed of glacially deposited sediments overlying a primarily a granitic rock base. Bedrock underlying the area is characterized by a narrow band of upper to middle Pennsylvanian age sandstone, greywacke, shale, and conglomerate known as the Rhode Island Formation (Zen et al. 1983). Proterozoic Z Age Dedham granite and granite, gneiss, and schist are situated immediately north and south of central Hanover. Dedham Granite is described as a grayish pink to greenish gray equigranular to slightly porphyritic granite (Zen et al. 1983).

Lithic materials preferred by the southeastern Massachusetts Indian peoples for use in the manufacture of chipped-stone tools included quartz, quartzites, fine-grained volcanic rhyolites or felsites, and argillaceous mudstones and slates. Felsites/rhyolites were acquired either regionally from one or more of the well-known lithic source outcrops located in the Blue Hills area (Mattapan Square, Sally Rock Felsite, Wampatuck Hill, Clarendon Hill), the Hale Reservation in the Town of Westwood, or from Hingham in the Boston Basin, from the Wamsutta source area of Attleboro, or from the Lynn-Mattapan volcanic suite of the North Shore (Marblehead) area of Massachusetts. Various lithic material types, which either occurred in geologic outcrops or were present in cobble form in the glacial drift, were also available from streambeds, from the nearby coastal margins, or perhaps were easily acquired by travel to one or more of these known source areas.

Soils

Glacial advance during the last glacial episode flowed generally southward in three lobes: the South Channel Lobe to the east, the Cape Cod Bay Lobe in the middle, and the Buzzards Bay Lobe to the west (Figure 3-2). The ice front had major standstills, as evidenced by the two end moraines that occur in southeastern Massachusetts; one formed Nantucket Island and Martha’s Vineyard and the other the Woods Hole area of Cape Cod. Several recessional moraines are present with the Buzzards Bay and Sandwich examples, the one through which the transmission line traverses being the most visible. The slow advance and rapid retreat of glacial ice depressed and shaped the land, scoured its surface, and deposited debris. Flowing meltwaters and stagnant or buried blocks of ice created a variety of landforms seen in Plymouth County today such as kames, eskers, terraces, and outwash plains interspersed by low hills, knolls, and kettle holes. The erosional forces of wind and water continued to transform the southern New England surface as the glaciers slowly melted.

The United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Soil Conservation Service identifies soils at the Area 1 and Area 2 sites in Hanover as Hinckley gravelly

PAL Report No. 488 21 Chapter Three loamy sands. These soils are excessively drained and occur primarily on terrace escarpments, eskers, and some kames (USDA 1969). Slope and droughtiness severely limit the use of this soil for crops or pasture and for most non-farm purposes. The most practical use for this soil is woodland (USDA 1969).

Drainage Patterns

The Town of Hanover lies within the North River drainage of northeastern Plymouth County. The North River and its tributary streams flow in a general northeasterly direction and empty into Massachusetts Bay at the Scituate- Marshfield boundary. This drainage is the major river system of northeastern Plymouth County and includes parts of Scituate, Marshfield, Norwell, Pembroke, Duxbury, Rockland, Halifax, Hanson, and Hanover. Local drainage is afforded by Iron Mine Brook and its associated wetlands. Iron Mine Brook is located roughly 120 m west of the Area 1 Site. Figure 3-2. Late Pleistocene glacial advance in From here, the brook flows generally southeastern Massachusetts. southward to empty into the Indian Head River at Curtis Crossing. The Indian Head River then flows eastward where it is joined by the Herring River just under a mile and a half southeast of the Hanover Marketplace. The confluence of these rivers comprises a vast freshwater wetland. The combined river system then turns north and meets the Third Herring Brook at the Hanover/Norwell town line to become the North River. The North River then meanders its way north and east for roughly five and a half miles to Massachusetts Bay at the Scituate and Marshfield town boundary. The combined river network forms an extremely productive riverine/lacustrine/wetland resource area.

Postglacial Vegetative Sequence for Eastern Massachusetts

Palynological studies from eastern (Newby and Webb 1994; Newby et al. 1986; Newby et al. 2000; Kelso et al. 2000; Sneddon 1987) and central (Newby 2000, Sneddon and Kaplan 1987) Massachusetts have been used to reconstruct Holocene period vegetation and forest type succession through time. Sediment cores from the Makepeace Cedar Swamp in northeastern Carver, Plymouth County (Newby et al. 2000) and Black Pond in (Sneddon 1987) suggest a vegetative sequence that conforms to broad patterns of forest type succession known from southern New England.

Following the retreat of the glaciers between roughly 14,000 and 13,600 B.P., southern New England supported an open treeless, low brush and herb vegetation assemblage similar to that of the modern tundra (Gaudreau and Webb 1985; Suter 1985). Core A from Makepeace Swamp indicates the presence of wet, open water conditions in the area circa (ca.) 13,750 years ago (Newby et al. 2000:363). Spruce pollen, with lesser amounts of pine, birch, and sedge, supports the general sequencing of known plant succession where a low brush gave way to a spruce dominated woodland. Pollen from Black Pond yielded similar

22 PAL Report No. 488 Physical Environment results with an open spruce woodland with pine (jack or red), fir, larch, and green alder in the area around 12,000 to 11,000 years ago (Sneddon 1987).

A change in climate between 11,000 and 10,000 years ago resulted in the decrease of the spruce, fir, larch, and alder boreal forest and an increase in birch with birch pollen reaching its maximum around 10,500 B.P. at Black Pond. Between roughly 9,800 and 8,200 years ago, the spruce woodland was had been replaced by a forest dominated by pine (Newby et al. 1986; Newby et al. 2000). A radiocarbon age of 8930 ± 90 B.P. from Houghton’s Pond core HP-2 clearly demonstrates when this pine-birch-oak forest was extant in eastern Massachusetts (Newby et al. 1986). This mixed coniferous/deciduous vegetation was part of a large-scale shift to a closed forest environment across the southern New England region. The Makepeace pollen cores suggest a period of dry climatic conditions (ca. 9700 years B.P.) during the transition from spruce to pine dominant woodland (Newby et al. 2000). This event has also been similarly observed from Northborough and Marlborough (Newby 2000) and from the Pequot Cedar Swamp in Ledyard, Connecticut (McWeeney 1999).

After approximately 8,350 years ago from Makepeace Cedar Swamp and approximately 8,200 years ago from Houghton’s Pond, oak replaces pine as the dominant pollen reflecting an increase in its frequency in the regional forests (Newby et al. 1986; Newby et al. 2000). At this time, oak pollen increased by 57 percent in a sediment core from Houghton’s Pond. Following 8,000 years ago, oak persisted and remains to this day as the largest constituents of southern New England’s hardwood forests, although beech may have been a substantial component, as well, between 8,000 and 4,800 years ago in southeastern Massachusetts (Gaudreau and Webb 1985; Newby et al. 1987).

By about 5,000 years ago, hickory occurs as an element of the regional deciduous forest, which also included lesser amounts of pine, birch, maple, elm and ash. Palynological research in Plymouth County, Massachusetts suggest that drier climatic conditions ca. 5,300 to 3,000 years ago may have stressed the hemlock trees in regional forests, making them more vulnerable to insects and/or disease (Bhiry and Filion 1996; Newby 2000; Newby et al. 2000; Yu et al. 1997). The hemlock decrease continued until ca. 3,000 B.P., but was gradual and likely was not noticeable to people who occupied the landscape.

Forest vegetation across the southeastern New England region between approximately 4,500 and 3,000 years ago was marked by maximum species diversity. Oak was the dominant species in addition to hickory, beech, yellow birch, elm, maple, sycamore and pine. Similar pollens of the same age and type were also recovered from the Salem Neck Sewage Plant from Salem (Kelso et al. 2000). A broad trend toward cooler climatic conditions is reflected in the palynological record between 3,500 and 2,000 years ago by an increase in the frequency of spruce pollen and slight decrease in the relative frequency of oak pollen. The Makepeace Cedar Swamp and the Houghton’s Pond cores demonstrate a period of more moist climatic conditions and rising water levels after 3,000 years ago (Newby et al. 1986; Newby et al. 2000). Hickory and chestnut became more common as components of the forest vegetation in southern New England. The prevalent southeastern Massachusetts forest by ca. 1000 years ago included an oak-chestnut type with secondary hickory, hemlock, beech, birch, pine, and maple (Newby et al. 1986).

Vegetation Types

The Area 1 and 2 sites within the Hanover Marketplace project area were populated by a second-growth mixed deciduous-coniferous forest. The predominant tree species is white pine with fewer oaks, birches, and red maples. Understory growth is limited to patches of greenbriar. The wetlands surrounding Iron Mine Brook contain mostly red maple with marsh grasses and ferns.

The transition of Black Pond from an open pond with rooted aquatic flora to a closing bog mat supporting white cedars occurred gradually, beginning with the establishment of an ericaceous (heath genus) flora by

PAL Report No. 488 23 Chapter Three

3300 B.P. The white cedar-dominated swamp began to develop with the arrival of this species at about 2500 B.P. The encroachment of the bog mat over the deeper portion of the pond prevented the growth of rooted aquatics in recent centuries. At the regional scale, evidence of eutrophication (algae bloom) in ponds and changes in wetland structure (bog formation) and vegetation have been noted in several pollen cores taken from different locations in southeastern New England (Nelson 1984). The Cedar Swamp core in the upper Sudbury River drainage, for example, contained evidence of eutrophication that has been attributed to the decline in hemlock and an increase in nutrient rich run-off from the deciduous forest. The occupation of upland areas adjacent to wetlands and ponds by prehistoric hunter/gatherer groups has also been suggested as a possible source of nutrients responsible for eutrophication (Sneddon and Kaplan 1987). Spruce increased in frequency and moved further south at higher altitudes in both the northern and southern New England forests as a result of a shift to cooler, moist climatic conditions across the entire Northeast after about 4000 B.P.

Syntheses of palynological and archaeological data from southeastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island have suggested that changes in wetlands (size, structure, vegetation types) due to eutrophication and the climatic cooling trend were factors influencing prehistoric settlement and resource use (Bradshaw et al. 1982; Thorbahn 1982; Cox et al. 1983; Simon 1991; Nicholas 1991). Another factor possibly affecting the size of ponds and wetlands and the vegetation communities associated with them was evidence of a local dry phase observed in pollen cores taken from Titicut Swamp in the Taunton Basin of southeastern Massachusetts. The overly dry climatic conditions took place between 4200 and 3150 B.P., and may have affected prehistoric settlement and resource (Bradshaw et al. 1982; Nelson 1984). Pollen cores taken from the greater eastern Massachusetts region, including Cape Cod, did not show evidence of a "drought" during this period (Winkler 1985; Newby et al. 1987; Sneddon and Kaplan 1987; Sneddon 1987). The cause, therefore, for the very localized dry conditions observed in southeast Massachusetts appears to be more likely related to geomorphological rather than climatic changes (Kelso, personal communication in Simon 1991). There is no evidence to date of a similar dry period elsewhere in eastern Massachusetts, and in particular in the upper North River drainage.

Some indications of forest clearance or alteration around 1000 B.P. have been observed in pollen diagrams from wetlands in southern Rhode Island and southeastern Massachusetts. A significant increase in herbaceous plant pollen (Ambrosia, Tubuliflorae, etc.) at that time suggests that there were openings in the forest vegetation cover which provided suitable habitat for these weedy plants (Bernabo 1977). During the late prehistoric period, forests in eastern and southeastern Massachusetts consisted of an oak- chestnut type with hemlock, hickory, beech, birch, pine, and maple.

Pollen cores taken from wetlands and ponds in southeastern New England clearly show the effects of early historic period forest clearance within the last 300 years. Decreases in tree pollen are matched by strong increases in pollen from weedy plants such as sheep sollel (Rumex), plantain (Plantago), ragweed (Ambrosia), and grass (Graminae). Some trees common as early successional stage types in second growth forests such as red cedar, birch, and white pine became dominant in abandoned farmland (Newby et al. 1987; Nelson 1984) or "old field" situations (Braun 1950).

24 PAL Report No. 488

CHAPTER FOUR

NATIVE AMERICAN LAND USE AND SETTLEMENT

Professional and avocational archaeological surveys have documented nearly an 11,000-year-long sequence of human occupation in southeastern Massachusetts. The following chapter summarizes the current body of Native American settlement data in the Nemasket area from the earliest period for which archaeological remains have been documented in the area to approximately King Philip’s War (1675– 1676). The pre-contact Native American history of Massachusetts is divided into three major periods: the PaleoIndian, Archaic, and Woodland (Table 4-1). The patterns associated with cultural and temporal periods for southern New England are presented sequentially. Each of these periods is distinguishable on the basis of material culture, specific patterns of land use, and occasionally by other indicators such as mortuary practices or traditions. The cultural and temporal groupings listed below are intended to serve as a generalized organizational framework only.

PaleoIndian Period (13,000–10,000 B.P.1)

Southern New England was populated by bands of mobile hunters and foragers collectively referred to as PaleoIndians following the retreat of glacial ice between 21,000 and 16,000 years ago. The earliest unequivocal evidence for human occupation in New England is associated with the Clovis Culture, which dates to as early as 11,120 ± 180 radiocarbon years B.P. at the Vail Site in Maine (Gramly 1982). The timing of the initial population of the Eastern Seaboard is presently debated by archaeologists in light of the discovery of cultural strata and artifacts in South Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, which apparently predate the PaleoIndian “Clovis Culture” or fluted point tradition. The advance and subsequent retreat of thick glacial ice across southern New England ca. 15,000 to 16,000 years ago is often assumed to have erased any evidence for “pre-Clovis” occupation of the region, and no such “Pre- Clovis” finds are known from New England.

Traditional interpretations of PaleoIndian settlement and subsistence systems are that mobile hunters exploited large migratory game such as mastodon, caribou, bison, or elk (Dragoo 1976; Kelly and Todd 1988; Snow 1980; Waguespack and Surovell 2003). PaleoIndian subsistence data from the New England- Maritimes (Meltzer and Smith 1986; Spiess et al. 1998) and the Great Lakes (Stothers 1996) regions indicate PaleoIndians exploited large migratory game, namely caribou. Nevertheless, the relative absence of migratory or megafaunal (i.e., mammoth and mastadon) animal remains from PaleoIndian archaeological contexts in southern New England has caused some to question the “specialized subsistence model” in the region (Dincauze 1993; Ogden 1977). Dincauze (1990) argues that southern New England PaleoIndians were more generalized in their subsistence regimes, hunting and gathering opportunistically available animal and plant species. Jones and Forrest (2003) concur arguing that the higher abundance of small PaleoIndian encampments relative to larger base camps in the region may be characteristic of the PaleoIndian settlement system whereby mobile foragers adjusted to resource unpredictability. Resource-rich freshwater glacial ponds and wetlands were widely distributed across the recently deglaciated New England landscape and likely supported a diversity of plant and animal species

1 Dates presented in this chapter refer to radiocarbon years before present unless otherwise stated. “Present” is defined as 1950 A.D.

PAL Report No. 488 25 Chapter Four

26 PAL Report No. 488 Native American Land Use and Settlement available for human consumption. Following the thinking of Jones and Forrest, smaller groups would have been better equipped to exploit available resources in southern New England than larger groups.

Cultural materials diagnostic of PaleoIndian occupation include fluted Clovis-like (Bull Brook, Neponset, or Nicholas type) and Eden-like projectile points. Other stone tools associated with this period include scraping tools, gravers, and drills and channel flutes. PaleoIndian tools recovered from southern New England typically include non-local (chert and jasper) lithic materials and extra-regionally available rhyolites.

Documented PaleoIndian materials are quite rare and suggest that PaleoIndian settlement and/or exploitation was focused along interior postglacial wetlands, glacial lakes, and riverine settings. The Bull Brook Site in Ipswich covered several acres and yielded thousands of artifacts that included diagnostic fluted points, scrapers, and assorted stone tools (Byers 1954; Grimes 1980; Grimes et al. 1984). Locus 8 of the Wapanucket Site (19-PL-203) in Middleborough produced one of the most significant PaleoIndian Period deposits known from southeastern Massachusetts. Located on the north side of Assawompset Pond, Locus 8 of the Wapanucket Site yielded an assemblage of PaleoIndian fluted projectile points, gravers, scrapers, and channel flakes, as well as debitage of chert and rhyolite from a highly localized area (Bradley and Boudreau 2006). The site is interpreted as a temporary campsite situated atop the crest of a sand dune located 8.5 m or 28 ft above the current lake level (Robbins 1980:305–306; Robbins and Agogino 1964). Site 19-PL-348, located on a bluff overlooking the North River and its wetlands in Marshfield, also yielded a suspected late PaleoIndian Plano assemblage (MHC site files).

The Archaic Period (10,000–3000 B.P.)

The Archaic Period represented a time of increased familiarization and settlement within the southern New England woodlands. The Archaic has been subdivided into Early, Middle, and Late periods. Paleoenvironmental and archaeological evidence argues in favor of increased diversification of food resources, the generalized exploitation of faunal and floral species, and the establishment of tribal territories throughout the Archaic Period. In general, Archaic Period peoples are conceptualized as having a primarily hunting and gathering subsistence economy with a settlement pattern characterized by wandering or seasonal relocations within circumscribed territories (Dincauze 1975).

Early Archaic Period (10,000–7500 B.P.)

The Early Archaic Period coincided with the commencement of the Holocene epoch, ca. 10,000 years ago. The early Holocene was marked by warmer and drier conditions than the preceding Pleistocene epoch. Early Archaic peoples continued to generalize in their subsistence base, hunting available game and harvesting woodland and wetland vegetation and nuts (Dumont 1981; Meltzer and Smith 1986; Nicholas 1987). Identifying Early Archaic archaeological deposits in southern New England and Massachusetts has typically relied on the recovery of bifurcate-based lithic projectile points. Concentrations of Early Archaic bifurcate-based projectiles have been identified around the perimeters of ponds, marshes, and wooded wetlands and at the headwaters of major rivers in southeastern Massachusetts (Taylor 1976). Bifurcate-based projectile points from the Taunton River drainage indicates Boston basin lithic materials (e.g. Blue Hills rhyolite, Sally Rock felsite, Mattapan felsites, etc.) were commonly used in their manufacture. The proximity of Early Archaic sites to wetland locations implies that wetland resources became increasingly important during the Early Archaic Period (Nicholas 1987).

A virtually exclusive reliance on regionally and extra-regionally available lithic materials such as various rhyolites for the production of Early Archaic bifurcate-based projectiles suggests a mobile subsistence strategy for the Early Archaic bifurcate-based producers focused on the acquisition of game within the regions interior wetlands. The identification of a semi-subterranean pit house associated with a LeCroy

PAL Report No. 488 27 Chapter Four

Bifurcate complex at the Weilnau Site in Ohio (Stothers 1996) and more recently the identification of two pit houses dated to 7830 ± 130 and 8110 ± 90 at the Whortleberry Site in Dracut, Massachusetts (Dudek 2005) may imply a previously unknown degree of sedentism for the Early Archaic bifurcate producers in portions of the Northeast and Great Lakes.

Early Archaic sites and materials have been recovered from around the perimeters of ponds, marshes, and wooded wetlands at the headwaters of major rivers. Few Early Archaic archaeological sites and materials are known from the North River Drainage, though many more are known from the Taunton River Drainage of Plymouth County. Diagnostic bifurcate-based projectile points have been recovered from a significant number of large multicomponent archaeological sites along a 24-km (15-mile) stretch of the Taunton River in Middleborough and Bridgewater leading some to speculate a territorial core focused in this area during the Early to Middle Archaic Period (Dincauze and Mulholland 1977). Numerous bifurcate-based projectile points have been recovered from the Titicut (19-PL-161) and Seaver Farm (19- PL-162) sites located in close proximity to one another on either side of the banks of the Taunton River in Bridgewater (Taylor 1970, 1976), the Double P Site (19-PL-343) also in Bridgewater (MHC 1982), the Riverside 3 and Bridge Street II sites within the Riverside Park Archaeological District in Lakeville (Begley and Davin 1996; Raber et al. 1991), the Fort Hill Site in North Middleboro (Taylor 1976), as well as, at the Wapanucket (Robbins 1980). The Nessralla’s Nursery Site (19-PL-372), located on a terrace at the southern end of Monponsett Pond in Halifax, was identified from Bifurcate-based projectile points from the Nessrall’s Nursery Site (19-PL-372) in Halifax represents the earliest evidence of Native American activity at Monponsett Pond (MHC site files; Mahlstedt 1985).

Middle Archaic Period (7500–5000 B.P.)

An increased visibility of Middle Archaic sites in southern New England suggests that colonizing peoples were firmly established in the region by 7500 B.P. with resident populations continuing to generalize in their subsistence regimes. Middle Archaic sites are common around waterfalls, river rapids, major river drainages, wetlands, and coastal settings (Bunker 1992; Dincauze 1976; Doucette and Cross 1997; Maymon and Bolian 1992) with large base camps established along extensive wetland systems (Doucette and Cross 1997). Smaller logistical camps and exploitation sites supplemented the base camps. Subsistence activities reflected at these sites included the harvesting of anadromous fish, hunting and foraging, and fishing and shellfish collection. An increase in the complexity of seasonal rounds is conjectured based on the broad range of resources available throughout the period (McBride 1984).

Southern New England Middle Archaic occupations are typically identifiable by the presence of Neville, Neville-variant, Stark, and Merrimack style projectile points (Dincauze 1976; Dincauze and Mulholland 1977). Adzes, gouges, and axes suggest heavy woodworking and possibly the appearance of dugout canoes. A preference for regionally available lithic raw materials (quartzite and rhyolite) with lesser amounts of locally available materials is reflected in the site database. The correlation between regional lithic material types and Middle Archaic materials has led Dincauze (1976) to theorize that Native American band or tribal territories were established within major river drainages, and that the scheduling of subsistence activities such as the seasonal pursuit of anadromous fish species may have developed in response to territoriality (Dincauze and Mulholland 1977). The location of many of southeastern Massachusetts’ documented Middle Archaic sites demonstrates a strong focus on the region’s interior wetland environs.

Middle Archaic Neville, Neville-variant, and Stark projectile points are present in artifact collections from the Pembroke Ponds complex (Mahlstedt 1985). Documented sites and collections include sites 19- PL-375 and 19-PL-475 located near the extensive wetlands of the Great Cedar Swamp and sites 19-PL- 141, 19-PL-400, 19-PL-415, and 19-PL-452 located around Monponsett Pond. Stark-like projectile points have been recovered from 19-PL-371 situated at the confluence of the Winnetuxet and Taunton Rivers in

28 PAL Report No. 488 Native American Land Use and Settlement

South Halifax, and the Bartlett Brook Site (19-PL-413) located along a small tributary of the Winnetuxet River. The recovery of Middle Archaic tools throughout the region is consistent with small occupations of limited focus representative of short-duration task-oriented locations associated with the acquisition and limited processing of game resources supported by the larger base-camps that were settled for longer periods of time.

Late Archaic Period (5000–3000 B.P.)

Late Archaic Period archaeological sites are well represented in southeastern Massachusetts. The density of Late Archaic deposits and an associated reliance on locally available lithic materials (quartz, quartzite, and argillite) is suggestive of increased Native American residency for the period (Dincauze 1975). Seasonal and multioccupation Late Archaic campsites were associated with procurement of various resources. Shellfish exploitation, first observed during the Middle Archaic, intensified as the rate of coastal inundation decreased and estuaries, salt marshes, and tidal mud flats were established (Braun 1974; Lavin 1988). The overlapping mosaic of archaeological sites created during generations of land use attest to intensive utilization of the Northeast’s swamps and wetlands and occupation along regional waterways beginning approximately 4,200 years ago. The high density of Late Archaic sites in a wide range of habitats that includes edges of streams, bogs, and kettle hole swamps, coupled with the large number of artifacts attributed to the period, is suggestive of a large population exploiting an extremely broad spectrum of resources (Dincauze 1975; McBride 1984; Ritchie 1983).

The Late Archaic Period is defined by three cultural traditions: the Laurentian, Small Stemmed, and Susquehanna. Each tradition is associated with specific periods of time, distinct lithic technologies, and/or ceremonial or cultural practices that can be discriminated archaeologically. The Laurentian tradition is the earliest expression of the Late Archaic in the Northeast. Materials associated with Laurentian occupations include woodworking tools (hones and adzes), ground slate points and knives, ulus, simple bannerstones, and broad-bladed and side-notched Vosburg, Otter Creek, and Brewerton type projectile points (Ritchie 1980:79). Lithic materials used in Laurentian tradition tool manufacture include quartzites, volcanics, and some argillites. Laurentian tradition site distributions imply an interior settlement focus associated with a hunter-gatherer subsistence economy. A focus on the uplands led Ritchie (1980) to suggest an essentially interior riverine adaptation for Laurentian groups.

The Small Stemmed tradition continues as an accepted Late Archaic cultural manifestation, although the duration of the tradition appears to extend into the Woodland Period (Mahlstedt 1985). The Small Stemmed lithic tradition may be a regional development out of the Middle Archaic Neville/Stark/Merrimack sequence (Dincauze 1976; McBride 1984). Diagnostic elements associated with the tradition include Squibnocket Stemmed, Wading River, and a host of small or narrow stemmed projectile points (Dincauze 1975). Small, basally ground Squibnocket triangles appear to be contemporaneous with Small Stemmed occupations for southern New England (Ritchie 1969). Regional archaeological data indicates Small Stemmed producers relied on a quartz tool technology (McBride 1984). Quartz cobbles from glacial outwash, riverbeds, or coastal contexts were the most common sources of raw material for Small Stemmed chipped-stone tools.

Many sites along the North River (e.g. 19-PL-49, 19-PL-50, 19-PL-24, 19-PL-348) have produced Late Archaic cultural materials. Site 19-PL-511, located along the Indian Head River roughly one mile south of the Area 1 and Area 2 Sites is interpreted as a major quartz reduction station that yielded numerous quartz artifacts and lithic debitage. Site 19-PL-549, located on the south shore of the river produced one Squibnocket and two Small Stemmed projectile points. A Brewerton projectile point, six bifaces, a rock- lined pit feature, and argillite and quartz debitage were excavated from Late Archaic campsite 19-PL-507 located roughly one mile north of the Hanover Marketplace. 19-PL-512 in Norwell produced a Brewerton, 16 Small Stemmed, and 12 Squibnocket projectile points. Multicomponent site 19-PL-583

PAL Report No. 488 29 Chapter Four also in Norwell yielded four Squibnocket Triangles in associated with a quartz and argillite debitage assemblage. Late Archaic components are also present in the Pembroke Ponds complex from site such as 19-PL-446, 19-PL-457, and 19-PL-449.

Transitional/Terminal Archaic Period (3600–2500 B.P.)

The Transitional Archaic Period bridges the Archaic and Woodland periods and is recognized in southern New England by Susquehanna tradition cultural materials and sites. An extensive trade network, increased burial ceremonialism, and technologies markedly different from the antecedent Late Archaic traditions characterized the Transitional Archaic. Radiometric and stratigraphic information from some southern New England archaeological sites indicate the Susquehanna tradition was temporally contemporaneous with the Late Archaic Small Stemmed tradition sites (Filios 1989). The Susquehanna tradition in southern New England commenced with the Atlantic Phase (ca. 3600 B.P.) and terminated with the Orient Phase (ca. 2600 B.P.) coincident with the beginning of the Early Woodland Period (Dincauze 1972; Ritchie 1980). The peoples associated with these phases, although differing in some ways from one another, shared similar cultural commonalities (lithic technologies, cultural materials, and/or settlement and subsistence data) to place them within the collective Susquehanna archaeological tradition.

New technological developments associated with the Susquehanna tradition included the manufacture of steatite vessels and broad-bladed tool forms (Atlantic, Susquehanna Broad, Coburn, and Orient Fishtail projectile points or knives) that either developed out of the local populations or were introduced to the region by peoples migrating to New England. Steatite bowl use, technology, and trade had its beginnings approximately 3,600 years ago following the Atlantic Phase, peaked between 3400 and 2900 B.P., and fell into disuse by the end of the Orient Phase. Regionally available steatite outcrops are known from the Worcester area, middle Connecticut River valley, and northern Rhode Island. Broad and thin Susquehanna tradition bifaces were ideally suited for knives and possibly woodworking implements and are in marked contrast to the more linear, elongated, narrow, and thicker piercing Small Stemmed projectiles. Susquehanna tradition chipped-stone tools were commonly manufactured from a variety of lithic materials that included regionally available rhyolites, quartzite, and non-local cherts. A reliance on readily available lithic materials such as quartz, argillite, and some rhyolites is apparent by the final Orient Phase of the Susquehanna tradition. The manufacture and use of heavy steatite vessels by Susquehanna tradition peoples may imply a trend toward increased sedentism by resident populations. However, the predominance of non-local lithic materials in Susquehanna tradition cultural assemblages implies a relatively mobile settlement strategy.

The Transitional Archaic settlement pattern was essentially oriented toward coastal or riverine settings with a subsistence base focused on the acquisition of riverine or estuarine flora and fauna that included fish, nuts, and small- to medium-sized mammals (Pagoulatos 1988). Susquehanna tradition sites are markers of the Transitional Archaic Period and are best known from regional cremation cemetery complexes such as the Vincent, Watertown Arsenal, and Millbury III sites in Massachusetts (Dincauze 1968; Leveillee 1995) and the Bliss and Griffin sites in Connecticut (Pfeiffer 1980). In addition to mortuary sites, documented Susquehanna tradition occupation sites include moderate-sized residential camps, shorter duration and smaller field camps, and logistical location special purpose sites (Pagoulatos 1988).

A Transitional Archaic Atlantic projectile point of chert, quartz cores and bifaces, and quartz, quartzite, and argillite debitage were excavated from site 19-PL-510 located one mile south of the Hanover Marketplace. Susquehanna Broad and Atlantic-like projectile points wre also recovered from site 19-PL- 141 within the Pembroke Ponds complex.

30 PAL Report No. 488 Native American Land Use and Settlement

The Woodland Period (3000–450 B.P.)

The Woodland Period was a time of dynamic development for southern New England’s indigenous peoples and generally involved a transition from a foraging way of life toward a more sedentary existence. The Woodland Period has traditionally been interpreted as reflecting an abandonment of the Archaic subsistence pattern of hunting/gathering/fishing, replacing, or supplementing it with the adoption of horticulture and ceramic technology (Snow 1980). However, the transition from the Archaic Period into the Woodland Period does not reflect a strictly linear evolution from one stage to the next. The archaeological record supports a continued diversification of food resources, an increased reliance on shellfish and maritime resources, refinement in pottery manufacturing, the maintenance of long-distance trade and exchange networks, and eventually year-round coastal or riverine settlement with evidence for horticulture. Like the Archaic Period, the Woodland Period can be subdivided into Early, Middle, and Late periods.

Early Woodland Period (3000–1600 B.P.)

Early Woodland settlement patterns were characterized by limited use of upland areas and more intensive use of coastal and estuarine resources and locales. Nevertheless, bends and confluences of major rivers continued to support Early Woodland settlement. Coastal habitation sites and shell midden deposits from along the saltwater and estuarine margins of Maine to New York reflect the increasing dependence on shellfish and other marine resources during the Early Woodland Period. Interior site locations that contain artifacts diagnostic of the Early Woodland Period are not as numerous as the preceding periods. This may be related to the problem of determining what constitutes diagnostic artifact assemblages for the period.

Early Woodland archaeological deposits have traditionally been diagnosed through the presence of Meadowood, Lagoon, and Rossville type projectile points, as well as grit-tempered, cord-marked Vinette I ceramic styles in the absence of radiocarbon assays. Early Woodland Period occupations, however, are generally underrepresented in the regional archaeological record. This has led to speculation that there was a population decline for the period (Dincauze 1974; Lavin 1988). Conversely, others argue that the apparent underrepresentation of Early Woodland sites may stem from the difficulty in determining what constitutes diagnostic artifact assemblages for the period (Juli and McBride 1984). The positive association of some Small Stemmed projectile points with Early Woodland radiocarbon dates indicates that some Early Woodland assemblages are being misidentified as older Late Archaic materials.

Patterns of Early Woodland settlement and resource collection in the North River drainage are not well documented and are poorly understood as most of the sites in the region occur in coastal or estuarine zones with lesser numbers on major rivers and lakes. Early Woodland Rossville projectile points from site 19-PL-348 were observed in the Seamans artifact collection. Both the Halifax Springs and Plymouth Street sites within the Pembroke Ponds complex contained Meadowood and Rossville-like projectile points.

Middle Woodland Period (1600–1000 B.P.)

Middle Woodland site distributions suggest a continued focus on coastal or riverine ecosystems. Interior Middle Woodland sites particularly targeted major river bends and confluences. Small hunting camps were contrasted with larger residential habitations, and small “nodal” sites specialized in the circulation of cultural materials through a formalized trade network may have been part of the regional Middle Woodland settlement system (Hecker 1995).

Traditionally the introduction, adoption, and subsequent intensification of horticulture for the production of food in the Northeast has been perceived as substantially altering previously established settlement and

PAL Report No. 488 31 Chapter Four subsistence patterns of Archaic Period hunters and gatherers (Snow 1980). Consequently, horticulture has been assumed to have had important impacts on the later Native American subsistence and settlement base for southern New England, as it was widely believed that it initially supplemented and later supplanted a pre-existing focus on hunting and gathering subsistence strategies sometime during the Middle Woodland Period. However, the earliest evidence of domesticated agricultural products in the region dates to around A.D. 1000, coincident with the end of the period suggesting a “late” reliance on horticulture (Bendremer and Dewar 1993).

Artifacts diagnostic of the period include Jack’s Reef Pentagonal and Corner-Notched and Fox Creek type projectile points and rocker and dentate-stamped ceramics. Middle Woodland occupations in southeastern New England are commonly marked by a high occurrence of non-local chert, jasper, and various amounts of hornfels from the Blue Hills area south of Boston (Luedtke 1987; Ritchie and Gould 1985). The use of Boston Basin lithics and exotic cherts and jaspers is in contrast to the almost exclusive use of quartz and argillite Small Stemmed materials and Terminal Archaic Orient Phase materials dating to the Early Woodland Period. The relative frequency of “exotic” raw materials from Middle Woodland sites implies the existence of long-distance exchange networks extending from Labrador to Pennsylvania and beyond (Dragoo 1976; Fitting 1978; Snow 1980).

A number of possible Middle Woodland Period occupations are suggested by artifacts in the Seamans Collection. For example, the Winnetuxet/Taunton Site contained three Jack’s Reef Corner-Notched projectile points (Mahlstedt 1985). Middle Woodland Fox Creek projectile points were also unearthed at the Oak Island Site (19-PL-50) on the North River.

Late Woodland Period (1000–450 B.P.)

The distribution of Late Woodland Period archaeological deposits appears to be a continuation of the Middle Woodland pattern with Late Woodland archaeological deposits common within coastal environments, around interior freshwater ponds and wetlands, and adjacent to large tributary streams and rivers. Late Woodland settlement types included specialized exploitation sites (shell middens, hunting and processing camps, lithic workshops, etc.), small domestic sites, and larger hamlets or villages. By the Late Woodland Period maize horticulture continued to gain in importance. With intensive maize horticulture came the need, refinement, and advances in storage technology to ensure that ample maize would be available throughout the winter months and that a sufficient supply of seed crop would be available for the next season. With an increased reliance on stationary storage facilities, people became tethered to specific site areas or localized regions, which resulted in decreased mobility, whereby residential mobility was abandoned in favor of logistical mobility. Logistical mobility involved the mobilization of few individuals, as opposed to entire family units or perhaps bands, to set out for exploitative purposes. Coastal sites were contrasted with interior hunting sites where individuals exploited and hunted terrestrial animal species such as deer and gathered predictable botanical resources such as nuts and berries.

Reduction in communal mobility influenced the development of Late Woodland territories and social structures. Social complexity, the formation of political alliances, and the establishment of tribal territories appear to have developed during the period (Mulholland 1988). Many researchers believe “intensive” maize horticulture must have been inextricably linked with population growth and Native American sedentary settlement reasoning that only such a productive subsistence economy could reliably support such large communal populations. McBride and Dewar (1987) have countered arguing that large settlements could have developed independently of horticulture, especially in ecologically rich settings such as coastal environments and estuaries, where there is a rich and reliable maritime or estuarine (fish and shellfish) base.

The Late Woodland Period is associated with an improvement in ceramic technology and production.

32 PAL Report No. 488 Native American Land Use and Settlement

Late Woodland artifacts represented in the regional archaeological record include triangular Madison and Levanna type projectile points and cord-wrapped, stick-impressed, and incised ceramics. Diagnostic Levanna projectile points were most often manufactured out of quartz, argillite, as well as rhyolites derived from the Lynn Volcanic Suite and Blue Hills Area of northeastern Massachusetts and the Boston Basin, respectively, or coastal cobbles.

Site 19-PL-509, located on a high, flat ridge between Iron Mine Brook and its associated wetlands less than one mile south of the Area 1 Site produced numerous artifacts including a felsite Levanna projectile point and aboriginal ceramic sherds.

Contact Period (450 - 300 B.P.)

Native American settlement and subsistence patterns established during the Late Woodland were disrupted beginning in the early sixteenth century with initial sporadic and later sustained contact with European immigrants and settlers. Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Native American settlements were focused within traditional coastal tribal territories that developed prior to and during the Late Woodland Period. Aspects of the Native culture patterns remained unchanged, some intensified, while others were adapted from European practices as a result of contact. Traditional Native American material assemblages were supplemented by European items such as copper, brass, and iron pots, metal and knives, bottles, jugs, cloth, etc. The subsistence economy of the resident Native Americans eventually changed as a result of the increasing reliance on and partial adaptations to, the European commodity-based economic system (Turnbaugh 1993a, 1993b). Local Natives began to sell off their land or the rights to the resources supported by them as they became increasingly reliant upon European items and were involuntarily coerced into a “life of enforced dependency” (Bourne 1990:135).

When European explorers and settlers first arrived on the shores of southeastern Massachusetts, in the vicinity of the Hanover Marketplace was the traditional tribal territory of the Massachusett Indian peoples. The Massachusett occupied the lands around Massachusetts Bay. Their neighbors the Pokanoket (Wampanoag) occupied the lands extending westward from the eastern shore of Narragansett Bay all along the coast to include Cape Cod and the Islands. Early European visitors to southeastern Massachusetts included Bartholomew Gosnold who attempted a settlement at Cuttyhunk in 1602, Martin Pring who visited Truro in 1603, George Waymouth’s visit to Nantucket in 1605, and Samuel de Champlain’s (1615) followed by Captain John Smith’s (1614) explorations along the coastline. Permanent settlement was not established until the Pilgrims settled Plymouth in 1620, however. Contagious diseases, many of which the resident Algonquian Indians had not had sufficient time to build up a natural immunity to, followed the recently arrived European immigrants to the Americas. The result was a series of seventeenth-century epidemics that virtually decimated southern New England’s indigenous population depopulating large portions of eastern Massachusetts opening the area up for settlement by Europeans.

Early- to mid-seventeenth century Native American settlement was focused within major river drainages along important waterways. The MHC (1982:33) has denoted five major Native American core areas of Contact Period settlement in southeastern Massachusetts. Identified cores included the Plymouth Bay, North River, Assawopmset, Pembroke Ponds, and Titicut cores (Figure 4-1). The Pembroke Ponds core was occupied by the Massachusett with a major native settlement at Mattakeeset. The coastal core, which extended from the North River south to Plymouth Bay, included a major settlement at Patuxet, the central location of a probable cultural and linguistic sub-group of the Wampanoag (MHC 1982). The Neponset Core, located to the north and west of Hanover, had settlement focused around large headwater ponds and smaller ponds in Canton, Sharon, and Walpole.

PAL Report No. 488 33 Chapter Four

Figure 4-1. The Hanover Marketplace in relation to core areas of seventeenth-century Native American settlement within southeastern Massachusetts (source: MHC 1982).

34 PAL Report No. 488

CHAPTER FIVE

METHODOLOG

The goal of archaeological investigations at the Hanover Marketplace was to evaluate the eligibility of the Area 1 and Area 2 sites for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and mitigate the effects construction impacts would have on the Area 1 Site through archaeological data recovery.

Fieldwork Data Collection Techniques

Archaeological Site Examination

Evaluation of National Register significance for the Area 1 and Area 2 sites was aided by determining the horizontal and vertical boundaries of the archaeological deposits, assessing each of the site’s archaeological content, and determining their ability to provide new archaeological data capable of adding to our knowledge of pre-contact Native American land use in southeastern Massachusetts.

Area 1 Site

Intensive archaeological survey of the Area 1 Site by the OPA involved the excavation of 50-x-50 cm test pits at a 10 m interval along four parallel transects that ran in a northwest/southeast direction (see Figure 1-4). Determination of the spatial limits of Area 1 Site cultural materials at the site examination level was accomplished by establishing a 5 m coordinate grid of test pits across the entire knoll atop of which the site was located (see Figure 3-1). OPA Test Pit 7, located at the southeastern end of the knoll roughly 14 m west of Columbia Road, was assigned PAL grid coordinates N0E0. A total of 103, 50-x-50 cm test pits was excavated during the site examination of the Area 1 Site. Test pits were excavated 75 m north of N0E0 site datum, 50 m south of the datum, and 35 m west of the datum to the edge of a steep slope and associated borrow pit. Following test pit excavation, six, 1-x-1 m excavation units (EUs) was excavated in areas of relatively high artifact densities to collect information on the site’s archaeological content and its physical integrity. Pre-contact Native American cultural materials and/or cultural materials were recovered from all six of the excavation units.

Archaeological test units were excavated by shovel and trowel in arbitrary 10 cm levels into sterile subsoils. Excavated soils were hand-sieved through ¼-inch hardware cloth. Cultural material remaining in the screen was bagged by unit, level, feature, and/or activity loci and labeled with appropriate provenience information. Notes were recorded on standardized test pit and excavation unit forms. Soil samples for flotation were collected from each feature. Black and white photographs and color slides were taken of the general site areas and of the cultural features.

The excavation of archaeological test pits during the site examination resulted in the recognition of two spatially discrete loci of pre-contact Native American cultural activity: the Northeast Quadrant Concentration and the S5W10 Concentration. The Northeast Quadrant Concentration is distributed about a 650 m2 area at the crest of the knoll that borders Route 53 within the northeastern site area. The Northeast Quadrant Concentration extends from the N10 grid line northward to the N70 grid line and from the edge of the road embankment westward to the W10 grid line (see Figure 2-1). This locus of Native American activity represents an area of domestic space that dated to the Late/Transitional Archaic

PAL Report No. 488 35 Chapter Five

Period. Activities conducted at the Northeast Quadrant Concentration included stone tool manufacture and subsistence-related activities (resource acquisition and processing).

The S5W10 Concentration was located approximately 20 m southwest of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration. This locus of Native American activity encompasses an approximate 150 m2 area located between the N0 and S10 and E0 and W15 grid lines (see Figure 2-1). A steeply gouged borrow area was located to the immediate southeast of this locus. The S5W10 Concentration appears to represent a short- term, task-specific activity area where quartz tools were manufactured.

Area 2 Site

Intensive archaeological survey of the Area 2 Site involved the excavation of test pits along three parallel and one perpendicular testing transects (see Figure 1-5). Close interval “bracket” test pits 18-1, 19-1, 19- 2, and 19-3 provided additional archaeological sampling in the vicinity of OPA test pits 18, 19, and 28, which yielded low densities of pre-contact Native American argillite and quartz chipping debris (Missio and Jones 1992). The initial task of the archaeological site examination of the Area 2 Site was to define the limits of the archaeological deposits. Thirty-two, 50-x-50 cm test pits organized within a 5 m coordinate grid system were excavated atop a small knoll top peripheral to intensive level test pits (see Figure 2-2). The Area 2 N0E0 site examination reference datum was established at the northwest side of the knoll top at OPA test pit Number 18.

Following the excavation of site examination test pits, two, 1-x-1 m EUs were excavated in areas of comparatively high artifact densities. Low-densities of Native American chipping debris were recovered from each of the EUs. Only two of a proposed three to five EUs were excavated in the Area 2 Site due to the generally low density of pre-contact Native American cultural materials from the site area. The Area 2 Site was determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, and no additional archaeological investigations were recommended beyond the site examination level.

Archaeological Data Recovery Program - Area 1 Site

The primary objective of the archaeological data recovery at the Hanover Marketplace Area 1 Site was to recover an adequate sample of archaeological data from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration and S5W10 Concentration loci to assess the site’s type, content, and structure and to permit inter- and intra- site comparisons. PAL Inc. proposed accomplishing this objective by excavating a total of 70 m2 of the Area 1 Site focusing on the S5W10 and Northeast Quadrant concentration areas. Data recovery archaeological excavation combined with previous intensive and site examination testing resulted in the total investigation of 84.25 m2 of the Area 1 Sites.

EUs of variable sizes were judgmentally located within each of the concentration areas during the archaeological data recovery program. Ten, 2-x-2 m EUs (EUs 6, 7, 8, 9,10, 12, 14, 19, 20, and 23), seven, 1-x-2 m units (EUs 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 21), and one 1-x-1 m EU 22 were excavated within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration for a total of 55 m2. Three, 2-x-2 m EUs (EUs 1, 2, and 4), 1-x-2 m EU 3, and 1-x-1 m EU 5 were excavated within the S5W10 Concentration area for a total of 15 m2. All archaeological test units were mapped relative to the N0E0 site datum established during the preceding site examination survey. The location of the site datum was also recorded relative to USC & GS & State Survey Disk 53 BG benchmark located on the west side of Route 53.

Area 1 Site data recovery EUs were mapped onto a master site plan using an optical surveyor’s transit. Surface elevations for each of the unit’s specific sub-datum points were also recorded at this time. The southwest corner or the most elevated corner of an EU was selected for use as an EU sub-datum. Vertical

36 PAL Report No. 488 Methodology depth of excavation and artifact location within an EU were all recorded relative to a unit’s unique sub- datum.

Data recovery EUs were excavated in arbitrary 5 cm levels to sterile subsoil. Excavated soils were screened through ¼-inch hardware cloth. Artifacts greater than ¼- inch in size were collected and labeled with appropriate provenience information (e.g. unit, level, soil stratum or feature, survey quadrant, etc.). Scaled plan and profile drawings were made on measured paper for all archaeological features and artifact concentrations observed during excavation. Field notes were recorded on standardized EU and feature forms. Black and white photographs and color slides were taken of the site, fieldwork, archaeological test units, features, and activity areas.

Charcoal from cultural features and natural subsoils were also collected from the Area 1 Site. Four charcoal samples were submitted to Beta Analytic radiocarbon facility in Florida for radiocarbon dating. Soils collected from cultural features, as well as from two off-site control locations and natural A and B soil contexts within the site were subjected to soil flotation. Pollen samples were similarly collected from cultural features and from off-site control areas during the data recovery program.

Laboratory Processing and Specialized Analyses

Processing

Cultural materials recovered from Area 1 and Area 2 sites, Hanover Marketplace during the site examination and data recovery investigations were returned to PAL, Inc.’s facility in Pawtucket, Rhode Island for laboratory processing. Cultural materials were organized by site and provenience, and recorded and logged in on a daily basis. Cultural materials were sorted by type and either dry-brushed or cleaned with tap water depending on the material or artifact type and condition.

Cataloguing

Cultural materials were sorted by type and catalogued into a hierarchically based custom program designed using ALPHA4 database software. Materials which display similar attributes such as material, color, size, functional, and typological classes were grouped and catalogued by lots. Materials lots were stored in 2 ml thick polyethylene zip lock bags with acid free tags containing all provenience information.

Specialized Analysis of Cultural Materials

Lithic Analysis

Various morphological attributes of chipped-, ground-, or rough-stone tools were examined and collected as an element of the archaeological surveys. Recorded lithic attributes include lengths, widths, thickness, shoulder angles, manufacturing techniques, and wear patterns of all tools and artifacts. Artifact typologies developed for the region (Fogelman 1992; Fowler and Hoffman 1991; MHC 1984; Ritchie 1971) were also consulted to classify specific stone artifacts such as projectile points recovered from the site. Many of these tools were considered temporally “diagnostic” due to their consistent and repeated regional association with specific radiocarbon ages.

Culturally modified lithic materials, such as stone tools and chipping debris, were identified in terms of material, size (0–1 cm, 1–3 cm, 3–5 cm, etc.), and color. A lithic-type collection, maintained at PAL and containing materials from various source areas in New England and nearby regions such as New York and Pennsylvania, was utilized in the identification of all lithic materials. Chipping debris was classified as either flakes or shatter. Pieces of debitage showing evidence of a striking platform, bulbs of percussion,

PAL Report No. 488 37 Chapter Five

or identifiable dorsal or ventral surfaces were called flakes. Debitage without these attributes, and exhibiting angular or blocky forms, were classified as shatter. Lithic debris was examined for edges that had been modified by use wear or intentional retouch.

Lithic analysis aided in identifying activity areas, discerning different occupations, and reconstructing the patterns of lithic resource procurement or the movement of such materials across the landscape. These data were helpful with answering some of the data recovery research questions outlined in Chapter 2.

X-Ray Fluorescence and Petrographic Studies

Barbara Calogero (1991) has questioned the skill of some southern New England archaeologists to identify and source lithic materials based on morphological criteria alone. The ability to accurately identify some lithic materials recovered during PAL, Inc.’s archaeological investigations at the Hanover Marketplace was supplemented through the use of petrological and geochemical techniques. Petrographic thin sections and X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyses were employed to determine probable geological formations or likely lithic source areas from where various materials recovered from the site may have originated. Petographic thin sectioning involved cutting a thin slice of a rock, which was then ground optically flat for view under a polarizing petrographic microscope.

XRF stimulates emission of X-rays by irradiating a sample with energies. Electrons orbiting the nuclei of a sample’s atoms can be ejected from their orbits if they absorb sufficiently strong X-ray photons during energy bombardment. During this process, higher energy level orbiting electrons drop to fill lower level electron orbits vacated by the electrons ejected from the atom during irradiation. X-ray photons are emitted from the atoms at this time. The energy of any emitted X-ray photons is equal to the difference in energy levels between the two orbits of the transitioning electrons, and the wavelength of these photons, which can be measured with detection devices, is unique for each element. Consequently, one can determine the elemental constituents of a sample by determining the wavelength of the emitted X-ray photons. Furthermore, the number of X-rays emitted from a sample per a given unit of time correlates with the concentration of that element in any given sample. A pilot XRF study using various southern New England volcanic materials (e.g. felsites, rhyolites, and hornfels) suggests distinctive geochemical “signatures” may be unique to certain lithic source areas in the Boston Basin of southeastern Massachusetts (Ritchie and Hermes 1990, 1992; Hermes and Ritchie 1997a, 1997b). A quantifiable assessment of a lithic source area can be useful to studying pre-contact Native American lithic procurement patterns and exchange networks.

Petrologic thin sections and geochemical analyses of selected debitage and artifacts was initiated by PAL senior archaeologist Duncan Ritchie and conducted by O. Don Hermes of the Department of Geology, University of Rhode Island. Thirteen lithic specimens were submitted to Don Hermes for petrologic and/or geochemical analyses. Artifacts included lithic chipping debris and temporally diagnostic Early Archaic and Middle Archaic projectile points. Selected artifacts were photographed and detailed information on artifact type, color, size, weight, and presumed source area were recorded prior to submission. Results of the petrographic studies are provided in Appendix G of this report.

Flotation Analysis

Selected soil samples obtained from cultural features and activity areas at the Area 1 and Area 2 sites were subjected to flotation analysis. Soils were collected in the field using a clean masonry trowel and were placed in clean 4 millimeter thick polyethylene bags. Provenience information was recorded on a soil sample tag and placed within a smaller polyethylene bag along with the sample to maintain provenience information. Flotation of soil samples was accomplished using the Model-A Flote-Tech Machine, which utilizes a multi-modal flotation technique. The system circulates water in a closed loop

38 PAL Report No. 488 Methodology between a water reservoir and a flotation tank. Provision is made for removing the residue from the system without loss of water from the loop. A method of incorporating aeration into the water makes the flotation process more efficient than conventional techniques. Using the system’s baffle, objects having a specific gravity slightly greater than water are removed easily. Two mesh sizes are used in the system, a coarse fraction screen measuring 1.0 mm in size and a fine fraction screen measuring 0.33 mm in size.

Following this process the recovered material was subsequently divided into heavy and light fractions. The fractions are then scanned using both an illuminated desk magnifier fitted with a 3-diopter lens (1.75x magnification) and a stereomicroscope with magnification ranges of 7x to 40x. Recovered cultural materials and organic remains (e.g., carbonized seeds and nuts, bone, fish scales, charcoal, chipping debris, and shell) were recorded, separated into plastic vials, and labeled. The scanned samples are boxed, labeled, and curated along with the project’s cultural assemblage.

Faunal and Floral Analysis

PAL laboratory staff analyzed all faunal and floral materials recovered during field excavation and/or through the processing of flotation samples. Faunal remains and botanical specimens were identified using a combination of reference materials and PAL’s comparative collections.

Faunal remains from the Hanover Marketplace were cleaned, counted, and weighed per level by EU. Bone was first separated into categories of calcined (burned) and non-calcined. Fragments that contained recognizable physical attributes were identified to species. Characteristics of Feature 13 (i.e. large size and depth, oval shape, presence of bone), exposed in data recovery EU 19 and site examination EU 3 in the Northeast Quadrant Concentration within the Area 1 Site, suggested a potential for this feature to be a Native American burial. PAL, Inc. retained outside consultants to examine the recovered bone assemblage to confirm or refute the burial hypothesis. Calcined bone fragments recovered from Feature 13 were examined by physical anthropologist Dr. Michael Gibbons of the Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts - Boston and Connecticut State Archaeologist Dr. Nicholas Bellantoni. Both specialists agreed that the few identifiable pieces within the calcined bone assemblage most likely were those of a small mammal such as a rodent and not human.

Seed and nut specimens recovered from cultural features during the flotation procedures were examined under magnifications ranging from 10x to 200x, using a binocular dissecting microscope, to permit species identification. Fragments of charred wood were broken transversely and tangentially with fingers to obtain a cleaner surface to allow observation of patterns of pores and ray distributions necessary to determine taxonomic designation. Floral data is included as Appendix F of this report.

Radiocarbon Dating

Seven charcoal samples (three site examination and four data recovery) from five distinct feature/test unit contexts were submitted to Beta Analytic Inc. Radiocarbon Laboratory in Florida for radiocarbon dating (see Appendix E). Submitted specimens included charcoal from Feature 1, Feature 2, Feature 8, and Feature 13 and charcoal recovered from site examination test pit N40W5. Hanover Marketplace radiocarbon dates are provided in Chapter 6.

Radiocarbon dating provides an interpretative tool for understanding pre-contact Native American sites. Charcoal and other carbon bearing materials (bone and shell), which are often preserved on archaeological sites, can be subjected to radiocarbon dating to obtain approximations of when these remains died, which presumably coincides with the period of use and when a site was inhabited. All living organisms absorb atmospheric carbon isotopes 12C and 13C, as well as the radioactive carbon isotope 14C through the process of respiration. Any 14C present in a host organism is no longer exchanged

PAL Report No. 488 39 Chapter Five

with the biosphere following an organism’s death. Radioactive 14C trapped within once-living animal or floral tissue begins to decay at a steady rate until it reaches a non-radioactive stable state. Radiocarbon dating is accomplished by comparing the amount of radioactive carbon (14C) remaining within an organic tissue sample with the known rate of radioactive decay for 14C and a calibration curve that documents the changing proportions of atmospheric 12C, 13C, and 14C through time. In this way, an approximate age of death, or more precisely a range of dates, are derived that record the time elapsed since an organism’s death. Consequently, true radiocarbon “ages” do not represent single absolute dates, but rather a range of dates within which there is a reasonable degree of certainty that the actual date falls. Radiocarbon ages are expressed as radiocarbon years before present (B.P.) at the 95.4 percent confidence level. “Present” is defined as 1950 A.D.

Radiocarbon years are abstract archaeological constructs that do not correlate with calendar dates at a one to one ratio. Therefore, radiocarbon dates must be adjusted using available calibration curves to read them as calendar ages. Translation of radiocarbon dates into calendrical dates was accomplished by the OxCal (version 3.10) calibration program. All radiocarbon age ranges presented in this report are expressed at the 95.4 percent confidence level.

Depositional Analysis

Discriminating distinct occupations and identifying specific activity areas at the Area 1 and Area 2 sites was made possible by examining the spatial patterning of cultural materials (density, diversity, and horizontal and vertical distribution) and features. This goal was further assisted through the production of density contour maps using a combination of PAL, Inc.’s artifact catalog and the Surfer software program. A depositional analysis permitted an assessment of the site’s history of occupation and use.

Feature Analysis

Feature analysis examined the spatial distribution (horizontal and vertical) and physical attributes of Native American features contained within the Area 1 Site. An attribute format including size, surficial morphology, shape in profile, fill types (colors and textures), construction mode, contents, and other observable variables was used to determine the temporal/cultural affiliations, the probable function, and depositional history of all features. Feature analysis also drew upon radiocarbon dating and the identification of floral and faunal remains, which assisted in determining patterns of resource use and aided in reconstructing the seasonality of occupation during the different time periods. The results of the feature analysis provided some answers to questions about on-site activities, size of groups, length of stay, intensity of occupation, and the role of the activity areas within the larger site area and within the larger settlement systems.

Curation

Following laboratory processing and cataloging activities, all recovered cultural materials were placed in acid-free Hollinger boxes with box content lists and labels printed on acid-free paper. These boxes are stored at PAL, Inc. in accordance with state and federal curation guidelines until such time as a permanent state repository is designated.

Public Education Component

A key element of any archaeological data recovery program is public outreach. Disseminating information to the public began during the fieldwork element of the project. PAL, Inc. staff gave teachers and three science classes from the St. Coletta School, located on Columbia Road adjacent to the Area 1 Site, site tours and discussed the pre-contact Native American archaeological record of the Area 1 Site

40 PAL Report No. 488 Methodology and the North River area. Field crews also provided practical demonstrations of techniques of archaeological excavation and discussed the archaeological processes.

Following the fieldwork, a narrated slide show and lecture entitled “Archaeological Excavations at the Area 1 Site (19-PL-749), in Hanover, Massachusetts” was presented to the Cohannet and North River chapters of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society by the Project Archaeologist. A paper entitled “Archaeological Investigations at the Area 1 Site (19-PL-749), Hanover Marketplace Project Area, Hanover, Massachusetts” was also presented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the Eastern States Archaeological Federation in Albany, New York (Begley 1994).

PAL Report No. 488 41

CHAPTER SIX

RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

PAL contracted with the Carpionato Corporation to conduct archaeological site examination and data recovery investigations within the Hanover Marketplace in accordance with relevant state laws. The results of the field investigations for both of these surveys are summarized in Chapter 6 of this report.

Results of the Archaeological Site Examination

Area 1 Site

Site examination subsurface archaeological testing was designed to define the horizontal and vertical limits of the Area 1 Site, assess the site’s internal structure and content, and to identify the age(s) or cultural affiliation(s) of the site. A total of 103, 50-x-50 cm test pits was excavated within the Area 1 Site during the archaeological site examination (see Figure 2-1). Northern and western site boundaries were defined by the presence of natural steep slopes down to the adjacent wetland. No sterile test pits were excavated in these areas, although artifact densities were extremely low typically consisting of a single piece of debitage from test pits excavated along the sloping embankment below the 84-foot contour line. It is unlikely that materials recovered from the sloping embankment were deposited at these areas by human agents. A more parsimonious reason that explains why cultural materials were recovered from the site’s sloping embankment is that these items migrated down slope from the high density activity area situated upslope due to a number of natural processes such as erosion, soil creep, cryoturbation, or bioturbation. The Area 1 Site’s southern limits were defined by 14 sterile test pits and low-density Native American cultural materials recovered from deep plow zone stratigraphic contexts within few test pits in the southern site area. An uneven ground surface with evidence for earth piles, depressions, and evidence for olive brown fill that contained asphalt in three test pits excavated in the area indicated the southern limits of the Area 1 Site had been disturbed.

Archaeological grid testing established that the Area 1 Site was contained within an approximate 2,750 m2 area. The greatest concentrations of pre-contact Native American cultural materials was recovered from the northeastern limits of the testing area (Northeast Quadrant Concentration) between the N15 and N65 gridlines from the Route 53 roadway cut westward to the W05 gridline. Moderate to low densities of pre-contact Native American materials continued south and west to the steep drop to the adjacent vegetated wetland. Following identification of the site’s boundaries, six, 1-x-1 meter EUs were excavated within the identified Northeast Quadrant Concentration. Native American cultural materials were recovered from all six of the EUs. The S5W10 Concentration area was located roughly 20 m southwest of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area along the S10, S5 and N0 grid lines (see Figure 2-1). This artifact concentration measured roughly 150 m2, and was bordered to the west and south by a steeply gouged borrow area. Low densities of felsite, quartzite, jasper, and quartz chipping debris and few cultural materials including two bifaces of Blue Hills rhyolite and felsites, one Hingham Red Felsite core/hammerstone, a quartz core, and calcined bone fragments were recovered from the S5W10 Concentration area.

A total of 3,558 prehistoric materials was recovered from the Area 1 Site during the archaeological site examination (Table 6-1). The inventory of lithic tools from the Area 1 Site included Small Stemmed

42 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Table 6-1. Pre-contact Native American Cultural Material by Depth,Site, Area 1 Hanover Marketplace, SiteExamination.

PAL Report No. 488 43 Chapter Six projectile points, untyped projectile point fragments, drills, scrapers, bifaces, quartz cores, one hammerstone or lithic core adaptively reused as a hammerstone, a weight/net sinker, and a whetstone possibly of argillite. Lithic debitage (flakes and shatter) recovered from the site during the site examination included argillite (N=164), various felsites and rhyolites (N=1,582), hornfels (N=5), jasper (N=4), quartz (N=1,485), quartzite (N=6) and unidentified lithic materials (N=20). Pre-contact Native American cultural materials were recovered between 0 and 100 cm below the ground surface (cmbs) (see Table 6-1). The majority of the Area 1 Site’s cultural materials were recovered from the A/B soil horizon interface between 20 and 30 cmbs. In addition to the large lithic assemblage, fewer nineteenth and twentieth century cultural materials were recovered between 0 and 20 cmbs from plowed stratigraphic contexts at the Area 1 Site (see Appendix B).

Test Pits

As discussed in the Chapter 5, hand excavation of test pits resulted in the identification of two, spatially discrete Native American activity areas within the Area 1 Site. The S5W10 Concentration area was defined on the basis of moderate (50 to 100 pieces of chipping debris per m2) lithic densities. The Northeast Quadrant high density concentration area generally yielded more than 100 pieces of chipping debris per m2 with areas within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration yielding over 260 pieces of debitage per m2 of excavated site area. In all, 3,125 cultural items or 88 percent of the Area 1 Site’s assemblage was recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area.

Two cultural features were encountered in the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site as a result of the site examination survey. Cultural features were initially exposed in grid test pits and were further evaluated with 1-x-1 m excavation units. Feature 1 was first exposed at a depth of 18 cmbs in test pit N45E0 (Figure 6-1). The feature appeared as a dark yellowish brown (10 YR 3/6) silt and sand soil discoloration measuring some 20-x-34 cm that contrasted with the surrounding yellowish brown (10 YR 5/4) A2 soil horizon matrix. Continued excavation of test pit N45 E0 demonstrated that Feature 1 appeared to be a shallow (10 cm thick) pit-like anomaly that contained charcoal flecks and lithic chipping debris (see Figure 6-1). Lithic artifacts recovered from the feature between 10 and 30 cmbs included one quartz biface fragment, 48 felsite flakes, 16 quartz flakes, six Blue Hills rhyolite flakes, three Sally Rock felsites flakes, two flakes of an unidentified volcanic material, and single flakes of argillite, hornfels, and Saugus jasper. Fifty-five additional Native American artifacts were also recovered from outside of feature contexts within test pit N45E0. These materials included an ovoid quartz scraper, a whetstone possibly of argillite, a felsite biface fragment, and lithic debitage.

Area 1 Site Feature 2 was originally uncovered in the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area within test pit N55E0 (Figure 6-2). Archaeological excavation resulted in the exposure of several large, relatively flat, conglomerate (“pudding stone”) stones across the floor of the entire test pit between 20 and 30 cmbs. The presence of these large flat stones and their apparent circular formation was curious as very few stones of these sizes had been observed elsewhere within the Hanover Marketplace project area. Few pieces of chipping debris and one dark gray felsite biface fragment were recovered from test pit N55E0 between 0 and 30 cmbs. An incised pre-contact Native American clay vessel rim sherd was also recovered in apparent association with the stone arrangement. Additionally, charcoal fragments were observed between 30 and 40 cmbs both within and below the stone feature surface. Continued excavation of test pit N55E0 was temporarily suspended at 40 cmbs so that it might be further examined through the excavation of an adjacent EU.

Excavation Units (EUs)

EU 1 was excavated contiguous to the west side of test pit N45E0 within which Feature 1 was first exposed. No evidence of Feature 1 was present in the test unit, however, although few charcoal flecks

44 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-1. Plan and profile of Area 1 Site Feature 1 in test pit N45E0.

PAL Report No. 488 45 Chapter Six

Figure 6-2. Plan and profile of Area 1 Site Feature 2 in test pit N55E0.

46 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

were recovered from natural soil strata between 10 and 20 cmbs. Over 700 pieces of lithic chipping debris of a variety of materials (i.e. felsite, quartz, rhyolite, argillite, jasper, Saugus jasper, Sally Rock felsites, and an unidentified volcanic) were recovered from EU 1. Pre-contact Native American cultural materials within EU 1 were most densely concentrated within the A2 Horizon between 20 to 30 cmbs. This coincides with the high density layer and level of Feature 1 within adjacent test pit N45E0. Cultural materials recovered from this level included chipping debris, biface fragments of quartz, felsite, and Sally Rock felsites, a Native American clay pot sherd, one aboriginal pottery vessel sherd, three pieces of fire- cracked or fire-affected rock, and two pieces of calcined mammal bone (see Appendix B). The presence, distribution, and densities of chipping debris and domestic debris such as fire-cracked rock, pottery, charcoal flecks, and faunal remains suggested an “occupation” or “living surface” was present in the area. Recovered material types suggest activities such as food processing and stone tool manufacturing occurred in this area. This position is further supported by the analysis of a soil recovered from the area between 40 and 50 cmbs. Archaeological materials including minute calcined bone fragments and 58 microflakes of quartz and felsites were recovered from the soil sample.

Charcoal recovered in association chipping debris, fire affected rocks, and a calcined bone fragment from test pit N40W5 located approximately five meters southwest of Feature 1 produced a radiocarbon age of 3540±80 B.P. (Beta-55006). Calibration of this date using the OxCal (version 3.10) radiocarbon calibration program suggests this charcoal and perhaps the Native American occupation that resulted in the creation of Feature 1 dated to Late Archaic Period between 4090 and 3630 B.P. (2140 to 1680 B.C.) (Table 6-2).

Table 6-2. Radiocarbon Results from Selected Features Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace.

Beta Unit/ Material Measured age 2 sigma calibration* 2 sigma calibration* Sample No. Feature (B.P.) (BC/AD) (B.P.) 55004 Feature 2 Charcoal 3290±80 1760 to 1410 B.C. 3710 to 3360 55006 TP N40W5 Charcoal 3540±80 2140 to 1680 B.C. 4090 to 3630 * C14 dates calibrated using the OxCal (version 3.10) radiocarbon calibration program

EU 3 was placed along the east side of test pit N55E0 to further investigate Feature 2 first exposed in the test pit (see Figure 6-2). Cultural materials recovered from EU 3 included felsites, rhyolite, Saugus Jasper, quartz, and argillite chipping debris, a quartz Squibnocket Stemmed projectile point, an untyped felsite projectile point, and a burnt nut shell possibly of hickory. Twenty-five pieces of argillite, Blue Hills rhyolite, felsite, and quartz chipping debris were recovered from A2 soil contexts between 10 and 20 cmbs in EU 3. Thirteen additional pieces of quartz and felsite chipping debris, nine fire-cracked rocks, and charcoal were recovered from the EU between 20 and 30 cmbs.

Feature 2, initially observed in test pit N55E0, was exposed at a depth of 13 cmbs within the southwestern corner of EU 3. Feature 2 presented itself at the outset as an “oxidized” or reddened soil stain that measured 50 cm in diameter. A dark gray felsite drill fragment was recovered from reddened feature contexts at a depth of 18 cmbs. An additional 57 pieces of quartz, felsite, Sally Rock felsite, and Saugus jasper chipping debris were recovered from feature soils between 20 and 30 cmbs. Feature 2 persisted beneath its upper “oxidized” portion as a fire-cracked/burned rock “pavement” to a depth of 50 cmbs (Figure 6-3). The Feature 2 burnt rock pavement was comprised of tightly packed small (5-x-7 cm), medium (8-x-12 cm), and large (24-x-24 cm) conglomerate and granite stones within the northern two- thirds of EU 3 and continuing to the north, east, and west. Continued excavation of the Feature 2 demonstrated that small- to medium-sized cobbles and flat rocks had been piled atop eleven large fire- affected conglomerate and granite platform stones that formed the base of the rock pavement between 40 and 50 cmbs. A total of 155 fire-cracked rocks and hundreds of burnt and fire-cracked stone fragments

PAL Report No. 488 47 Chapter Six

Figure 6-3. Profile of archaeological site examination EU 3 showing Feature 2.

48 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations were associated with Feature 2 within EU 3. Similar rock pavements have been unearthed at other southeastern Massachusetts riverine sites such as Canoe River West (Simon 1982) and Riverside 2 (Waller 2009) suggesting they may have served to process (cook or dry) riverine food resources such as fish, small game, and/or birds.

Fifty-three pieces of argillite, felsite, quartz, quartzite, Sally Rock felsite, and Saugus jasper chipping debris were recovered from Feature 2 soils between 30 and 40 cmbs. Much of this debitage bore evidence of heat exposure. Eighteenth pieces of quartz and felsites chipping debris and 75 fire-cracked/reddened rocks were recovered from Feature 2 between 40 and 50 cmbs. Soil collected from Feature 2 and subjected to soil flotation yielded 22 microflakes of quartz and felsite and one chenopodiaceae seed. A Sally Rock felsite biface fragment and 16 pieces of Saugus jasper, Blue Hills rhyolite, felsite, and quartz chipping debris were recovered from adjacent yellowish brown B1 subsoils at this same level.

A small, circular concentration of charcoal that measured roughly 25 cm in diameter was exposed within the fire-affected rock concentration located in the northern limits of EU 3. Charcoal flecks were similarly scattered throughout the burnt rock pavement and its associated fill soil. Charcoal collected from the 30 to 40 cmbs excavation level yielded a radiocarbon age of 3290±80 B.P. (Beta-55004). Calibration of this date using the OxCal (version 3.10) radiocarbon calibration program suggests Feature 2 was created during the Late/Transitional Archaic Period between 3710 and 3360 B.P. (1760 and 1410 B.C.) (see Table 6-2).

Relatively high frequencies of lithic chipping debris (quartz, felsites, Sally Rock felsite, argillite, Saugus jasper, and Blue Hills rhyolite) persisted beneath Feature 2 in EU 3 to 100 cmbs. Chipping debris from the deeper levels of EU 3 was generally larger and blockier than that from Feature 2 suggesting bifacial stone tool reduction and early stage shaping was represented by the underlying debitage assemblage, while final stage bifacial shaping and finishing was more common at the feature level.

Site examination EUs 2, 4 and 5 were excavated within central portions of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area between test pits along the E0 and W5 grid lines at the Area 1 Site (see Figure 2-1). Soil strata generally consisted of a plowed A Horizon underlain by a yellowish brown B Horizon subsoil. Two-hundred and sixty-four pre-contact Native American cultural materials (262 pieces of chipping debris, a Small Stemmed projectile point, and a granitic weight/netsinker) were collected from EU 2 during the site examination survey. Lithic debitage from the EU included Blue Hills rhyolite, argillite, quartz, felsite, hornfels, Hingham red felsite, Saugus jasper, Mattapan banded felsite and an unidentified volcanic material. The argillite flakes (N=65) from EU 2 alone account for 40 percent of Area 1 Site argillite assemblage. The concentration of recovered chipping debris from between 20 and 30 cmbs was suggestive of the presence of a lithic workstation at this level within the test unit. EU 4 and EU 5 yielded similarly high artifact counts. One quartz core, two felsite untyped projectile point tip/midsection fragments, a felsite scraper, and 569 pieces of lithic chipping debris were recovered from EU 4. Cultural materials from nearby EU 5 included 267 pieces of lithic debitage, a quartz scraper, and a felsite drill.

EU 6 was excavated between grid test pits N65E0 and N65W5 within the northernmost limits of the Area 1 Site’s Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area. Thirty-nine pieces of lithic debitage and one quartz Small Stemmed projectile point were recovered between 0 and 40 cmbs from EU 6.

In summary, archaeological site examination of the Area 1 Site resulted in the recognition of two activity areas where a range of tasks such as resource procurement, processing, and disposal and the manufacture and maintenance of chipped stone tools occurred. Recoveries of calcined bone, a carbonized nut shell and seed, and a net sinker indicate terrestrial and riverine/wetland natural food resources were targeted for exploitation by the site occupants. Temporally and culturally diagnostic stone tools and radiocarbon assays of 3540±80 B.P. and 3290±80 B.P. indicate the site was occupied during the Late and/or

PAL Report No. 488 49 Chapter Six

Transitional Archaic Periods and that additional information could be gleaned from further archaeological study of the site.

Area 2 Site

Similar to the Area 1 Site, the goal of the archaeological site examination of the Area 2 Site was to determine the site’s horizontal and vertical limits and study its internal structure, composition, and age. A total of 32, 50-x-50 cm test pits was excavated within the Area 2 Site the site examination survey (see Figure 2-2). The northern, eastern, and southern boundaries of the site were defined by the excavation of sterile test pits. An activity eroding slope formed the western limits of the site. Following identification of the site’s boundaries, two, 1-x-1 meter EUs were excavated in areas of anticipated artifact concentrations.

Archaeological grid testing established that the Area 2 Site was contained within an approximate 375 m2 area. Native American cultural materials were limited to the 42 pieces of chipping debris and one drill fragment (Table 6-3; Appendix A). No cultural features were identified within the Area 2 Site during the archaeological site examination. The base/midsection of a Blue Hills rhyolite drill was recovered from a depth of 20 to 30 cmbs within test pit N0E25. The base/midsection of this artifact is consistent with Neville-like projectile points diagnostic of the Middle Archaic Period (7500-5000 B.P.). No other tools were collected from the Area 2 Site. Lithic materials recovered from the Area 2 Site included quartz, felsites, and lithic materials morphologically similar to Blue Hills rhyolite, Lynn Volcanic complex felsites, Hingham Red felsites, and Saugus “jasper”. Cultural materials from the site were generally recovered in very low densities. The deposit of primarily rhyolite flakes from EU 2 represents the only artifact concentration identified at the site.

Table 6-3. Pre-contact Native American Cultural Material by Depth, Area 2 Site, Hanover Marketplace, Site Examination.

Depth (Centimeters below ground surface) Material Function Total 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 Blue Hill Rhyolite Drill 1 1 Flake 33 18 24 Felsite Flake 24 5 11 Quartz Flake 4 4 Shatter 1 1 Saugus Jasper Flake 1 1 Total 10 7 24 0 1 42

The Area 2 Site yielded very limited and little new categories of archaeological data despite producing some information on lithic raw material use and preference and circumstantial evidence for a Middle Archaic Period occupation. The site was determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and no additional investigation of the Area 2 Site was recommended beyond the archaeological site examination.

Archaeological Data Recovery - Area 1 Site (19-PL-749)

Archaeological data recovery of the Area 1 Site commenced in the late fall of 1992. Hand excavation of 2-x-2 m, 1-x-2 m, and 1-x-1 m EUs was undertaken within the Northeast Quadrant and S5W10 concentration areas identified during the preceding archaeological site examination survey resulting in the recovery of 26,692 pre-contact Native American cultural materials (Figures 6-4 and 6-5 and Appendix C). Fourteen cultural features including fire pits, storage/refuse pits, and lithic workshops were also exposed within the site area during the data recovery investigation.

50 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-4. Locations of archaeological test units, Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site. PAL Report No. 488 51 Chapter Six

Figure 6-5. Locations of archaeological test units, S5W10 Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site.

52 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

S5W10 Concentration Area

A total of 15 m2 of the S5W10 Concentration Area was investigated during data recovery investigations. The S5W10 Concentration Area represents the smaller of two activity areas identified during the archaeological site examination of the Area 1 Site (Figure 6-6). Data recovery excavations within this concentration area yielded Native American chipping debris, chipped and ground/pecked stone tools, and four cultural features. Cultural materials from the S5W10 Concentration Area during data recovery investigations were recovered at depths ranging between 0 and 110 cmbs. The lithic, feature, and organic assemblages from the S5W10 Concentration Area collected during data recovery investigations are discussed below.

Chipped and Ground/Pecked Stone Tools

Sixteen chipped and ground or pecked stone tools were recovered from the S5W10 Concentration Area during data recovery investigations. Stylistically identifiable projectile points from the S5W10 Concentration Area included one quartz Small Stemmed projectile point (EU 1), a quartz Squibnocket Triangle projectile point (EU 2), and a Neville-type projectile point manufactured out of a pink/black felsites (EU 1). Both of the quartz projectile points from the S5W10 Concentration Area were crudely made and appear to have been broken during the manufacturing process. The stem of the Small Stemmed projectile point from EU 1 tapers to a rounded base and has uneven, rounded shoulders typical of the Late Archaic Squibnocket Stemmed Small Stemmed projectile type in Massachusetts (see Ritchie 1969, 1971). The Neville-type projectile point from EU 1 was limited to a basal fragment with one remnant shoulder. The notched base is 1.24 cm in width and has a remnant shoulder angle of 102º. Breakage of this artifact appears to have resulted from use or perhaps impact.

One drill/perforator manufactured out of a light gray felsite was recovered from EU 2 located in the S5W10 Concentration Area during data recovery investigations. This artifact is quite symmetrical and has a straight blade, even shoulders, and a well-formed base (Figure 6-7a). The drill measures 4.21 cm in length, although a small portion of its tip was missing, 2.51 cm in maximum width, and 0.83 cm in thickness. Its base measured 0.93 cm in width and had shoulder angles of 104º and 112º. Basal attributes (width, thickness, shoulder angle, and length) of the drill are all consistent with metrics for known Middle Archaic Neville projectile points recovered elsewhere from southeastern Massachusetts and New England.

Non-diagnostic chipped stone tools recovered from the S5W10 Concentration area included seven bifacial tool fragments or rough bifaces broken and subsequently discarded during various stages of the manufacturing process. Recovered bifacial tools or tool fragments were manufactured of quartz (N=2), Blue Hills rhyolite (N=2), argillite (N=1), felsites (N=1), and arkose (N=1). One of the Blue Hills rhyolite bifaces is a well-thinned tip/midsection that broke along a natural fracture plane during the latter stages of stone tool manufacture. The gray arkose biface is a mostly complete example crossmended from four separate fragments (Figure 6-8). This tool is flat measuring 9.45 cm in length, 8.52 cm in maximum width, and 0.66 cm in thickness. This artifact has been bifacially flaked around its exterior lateral edge. Evidence for abrading also extended from one of its edges towards the middle of its dorsal surface. The arkose biface recovered from the S5W10 Concentration Area may have functioned as a scraper or chopper.

Other chipped stone tools from the S5W10 Concentration Area include a worked felsite flake (EU 4) and a fragment of a slate knife (EU 1). The worked flake measured 3.67 cm in length, 2.79 cm in maximum width, and 0.72 cm in thickness and was manufactured out of a light grayish-brown felsite with conspicuous quartz phenocrysts. Irregular unifacial retouch and/or some light use wear were evident

PAL Report No. 488 53 Chapter Six

Figure 6-6. Contour map showing the relatively densities of Native American lithic materials within the Northeast Quadrant and S5W10 concentration areas, Area 1 Site.

54 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-7. Drills from the Area 1 Site (a. EU 2-SE, 40-45 cmbs; b. EU 9-NW, 25-30 cmbs; c. EU20-NE, 10-15 cmbs).

Figure 6-8. Arkose biface from EU 2, S5W10 Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 55 Chapter Six along one of its edges on its dorsal surface. The slate knife from EU 1 is a spall fragment with a bifacially modified edge exhibiting heavy use wear. It measures 9.68 cm in length, 4.58 cm in maximum width, and 1.12 cm in thickness.

Ground/pecked stone tools from the S5W10 Concentration Area included an incomplete Braintree Slate bannerstone/atlatl weight (EU 1), a cobble tool of undetermined material (EU 2), and granite hammerstone (EU 1). The slate atlatl weight from EU 1 was roughly circular and channeled with a partial perforation (Figure 6-9). This artifact measured 3.35 cm in length, 3.10 cm in maximum width, and 1.75 cm in thickness. The perforation measured 0.57 cm in diameter and extended 0.41 cm into artifact. The partially finished surfaces appear pecked and numerous striations are apparent. The incomplete atl atl weight from EU 1 appears to have been broken during the latter stages of its manufacture. The cobble tool from EU 2 is a flat, discoidal stone that measures 8.87 cm in length, 8.18 cm in maximum width, and 1.8 cm in thickness. Both of its flat surfaces have been polished and some evidence for battering or crushing is evident along its outer edge. Evidence for flaking is visible on either side of the artifact (Figure 6-10). Overall morphology of this artifact is consistent with net sinkers or stone weights recovered elsewhere from archaeological contexts within southeastern Massachusetts and southern New England. A granite hammerstone with one working end that bears evidence for battering and/or crushing was recovered from between 15 and 20 cm within EU 1 at the Area 1 Site. This artifact measures 6.61 cm in length, 5.91 cm in maximum width, and 3.35 cm in thickness.

Lithic Chipping Debris

Lithic chipping debris represented the largest artifact class recovered from the S5W10 Concentration Area during data recovery investigations. Chipping debris from this concentration outnumbered stone tools by a ration of 81:1. A total of 1,549 pieces of lithic chipping debris or debitage (flakes and shatter) was recovered from the S5W10 Concentration Area during archaeological data recovery investigations of the Area 1 Site. The total debitage assemblage is increased to 1,619 when those materials recovered during the preceding site examination are added to the total tallies of chipping debris. Debitage is the lithic waste product generated during chipped stone tool manufacture. A variety of lithic materials including quartz, felsite, Braintree slate, arkose, quartzite, argillite, and several unidentified materials was recovered from the concentration area (Figure 6-11). Quartz dominates the debitage assemblage, followed by rhyolite, felsites, Braintree slate, arkose, quartzite, argillite, and Saugus jasper. Felsites from the S5W10 Concentration Area include many varieties such as Sally Rock Felsite (N=4), Mattapan Banded Felsite (N=2), Hingham Red Felsite (N=45), and a non-specific felsites category (N=141) discriminated on the basis of their physical attributes such as color, texture, phenocryst size and shape, etc.

Chipping debris was recovered from between 0 and 110 cmbs within the S5W10 Concentration Area (Figure 6-12). Distributions of lithic debitage by depth at the Area 1 Site are presented in Table 6-4. More than 51 percent (N=792) of the S5W10 Concentration Area chipping debris was recovered from a narrow 25 cm range between 5 and 30 cmbs. Moderate densities of chipping debris were also recovered at depths ranging between 30 and 65 cmbs (N=532; 34.5 percent). Comparatively fewer pieces of debitage (N=225; 14.5 percent) were recovered from between 65 and 110 cmbs. EUs 2 or 5 were responsible for all of the chipping debris recovered from depths greater than 50 cmbs at the S5W10 Concentration area of the Area 1 Site. Chipping debris from this concentration area was generally with the 0 to 1 cm and 1 to 3 cm size categories accounting for more than 89 percent of the total debitage assemblage (12.6 and 76.5 percent, respectively). Size class distributions for chipping debris recovered from the Area 1 Site during data recovery investigations are presented in Table 6-5.

56 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Table 6-4. Vertical Distribution of Chipping Debris Recovered during Archaeological Data Recovery of the Area 1 Site. S5W10 Concentration Area Northeastern Quadrant Concentration Area

EU01 EU02 EU03 EU04 EU05 EU06 EU07 EU08 EU09 EU10 EU11 EU12 EU13 EU14 EU15 EU16 EU17 EU18 EU19 EU20 EU21 EU22 EU23 REU3 Total Depth 00-05 5 . . . 1 1 . 25 34 . 5 . . . . 31 1 6 . 16 19 . . . 144 05-10 25 24 20 53 . 47 3 142 93 23 20 57 18 87 137 22 19 22 29 78 90 21 142 . 1,172 10-15 34 16 41 59 6 115 98 115 188 409 36 102 18 121 63 48 106 52 70 246 106 68 163 . 2,280 15-20 35 37 35 98 5 123 330 263 297 348 31 119 64 242 245 51 79 51 217 234 89 112 143 . 3,248 20-25 62 6 19 88 5 192 211 309 83 277 59 386 72 321 240 46 104 124 234 242 50 533 228 . 3,891 25-30 43 11 13 50 7 209 365 292 309 843 54 559 83 365 319 35 44 74 206 133 30 485 128 . 4,657 30-35 24 10 4 16 19 148 487 149 30 235 29 478 99 247 155 9 30 42 174 36 9 160 81 . 2,671 35-40 19 18 . 6 23 127 110 93 63 332 12 175 98 118 65 6 9 25 87 13 6 87 44 . 1,536 40-45 2 7 . 7 48 84 115 97 19 160 16 94 95 44 14 . 3 16 77 . 3 7 24 . 932 45-50 1 16 . 8 59 15 41 96 18 99 5 44 61 . 3 . 1 6 64 . 4 4 17 . 562 50-55 . 11 . . 68 14 25 10 1 55 4 33 38 . . . . 2 54 . . . 4 . 319 55-60 . 12 . . 72 1 3 17 . 63 2 12 40 . . . . 2 59 . . . 1 . 284 60-65 . 11 . . 65 1 . 3 . 31 2 6 22 . . . . . 56 . . . . . 197 65-70 . 5 . . 38 . . . . 47 1 . 31 . . . . . 25 . . . . . 147 70-75 . 6 . . 38 . . . . 15 . . 9 . . . . . 16 . . . . . 84 75-80 . 23 . . 20 . . . . 36 . . 2 . . . . . 14 . . . . . 95 80-85 . 12 . . 16 . . . . 7 ...... 37 . . . . . 72 85-90 . 9 . . 9 . . . . 11 ...... 45 . . . . . 74 90-95 . 5 . . 9 . . . . 1 ...... 42 . . . . . 57 95-100 . 18 . . 9 ...... 61 . . . . . 88 100-105 . 7 ...... 46 . . . . . 53 105-110 . 1 ...... 60 . . . . . 61 110-115 ...... 51 . . . . 33 84 115-120 ...... 168 . . . . 46 214 120-125 ...... 63 . . . . 57 120 125-130 ...... 78 . . . . 53 131 130-135 ...... 57 . . . . 26 83 135-140 ...... 63 . . . . 45 108 140-145 ...... 252 . . . . 25 277 145-150 ...... 182 . . . . 37 219 150-155 ...... 89 . . . . 17 106 155-160 ...... 84 . . . . 27 111 160-165 ...... 24 . . . . 22 46 165-170 ...... 13 . . . . 13 26 170-175 ...... 20 . . . . . 20 175-180 ...... 16 . . . . . 16 180-185 ...... 15 . . . . . 15 185-190 ...... 12 . . . . . 12 190-195 ...... 7 . . . . . 7 195-200 ...... 2 . . . . . 2 200-205 ...... 4 . . . . . 4 205-210 ...... 2 . . . . . 2 210-215 ...... 2 . . . . . 2 215-220 ...... 2 . . . . . 2 220-225 ...... 1 . . . . . 1

Total 250 265 132 385 517 1,077 1,788 1,611 1,135 2,992 276 2,065 750 1,545 1,241 248 396 422 2,880 998 406 1,477 975 401 24,232

PAL Report No. 488 57-58 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-9. Atl atl weights from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace (a. EU 1-NW, 30-35 cmbs; b. EU 20-NE, 15-20 cmbs).

Figure 6-10. Cobble tool/stone weight from EU 2, Area 1 Site. PAL Report No. 488 59 Chapter Six

Figure 6-11. Lithic Materials from the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site.

Figure 6-12. Lithic chipping debris by depth from the Site S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site.

60 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Table 6-5. Distribution of Chipping Debris by Size Range Recovered during the Data Recovery Program of the Area 1 Site. Size Range (Centimeters) 0-1 1-3 3-5 5-7 7-9 9-11 11-13 Total Unit EU01 14 185 44 6 . 1 . 250 EU02 25 205 26 8 1 . . 265 EU03 6 102 20 3 1 . . 132 EU04 48 298 28 9 1 . 1 385 EU05 103 395 15 4 . . . 517 EU06 135 895 43 3 1 . . 1,077 EU07 249 1,461 72 6 . . . 1,788 EU08 231 1,304 68 4 2 2 . 1,611 EU09 307 753 66 9 . . . 1,135 EU10 837 1,991 158 5 1 . . 2,992 EU11 72 186 14 4 . . . 276 EU12 659 1,257 125 18 5 1 . 2,065 EU13 196 511 38 5 . . . 750 EU14 538 935 63 7 2 . . 1,545 EU15 459 698 80 4 . . . 1,241 EU16 61 173 12 1 1 . . 248 EU17 92 284 17 2 1 . . 396 EU18 122 280 17 2 . . 1 422 EU19 1,419 1,374 80 4 3 . . 2,880 EU20 285 654 54 4 . 1 . 998 EU21 95 283 24 3 1 . . 406 EU22 431 972 66 6 2 . . 1,477 EU23 282 609 77 5 1 1 . 975 REU3 278 99 17 6 1 . . 401

Total 6,944 15,904 1,224 128 24 6 2 24,232

Native American Features

The site examination and data recovery investigations of the Area 1 Site were designed to locate and investigate any Native American cultural features (e.g. hearths, burnt rock features, refuse/storage pits, etc.) that might have been present at the site. Features are an important sources of archaeological information as they often contain charcoal or other organic materials useful for radiocarbon-dating, provide indicators of site function and/or season of occupation based on the presence of associated seeds, shells, or animal remains, and sometimes provide clues as to the duration of a site’s occupation and to the size of the occupying population. Recorded attributes of Area 1 Site archaeological features included content, morphology, type of fill, size, and their relationship to surrounding soils, cultural materials, and other features. The structure and contents of a feature, when analyzed in tandem, reflect on-site activities and may assist in a functional definition of a site or occupation area (Stewart 1977, Barnes 1980).

Four cultural features (Features 1, 2, 3, and 4) were identified and excavated within the S5W10 Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site during the data recovery investigations (Table 6-6). Features were first identified at depths ranging between 30 and 75 cmbs (Figure 6-13 and see Table 6-6). The shallowest cultural feature (Feature 2; 30 cmbs) was not Native American but represented a post-contact period farm animal burial. The three remaining features excavated within the S5W10 Concentration Area included both fire-related features and/or storage/refuse pits (see below). Stewart (1977) defines a fire pit is any subsurface facility that produced in situ evidence for fire. Fire-related features include hearths, cook fires,

PAL Report No. 488 61 Chapter Six

Figure 6-13. Depths of cultural features from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace.

62 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Table 6-6. Inventory of Cultural Features Identified within the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site Data Recovery Program.

Feature Associated Vertical Extent Associated Cultural Interpretations Comments No. Units (cmbs) Materials 01 EUs 2 and 75-110 cmbs chipping debris, charcoal fire pit/hearth; historic intrusion; 5 associated C14: 7740 ± 150 B.P. (Beta arkose/Braintree #60199) slate lithic workshop 02 EUs 2 and 30-100 cmbs chipping debris, prehistoric animal historic intrusion; rodent 5 contact and post-contact burial, bovine (?) burrow period bone, post-contact period materials 03 EU 5 50-80 cmbs chipping debris, charcoal fire pit rodent disturbance (upper strata); high density Braintree slate 04 EU 5 70-90 cmbs chipping debris, charcoal fire pit semi-circular dark flecks brown/black stain; historic intrusion; high density Braintree slate

earth ovens, and/or similar features that served as sources of warmth or were used for heating. Ritchie and Funk (1973) further define hearths as small basin-shaped “masses of pure charcoal”. Stewart (1977) notes that larger fire pits could have served as earth ovens, especially in cases where they were lined with rocks or if they contained the remains of plant materials. Storage pits include pits that were dug for purposes of holding materials either on a temporary or permanent basis (Luedtke 1985). Ethnographic analogy and numerous archaeological examples indicate storage pits often were reused as receptacles for trash and perhaps as latrines following once they had their stores removed (see Ritchie and Funk 1973; Barnes 1980).

All cultural features within the S5W10 Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site were contained within EU 2 and/or EU 5. Feature 2 appeared at 30 cmbs as mottled dark yellowish brown, yellowish brown, and light olive brown fine sand anomaly along the eastern edge of EU 2 and in the northern third of EU 5 (Figure 6-14). The upper levels of the Feature 2 fill in both EU 2 and EU 5 produced nineteenth century field debris (e.g., whiteware, pearlware, kaolin pipe bowl fragment, nails). Pre-contact Native American cultural materials including lithic chipping debris were also recovered from the feature fill. Large, robust bones of a bovine limb were eventually exposed within Feature 2 between 90 and 100 cmbs. Feature 2 was roughly square shaped in plan at this level and is interpreted as a post-contact period animal burial (see Figure 6-14).

Continued excavation of Feature 2 demonstrated that this historical feature upon two pre-contact Native American cultural features (Features 1 and 4) (Figure 6-15). Feature 1 first appeared as a dark yellowish brown (10 YR 3/4) soil stain with associated charcoal flecks exposed in the B1 subsoil at a depth of 65 cmbs within EU 2. Feature 1 became more defined by 75 cmbs appearing as a circular (62 cm diameter) very dark brown (10 YR 2/2) soil stain with associated charcoal that contrasted with the surrounding light olive brown (2.5 Y 5/6) B2 subsoil. Feature 1 yielded 145 pieces of chipping debris (arkose, Blue Hills rhyolite, quartz, felsite, and Braintree slate, unidentified material) from between 70 and 110 cmbs and a Blue Hills rhyolite biface fragment from between 90 to 95 cmbs. Some of the debitage recovered from

PAL Report No. 488 63 Chapter Six

Figure 6-14. Plan of cultural features from the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site.

64 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-15. Profile of cultural features from the S5W10 Concentration Area, Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 65 Chapter Six

Feature 1 appears to have been exposed to heat. Arkose and Braintree slate account for approximately 68 percent of the chipping debris recovered from Feature 1. All of the arkose flakes recovered from the S5W10 Concentration Area during data recovery investigations were either recovered from Feature 1 (N=42; 80.8 percent) or in association with Feature 1 (N=10; 19.2 percent). Additionally, the arkose biface depecited in Figure 6-8 was also recovered in association with Feature 1 from EU 2. Similarly, 57 Braintree slate chipping debris from Feature 1 (N=57) accounts for 32 percent of the Braintree slate debitage assemblage recovered from the Area 1 Site S5W10 Concentration Area. Soil flotation of seven soil samples collected from Feature 1 between 80 and 105 cmbs yielded additional debitage (N=91) of predominantly felsite and quartz and approximately 30 charred acorn (Quercus sp.) and/or hickory (Carya sp.) nut fragments.

The volume, density, and type of lithic materials from Feature 1 suggests the feature and this section of the site area served as a discrete lithic work station and disposal locale for raw materials not commonly used in projectile point manufacture. Charcoal recovered from Feature 1 between 75 and 95 cmbs produced a radiocarbon date of 7740±150 B.P. (Beta-60199). Calibration of this radiocarbon date using the OxCal Radiocarbon Calibration Program (version 3.1) yields an Early/Middle Archaic calibrated date range of between 9,000 and 8,300 B.P. or 7050 to 6350 B.C. A felsite drill with Middle Archaic Neville- like basal attributes (see Figure 6-7a), recovered from 40 to 45 cmbs in EU 2, and a Neville projectile point base from contiguous EU 1 provide added evidence of a Middle Archaic Period occupation within this section of the S5W10 Concentration Area.

Features 3 and 4 in EU 5 were fairly shallow, basin shaped pits that contained charcoal and lithic chipping debris. Feature 3 appeared as a dark yellow brown (10 YR 3/4) soil anomaly observable at 50 cmbs at the B1/B2 subsoil interface. Feature 3 was semi-circular in plan measuring some 80 cm in length and 40 cm in width. The feature extended into the south and east walls of EU 5 (see Figure 6-14). Feature 3 soils had been partially impacted by rodent activity at 50 cmbs. Cultural materials from Feature 3 were recovered between 50 and 80 cmbs and consisted almost entirely of chipping debris (N=109). Lithic debitage recovered from the feature included small amounts of argillite, felsite, quartzite and Hingham red felsite, moderate amounts of Blue Hills rhyolite and quartz, and a high density of Braintree slate. No cultural materials were recovered below 80 cmbs in Feature 3 despite continuation of the feature to 100 cmbs.

Feature 4 was exposed in the northeastern portion of EU 5 70 cmbs. Feature 4 presented as a very dark brown (10 YR 2/2) soil anomaly with associated charcoal flecks visible at the B1/B2 soil interface. The feature was excavated to a depth of 90 cmbs. Feature 4 had been truncated by the excavation of the historic cow burial (Feature 2) to the north. Twelve pieces of chipping debris (Braintree slate, felsite, unidentified material) were recovered from feature fills between 70 and 80 cmbs. Most of these materials showed evidence of being exposed to heat.

Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area

Site examination archaeological survey indicated the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site was the larger of site’s two activity areas encompassing an estimated 650 m2 of site area. Data recovery excavations within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site recovered a range of artifacts from between 0 and 225 cmbs and 10 cultural features.

Chipped Stone Tools

A total of 309 chipped and ground/pecked stone tools was recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area during the data recovery program. The assemblage of chipped/ground stone tools included 129 projectile points and projectile point fragments, 146 bifacial tool blades, two drills/perforators, two scrapers, 18 unifacial tools, five cores, one pestle, one atlatl weight, one cobble

66 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations tool, one large chopper, one whetstone, one paintstone and one hammerstone. An inventory of Native American stone tools recovered from Area 1 Site during data recovery investigations is presented in Table 6-7. Metrics on selected projectile points and projectile point performs from the Area 1 Site are included in the back of this report (see Appendix D).

Table 6-7. Distribution of Native American stone tools from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace.

Unit Too Drill Drill Core Core Total Total Blade Blade Pestle Pestle Atl atl Biface Scraper Scraper Uniface Preform Preform Chopper Chopper Whetstone Paintstone Paintstone Unid. Stone Cobble Tool Tool Cobble Utilized Flake Flake Utilized Hammerstone Worked Flake Projectile Point

EU01 1 1 1 2 1 6 EU02 3 1 1 1 6 EU03 1 1 EU04 2 1 3 EU06 8 1 1 10 EU07 11 1 11 23

EU08 14 3 20 1 38 EU09 10 1 2 6 19 EU10 15 1 10 2 1 29 EU11 3 8 1 12 EU12 17 1 1 13 3 35 EU13 9 1 3 13 EU14 14 1 11 1 1 28 EU15 3 1 1 4 2 11

EU16 2 2 4 EU17 2 3 1 6 EU18 1 2 3 EU19 11 8 1 2 22 EU20 1 7 1 1 4 1 15 EU21 2 5 7 EU22 1 1 2 12 4 1 21 EU23 6 5 11 REU3 1 1 2

Total 2 144 1 1 2 5 3 2 9 131 1 1 2 12 1 1 6 1 325

Approximately 49 percent of the chipped stone tools recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area during data recovery investigations were manufactured out of quartz. Felsite (38 percent) is the second most abundant lithic type used in the manufacture of chipped stone tools. The felsite category can be further subdivided into tools manufactured out of a gray felsite (28 percent), Hingham red felsite (3 percent), Sally Rock felsite (2 percent), Saugus jasper (1.5 percent), Lynn Volcanic Complex (black/dark gray) felsite (1.5 percent), Blue Hills rhyolite (1.5 percent), and Attleboro red felsite (0.5 percent). Other material types represented in the Area 1 Site stone tool assemblage includes argillite (4 percent), combined non-local extra-regional or “exotic” materials including chert,

PAL Report No. 488 67 Chapter Six

Pennsylvania jasper, chalcedony (combined 4 percent), quartzite (2 percent), arkose and slate (2 percent), unidentified volcanics (0.5 percent), and unidentified material (0.5 percent).

Projectile Points

A total of 131 projectile points and projectile point fragments was recovered from the Area 1 Site during data recovery investigations (Table 6-8). Projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area will be discussed by type below.

Table 6-8. Projectile and projectile point fragments from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace.

Lithic Material

Type TOTAL Chert Chert Jasper Felsite Felsite Quartz Argillite Argillite Rhyolite Rhyolite Quartzite Chalcedony Chalcedony Saugus Jasper Jasper Saugus Lynn Volcanic Volcanic Lynn Blue Hills Rhyolite Rhyolite Hills Blue Hingham Red Felsite Felsite Red Hingham Attleboro Red Felsite Felsite Red Attleboro Unidentified Volcanic Volcanic Unidentified Bifurcate-based 1 4 5 Neville 3 1 2 1 7 Stark 1 1 Brewerton 1 1 2 Brewerton-eared 2 2 Squibnocket Stemmed 11 11 Squibnocket Triangle 4 1 5 Small Stemmed 1 1 1 27 2 32 Atlantic 261 9 Susquehanna broad 51 6 Wayland notched 3 3 Orient 2 1 1 1 5 Jack’s Reef corner notched 1 1 Untyped 1 1 14 1 1 22 1 1 42 Total 3 1 2 1 2 40 3 3 1 65 5 2 2 1 131

Three bifurcate-based projectile points were recovered in the Northeast Quadrant concentration during archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site (Figure 6-16). Bifurcate-based projectile points are temporally diagnostic of Native American occupations dating to the Early Archaic (10,000–7500 B.P.) Period. A mostly complete bifurcate of Lynn Volcanic felsite was recovered from the northeast quadrant of EU 8-NE at a depth of 40-45 cmbs in association with Feature 8 at the site (see Figure 6-16a). This point is well made measuring some 4.16 cm in length, 0.65 cm in thickness, and 3.47 cm at its shoulder with a basal width of 1.96 cm. The edges of the broad equilateral, triangular blade are slightly serrated, and one of its barbs appears to have broken from use. Its deeply notched base bears no evidence of grinding.

A second, broken bifurcate-based projectile point manufactured out of a tan rhyolite was recovered in three parts (a tip/midsection and two basal fragments) from the northwest quadrant of EU 8 and the south half of adjacent EU 11 (see Figure 6-16b). Weathering of this material may be partially responsible for its tan color. The tip/midsection of the projectile point was recovered from Feature 6 located in the northwest quadrant of EU 8 at a depth of 25-30 cmbs. The larger of the two basal fragments of this projectile was

68 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-16. Bifurcate-based projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU 8-NE, 40-45 cmbs; b. fragments from EU 8 and EU 11; c. EU 16-South Half, 35-40 cmbs). also recovered from Feature 6 in EU 8 at a depth of 35-40 cmbs. A second, cross-mending basal fragment was recovered from the south half of adjacent EU 11 at a depth of 30-35 cmbs. Reconstruction of the point base indicates the base of this projectile was 2.03 cm in width with a thickness of 0.67 cm.

The third bifurcate-based projectile point was recovered from the south half of EU16 at a depth of 35-40 cmbs (see Figure 6-16c). The base/midsection of this projectile was manufactured out of Blue Hills Rhyolite and measures 3.06 cm in length, 3.17 cm in shoulder width, and 2.17 cm at its base. This artifact is thicker than the other two bifurcate-based projectile points from the Area 1 Site measuring 0.81 cm in thickness. Its basal ears are also more rounded with its bifurcate base less pronounced (shallower) than the previous two examples (see Figure 6-16). Shoulder symmetry has been altered by retouch or reworking with shoulder angles of 84 and 77 degrees.

Middle Archaic (7500–5000 B.P.) projectile points were also well-represented at Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area (Figure 6-17). Six complete or mostly complete Neville projectile points, five basal/midsections, and one base with a partial shoulder were recovered from EUs 7, 9, 10, and 11 excavated in the concentration area. Descriptions of these projectiles and projectile point fragments are provided in Appendix D-1. The physical characteristics of these projectile points and fragments are consistent with Neville points described by Dincauze (1976) from the Neville Site in Manchester, New Hampshire. Neville points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area were all manufactured out of various types of felsites that included Blue Hills Rhyolite (N=2), a gray felsite, a dark gray felsite, Saugus jasper, and Hingham red felsite.

A complete argillite Stark type projectile point was recovered from between 30 and 35 cmbs within the southwest quadrant of EU 23. The Stark point exhibits symmetrical edges with an uneven base and

PAL Report No. 488 69 Chapter Six

Late Archaic Period projectile points were well represented at the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site. Recovered Late Archaic Period projectile points included Laurentian Tradition Brewerton eared (Figure 6-18), Small Stemmed (Figure 6-19), and Squibnocket stemmed and triangle varieties (Figures 6-20 and 6-21). Three Laurentian Tradition Brewerton projectile points were recovered from data recovery EU 10 while a fourth was recovered from EU 11. Brewerton projectile points were manufactured out of a brownish-gray quartzite (N=1) and several varieties of felsites (N=3). The quartzite Brewerton point from EU 10 appears to have been broken during use and bore some evidence for basal retouch. The grayish tan felsite Brewerton eared projectile point from the northeast quadrant of EU 10 exhibits good edge to edge symmetry, but has a poorly thinned base (see Figure 6-18a). A Brewerton eared notched projectile point manufactured out of Blue Hills Rhyolite was recovered from between 15 and 20 cmbs in the northeast quadrant of EU 10 (see Figure 6-18b). This projectile exhibits near perfect symmetry with well thinned edges and base. The remaining Brewerton eared projectile point was recovered between 50 and 55 cmbs in EU 11. This projectile was manufactured out of a dark gray felsite. Its poorly defined notches, thick midsection, and broken tip suggest the artifact was discarded prior to its completion.

The majority of the Late Archaic Period projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area were associated with the Small Stemmed lithic tradition (Small Stems/Wading River, Squibnocket Stemmed, and Squibnocket Triangles). Forty-two Small Stemmed points and point fragments, 19 of

70 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-18. Representative Brewerton-eared projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU10-NE, 25-30 cmbs; b. EU11-North half, 50-55 cmbs).

PAL Report No. 488 71 Chapter Six

Figure 6-20. Squibnocket stemmed projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU 7-SE, 30-35 cmbs; b. EU 7-NW, 15-20 cmbs; c. E 09- SW, 10-15 cmbs; d. EU19-SE, 105-110 cmbs; e. EU14-NW, 20-25 cmbs; f. EU 7-NW, 25-30 cmbs).

72 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations which were complete or mostly-complete, were recovered during the data recovery investigations. Four temporally contemporaneous and culturally affiliated Squibnocket Triangle projectile points were also recovered from the site. A significant portion of the Small Stemmed point assemblage (19 of 42; 45 percent) was recovered in association with quartz lithic workshop Feature 9 exposed within EUs 12, 14 and 22 at the site. Nevertheless, all of the units excavated within in the Northeast Quadrant concentration save for EU 6, yielded Small Stemmed tradition projectile points. The majority of the Small Stemmed tradition projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area (87 percent) were manufactured out of quartz. Two Small Stemmed and one Squibnocket Triangle were manufactured out of quartzite while three stemmed points were manufactured out of a Lynn Volcanic felsite, argillite, and a chalcedony.

Like the Late Archaic Period, Transitional Archaic Period (3600–2500 B.P.) projectile points were quite common from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site. This assemblage is comprised of both well-made, finished projectile points apparently broken in use and poorly made, unfinished or rejected points. Transitional Archaic Period projectile points cover the entire Susquehanna Tradition and include eight Atlantic points, three Wayland Notched, six Susquehanna Broad, and five Orient Fishtails (Figures 6-22 through 6-25). Nineteen (86 percent) of the Transitional Archaic/Susquehanna Tradition projectile points were manufactured out a felsitic material that included gray and purple felsites, as well as Hingham red felsite and Lynn Volcanic felsite. Other lithic materials used in the manufacture of Transitional Archaic Period projectile points included a gray/green chert for one of the Atlantic projectiles points, a Susquehanna Broad point manufactured out of Pennsylvania jasper, and Orient Fishtails of quartz and quartzite. In addition to projectile points, a dark gray/banded chert knife with Susquehanna tradition attributes was recovered from EU 15 excavated within the site (see Figure 6-25a).

The base and midsection to a jasper Jack’s Reef Corner Notched projectile point represents the only Woodland Period projectile point recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area during data recovery investigations (Figure 6-26). Jack’s Reef Corner Notched projectile points are indicators of Middle Woodland Period (1600–1000 B.P.) occupations in southern New England. The projectile was recovered from EU 12 between 20 and 25 cmbs. Its blade is well-thinned, but asymmetrical. The tip and one of its basal corners and notches were apparently broken by use.

Non-descript Chipped Stone Tools and Stone Tool Fragments

Forty-three untyped projectile points/fragments were recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site. Artifacts such as types primarily included projectile point tips or tip/midsection fragments manufactured from a variety of lithic materials that included quartz (N=22), felsite (N=18), argillite (N=1), Pennsylvania jasper (N=1), and one unidentified volcanic material (see Appendix B).

Two drills were recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area during data recovery investigations. The first drill was recovered from between 40 and 45 cmbs within the southeast quadrant of EU 02. This artifact was manufactured out of a greenish black chert morphologically similar to Normanskill chert, which outcrops in eastern New York (see Figure 6-7c). It is missing its tip and a portion of its base. A complete grayish-green felsites drill was recovered from between 25 and 30 cmbs within the northwest quadrant of EU 09 (see Figure 6-7b). This artifact measures 5.58 cm in length, 2.24 cm in maximum width, and 0.7 cm in thickness. The felsite drill from EU 09 is well made with uniform edges and an expanding base. Some evidence of use wear is evident along its tip and edges.

PAL Report No. 488 73 Chapter Six

74 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-24. Wayland Notched projectile points from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU14-SW, 5-10 cmbs; b. EU 8-SE, 10-15 cmbs; c. EU14-NE, 10-15 cmbs).

PAL Report No. 488 75 Chapter Six

One hundred and forty-six bifacial tool and tool fragments were recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area. Nine of the bifacial tools were identified as projectile point preforms (see Appendix D-2). Projectile point performs were manufactured out of quartz (N=6), Sally Rock felsite (N=1), argillite (N=1), and chert (N=1). Thirty-nine complete or mostly complete bifaces were recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area. Representative bifaces from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area are depicted in Figures 6-27 and 6-28. Bifaces were manufactured out of quartz (N=72; 49 percent), felsite (N=61; 42 percent), argillite (N=8; 5.5 percent), and chert, arkose, slate, and unidentified lithic materials (N=5 total; combined 3.5 percent). Recovered bifaces ranged from 2.10 cm to 11.75 cm in length, 1.49 cm to 7.33 cm in maximum width, and between 0.43 cm and 4.26 cm in thickness. The morphological attributes of these bifaces are summarized in Appendix D-3. On average, bifaces from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site were three times as long as they were wide. Figure 6-26. Jack’s Reef Corner Notched projectile point from data recovery EU 12 at the Additional edge tools from the Northeast Area 1 Site. Quadrant Concentration Area included a quartz scraper and a quartzite scraper, both of which were roughly tear-drop in shape, a quartzite bifacially worked chopper, one quartz cobble tool, and 18 unifacial tools. Unifacial tools were manufactured out of quartz (N=10), felsites (N=6), chalcedony (N=1), and slate (N=1). Five remnant quartz cores were also recovered from the concentration area. Each of this was recovered in association with dense quartz chipping debris and projectile points that correlated with Features 9 and 13 (see below).

Ground/Pecked Stone Tools

Several ground or pecked stone tools were recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site. One of them included a pestle manufactured out of an unidentified metamorphic material from the southwest quadrant of EU 20. This artifact measures 21.5 cm in length, 4.64 cm in maximum width, and 3.66 cm in thickness and has a mass of 448.1 g. Visible evidence of use is apparent on either end of the pestle, as well as some visible polish on the body likely created by handling and use (Figure 6- 29).

The second groundstone tool from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area included a fragment of a slate atlatl (spear thrower) weight. This notched artifact was recovered from the northeast quadrant of EU 20 between 15 and 20 cmbs. The atlatl weight measures 6.98 cm in length, 3.47 cm in maximum width, and 0.55 cm in thickness and is broken at one end, just to one side of the two symmetrical notches (see Figure 6-9b). The dorsal surface has been pecked and polished while the ventral surface is rough. Its edges are ground and polished. The notches, centered at the top and bottom of the artifact, are deeply

76 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-28. Representative large bifaces from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site (a. EU17-South half, 25-30 cmbs; b. EU14-NW, 20-25 cmbs; c. EU08-SW, 45-50 cmbs).

PAL Report No. 488 77 Chapter Six

Figure 6-29. Stone pestle from EU 20, Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site. ground and incised into the body of the artifact. Two less pronounced notches are visible to one side of the prevalent notches (see Figure 6-9b). This series of notches provided a means of hafting the weight to the spear thrower. It appears as if this artifact was broken during manufacture.

A slate abrading stone was recovered in association with a quartz workshop/lithic station (Feature 09) located at the interface of the A and B Horizons within EU 22. The abrading stone measures 4.51 cm in length, 2.84 cm in maximum width, and 0.87 cm in thickness. It appears ground and pecked and has two deep grooves on one side of the artifact.

A lithic hammerstone from EU 13 remains the only additional ground/pecked stone tool from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area.

Lithic Chipping Debris

A total of 22,693 pieces of lithic debitage (flakes, shatter) was recovered during the data recovery archaeological excavations at Area 1 Site Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area. A variety of lithic types comprise the material assemblage (Figure 6-30). Quartz, followed by felsites, account for over 90 percent of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area debitage assemblage. Felsites include a number of varieties, which can be differentiated from one another on the basis of physical attributes such as color, phenocryst type, texture and weathering. Felsite types included a gray/grayish tan variety (31 percent), Blue Hills rhyolite (4.6 percent), Sally Rock felsite (2.8 percent), Lynn Volcanic felsite (1.6 percent), Hingham red felsite (1.3 percent), and Saugus jasper (0.5 percent). The remainder of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area chipping debris assemblage consisted of argillite (2.5 percent), unidentified (1.6 percent), unidentified volcanic material (0.5 percent), quartzite (0.4 percent), sandstone and slate (0.2 percent), and non-local or “exotic” lithic materials (i.e. chalcedony, chert, jasper; combined 0.3 percent). Two hornfels flakes were also recovered from the excavation area. Unidentified lithic materials were typically too fragmentary to be identified or had been fired altering their physical appearances.

78 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-30. Lithic chipping debris materials from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site. Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area chipping debris was dominated by flakes that ranged between 1 and 3 cm in size (65 percent). Chipping debris between 0 and 1 cm in size comprised the next greatest size category at 29.5 percent. Five percent of the debitage assemblage ranged between 3 and 5 cm in size, while only a trace amount (0.5 percent) greater than 5 cm in length. The predominance of smaller flakes from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area implies that secondary and tertiary lithic reduction stages (bifacial thinning and finishing) were the primary chipped stone manufacturing activities that were conducted on site.

Chipping debris was uniformly distributed between 0 and 55 cmbs with its highest occurrence between 25 and 30 cmbs (Figure 6-31). A secondary, though lesser “spikes” in chipping debris was also observed between 115 to 120 cmbs and 140 to 145 cmbs in the stratigraphic coloumn (see Figure 6-31).

In addition to “macro”-flakes (those greater than ¼ of an inch in size) recovered during hand screening of soils within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, approximately 1,750 microflakes were recovered from soil samples collected from the field and subjected to soils flotation in the lab. Similar to the debitage recovered during the screening process, microflakes recovered during soils flotation were dominated by quartz and felsite.

PAL Report No. 488 79 Chapter Six

Figure 6-31. Lithic chipping debris by depth from the Site Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area, Area 1 Site. Paintstone

A small paintstone or piece of ochre was recovered from between 140 and 145 cmbs within Feature 13 identified within the southeast quadrant of EU 19. The ochre fragment was recovered in association with black (10 YR 2/1) charcoal and a cluster of fire-cracked/affected rock. Ochre fragments were also recovered from Feature 13 soil samples collected from 100 to 105 cmbs and 195 to 200 cmbs.

Native American Features

Ten cultural features (Features 5 through 14) were identified and excavated within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area during archaeological data recovery investigations at the Area 1 Site. Identified cultural features included fire-related pits, food processing and storage pits, fire-cracked rock concentrations, and lithic workshops. Burnt rock pavement Feature 2, initially exposed in the southwestern corner of site examination EU 03, was also further examined as a result of the excavation of

80 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

EU 19. Depths for the cultural features excavated within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area are depicted in Figure 6-13.

Feature 5 was exposed at a depth of 45 cmbs in the southwest quadrant of EU 6 and continued into the south half of EU 11. The feature appeared as a roughly circular dark yellowish brown (10 YR 3/6) soil discoloration with associated charcoal surrounded by a dark brown (7.5 YR 3/4) “ring” or leaching zone (Figure 6-32). Feature 5 measured approximately 60 cm in diameter and extended to 92 cmbs into the B2 subsoils (Figure 6-33). Natural, gravelly B2 subsoils abut Feature 5 to the southwest (see Figure 6-32). Twenty-three pieces of quartz, Blue Hills rhyolite, felsite, and Hingham red felsite chipping debris, charcoal, and one piece of calcined bone were recovered from Feature 5 during archaeological excavation. Quartz and felsite microflakes (37 total) and two unidentified seeds were also recovered from Feature 5 following flotation of sampled soils.

Feature 6 was exposed in the northeast quadrant of EU 8, southeast of Feature 5 exposed in EUs 6 and 11 (see Figure 6-32). Feature 6 appeared as a roughly 60 cm, strong brown (7.5 YR 4/6) soil stain at a depth of 25 cmbs in the B Horizon. This feature was basin-shaped in profile and continued to a depth of 65 cmbs (Figure 6-34). The tip/midsection and basal portion of a bifurcate base projectile point (see Figure 6-16b) was recovered from Feature 6 between 25 and 30 and 40 and 45 cmbs, respectively. The missing basal portion of this projectile point was recovered immediately west of Feature 6 at a depth of 30 to 35 cmbs in the southern half of EU 11. A second bifurcate base projectile point (see Figure 6-16a) was recovered in association with Feature 8 between 40 and 45 cmbs in the northeast quadrant of EU 8 (see Figure 6-4). Quartz, and felsite debitage (25 total), calcined mammal bone (N=7), one unidentified calcined bone fragment, and charcoal were also recovered from Feature 6 during archaeological excavation. Soils flotation resulted in the recovery of additional charcoal, calcined bone fragments, quartz, felsite, and quartzite microflakes (38 total), and uncharred polygonaceae, gramineae, aceraceae, and chenopodiaceae seeds.

Feature 7 was exposed at a depth of 25 cmbs in northwest corner of EU 12 (Figure 6-35). Feature 7 appeared as an oval dark reddish brown (5 YR 3/4) stain that extended to a depth of 30 cmbs located along the northwestern perimeter of quartz debitage concentration Feature 9 (see below). The top of Feature 7 appears to have been impacted by historical plowing. Cultural material recovered from feature fills included charcoal flecks, quartz and felsite chipping debris (69 total), and an untyped projectile point tip of Pennsylvania jasper. Numerous quartz and felsite flakes, a jasper Jack’s Reef Corner Notched projectile point (Figure 6-26), a felsite Susquehanna Broad projectile point (see Figure 6-27d), and one chert (see Figure 6-27a) and one quartz biface were recovered from the plow zone/B Horizon subsoils peripheral to Feature 7. Cultural materials including calcined bone, charcoal, quartz and felsite microflakes (60 total), and four unidentified seeds were recovered during soil flotation of Feature 7 fill. A thin charcoal scatter was situated immediately south of Feature 7 along the western edge of the Feature 9 quartz concentration area.

Feature 8 was exposed approximately one meter east of Feature 6 in EU 8 (see Figure 6-32). Feature 8 was exposed at the B1/B2 interface at a depth of 45 cmbs. Feature 8 presented as a dark yellowish brown (10 YR 3/6), roughly 50 cm diameter circular stain with associated charcoal. Feature 8 was basin-shaped in profile and continued to 65 cmbs (see Figure 6-34). One gray felsite and three Hingham red felsite flakes, charcoal, and fire-cracked rock were recovered from the feature during archaeological excavation. Few quartz and felsite microflakes were also recovered from feature soils subjected to soils flotation. A bifurcate base projectile point was recovered immediately west of Feature 8 between 40 and 45 cmbs (see Figure 6-16a). Feature 8 is interpreted as a fire pit. Charcoal from the feature yielded a radiocarbon age of 3510 ± 90 B.P. (Beta 67934).

PAL Report No. 488 81 Chapter Six

Figure 6-32. Plan of Native American cultural features 5, 6, and 8 in EUs 6, 8, and 11, Area 1 Site.

82 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-33. Feature 5 stratigraphic profile of EU 6, Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 83 Chapter Six

Figure 6-34. Features 6 and 8 stratigraphic profiles in EU 8, Area 1 Site.

84 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-35. Plan of Feature 9 in EUs 12, 14, 20, and 22, Area 1 Site. Site. 1 Area 22, and 20, 14, 12, EUs in 9 Feature of Plan 6-35. Figure

PAL Report No. 488 85 Chapter Six

Figure 6-36. Plan of Feature 10 at 20 cmbs in EU 21, Area 1 Site. Site. 1 Area EU 21, in 20 cmbs 10 at Feature of Plan 6-36. Figure

86 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Feature 9 was located within the south-central portion of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area in EUs 12, 14, 20, and 22 (see Figure 6-35). Feature 9 was first identified in EU 12 and exposed at the topsoil/subsoil interface between 20 and 25 cmbs in the north half of EU 14. Feature 9 appeared strong brown (7.5 YR 5/6) in color in the northwestern quadrant of EU 14 and dark yellowish brown (10 YR 4/6) elsewhere. Hand excavation resulted in the recovery of quartz debitage. Charcoal and calcined bone were recovered in association with quartz chipping debris from along the north wall of EU 14 within 10 cm of feature excavation. EUs 20 and 22 were opened in proximity to EUs 12 and 14 to further investigate Feature 9’s appearance, nature, and content. Cultural materials from Feature 9 included six Small Stemmed projectile points, three untyped quartz projectile point fragments, one untyped Hingham red projectile point fragment, 14 quartz, one chert, and five felsite bifaces, six unifacial quartz tools, a rhyloite utilized flake, two quartz core fragments, slate whetstone, fire-cracked rock, calcined bone (N=91), and over 3,700 pieces of chipping debris, nearly 87 percent of which was quartz. Non-quartz debitage included felsite, argillite, chert, quartzite, rhyolite, and Saugus jasper. The majority of the calcined bone was recovered in association with the town charcoal deposits located within the central feature area exposed in the northeast quadrant of EU 14 (see Figure 6-35). Soils flotation yielded additional calcined bone fragments, charcoal, quartz and felsite microflakes, pieces of fire-cracked rock, and uncharred aceraceae, chenopodiaceae, and polygonaceae seeds.

Feature 9 and that portion of the Area 1 Site investigated by EUs 12, 14, 20, and 22 appears to represent a significant locus of Small Stemmed Tradition activity with 19 (59 percent) of the Small Stemmed projectile points recovered during data recovery investigations being collected from this comparatively small 13m2 area. Feature 9 is interpreted as a lithic workshop area that produced quartz chipping debris, bifaces, and Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points.

Feature 10 was located at the plow zone/subsoil interface at a depth of 20 cmbs in the eastern half of EU 21 (Figure 6-36). Feature 10 appeared as a small fire-cracked rock concentration with associated charcoal flecking that measured roughly 50 cm x 50 cm. Cultural materials recovered in association with Feature 10 included a quartzite Small Stemmed projectile point and argillite, felsite, quartz, Attleboro red felsite, Hingham red felsite, Lynn Volcanic felsite, and Sally Rock felsite. Calcined bone, charcoal, quartz and felsite microflakes, and uncharred gramineae and aceraceae seeds were collected from soil samples subjected to flotation.

Feature 11 was exposed immediately southwest of Features 5 and 6 in EU 13 (Figure 6-37). The upper portion of this feature was obscured by a rotting root along the west wall of the test unit. Following the removal of the root intrusion, Feature 11 appeared as a dark yellowish brown and yellow brown (10 YR 4/6 mottled with 10 YR 5/8) soil anomaly that contrasted with the natural yellowish brown (10 YR 5/6) B1 subsoil. Feature 11 was amorphous in plan and appears to have been non-cultural in origin likely created as a result of nearby tree growth and decay.

Features 12 and 14 were exposed within the southern portion of the Northeast Quadrant concentration in EU 23 (Figure 6-38). Feature 12 presented as a dense concentration of fire-cracked rocks situated at the A/B Horizon interface at a depth of 20 cmbs. A portion of the feature had been impact by historic plowing. Two charcoal concentrations were observed within feature along the west wall of EU 23. Several unidentified calcined bone fragments, a red, “oxidized” area along the east wall, and ashy surrounding some of the larger rocks were also associated with the individual rocks that comprised the identified rock platform or pavement. Feature 12 continued into B1 subsoil terminating at a depth of 35 cmbs.

Cultural materials including a felsite Atlantic projectile point base/midsection, felsite biface fragment, argillite Stark projectile point, a quartz biface fragment, and untyped quartz projectile point basal

PAL Report No. 488 87 Chapter Six

Figure 6-37. Plan of Feature 11 in EU 13, Area 1 Site.

88 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-38. Plan of Features 12 and 14 in EU 23, Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 89 Chapter Six

fragments were recovered in association with Feature 12. Additionally, more than 400 pieces of debitage (argillite, felsite, quartz, quartzite, sandstone and unidentified lithic material) were also recovered in association with the feature stones. Morphological attributes of the two quartz projectile point bases are consistent with Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points. Charcoal collected from site examination test pit N40W5 located in proximity to EU 23 yielded a radiocarbon age of 3540 ± 80 B.P. suggesting Feature 12 was constructed during the Late/Transitional Archaic Period. Flotation of soils sampled between 25 and 30 cmbs from Feature 12 produced contained calcined bone fragments, quartz and felsite microflakes (10 total), small pieces of fire-cracked rocks, and 14 uncharred chenopodiaceae seeds. A second sample collected between 30 and 35 cmbs similarly yielded calcined bone fragments, quartz and felsite microflakes (10 total), fragments of red ochre, and uncharred chenopodiaceae and aceraceae seeds (20 total).

Feature 13 was located in the south half of EU 19 within the northern Northeast Quadrant Concentration Area of the Area 1 Site. EU 19 was established contiguous to the north wall of site examination EU 3 in order to fully investigate site examination Feature 2 (Figure 6-39). Fire-cracked rock, charcoal, chipping debris and a felsite biface were recovered Feature 2 during the hand excavation of EU 19. Charcoal, calcined bone, quartz and felsite microflakes, and aceraceae and unidentified seeds recovered following flotation of a soil sample collected from Feature 2 between 30 and 35 cmbs. A portion of Feature 2 was also present in the eastern half of EU 18 located of the southwest corner of EU 3 (see Figure 6-39). Chipping debris, charcoal, a piece of a quartz core, and over 100 pieces of fire-cracked rock ranging in size from 5 to 25 cm were recovered from Feature 2 in EU 18. Charcoal, microflakes, few uncharred chenopodiaceae, aceraceae, and unidentified seeds were also recovered Feature 2 soils sampled from between 40 and 45 cmbs in EU 18.

Over 400 pieces of lithic chipping debris (quartz, Blue Hills rhyolite, gray felsite, Sally Rock felsite, and argillite) were recovered from between 50 and 100 cmbs as excavation of EU 19 continued. The majority of the chipping debris was recovered from the south half of the excavation unit. A quartz biface tip fragment and the midsection to an untyped quartz projectile point were recovered from the southeast quadrant of EU 19 between 60 and 65 cmbs and 90 and 95 cmbs, respectively. A large gray felsite cobble fragment was also recovered from the southeastern quadrant of EU 19 between 80 and 85 cmbs. Large rocks of this size were infrequent in the sandy B1 matrix. The cobble was split in half and appeared fire- reddened. Although several pieces of charcoal were collected from the unit, there were no discernible concentrations.

A large light yellowish brown (10 YR 6/4) semi-circular soil discoloration first appeared in the B Horizon subsoil at a depth of 100 cmbs. This anomaly was designated Feature 13. Continued excavation revealed Feature 13 to be an oval dark yellowish brown (10 YR 3/4) soil discoloration with a dark brown (10 YR 3/3) silt, sand, and charcoal deposit located along the western edge of the feature (Figure 6-40). Feature 13 encompassed nearly the entire south half of EU 19 where it measured roughly 160 cm along its east/west axis. It was clear at this point that Feature 13 continued southward into site examination EU 3. EU 3 (renamed data recovery test unit REU3) was re-opened and excavated to a depth of 100 cmbs to expose more of the feature. Feature 13 presented as a circular dark yellowish brown (10 YR 4/6) soil anomaly with a dark yellowish brown 10 YR 3/4) core with associated fire-cracked rocks at 150 cmbs (see Figure 6-40). A black (10 YR 2/1), roughly 90 cm long charcoal and sand deposit was exposed along the west edge of the feature. Excavation of REU 3 was discontinued at 175 cmbs with Feature 13 being bisected along the shared wall of units REU3/EU19. Excavation of EU 19 continued to 245 cmbs where the profile of Feature 13 was exposed in its entirety (Figure 6-41).

Pre-contact Native American cultural materials recovered from Feature 13 between 100 and 225 cmbs included 1,714 pieces of lithic chipping debris (predominantly quartz), charcoal, calcined bone fragments, fire-cracked rocks, two quartz Small Stemmed projectile points, three quartz and one Sally Rock felsite

90 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-39. Plan of Feature 2 at 30 cmbs in EUs 18 and 19 and site examination EU3, Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 91 Chapter Six

Figure 6-40. Plan of Feature 13 data recover EU19 and site examination EU3, Area 1 Site.

92 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Figure 6-41. East and west profile of EU19 showing Feature 2 and Feature 13, Area 1 Site.

PAL Report No. 488 93 Chapter Six biface fragments, one quartz cobble tool, and one ochre/possible paintstone fragment. Charcoal sampled from Feature 13 between 110 and 115 cmbs yielded a radiocarbon date of 4600 ± 90 B.P. (Beta 63082). Flotation of soil samples collected from Feature 13 yielded an additional 976 microflakes or quartz, felsite, and quartzite, pieces of calcined bone, charcoal, fire-cracked rocks, ochre, and uncharred chenopodiaceae, gramineae, and aceraceae seeds. Feature 13 is interpreted as an exceptionally large refuse pit underlying burnt rock platform Feature 2. Calcined bone fragments from Feature 13 were examined by physical anthropologist Dr. Michael Gibbons (Department of Anthropology, UMass- Boston) and Dr. Nicholas Bellantoni (Connecticut State Archaeologist) to determine if they were potentially human and assess whether or not Feature 13 was a potential burial feature. Both experts agreed that identifiable bone fragments from Feature 13 were those of a small mammal such as a rodent.

Feature 14 was exposed at a depth of 40 cmbs in the northeast corner of EU 23 (see Figure 6-38). Feature 14 appeared as a dark yellowish brown mottled with a strong brown silty sand semi-circular soil stain with associated charcoal that measured approximately 50 cm in plan. Feature 14 continued to a depth of 75 cmbs. Cultural materials recovered from Feature 14 included four calcined bone fragments, several pieces of charcoal, a quartz biface, one flake of an unidentified lithic material, and one piece of quartz shatter. Additional materials recovered during soils flotation included more charcoal and calcined bone fragments, uncharred chenopodiaceae and gramineae seeds, fragments of red ochre, fire cracked rock, and numerous quartz and felsite microflakes (approximately 200 total). The greatest concentration of chipping debris was sampled from the very bottom of Feature 14. Feature 14 is interpreted as a storage/refuse pit.

Post-contact Period Cultural Materials

Nineteenth and twentieth century post-contact period cultural materials were recovered from across the Hanover Marketplace project area during both the site examination (Table 6-9) and data recovery (Table 6-10) archaeological surveys. Post-contact period cultural materials included domestic and construction items and skeletal remains recovered from a historic farm animal burial. Domestic items recovered from the area included ceramic sherds (whiteware, pearlware, glazed and unglazed redware), kaolin pipe fragments, bottle glass shards, and several pieces of coal. Recovered construction items included brick fragments, window glass shards, and machine cut nails and wire nails. Post-contact period cultural materials were primarily recovered from site area topsoils (organic layer and plow zone) between 0 and 20 cmbs. The plow zone within the southern limits of the Area 1 Site was noticeably deeper persisting in some cases to approximately 50 cmbs.

Charcoal

A total of 42 wood charcoal samples was collected during data recovery investigations of the Area 1 Site. Four charcoal samples were submitted to Beta Analytic for radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon dates from the Area 1 Site are presented in Table 6-11.

94 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Investigations

Table 6-9. Nineteenth and twentieth century cultural materials recovered during the archaeological site examination of the Area 1 and Area 2 Sites, Hanover Marketplace.

Site Material Function Count Area 1 Brass Firearms and Ammunition 2 Brick Brick 13 Ceramic Pipe Unmarked 4 2 Pipe Unmarked 5 2 Coal Light/heat/cooking Item 5 Glass Bottle Marked 2 Bottle Press Molded 7 Curved Glass 19 Modern Bottle 6 Window Glass 1 Historic Bone Mammal Historic 11 Iron Machine Cut Nail 4 Unidentified 12 Unidentified Nail 2 Wire Nail 1 Metal Other Historic 1 Structural Hardware 1 Pearlware Ceramic Sherds 4 Red Bodied Coarse Ceramic Sherds 2 Red Coarse Unglazed Ceramic Sherds 2 Whiteware Ceramic Sherds 10 Plate/platter/saucer 1 Teacup/mug 1

*Total- Area 1 111

Area 2 Glass Curved Glass 1 Marble 1

*Total- Area 2 2

Total 113

PAL Report No. 488 95 Chapter Six

Table 6-10. Post-contact period cultural materials recovered during data recovery archaeological investigations of the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace.

Material Function Count Brick Construction Item 2 Ceramic Pipe Marked 1 Pipe Unmarked 3 Coal Light/heat/cooking Item 1 Copper Alloy Bullet 1 Earthenware Ceramic Sherds 1 Glass Curved Glass 1 Window Glass 11 Glass Molded Bottle Machine Lip 1 Historic Bone Mammal Historic 13 Iron Hardware 1 Machine Cut Nail 1 Unidentified 10 Pearlware Ceramic Sherds 12 Pearlware Handpainted Ceramic Sherds 12 Pearlware Transfer-print Ceramic Sherds 13 Porc/handpaint/underglaze Plate/platter/saucer 4 Red Bodied Coarse Ceramic Sherds 1 Red Coarse Unglazed Ceramic Sherds 5 Tin Button 1 Whiteware Ceramic Sherds 1

Total 96

Table 6-11. Data recovery and site examination radiocarbon dates from the Area 1 Site, Hanover Marketplace.

Phase Unit or Depth Radiocarbon results Calibrated date Sample No. Feature (in range* cmbs) Data recovery Feature 1 70-105 7740 ± 150 B.P. 9000 – 8300 B.P. (Beta-60199) (7050 – 6350 BC) Feature 13 110-115 4600 ± 90 B.P. 5600 – 4950 B.P. (Beta 63082) (3650 – 3000 BC) Feature 8 45-50 sample too small/no date Feature 8 50-65 3510 ± 90 B.P. 4100 – 3550 B.P. (Beta-67934) (2150 – 1600 BC) Site examination Feature 2 30-40 3290 ± 80 B.P. 3710 – 3360 B.P. (Beta-55004) (1760 – 1410 BC) Test pit 30-40 3540 ± 80 B.P. 4010 – 3630 B.P. (Beta-55006) N40W5 (2060 – 1680 BC) Feature 1 10-20 100.5 ± 0.9% B.P. Modern (Beta-55005) * Radiocarbon calibration at the 95.4% confidence interval accomplished using the OxCal (version 3.10) Radiocarbon Calibration Program

96 PAL Report No. 488

CHAPTER SEVEN

RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Petrographic and Geochemical Analysis

Petrographic analysis was conducted on several lithic samples from the Area 1 Site to provide quantifiable information on likely source areas of several varieties of felsites used in chipped stone tool manufacture by the pre-contact Native American occupants of the site. Representative samples of lithic materials macroscopically identified as “Hingham red felsite” and “Sally Rock felsite” were submitted to the University of Rhode Island’s Geology Department for thin sectioning and to be subjected to X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (XRF) analysis. X-ray fluorescence stimulates emission of X-rays by irradiating a sample with energies. Electrons orbiting the nuclei of a sample’s atoms can be ejected from their orbits if they absorb sufficiently strong X-ray photons during energy bombardment. During this process, higher energy level orbiting electrons drop to fill lower level electron orbits vacated by the electrons ejected from the atom during irradiation. X-ray photons are emitted from the atoms at this time. The energy of any emitted X-ray photons is equal to the difference in energy levels between the two orbits of the transitioning electrons, and the wavelength of these photons. These photons are unique for each individual element and can be measured with special detection devices. Consequently, one can determine the elemental constituents of a sample by determining the wavelength of the emitted X-ray photons. Furthermore, the number of X-rays emitted from a sample per a given unit of time correlates with the concentration of that element in any given sample providing a picture of concentration of specific elements or compounds within a sample under study.

It was anticipated that examination of thin-sections and geochemical analysis using XRF would be the start of an accumulating database on southern New England Native American lithic source area geochemistry. So-called temporally or culturally diagnostic artifacts and selected debitage samples from the Area 1 Site were submitted to XRF analysis using the non-destructive method described by Hermes and Ritchie (1997b) (Table 7-1). The results of the XRF analysis are presented in Table 7-2. The full range and concentrations of trace elements sampled for the Lynn Volcanic and Blue Hills volcanic complexes reported elsewhere in the archaeological literature (see for example Hermes and Murray 1990) are also presented in Table 7-2 for comparative purposes. Non-destructive XRF offers the potential to provide a rapid, geochemical characterization of lithic materials and source areas without destroying archaeological materials. Following XRF, debitage samples were sectioned for petrographic examination (Table 7-3).

Area 1 Site artifacts subjected to geochemical and petrographic analysis included lithic materials cataloged as Hingham red felsite (Sample Nos. 488-L1, 488-L6, and 488-L7), Sally Rock felsite (Sample Nos. 488-L8, 488-L9), Blue Hills rhyolite (Sample Nos. 488-L4, 488-L10, 488-L11, 19-PL-749) and Lynn volcanic felsite. Geochemical characterization of southern New England lithic source areas and materials is only in its infancy and the full range of source area variability is presently unknown. Thus, using trace elements to determine the parent source for a number of the recovered Hanover Marketplace artifacts is not currently possible. Nonetheless, supplemental archaeological studies that characterize the mineralogy, geochemistry, and molecular compounds of lithic sources areas and archaeological materials and the continued compilation of a lithic source database should provide additional and new insight into pre-contact Native American population movements and/or trade and exchange networks operating in southern New England throughout the past (Hermes and Ritchie 1997a, 1997b).

PAL Report No. 488 97 Chapter Seven

Table 7-1. Lithic Samples and Artifacts Examined by Petrographic and Geochemical Analysis.

Analysis Sample Provenience Description Phase Material Description Thin Trace No. (in cmbs) Section Element 488-L1 Debitage Site Exam EU04: 20-30 Felsite Red X X Projectile point; Data 488-L2 EU08-NE: 40-45 Felsite Dark gray X Bifurcate-base Recovery Data 488-L3 Debitage EU08-SW: 40-45 Felsite Dark gray X X Recovery Projectile point; Data 488-L4 EU16-S: 35-40 Rhyolite Blue-gray X Bifurcate-base Recovery Projectile Point: Data Blue-gray- 488-L5 EU18-E: 15-20 Felsite X Orient Fishtail Recovery tan Data 488-L6 Biface EU10-SW: 65-70 Felsite Red X Recovery Data EU14-NE: 30-35 488-L7 Debitage Felsite Red X X Recovery Feature 9 Data 488-L8 Biface EU09-NE: 25-30 Felsite Tan X Recovery Data 488-L9 Debitage EU09-SW: 5-10 Felsite Tan X X Recovery Data 488-L10 Debitage EU09-NE: 25-30 Rhyolite Blue-gray X X Recovery Data Blue-gray- 488-L11 Debitage EU06-SE: 25-30 Rhyolite X X Recovery tan Data 488-L12 Debitage EU14-SE: 40-45 Felsite Pink/red X X Recovery 19-PL- Projectile point: Data EU07-SE: 25-30 Rhyolite Blue-gray X 749 Neville Recovery

Petrographic thin sections prepared from debitage samples indicated that the felsites used by pre-contact Native American occupants of the Area 1 Site may have originated from one or more of the Lynn/Mattapan source areas. Petrographic features of a number of the so-called Blue Hills rhyolite samples recovered from the site (e.g. the presence of epidote, plagioclase, clasts, and flow banding) are similar to those known from the Lynn/Mattapan volcanic complex. Trace elements however, in particular the concentrations of strontium (Sr), yttrium (Y), and zirconium (Zr) are consistent with reported concentrations from the Blue Hills complex. Sectioned “Sally Rock felsite” specimens appear to be examples of non-volcanic rock, most likely a clastic siltstone. Detailed technical descriptions of the Hanover Marketplace petrographic thin sections are included in Appendix G.

Depositional History

Area 1 Site soils were fairly uniform consisting of a plowed A Horizon underlain by B and C Horizon subsoils (see Chapter 6). Disturbance to the site is generally limited to agricultural plowing. Repeated plowing has likely displaced artifacts both horizontally and vertically from their places of original discard within the site. Consequently, data pertaining to the vertical separation of the various discrete, temporal occupations that comprise the Area 1 Site is limited due to the presence of relatively undisturbed, natural soils and the absence of well stratified occupational surfaces at the site. Nevertheless, mean depths for temporally diagnostic projectile points recovered from the site suggests that some vertical separation between the various archaeological components that comprise the Area 1 Site still existed at the site (Table 7-4). A discussion of the occupational history of the Area 1 Site drawn from a study of temporally diagnostic artifacts and radiocarbon assays follows.

98 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Studies

Table 7-2. Trace Element Data for Artifact and Debitage Samples.

Sample Trace Element Concentrations (parts per million) Number

Rb Sr Y Zr Nb Ba La Ce Zn

488-L1 114 13152 309 28 286 67 10896 488-L2 52 30033 364 18 1130 43 96 98 488-L3 66 34635 361 17 1389 33 84 106 488-L4 196 13111 1097 86 39 90 99 204 488-L5 57 22132 190 15 1168 44 84 65 488-L6 81 20134 289 19 314 45 88 65 488-L7 105 13344 281 23 348 33 83 48 488-L8 104 2082 586 46 252 36 63 33 488-L9 116 23108 498 44 275 81 15324 488-L10 172 5223 106 13 173 40 60 51 488-L11 181 23122 1053 88 43 48 58 113 488-L12 40 24720 137 9 989 30 57 20 19-PL-749 189 1590 1149 94 54 113 19444 Blue Hills source area 190- 10- 70- 820- 100- 50- 65- 190- 95- range* 200 45 130 1690 140 170 170 250 230 Lynn Volcanic source area 52- 140- 19- 218- 11- 792- 24- 59- 29- range* 142 433 36 341 27 1358 69 132 41 * data from Hermes and Murray (1990).

Early Archaic Occupation

The earliest evidence for pre-contact Native American occupation of the Area 1 Site dates to the Early Archaic Period. Early Archaic Period occupation at the site is indicated by the recovery of three bifurcate- base projectile points (see Figure 6-16). Bifurcate-base projectile points were recovered from between 15 and 45 cmbs at an average depth of 37.5 cmbs (see Table 7-4 and Appendix C). Two pieces of a tan felsite bifurcate were recovered from Feature 6 fill, while a crossmending basal fragment was recovered from immediately west of the feature. A dark gray/black felsite bifurcate was recovered from immediately northwest of Feature 8. Charcoal from Feature 8 produced a radiocarbon age of 3510 ± 90 B.P. (Beta 67934). A third bifurcate was recovered from EU 16, located less than five meters southeast of the two previously recovered bifurcate-based projectile points. These data appear to suggest a tightly clustered Early Archaic occupation concentrated within the central portion of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area.

While there have been a number of bifurcate-base projectile points recovered from systematic archaeological investigations in Massachusetts, they are not abundant and they have not been adequately radiocarbon dated. Early Archaic radiocarbon dates of 8555±200 and 8260±40 B.P. have however, been returned from the Double P Site in Bridgewater (Simon 1982) and the Federal Pond Site in Plymouth (Waller 2012), both of which produced bifurcate-base projectile points. Johnson (1984) observed that all sites in Massachusetts, which had yielded Early Archaic artifacts also contained later Archaic materials. This association is suggestive of “a basic continuity of settlement pattern through the Archaic period” (Barber 1979:207).

PAL Report No. 488 99 Chapter Seven

Table 7-3. Results of Petrographic Thin Section Analysis.

Sample Rock Type/Petrographic Features Probable Source Area No. Pyroclastic tuff, calcalkaline volcanic rock, quartz and Petrography and geochemistry consistently 488-L1 feldspar phenocrysts indicate volcanic rock; e.g., Lynn/Mattapan Flow structure is diagnostic indicating rock is a banded Petrography and geochemistry consistently 488-L3 rhyolite, calcalkaline volcanic, plagioclase phenocrysts indicate volcanic rock; e.g., Lynn/Mattapan Presence of epidote, clastic nature and high- No plagioclase, sparse phenocrysts, unknown elongate field strength trace elements suggest an 488-L7 fine-grained needle-like mineral in matrix, epidote affinity with calcalkaline volcanics, e.g., Lynn/Mattapan No phenocrysts, fine-grained quartz-rich rock with Rock non-volcanic, completely clastic; most 488-L9 iron-staining, feldspar clasts likely a siltstone Geochemistry is non-diagnostic. Presence of Microphenocrysts of quartz and feldspar, matrix is 488-L10 epidote, plagioclase, clasts, and flow banding banded with flow around phenocrysts, epidote suggest a link to Lynn/Mattapan Quartz and feldspar microphenocrysts, matrix consists Geochemistry and petrography, plus the 488-L11 of fine-grained intergrowth of quartz, feldspar, presence of aegerine, consistently indicate an aegerine alkalic affinity Blue Hills Volcanic tuff with abundant feldspar Lynn/Mattapan; Shard texture may be more 488-L12 microphenocrysts, matrix consists of devitrified quartz- prominent in the Lynn source rocks northeast feldspar intergrowth, relict glass shard texture of Boston

Table 7-4. Vertical Distribution of Diagnostic Projectile Points.

Projectile Point Type Count Average Depth (in cmbs) Bifurcate-base 3 37.5 Neville/Stark 9 34.1 Brewerton 4 31.2 Small Stemmed 51 24.2 Atlantic 8 23.7 Susquehanna Broad 6 20.0 Orient Fishtail 5 18.5

Middle Archaic Occupation

Middle Archaic Period occupation of the Area 1 Site is represented by a substantial lithic artifact assemblage, subsistence-related features, and a lithic workshop. Middle Archaic Period cultural materials that included temporally diagnostic Neville and Stark projectile points were recovered at an average depth of 34.1 cmbs from two distinct areas within the Area 1 Site: contiguous EUs 1, 2 and 5 located within the S5W10 Concentration area and EUs 7, 9, 10 and 23 excavated within the southeastern portion of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area.

Charcoal recovered in association with Middle Archaic artifacts from pit Feature 1 located within the S5W10 Concentration area produced a radiocarbon age of 7740±150 B.P. (Beta 60199). Feature 1, along with associated Features 3 and 4, contained high densities of arkose and Braintree slate chipping debris, much of which showed evidence of being exposed to heat. The high density of these materials in the feature fills appears to represent a discrete lithic work station that dated to the Middle Archaic Period. Cultural materials recovered from the workshop area included an atlatl weight of Braintree Slate that was apparently broken during manufacture and a large arkose biface that likely served as a scraper. A gray

100 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Studies felsite Neville drill/perforator was recovered from EU 2 in association with Feature 1, while a Neville projectile point base and a discoidal cobble tool (see Figure 6-9a) were recovered nearby.

One Stark and five Neville projectile points were recovered from within the southeastern portion of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area between 25 and 55 cmbs. The Stark point was recovered from the bottom of fire-cracked rock concentration Feature 12. Charcoal collected from Feature 12 produced a radiocarbon age of 3540±80 B.P. (Beta-55006). This feature is apparently associated with the known Small Stemmed Tradition occupation of the Area 1 Site Northeast Quadrant Concentration area. Neville points were recovered from contiguous EUs 7, 9, and 10 and from EU 7. A significant amount of chipping debris recovered in association with the Neville points was represented by a wide variety of felsites. The debitage to artifact ratio within this Middle Archaic activity area was extremely high indicating that tool manufacture and maintenance was conducted at this locale. The greater frequency of small flakes at the expense of large primary flakes and shatter indicates that secondary and tertiary stages of chipped stone stool manufacture had been conducted here with larger felsite blocks, cores, blanks, or other objective pieces being brought to the site for further finishing into formal or useful tool types.

In all, the archaeological data from the Area 1 Site indicate that the Middle Archaic occupation of the site was comprised of small, overlapping (re-occupied) camps located on the southern slope of the knoll along Iron Mine Brook and its associated wetlands.

Late Archaic Occupation

The Area 1 Site appears to have been most intensely occupied during the Late Archaic Period. Late Archaic occupations at the site included both Laurentian Tradition and Small Stemmed Tradition components. Laurentian Tradition Brewerton-type projectile points were collected from EU 10 excavated within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area, while a fourth was recovered from EU 11 to the north. Stratigraphically, Brewerton points appear to overlay Middle Archaic Neville and Stark points and underlay Small Stemmed Tradition projectiles at the site affirming the chronological placement of Brewerton points between the Middle Archaic and Small Stemmed Point Tradition of the Late Archaic Period (see Table 7-4).

The greatest Late Archaic component to the Area 1 Site is associated with Small Stemmed Tradition. Forty-six Small Stemmed and five Squibnocket Triangle projectile points were recovered from the Area 1 Site during both site examination and data recovery archaeological investigations. The vast majority of these projectile points (45 of 51 or 88 percent) were manufactured out of quartz. Additionally, a significant portion of the Small Stemmed Tradition point assemblage was associated with quartz workshop Feature 9 situated within the central portion of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area, although all of the EUs excavated in the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area (save for EU 6) produced Small Stemmed lithic materials. These data lend support to Dr. Kevin A. McBride’s (1984) assertion that the Small Stemmed Tradition was reliant upon an efficient quartz cobble tool technology. In addition to projectile points, Native American cultural materials associated with the Late Archaic Small Stemmed Tradition to the Area 1 Site included bifaces and bifacial tool fragments, unifacial tools, core remnants, a slate whetstone, pestle, chopper, and a slate atlatl weight.

As mentioned above, charcoal from Feature 12 produced a Late Archaic radiocarbon age of 3540±80 B.P. Other Late Archaic radiocarbon dates from the site included a 3290±80 B.P. from charcoal recovered from hearth/burnt rock platform Feature 2, 3510±90 B.P. date from Feature 8, and a 4600±90 B.P. date from charcoal recovered between 110 and 115 cmbs within Feature 13. Feature 13 underlay Feature 2 and produced several Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points from the same level that yielded the dated charcoal. Although it was not dated, fire-cracked rock concentration Feature 10 produced Small Stemmed

PAL Report No. 488 101 Chapter Seven materials and therefore appears to be associated with the Late Archaic Small Stemmed occupation of the Area 1 Site.

Site examination and data recovery archaeological investigations of the Hanover Marketplace suggest that the Area 1 Site was comprised of a series of small to moderate-sized camps created during the Late Archaic Period. The presence of a numerous Small Stemmed projectile points indicates that hunting was important to those who occupied the site during this period. Deep pit Feature 13 appears to have served as a refuse/disposal pit. The recovery of a slate atlatl weight in contextual association with narrow stemmed and triangular projectile points suggests that these implements served as spear points as opposed to arrow points. The quartz biface assemblage along with the full range of quartz debitage (primary, secondary, and tertiary flakes, lithic shatter, and quartz cores) indicates that the full range of chipped stone tool manufactured from initial raw material selection through rough bifacial tool preparation to final-stage tool finishing occurred on site. The presence of lithic tools that included scrapers and drill/perforators indicate the Small Stemmed Tradition occupants of the site also engaged in other activities that included hide- working.

Fire-cracked rock concentrations and pit features identified and excavated at the site suggest that food processing/consumption, storage, disposal were also practiced at the Area 1 Site during the Late Archaic Period. The recovery of calcined mammal bone from both Feature 13 fill contexts and in non-feature soil contexts at the site lends further support to the notion that hunting and the subsequent processing/consumption of acquired game was conducted at the site. Burnt rock platform/hearth Feature 2 and fire-cracked rock concentrations Features 10 and 12 were likely used to dry, cook, or otherwise process food resources that may have included small game, birds, and/or fish. Although no evidence for fish was recovered from the site, the net sinker/stone weight from during site examination EU 2 indicates riverine resources were indeed exploited during the Late Archaic Period. The recovery of a fragment of a possible charred hickory nut from Feature 2 may indicate this burnt rock platform/hearth was used to process botanical foods. The presence of food-grinding implements that includes a pestle and coarse chopper adds credence to the supposition that hard nuts were exploited by the occupants of the site during the Late Archaic. Pollen sampled from nearby Black Pond suggests that hickory had become an integral component of the local oak-white pine forest by 3500 B.P. (Sneddon 1987).

Transitional Archaic Occupation

The Transitional Archaic Period overlapped temporally and possibly culturally with the end of the Late Archaic Period and the beginning of the Early Woodland Period (see Chapter 4). A Transitional Archaic component at the Area 1 Site was identified within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area where eight Atlantic, six Susquehanna Broad, three Wayland Notched, and five Orient Fishtail projectile points were recovered. These materials are associated with each of the known phases of Transitional Archaic occupation in Massachusetts dating between 3600 and ca. 2600 radiocarbon B.P. EU 8 alone produced six Atlantic, two Susquehanna Broad, one Wayland Notched, and one Orient Fishtail. Three Susquehanna Broad points and one Atlantic point were recovered from contiguous EUs excavated to the north and south, while an Atlantic point was recovered from fire-cracked rock concentration Feature 12 situated within the southern portion of the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area. Atlantic points at the Area 1 Site were recovered from an average depth of 23.7 cmbs, Susquehanna Broad points from an average depth of 20.0 cmbs, and Orient Fishtail points from an average depth of 18.5 cmbs (see Table 7-4) conforming to the known succession of Transitional Archaic Period archaeological phases in southern New England and Massachusetts.

The Late and Transitional Archaic occupations at the Area 1 Site both appear as dense concentrations of cultural materials and features of near contemporaneous age.

102 PAL Report No. 488 Results of the Archaeological Studies

Middle Woodland Occupation

The most recent and yet smallest identified occupation at the Area 1 Site dated to the Middle Woodland Period. A Middle Woodland component to the site was identified by the recovery of a jasper Jack’s Reef Corner Notched projectile point from shallow pit Feature 7 located in EU 12. Feature 7 intruded into Late Archaic Small Stemmed Tradition quartz workshop Feature 9. A jasper projectile point tip fragment was also recovered from Feature 7. Pennsylvania jasper flakes from the north half of EU 12 and the two pre- contact Native American clay pottery sherds recovered from the site are likely associated with the Middle Woodland occupation of the Area 1 Site.

Shallow fire pit Feature 7, the jasper Jack’s Reef projectile point and associated jasper debitage, and the two clay pot sherds suggest the Area 1 Site was occupied only briefly during the Middle Woodland Period. Activities implied by the site’s artifact and feature content include limited food processing and hunting.

PAL Report No. 488 103

CHAPTER EIGHT

SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT OF THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Combined site examination and data recovery archaeological investigations demonstrated that the Area 1 Site occupied a knoll bordering Columbia Road. The Area 1 Site was first occupied during the Early Archaic Period with a more sizable occupation dating to the Middle Archaic Period. The most intense and diverse occupation and use of the site occurred during the Late Archaic Period primarily by producers of Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points and artifacts. Susquehanna Tradition projectile points such as Atlantic, Wayland Notched, Susquehanna Broad, and Orient Fishtail varieties demonstrate that the Area 1 Site was also occupied during the Transitional Archaic Period, although to a lesser degree. A small, short- duration Middle Woodland component was also present at the site.

Pre-contact Native American archaeological deposits were most dense in northeast corner of the Area 1 Site (Northeast Quadrant Concentration area), with lesser concentrations located to the northwest and within the site’s southern half (S5W10 Concentration area). Identified concentration areas consisted of moderate to high densities of lithic debitage with associated chipped and ground/pecked stone tools, few Native American clay pot sherds, and several associated archaeological features. Two of excavated features contained charcoal that yielded Late/Transitional Archaic Period radiocarbon dates (see Chapter 7).

Evaluation of Archaeological Data

The categories of data collected from the Area 1 Site as a result of site examination and data recovery program archaeological investigations provided new categories of data relevant for advancing our understanding of pre-contact Native American settlement and land use in southeastern Massachusetts.

Stated Goals/Data Collection

Each of the research questions generated for the Hanover Marketplace archaeological data recovery program was addressed by a set of stated goals/data collection objectives. Certain assumptions were made regarding the categories of archaeological data expected to be present at the Area 1 Site following the findings of the site examination survey. Expected classes of archaeological data and those actually obtained from the site as a result of data recovery archaeological investigations were for the most part commensurate. Some discrepancies between the anticipated and actual data sets were, however, encountered. These differences led to limited modifications in the research goals. Area 1 Site archaeological data sets are described below in these terms.

Lithic Assemblage

The Area 1 Site lithic assemblage, which consisted of chipped and ground/pecked stone tools and lithic debitage, exceeded the expected categories of archaeological information necessary to address the occupational and depositional history of the site, examining the differential use of space within the site, and assessing the social organization of on-site activities. Diagnostic projectile points and other tools were recovered, several from radiocarbon-dated cultural contexts. Chipped-stone tools also provided information about lithic technologies within the North River drainage relative to lithic patterns observed at other sub-regional or regional sites.

104 PAL Report No. 488 Summary and Assessment of the Research Questions

The density, variability, morphological attributes, and distribution of the chipping debris provided ample information useful for reconstructing site use and the spatial patterning of activities. These data were also useful for answering questions about lithic technologies and raw material distributions within the North River drainage. Selective petrographic analyses and thin sectioning provided information of probable lithic source areas targeted by the Area 1 Site occupants.

Features

Cultural features (N=14) at the Area 1 Site provided information useful for addressing questions about on-site activities, intensity of occupation, and the role of the activity areas within the site and within larger subregional land use systems. Radiocarbon dates derived from organic materials obtained from undisturbed soil contexts within three of these features, together with the two radiocarbon dates derived from archaeological features during the preceding archaeological site examination survey, provided a well-dated chronology of site occupation and land use. Feature depths and their temporal and/or cultural affiliations provided the basis for interpreting the site’s depositional history. Feature morphological attributes and contexts also provided insight into the full range of on-site domestic activities and clues as to social organization across the site over time. Floral and faunal remains obtained from archaeological features assisted with answering questions of resource exploitation and the seasonality(ies) of site occupation.

Palynological Data

Several of the data recovery program archaeological research themes required reconstruction of the Area 1 Site/North River drainage paleoenvironment. Sneddon’s (1987) reconstruction the late glacial and postglacial vegetation of Black Pond in nearby Norwell was particularly useful for interpreting the paleoenvironment of the Area 1 Site. Topographic maps with information on the surficial deposits and soil types were also reviewed in order to assist with reconstructing the past environmental conditions.

Floral/Faunal Data

It was expected that archaeological features at the site would provide floral and faunal remains, which when combined with local and regional palynological information, would aid in interpreting resource use, site seasonality, and the settlement history of the site. While few identifiable seed and nuts were recovered from pre-contact Native American archaeological contexts at the site during data recovery investigations, the fragmentary nature of the recovered calcined bone specimens was too small for the most part to permit species identification. Soil flotation resulted in the recovery of shell from six samples. Recovered shell, however, was highly fragmented and species identification of them is questionable. The generally acidic conditions of site area soils is likely partially responsible for the poor representation of organic remains (floral, faunal, aquatic, riverine, etc.) at the site. The general absence of floral and faunal remains from the site precludes definitive interpretations about targeted resources and site seasonality.

Petrographic and Geochemical Data

Trace element analysis and petrographic thin sectioning verified for the most part lithic source areas determination based on a macroscopic (visual) inspection of the Area 1 Site lithic materials. Petrographic and geochemical analyses demonstrated that lithic sourcing is best accomplished by combining macroscopic criteria, trace element analyses, and the examination of thin sections. Lithic materials, such as some of those derived from the Lynn/Mattapan volcanic complex, exhibit a broad spectrum and range of trace elements. While it may be possible to associate some of these lithic materials to a broad geographic complex, it is often difficult to correlate them with very specific quarry sites. Pink/red felsite Sample # 488-L12 for example is geochemically similar to other lithics derived from the Lynn/Mattapan

PAL Report No. 488 105 Chapter Eight volcanic suite. Morphological and observable thin section characteristics of this sample that include elongated accessory minerals within a crenallated pattern are consistent with other red felsite samples (Sample # 488-L1, 488-L6, 488-L7) that are known to outcrop in Hingham. Nevertheless, PAL interprets Sample # 488-L12 as most likely as having been derived from the Lynn/Mattapan volcanic complex of northeastern Massachusetts. Trace element analysis of the red felsite shows possible geochemical “markers” that includes elevated amounts of some elements such as zinc and lesser ancillary elements such as barium.

Assessment of Research Questions

Research Question 1: What was the extent and nature of Late Archaic Period use of the Area 1 Site? Does the data conform to the general regional model?

The database of known pre-contact Native American archaeological sites from eastern/southeastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island indicates that sites vary in size and structural characteristics. These variations are probably reflections of certain factors or processes that include site function, duration of occupation, the size of the group(s) occupying a site, and the frequency of site re-occupation. Many southern New England archaeological sites situated in resource rich areas such as river or swamp margins commonly contain evidence for repeated occupation over thousands of years. Archaeological sites recurrently occupied over thousands of years oftentimes provide evidence for and changes in pre-contact Native American settlement systems at the local level.

The fourth millennium B.P. in southern New England is recognized as a time of environmental stabilization, which may have led hunter/gatherer populations to develop settlement and subsistence strategies confined to circumscribed territories. Lithic material distributions appear to suggest a gradual decrease in group territory size from the preceding periods (ca. 8000 to 6000 B.P.) and increased resource specialization within an environment that supported variable and diverse natural resources (Dincauze 1980). A reduction in group size operational territories around 4000 to 3000 years ago may have contributed to increased re-use and occupation of optimal environmental settings and resource areas such as large riverine settings, upland zone wetlands, etc. Another factor could be changes in the logistical organization of task-oriented groups possibly in tandem with a reduction in territory size (Thorbahn 1982). Regardless of the motivational cause or causes, the result appears to have been that optimal site locations (those having the greatest resource abundances and diversities) were targeted for repeated, periodic settlement during the Late Archaic Period. Archaeological investigations at several multicomponent riverine and upland wetland zone sites located in the Taunton River drainage of southeastern Massachusetts appear to support this hypothesis. The most intensive occupation of the Bay Street 1 Site occurred between 4300 and 3200 years ago for example. The nearby Canoe River West Site contained several large burnt rock pavements that appear to have been constructed and used for purposes of resource processing between ca. 3200 and 2500 years ago. The variety of Native American features (e.g. large complex pits and hearths) at the Newcombe Street Site similarly dated to between 4000 and 3300 years ago is suggestive of several episodes of re-occupation dating to the Late Archaic Period (Thorbahn et al. 1982). Moderate to large (2500 to 5000 m²) multicomponent Archaic/Woodland Period sites located along the margins of wetlands/marshes in several other major river drainages in eastern Massachusetts also appear to have been intensively (re)occupied around 4500 to 3000 years ago. Features on two large riverine zone sites in the Neponset and Cochato river drainages, for example, were primarily associated with Late/Transitional Archaic occupations. Radiocarbon dates derived from large, deep pits with associated stone tool lithic manufacturing debris (e.g. chipping debris and bifacial tool blades) and hearth features at the Oak Terrace Site along the Neponset River clustered between 3990 and 3430 B.P. Archaeological features at the Gill Farm #3 Site situated along the Cochato River produced similar dates that ranged from 3940 to 3230 years ago. Pre-existing Middle Archaic occupations at each of these sites appear to have been impacted by the construction of later Late/Transitional Archaic cultural features.

106 PAL Report No. 488 Summary and Assessment of the Research Questions

Combined site examination and data recovery investigations at the Area 1 Site identified a substantial Small Stemmed and Squibnocket Stemmed/Triangle lithic assemblage and four archaeological features radiocarbon dated to 4600 ± 90 B.P., 3540 ± 80 B.P., 3510 ± 90 B.P., and 3290 ± 80 B.P. The site’s artifact content and feature record are suggestive of recurrent occupation of this location during the Late/Transitional Archaic Period. Dense lithic chipping debris, projectile points, bifacial and unifacial tools and core remnants associated with quartz workshop Feature 9 are demonstrative of an episode of intensive chipped stone tool manufacture located at the crest of the knoll. Concentrations of Laurentian Tradition Brewerton and Susquehanna Tradition projectile points and evidence for terrestrial and aquatic resource provisioning and processing from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area provide further evidence of recurrent occupation of the site dating the Late/Transitional Archaic Period. Late/Transitional Archaic occupants of the site engaged in resource processing, refuse disposal, and lithic manufacture/maintenance. Hunting and processing of small game as evidence by the recovery of calcined mammal bones appear to have been important Late/Transitional Archaic subsistence activities. Food- grinding implements recovered from the site (e.g. pestle and a coarse chopper) suggest that vegetal foods such as acorns or other nuts, wetland tubers, and/or other wetland flora were also exploited at this locale. Stone tools such as scrapers, knives, unifacial stone tools, and drills/perforators suggest that hide- working, butchering, and meat processing were also conducted at the Area 1 Site. A stone weight/net sinker indicates that riverine resources were also targeted by the site’s inhabitants.

As previously mentioned, the Area 1 Site was located along the southwestern side of a broad knoll that may once have been bordered by feeder streams/wetlands associated with Third Herring Brook on the east, by Iron Mine Brook and associated wetlands on the west, and on the northeast and northwest by wetlands that form the headwaters of these streams. The site is also situated less than one mile north of the confluence of the Indian Head and North rivers where three principal tributary streams (Third Herring Brook, Swamp Brook, Pudding Brook) converge in a large wetland. This upland wetland situated in proximity to the Indian Head and North rivers appears to have been one such “optimal site location” that was targeted for resource exploitation and/or settlement during the Late/Transitional Archaic periods.

Research Question 2: What information does the Area 1 Site contain on the transition between the Archaic and Woodland Period?

The recovery of two Native American clay pot sherds from two different locations within the Area 1 Site Northeastern Quadrant Concentration area during the archaeological site examination survey posed important questions to the PAL research team: does the site contain evidence for early (Late/Transitional Archaic Period) ceramic production and use or are these artifacts evidence for continuous or repeated occupation of the site that extended into the Early and Middle Woodland Periods? The earliest evidence for Native American ceramic production in the Northeast is generally attributed to the Early Woodland Period (ca 3000 B.P.). Some sites in the Taunton River drainage, however have produced evidence for early ceramic vessel use in southern New England. Ceramic sherds similar in type and style to known Early Woodland Vinette I ceramics were recovered in close association to a pit feature radiocarbon dated to ca. 3700 B.P. at the Bay Street I Site (Cox 1982). It was believed that continued archaeological investigation of the Area 1 Site would resolve whether the ceramics recovered from the site were early examples or evidence of later Woodland Period occupation.

Data recovery investigations at the Area 1 Site confirmed that the site contained a substantial Late Archaic Small Stemmed Tradition archaeological component. Hand excavation also documented that the site contained Late Archaic Laurentian Tradition and Transitional Archaic Susquehanna Tradition archaeological components. Previously unknown Early Archaic and Middle Archaic Period occupations were also identified at the site as a result of archaeological data recovery field investigations. Woodland Period artifacts recovered from the excavated portion of the Area 1 Site was limited to a single Pennsylvania jasper Jack’s Reef corner notched projectile point (see Figure 6-26). This projectile point

PAL Report No. 488 107 Chapter Eight was recovered from in association with Feature 7. Feature 7 is interpreted as a Middle Woodland fire pit, which intruded into the northwestern border of Late Archaic lithic workshop Feature 9. No additional Woodland Period artifacts or ceramic sherds were recovered from the Area 1 Site during data recovery archaeological investigations. The documentation of an ephemeral Middle Woodland component suggests that the site was only occasionally occupied for very brief periods of time during the Woodland Period as compared to the Late Archaic Period. Evidently then, this small interior stream and wetland setting associated with Third Herring Brook did not markedly factor into the long-term settlement system of the local and/or regional Native American population(s) during the Woodland Period.

Research Question 3: What is the nature and extent of wetland resource exploitation at the Area 1 Site, and how does this reflect changes in the environment around 4000 to 3000 years ago?

Archaeological research has demonstrated that Native American sites are commonly located in productive ecosystems, which supported a diversity of natural resources. Wetlands are very productive ecosystems, which served as important foci for human settlement and resource exploitation throughout the pre-contact period and into the historic period. Nicholas (1991) has identified five ecological features that attracted pre-contact Native American hunter/gatherers to wetlands: resource type (flora, fauna), seasonality, resource productivity, species diversity, and resource reliability.

Archaeological investigations within the greater Taunton River drainage have demonstrated that wetland margins were targeted for resource exploitation and settlement during the Late Archaic, particularly by those associated with the Small Stemmed Tradition. Resource availability and diversity likely contributed to the selection of the Area 1 Site as a camping locale during the Late Archaic. Fishing of anadromous fish derived from Iron Mine Brook and its tributaries may have contributed to intensive occupation of the site area. The burnt rock platform/hearth (site examination Feature 2) that overlay a deep pit (Feature 13) is an area where fish, meat and/or plant resources were likely processed. It is not possible to determine with any certainty which resources were exploited at this locale due to the absence of floral and faunal remains. Flotation of site examination Feature 2 soils produced one charred Chenopodium seed. Radiocarbon dates of 3290 ± 90 B.P. from site examination burnt rock platform Feature 2 and 4600 ± 90 B.P. from pit Feature 13, in addition to Small Stemmed and Orient Fishtail projectile point varieties suggest that these features may have been re-used throughout the Late/Transitional Archaic Period. Recovery of a single Native American ceramic sherd from within the burnt rock platform is suggestive of limited Woodland Period utilization/occupation of this particular area within the Area 1 Site. Three fire- cracked/burnt rock concentrations with associated Small Stemmed, Atlantic, and Orient Fishtail projectile points were exposed within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration area. Few Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, and Late Archaic Laurentian Tradition projectile points recovered away from the fire- cracked/burnt rock concentration areas are indicative of sporadic, short-duration occupation of the Area 1 Site during these periods relative to the Small Stemmed/Susquehanna Tradition occupations of the site.

Other sites in the Taunton River drainage contained evidence for similar resource processing dating to the Late/Transitional Archaic Period. The Canoe River West Site, for example, contained at least 26 burnt rock platforms situated in close proximity to one another and occasionally superimposed over deep pits (Simon 1982). Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points and quartz chipping debris were intermixed within the burnt rock concentrations, while Orient Fishtail points were recovered peripheral to the rock platforms. These features are suggestive of high bulk processing of resources derived from wetland/stream settings. Similar features have also been reported at the Pine Hawk Site (19-MD-793) located along the Assabet River in Acton (Waller and Ritchie 2001) and the Riverside 2 Site (19-PL-703) situated along the Nemasket River in Lakeville (Waller 2009).

108 PAL Report No. 488 Summary and Assessment of the Research Questions

Reconstruction of the late-/post-glacial vegetation and climatic history of Black Pond in Norwell indicates that a conifer forest dominated by white pine with hemlock had become established in the region by 9900 B.P. (Sneddon 1987). Oak was probably modestly present within the pine forest. By approximately 9500 B.P., birch and hemlock attained fairly stable levels while pine decreased. Oak increased rapidly reaching peak influx by 8600 B.P. This period represented a time of maximum warmth and dryness and also corresponded with a period of comparatively frequent forest fires. Hemlock has a low fire tolerance and the increase in fires may have forced hemlocks to low-lying areas. Ragweed became abundant reaching a peak at 8400 B.P. Davis (1965) hypothesized that generally warm and dry conditions during this period contributed to decreased forest density and that openings within the forests contributed to the colonization by ragweed. Beech and sycamore appeared nearly simultaneously ca. 7000 B.P. Hemlock began to decline ca. 4700 B.P., while hickory arrived soon after. The establishment of hickory may have been aided by openings in the forest vacated by dying hemlock trees. The transition from an open pond to a closing bog mat at Black Pond commenced with the establishment of ericaceous flora by 3300 B.P. The bog mat was in development at Black Pond by 3200 B.P. Development of the bog mat contributed to the establishment of Atlantic white cedar, which arrived at Black Pond approximately 2500 B.P.

The Area 1 Site wetland system may have experienced a vegetative and environmental sequencing similar to that at Black Pond summarized above. The low-lying wetlands that feed into Iron Mine Brook north of the knoll atop of which the site is located may have supported a pond sometime before 4000 B.P. This period coincides with the densest and most frequent period of occupation at the Area 1 Site. As the smaller streams and ponds transitioned from open water to closing bog mat presumably between ca. 3300 and 2500 B.P., the Woodland Period inhabitants of the Area 1 Site altered their settlement and subsistence regimes generally avoiding the site altogether. The archaeological data from the site is consistent with regional palynological and archaeological data which suggests changes in wetlands (size, structure, vegetation types) due to eutrophication and a climatic cooling trend influenced pre-contact Native American settlement choice and resource use (Bradshaw et al. 1982; Nicholas 1991; Simon 1991; Thorbahn 1982). Regional archaeological studies suggest settlement and resource focus shifts away from interior and wetland/riverine settings towards the coast and estuary and salt marsh margins (Braun 1974; Barber 1983; Dincauze 1973; Thorbahn 1984; Bernstein 1990, 1993). Braun (1974) notes that conditions conducive for the establishment estuaries and shellfish beds followed stabilization of the coastline ca. 4000 years ago. Coastal resources were exploited as early as the Middle Archaic Period but appear to have become increasingly important by ca. 4000 B.P. This trend only continued drawing focused settlement away from the interior river systems towards the coast.

Research Question 4: What was the relationship of the site to Late Woodland/Contact Period core areas of settlement to the south at Pembroke Ponds and to the north around the Boston Basin, and did this orientation extend back to the Late/Transitional Archaic Period?

Native core areas were established along major river drainages where seasonal rounds were made between the river estuary, its headwaters, and associated tributaries and interior ponds during the Contact Period (450 to 300 B.P.). Native American movements along this interior-coastal axis were influenced by the climate, seasonal availability of food and other resources, and the growing presence of European colonists and settlers. River systems served as core areas of Contact Period Native American settlement because of the diverse resources afforded by them which included freshwater, saltwater, and terrestrial food resources, proximity and availability of agricultural lands, and the presence of navigable water routes that assisted in transportation and movement (MHC 1982).

A relative absence of Woodland Period cultural deposits and materials at the Area 1 Site makes it difficult to address the relationship between the Area 1 Site and Late Woodland/Contact Period core areas of Native American settlement to the south at Pembroke Ponds and to the north around the Boston basin. The Pembroke Ponds complex was the location of a major interior Native American core area. An

PAL Report No. 488 109 Chapter Eight interior-coastal pattern of movement likely existed between the interior Pembroke Ponds complex and the coastal North River/Plymouth area. The Pembroke Ponds core was reportedly occupied by the Massachusett Indians with a major settlement located at Mattakeeset by the Contact Period. The coastal core, which extended from the North River south to Plymouth Bay, included a major settlement at Patuxet, the central location of a probable cultural and linguistic sub-group of Wampanoag (MHC 1982). Another regional core to which the Area 1 Site could conceivably share connections was focused on the Neponset River. Like that mentioned above, an interior-coastal pattern of movement likely operated within the Neponset core. The coastal component extended from Dorchester south through Milton and Quincy to perhaps the Fore River and beyond with most of the interior focused around large head-water and smaller ponds of Canton, Sharon, and Walpole. Upland sections of the Fore/Monatiquot drainage also were part of the Neponset core area (MHC 1982). Important lithic source areas such as the Blue Hills igneous complex and the Mattapan volcanic complex were located within the Neponset core. The Neponset, North River/Plymouth, and Pembroke Ponds cores continued to function as regional core areas throughout the sixteenth and into the mid- to late- seventeenth centuries. Virulent diseases introduced to the indigenous populations impacted these core areas most notably the settlement core at Patuxet (MHC 1982).

Wampatuck was the son and successor to Chickataubut, sachem of the Massachusett, in 1662. Chickataubut’s village in the early seventeenth century was located on the Neponset River estuary. At the time of his death of small pox in 1631, his territory extended from Neponset on the north, Duxbury to the south, and from the coast to Bridgewater and Middleborough to the west. The Area 1 Site is located in the central portion of this territory. Sometime between 1630 and 1660, the 3000 warriors of the Massachusett tribe were reduced to a mere 300 leaving Mount Wollaston (Quincy) for the ponds and fields of Mattakeeset (Pembroke Ponds complex). Wampatuck, as sachem of the drastically reduced tribe, sought to insure a reservation or buffer zone between the English settlements in Duxbury and present-day Hanson by insisting on continued ownership of the core area around the Pembroke Ponds. Wampatuck reserved 900 acres for his son and 100 acres for George Wampy “for the express use of the Indians and their heirs forever” (Town of Pembroke 1662). It is probable that the so-called “Thousand Acres” were never purchased outright from the Indians, but were rather taken gradually by early settlers as the Indians died off or left the area (Collamore 1884). In 1684, there were 40 Indians at Namattakeeset (Collamore 1867). In 1693, Wampatuck’s successor Jeremiah Momentague (or Momentaug) along with his wife Abigail sold 100 acres at Namassakeeset Ponds to Major William Bradford of Plymouth (Smith 1912).

The Area 1 Site and the immediate Hanover vicinity were situated peripheral to the interior Pembroke Ponds and coastal North River/Plymouth cores by the Contact Period. The database of known archaeological sites indicates that the upper North River drainage was an area of intense Native American settlement and resource exploitation during the Late and Transitional Archaic periods. This same database also demonstrates a sharp decline in upland interior wetland and river margin land use during the Woodland and into the Contact periods. Archaeological data recovered from the Area 1 Site is consistent with this demonstrated pattern of regional Native American land use in eastern Massachusetts. This clear shift in settlement choice and intensity (or lack thereof) of land use may be causally linked to a number of factors that include resource preference and availability and perhaps changes in social and political organization. Although the Area 1 Site was clearly located in a core of Native American settlement between 4000 and 3000 years ago, a relatively lack of Woodland Period cultural deposits and materials precludes an assessment of to what degree this core approximated those core areas of Native American settlement known in sixteenth and seventeenth century Massachusetts.

110 PAL Report No. 488 Summary and Assessment of the Research Questions

Research Question 5: How does the lithic assemblage at the Area 1 Site reflect the pattern of resource use and settlement, and what can this reveal about economic systems in the upper North River drainage?

Site examination and data recovery archaeological investigations of the Area 1 Site yielded a dense assortment of pre-contact Native American lithic artifacts. Some 323 chipped stone tools or tool fragments (projectile points, bifaces, drills, scrapers, unifacial tools) and nearly 30,000 pieces of chipping debris have been recovered from the site. Slightly more than 87 percent of the Area 1 Site lithic artifacts were recovered in the Northeast Quadrant Concentration. The Area 1 Site cultural assemblage includes artifacts that were manufactured out of locally, regionally, and extra-regionally derived lithic materials. Lithic material types from the site were variable consisting mainly of felsites and quartz with lesser amounts of other lithic materials such as argillite, quartzite, slate (Braintree slate, arkose, slate), chert, chalcedony, jasper, and some unidentified materials (see Figure 6-11).

Roughly 48 percent of the Area 1 Site chipped stone tools were manufactured out of quartz, while quartz comprised 51.5 percent of the site’s debitage assemblage. Forty-one and a half percent of the chipped stone tools from the site were manufactured out of some variety of felsite, while 42 percent of the site debitage is comprised of felsite. Felsites at the Area 1 Site include Hingham Red, Sally Rock, Saugus jasper, Mattapan, Attleboro Red, Blue Hills rhyolite, and Lynn Volcanic varieties.

Quartz is readily available in cobble form from streams, coastal margins, and the glacial train, as small boulders, or in boulder veins. Forty-five (88 percent) of the Small Stemmed Tradition (Small Stemmed and/or Squibnocket Triangle) projectile points recovered from the Area 1 Site were manufactured out of quartz. Reliance on quartz and to a lesser extent argillite for the manufacture of Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points is typical for the greater Taunton Drainage Basin and reflects a reliance on locally available and perhaps the presence of an established group territory. Diverse felsites are typically recovered from sites located to the north and west of the Boston Basin during the Late Archaic. A considerable proportion of the Area 1 Site Small Stemmed Tradition projectile points (19 of 46 or 41 percent) were recovered from in association with quartz workshop Feature 9. Other quartz artifacts from Feature 9 included six untyped projectile point fragments, 14 bifaces, six unifacial tools, two core remnants and over 3200 pieces of quartz chipping debris (flakes and shatter). The recovery of large primary flakes, pieces of shatter with cobble cortex, and core remnants, numerous small to medium-sized flakes, along with broken and/or unfinished tools indicates that all stages of bifacial tool manufacture from initial cobble reduction to final tool finishing occurred within this workshop. Other lithic materials were similarly worked through the entire reduction sequence. Several large Hingham red felsite primary reduction flakes and a large piece of Lynn Volcanic felsite shatter with cobble cortex were recovered from Feature 9 along with a large Hingham red felsite biface fragment. A Hingham red felsite projectile point fragment was also recovered from Feature 9.

Deep pit Feature 13, situated seven meters north of Feature 9, also contained Small Stemmed points and a high density of quartz chipping debris. Feature 13 underlay burnt rock platform/hearth Feature 2. Relatively high densities of predominantly quartz chipping debris were recovered from between 50 and 100 cmbs in Feature 13. Whereas chipping debris from Feature 2 for the most part consisted of late stage bifacial thinning and tertiary finishing flakes, debitage from Feature 13 primarily consisted of larger flakes generated during secondary bifacial shaping. Quartz debitage from Features 9 and 13 accounts for nearly 35 percent of the total quartz chipping debris recovered from the Area 1 Site during site examination and data recovery archaeological investigations.

Much quartz and Hingham Red felsite from the Area 1 Site was wasted. Cobble cortex, large waste flakes and shatter, and exhausted lithic cores suggest that Late Archaic occupants of the Area 1 Site had ready access to these materials and did not need to ration their use. Furthermore, raw material size and attributes

PAL Report No. 488 111 Chapter Eight suggest that these materials were acquired directly from their source areas and not through intermediary agents (trade). Consequently, the lithic data from the Area 1 Site suggest that the Late Archaic Small Stemmed Tradition occupants of the site engaged in a central-based wandering settlement system (sensu Beardsley 1956) that not only included the immediate Hanover area but extended northward to Boston Harbor.

Diagnostic Early and Middle Archaic projectile points recovered from the Area 1 Site are nearly all manufactured out of felsitic materials. The three Early Archaic bifurcate based projectile points recovered from the Northeast Quadrant Concentration were manufactured out of Blue Hills rhyolite, Lynn Volcanic felsite, and tan felsite. These lithic materials indicate that the territorial range of those occupying the Area 1 Site during the Early Archaic Period extended at least as far as Northshore Massachusetts to the Boston Basin.

Seven Middle Archaic Neville type projectile points were also recovered from the Area 1 Site as a result of site examination and data recovery archaeological investigations. Neville points were manufactured out of Lynn Volcanic felsite, Blue Hills rhyolite (N=3), Saugus jasper, Hingham Red felsite, and gray felsite. Five of the Neville points were recovered from between 25 and 55 cmbs in contiguous EUs 7, 9 and 10 located within the Northeast Quadrant Concentration. Felsite comprised the majority of the chipping debris recovered from in association with these Neville points. A relative absence of large primary flakes and shatter suggest that felsites were transported to the Area 1 Site as quarry blanks or preforms only to be further reduced into formal tools. Petrographic thin sections and XRF analysis suggest the Lynn/Mattapan volcanic suite as the most likely source area for these materials. An argillite Middle Archaic Stark projectile point was also recovered from the site. Other Middle Archaic artifacts recovered from the site included a felsite Neville projectile point basal fragment, a felsite Neville-like drill, an arkose bifacial scraper, and a Blue Hills rhyolite biface fragment. Small pit Features 2 and 3, associated with Feature 1 radiocarbon dated to 7740 ± 150 B.P., yielded 266 pieces of arkose (16 percent), Braintree slate (41 percent), felsite (22 percent), and quartz (12 percent) chipping debris.

Middle Archaic lithic materials from the Area 1 Site are indicative of a central-based wandering settlement pattern focused within a large territory that extended from Northshore Massachusetts to the southern extent of Boston Harbor. Many of these materials appear to have been transported from their source areas to the site as quarry blanks or preforms, where they were further reduced and fashioned into finished chipped stone tools. Artifact density and the site’s feature context suggest that the Area 1 site was occupied by a modest population that may have included an extended family or perhaps several small family groups during the Middle Archaic Period. The site’s archaeological content is consistent with residential mobility social structure whereby small family groups, as opposed to smaller task oriented groups, traveled together to resource areas for purposes of resource exploitation (Binford 1980).

Like most Early and Middle Archaic artifacts from the Area 1 Site, most of the Transitional Archaic Period projectile points recovered from the site (86 percent) were manufactured out felsite. Felsite varieties recovered from the site included gray felsite, purple felsite, Hingham Red felsite, and Lynn Volcanic felsite. These materials are consistent with a generally mobile settlement system.

Conclusions

Recovery and analysis of the Area 1 Site’s archaeological content contributed to our knowledge of pre- contact Native American settlement, resource use, and technology in eastern Massachusetts from the Early Archaic to the Middle Woodland Periods. Archaeological investigations have shown that the site contained evidence for repeated Native American occupation that extended from the Early Archaic through Transitional Archaic Periods. Limited archaeological data indicates the site was only occasionally occupied for very brief periods of time during the Woodland Period. Cultural materials, radiocarbon-

112 PAL Report No. 488 Summary and Assessment of the Research Questions dated features, and petrographic/geochemical data of selected lithic samples have provided new information on pre-contact Native American land use within Massachusetts’ interior wetland environmental settings.

Archaeological data collected from the site during site examination and data recovery field investigations was useful for addressing research questions developed for the Hanover Marketplace project and to mitigate the effects that commercial construction would have on the Area 1 Site. The MHC expressed satisfaction that the data recovery program was conducted in accordance with State Archaeologist’s standards (950 CMR 70) and those outlined in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeological Investigations following a review of PAL’s interim data management memorandum and site visits by MHC staff throughout fieldwork. The MHC concurred with PAL’s recommendations that no additional archaeological excavations were required for the Hanover Marketplace project and permitted project construction. Submission of this combined Area 1 and Area 2 site examination and Area 1 Site data recovery report satisfies the conditions of Massachusetts State Archaeologists Permit No. 1242 and effectively completes cultural resources archaeological investigations for the Hanover Marketplace project area.

PAL Report No. 488 113

REFERENCES

Barber, Russell, J. 1979 A Summary of Cultural Resource Information on the Continental Shelf from the Bay of Fundy to Cape Hatteras. Archaeology and Paleontology vol. 2. Institute for Conservation Archaeology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

1983 Research Design: Archaeological Data Recovery at Four Sites on Annasnappet Pond, Proposed Route 44 Location, Carver, Massachusetts. Institute for Conservation Archaeology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Barnes, Carol Ruth 1980 Feature Analysis: A Neglected Tool in Archaeological Survey and Interpretation. Man in the Northeast 20:101-113.

Beardsley, Richard K., Preston Holder, Alex D. Krieger, Betty J. Meggers, John B.Rinaldo, Paul Kutsche 1956 Functional and Evolutionary Implications of Community Patterning. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 11, Seminars in Archaeology. Pp. 129-157

Begley, William R. 1994 Archaeological Investigations at the Area 1 Site (19-PL-749), Hanover Marketplace Project Area, Hanover, Massachusetts. Paper presented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the Eastern States Archaeological Federation, Albany, NY.

Begley, William R., and Ann K. Davin 1996 Data Recovery Program, Riverside 2 (19-PL-703) and Riverside 3 (19-PL-702) Sites, Lakeville Corporate Park Project Area, Lakeville, Massachusetts. The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. Report No. 511. Submitted to Canpro Investments Limited, Lakeville, MA; Sverdrup Corporation, Boston, MA; and Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Quincy, MA.

Bendremer, Jeffery C.M., and Robert E. Dewar 1993 The Advent of Maize Horticulture in New England. In Corn and Culture in the Prehistoric New World, edited by S. Johannssen and C. Hastorf, pp. 369–393. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Bhiry, N., and L. Filion 1996 Mid-Holocene Hemlock Decline in Eastern North America Linked with Phytophagous Insect Activity. Quaternary Research 45:312–320.

Bernstein, David J. 1990 Prehistoric Seasonality studies in Coastal Southern New England. American Anthropologist 92(1):96-115.

1993 Prehistoric Settlement on the Southern New England Coast: The Record from Narragansett Bay. Academic Press, Inc. Boston, MA.

PAL Report No. 488 115 References

Binford, Lewis R. 1980 Willow Smoke and Dog’s Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:4–20

Bourne, Russell 1990 The Red King’s Rebellion: Racial Politics in New England 1675-1678. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

Bradley, James W., and Jeff Boudreau 2006 Re-Assessing Wapanucket: PaleoIndians in Southeast MA. Bulletin of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society 67(2):2006.

Bradshaw, Richard, Sheldon Nelson, and Katrina McGowan 1982 Paleoecological Reconstruction of the Taunton Quadrangle, Massachusetts. Final Report of the Interstate Highway 495 Archaeological Data Recovery Program, vol. III, edited by Peter F. Thorbahn. The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Department of Anthropology, Brown University. Submitted to the Massachusetts Highway Department, Boston, MA.

Braun, David P. 1974 Explanatory Models for the Evolution of Coastal Adaptation in Prehistoric Eastern New England. American Antiquity 39(4):582–596.

Bunker, Victoria 1992 Stratified Components of the Gulf of Maine Archaic Tradition at the Eddy Site, Amoskeag Falls. In Early Holocene Occupation in Northern New England, edited by Brian Robinson, James Peterson, and Ann Robinson, pp. 135–148. Occasional Publications in Maine Archaeology, No. 9, Maine Historic Preservation Commission, Augusta, ME.

Byers, Douglas S. 1954 Bull Brook: A Fluted Point Site in Ipswich, Massachusetts. American Antiquity 19:233– 256.

Calogero, Barbara 1992 Lithic Misidentification. Man in the Northeast 43:87–90.

Collamore, Francis 1884 History of Pembroke. In History of Plymouth County, Massachusetts, edited by D. Hamilton Hurd. J.W. Lewis, Philadelphia, PA.

Cox, Deborah C. 1982 Bay Street I Site (7KP). Final Report of the Interstate Highway 495 Archaeological Data Recovery Program, Vol. II, edited by Peter F. Thorbahn. The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Department of Anthropology, Brown University Report. Submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Public Works, Boston, MA.

Dewar, Robert E., and Kevin A. McBride 1992 Remnant Settlement Patterns. In Space, Time and Archaeological Landscapes, edited by Jacqueline Rossignol and LuAnn Wandsnider, pp. 227–255. Plenum Press, New York, NY.

116 PAL Report No. 488 References

Dincauze, Dena F. 1968 Cremation Cemeteries in Eastern Massachusetts. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 59(1). Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

1972 The Atlantic Phase: A Late Archaic Culture in Massachusetts. Man in the Northeast 4:40–61.

1973 Prehistoric Occupation of the Charles River Estuary: A Paleographic Study. Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin 38: 25-29.

1974 An Introduction to the Archaeology of the Greater Boston Area. Archaeology of Eastern North America 2(1):39–67.

1975 The Late Archaic Period in Southern New England. Arctic Anthropology 12(2):23–34.

1976 The Neville Site: 8,000 Years at Amoskeag, Manchester, New Hampshire. Peabody Museum Monographs 4. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

1980 Research Priorities in Northeast Prehistory. In Proceedings of the Conference on Northeastern Archaeology, edited by James A. Moore. Research Reports Number 19:29- 48. Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.

1990 A Capsule Prehistory of Southern New England. The Pequots in Southern New England: The Fall and Rise of an American Nation, edited by Laurence M. Hauptman and James D. Wherry, pp. 19–32. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.

1993 Fluted Points in the Eastern Forest. In From Kostenki to Clovis: Upper Paleolithic Paleo- Indian Adaptations. Chapter 20, edited by Olgo Soffer and N.D. Praslov, pp. 279–292. Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Dincauze, Dena F., and Mitchell Mulholland 1977 Early and Middle Archaic Site Distributions and Habitats in Southern New England. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 288:439–456.

Doucette, Dianna, and John R. Cross 1997 Annasnappet Pond Archaeological District, North Carver Massachusetts. An Archaeological Data Recovery Program. The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. Report No. 580. Prepared for US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Massachusetts Highway Department, Boston, MA.

Dragoo, Don W. 1976 Some Aspects of Eastern North American Prehistory: A Review 1975. American Antiquity 41:3–27.

Dudek, Martin G. 2005 The Whortleberry Hill Site: An Early Holocene Camp in Dracut, MA. Bulletin of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society. 66:12–21.

PAL Report No. 488 117 References

Dumont, John 1981 The PaleoIndian–Early Archaic Continuum: An Environmental Approach. Archaeology of Eastern North America 9:18–37.

Filios, Elena L. 1989 The End of the Beginning or the Beginning of the End: The Third Millennium in Southern New England. Man in the Northeast 38:79–93.

Fitting, James 1978 Regional Cultural Development, 300 B.C. to A.D. 1000. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 15:44–57.

Fogelman, Gary L. 1992 Projectile Point Typology for Pennsylvania and the Northeast. Fogelman Publishing Company, Turbotville, PA.

Forrest, Daniel 1999 Beyond Presence and Absence: Establishing Diversity in Connecticut’s Early Holocene Archaeological Record. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of Connecticut 62:79–100.

Fowler, William S., and Curtiss Hoffman 1991 A Handbook of Indian Artifacts from Southern New England. From the Original Text of William S. Fowler Revised by Curtiss R. Hoffman. Massachusetts Archaeological Society, Special Publication #4, Middleborough, MA.

Gaudreau, Denise C., and Thomas Webb 1985 Late Quaternary Pollen Stratigraphy and Isocrone Maps for the Northeastern United States. In Pollen Records of the Late Quaternary North American Sediments, edited by V. Bryant, Jr. and R.G. Holloway. American Association of Stratigraphic Palynologists Foundation, Dallas, TX.

Gramly, Richard Michael 1982 The Vail Site: A Palaeo-Indian Encampment in Maine. Bulletin of the Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences Vol. 30, Buffalo, NY.

Grimes, John R. 1980 “A New Look at Bull Brook.” Anthropology 3:1–2.

Grimes, John, W. Eldridge, B.G. Grimes, A. Vaccaro, F. Vaccaro, J. Vaccaro, N. Vaccaro, and A. Orsini 1984 Bull Brook II. New Experiments upon the Record of Eastern PaleoIndian Cultures. Archaeology of Eastern North America 12:159–183.

Hasenstab, Robert 1991 Wetlands as a Critical Variable in Predictive Modeling of Prehistoric Site Locations: A Case Study from the Passaic Basin. Man in the Northeast 42:39–61.

Hecker, Howard M. 1995 Jasper Flakes and Jack’s Reef Points at Adams Point: Speculations on Interregional Exchange in Late Middle Woodland Times in Coastal New Hampshire. The New Hampshire Archaeologist 35(1):61–83.

118 PAL Report No. 488 References

Hermes, O. Don, and Duncan Ritchie 1997a Application of Petrographic and Geochemical Methods to Sourcing Felsitic Archaeological Materials in Southeastern New England. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 12(1):1-30.

1997b Nondestructive Trace Element Analysis of Archaeological Felsite by Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 12(1):31- 40.

Jones, Brian D., and Daniel T. Forrest 2003 Life in a Postglacial Landscape: Settlement-Subsistence Change during the Pleistocene- Holocene Transition in Southern New England. In Geoarchaeology of Landscapes in the Glacieated Northeast, edited by David L. Cremeens and John P. Hart, pp. 75–89. University of the State of New York, Albany, NY.

Juli, Harold D., and Kevin A. McBride 1984 The Early and Middle Woodland Periods of Connecticut Prehistory: Focus on the Lower Connecticut River Valley. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of Connecticut 47:89– 98.

Kelso, Gerald K., Duncan Ritchie, and Nicole Misso 2000 Pollen Record Preservation Processes in the Salem Neck Sewage Plant Shell Midden (19- ES-471), Salem, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Journal of Archaeological Science 27:235–240.

Kelly, Robert L., and Lawrence C. Todd 1988 Coming Into the Country: Early PaleoIndian Hunting and Mobility. American Antiquity 53(2):231–244.

Lavin, Lucianne 1988 Coastal Adaptation in Southern New England and Southern New York. Archaeology of Eastern North America 16:101–120.

Leveillee, Alan 1995 A Program of Archaeological Data Recovery: The Millbury III Cremation Complex, Millbury, Massachusetts, Vol. II. The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. Report No. 396. Submitted to New England Power Service Company, Westborough, MA.

Luedtke, Barbara E. 1987 The Pennsylvania Connection: Jasper in Massachusetts Archaeological Sites. Bulletin of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society 48(1):37–47.

Mahlstedt, Thomas 1985 Prehistoric Archaeological Collection Analysis in Southeastern Massachusetts: Report on the Raymond Seamans Jr. Collection. On file, Massachusetts Historical Commission, Boston, MA.

Massachusetts Historical Commission 1982 Historic and Archaeological Resources of Southeast Massachusetts: A Framework for Preservation Decisions. Massachusetts Historical Commission, Boston, MA.

PAL Report No. 488 119 References

1984 Guide to Prehistoric Site Files and Artifact Classification System. Massachusetts Historical Commission, Office of the Secretary of State, Boston, MA.

Maymon, Jeffery H., and Charles E. Bolian 1992 The Wadleigh Falls Site: An Early and Middle Archaic Period Site in Southeastern New Hampshire. In Early Holocene Occupation in Northern New England, edited by Brian S. Robinson, James B. Petersen, and Ann K. Robinson, pp. 117–134. Occasional Publications in Maine Archaeology, No. 9, Maine Historic Preservation Commission, Augusta, ME.

McBride, Kevin A. 1984 Prehistory of the Lower Connecticut River Valley. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.

McBride, Kevin A., and Robert E. Dewar 1987 Agriculture and Cultural Evolution: Causes and Effects in the Lower Connecticut River Valley. In Emergent Horticultural Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by William F. Keegan, pp. 305–328. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Papers No. 7, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL.

McWeeney, Lucinda 1999 A review of Late Pleistocene and Holocene Climate Changes in Southern New England. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of Connecticut 62:3–18.

Meltzer, David J., and Bruce D. Smith 1986 PaleoIndian and Early Archaic Subsistence Strategies in Eastern North America. In Foraging, Collecting, and Harvesting: Archaic Period Subsistence and Settlement in the Eastern Woodlands, edited by Sarah W. Neusius, pp. 3–31. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Papers No. 6, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL.

Missio, Nicole and Donald G. Jones 1992 Intensive Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Hanover Marketplace Project in Hanover, Massachusetts. Office of Public Archaeology, Boston University Report. Submitted to Carpionato Corporation, Johnston, RI.

Mulholland, Mitchell T. 1988 Territoriality and Horticulture: A Perspective for Prehistoric Southern New England. In Holocene Human Ecology in Northeastern North America, edited by George P. Nicholas, pp. 137–164. Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Newby, Paige 2000 Report on the Paleoenvironmental Reconstruction for Crane Swamp and Cedar Swamp Pond, Central Massachusetts. Department of Geological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI.

Newby, P.E., and T. Webb III 1994 Radiocarbon Dated Pollen and Sediment Records from near the Boylston Street Fishweir Site in Boston, Massachusetts. Quaternary Research 41:214–224.

120 PAL Report No. 488 References

Newby, Paige, Thompson Webb III, and R.S. Webb 1986 Pollen and Sediment Records for Houghtons Pond in Eastern Massachusetts. Department of Geological Sciences, Brown University Report. Submitted to The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Pawtucket, RI.

Newby, Paige E., Peter Killoran, Mahlon R. Waldorf, Bryan N. Shuman, Robert S. Webb, and Thompson Webb 2000 14,000 Years of Sediment, Vegetation, and Water-Level Changes at the Makepeace Cedar Swamp, Southeastern Massachusetts. Quaternary Research 53:352–368.

Nicholas, George P. 1987 Rethinking the Early Archaic. Archaeology of Eastern North America 15:99–123.

1991 Places and Spaces: Changing Patterns in Wetland Use in Southern New England. Man in the Northeast 42:75–98.

Ogden, J. Gordon 1977 The Late Quaternary Paleoenvironmental Record of the Northeastern North America. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 288:16–34.

Pagoulatos, Peter 1988 Terminal Archaic Settlement and Subsistence in the Connecticut River Valley. Man in the Northeast 35:71–94.

Pfeiffer, John 1980 The Griffin Site: A Susquehanna Cremation Burial in Southern Connecticut. Man in the Northeast 19:129–133.

Raber, Michael S., Stephen P. Carini, Gifford Fogle, and Roger Moeller 1991 Archaeological Intensive Survey and Site Examinations for the Proposed Riverside Park, Lakeville, Massachusetts: The Bridge Street II and Riverside Sites 1-8. Raber Associates Report. Submitted to Lakeville Realty Trust, Middleborough, MA.

Ritchie, Duncan 1983 A Review of Past and Current Research in the Sudbury and Assabet Drainages. Man in the Northeast 25:83–93.

Ritchie, Duncan, and Richard A. Gould 1985 Back to the Source: A Preliminary Account of the Massachusett Hill Quarry Complex. In Stone Tool Analysis: Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, edited by Max Pavesic, James Woods, and Mark Plew, pp. 35–53. University of New Mexico Press, Alburquerque, NM.

Ritchie, Duncan and O. Donald Hermes 1990 Geochemical Analysis of Volcanic Materials from the Boston Basin and Prehistoric Lithic Resource Use. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Anthropological Association, Burlington, VT.

1992 Geochemical and Petrographic Characteristics of Material from Lithic Source Areas in the Lynn-Mattapan Volcanic Complex. Paper presented at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Anthropological Association, Bridgewater, MA.

PAL Report No. 488 121 References

Ritchie, William A. 1969 The Archaeology of Martha's Vineyard. Natural History Press, Garden City, NY.

1971 A Typology and Nomenclature for New York Projectile Points. Revised edition. New York State Museum and Science Service Bulletin 384, Albany, NY.

1980 The Archaeology of New York State. Harbor Hill Books, Harrison, NY.

Ritchie, William A., and Robert E. Funk 1973 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in the Northeast. New York State Museum and Science Service Memoir 20, Albany, NY.

Robbins, Maurice 1980 Wapanucket. Massachusetts Archaeological Society, Attleboro, MA.

Robbins, M., and G. Agogino 1964 The Wapanucket No. 8 Site: A Clovis-Archaic Site in Massachusetts. American Antiquity 29:509–513.

Suter, Suzanne 1985 Late Glacial and Holocene Vegetation History in Southeastern Massachusetts: A 14,000 Year Pollen Record. Current Research in the Pleistocene Vol. 2, pp. 87–89.

Simon, Brona G. 1982 Canoe River West Site. In The Prehistoric Site Summaries: Final Report of the Interstate Highway 495 Archaeological Data Recovery Program, Vol. II, edited by Peter F. Thorbahn. Department of Anthropology, Brown University, Providence, RI. Submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Public Works, Boston, MA.

1991 Prehistoric Land Use and Changing Paleoecological Conditions at Titicut Swamp in Southeastern Massachusetts. Man in the Northeast 42:63–74.

Smith, Susan 1912 Ancestors of Queen Patience. In Historic Pembroke, 1712–1912. August Edition Bryantville News, pp. 14–15, Pembroke, MA.

Sneddon, Leslie 1987 A Late Glacial and Post Glacial Vegetation History of Black Pond, Norwell, Massachusetts. On file, Massachusetts Historical Commission, Boston, MA.

Sneddon, Leslie, and Lawrence Kaplan 1987 Pollen Analysis From Cedar Swamp Pond, Westborough, Massachusetts. Quarterly of the Elmer Ekblaw Chapter of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society 9(2):1–15.

Snow, Dean 1980 The Archaeology of New England. Academic Press, New York, NY.

Spiess, Arthur, Deborah Wilson, and James Bradley 1998 PaleoIndian Occupation in the New England-Maritimes Region: Beyond Cultural Ecology. Archaeology of Eastern North America 26:201–264.

122 PAL Report No. 488 References

Stewart, Marilyn C. 1977 Pits in the Northeast: A Typological Analysis. In Current Perspectives in Northeastern Archaeology, edited by R.E. Funk and C.F. Hayes III. Researches and Transactions of the New York State Archaeological Association, Volume 17, No. 1.

Stothers, David M. 1996 Resource Procurement and Band Territories: A Model for Lower Great Lakes PaleoIndian and Early Archaic Settlement Systems. Archaeology of Eastern North America 24:173–216.

Taylor, William B. 1970 Seaver Farm Red Paint Burials. Bulletin of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society 31 (3&4):1–8.

1976 A Bifurcate Point Concentration. Bulletin of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society 37 (3-4):36–44.

Thorbahn, Peter F. 1982 Prehistoric Settlement Systems of Southern New England: Final Report of the I-495 Data Recovery Program. Department of Anthropology, Brown University. Submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Public Works, Boston, MA.

1984 Survey and Planning Project Completion Report: Prehistoric Land Use Zones Along the Taunton River. The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. Report. Submitted to the Massachusetts Historical Commission, Office of the Secretary of State, Boston, MA.

Town of Pembroke 1662 Records of the Major's Purchase, 1662-1785. Original ms. on file Town Clerk's Office, Pembroke, MA.

Turnbaugh, William A. 1993a Assessing the Significance of European Goods in Seventeenth Century Narragansett Society. In Ethnohistory and Archaeology Approaches to Postcontact Change in the Americas, edited by J. Daniel Rogers and Samuel M. Wilson, pp 133–160. Plenum Press, New York, NY.

1993b Community, Commodities, and the Concept Property in Seventeenth Century Narragansett Society. Archaeology of Eastern North America Papers in Honor of Stephen Williams, edited by James B. Stoltman. Mississippi Department of Archives and History, Jackson, MS.

United States Department of Agriculture 1969 Soil Survey of Plymouth County, Massachusetts. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Waguespack, Nicole M., and Todd A. Surovell 2003 Clovis Hunting Strategies, or How to Make Out on Plentiful Resources. American Antiquity 68(2):333–352.

PAL Report No. 488 123 References

Waller, Jr., Joseph N. 2009 Archaeological Investigation of the Kensington Court at Lakeville Station Project Area: Supplemental Data Recovery in Nemasket Indian Territory Lakeville, Massachusetts. PAL Report No. 2143.01, Submitted to KCLS Construction Holding Company, LLC, Sharon, MA.

2012 Archaeological Site Examination Federal Pond Archaeological Site (19-Pl-1156) Lower SEMA 345 kV Transmission Project, Plymouth, Massachusetts. PAL Report No. 2431.01, Submitted to Epsilon Associates, Inc., Maynard, MA.

Waller, Joseph N. and Duncan Ritchie 2001 A Program of Archaeological Data Recovery at the Pine Hawk Site (19-MD-793) Acton, Massachusetts. PAL Report No. 1027, Submitted to Woodard & Curran, Dedham, MA.

Yu, Z., J.H. Andrews, and U. Eicher 1997 Middle Holocene Dry Climate Change Caused by Change in Atmospheric Circulation Patters: Evidence from Lake Levels and Staple Isotopes. Geology 25:251–254.

Zen, E., Richard Goldsmith, Nicholas Ratcliffe, Peter Robinson, Rolfe Stanley, Norman Hatch, Andrew Shride, Elaine Weed, and David Wones 1983 A Bedrock Geologic Map of Massachusetts. U.S. Geological Survey, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Public Works, Boston, MA.

124 PAL Report No. 488