Vertebrate Evidence for Diet and Food

University of Wisconsin Milwaukee UWM Digital Commons Theses and Dissertations May 2015 Vertebrate Evidence for Diet and Food-processing at the Multicomponent Finch Site (47 JE-0902) in Jefferson County, Southeastern Wisconsin Zachary Ryan Stencil University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.uwm.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Stencil, Zachary Ryan, "Vertebrate Evidence for Diet and Food-processing at the Multicomponent Finch Site (47 JE-0902) in Jefferson County, Southeastern Wisconsin" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 843. https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/843 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by UWM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UWM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VERTEBRATE EVIDENCE FOR DIET AND FOOD-PROCESSING AT THE MULTICOMPONENT FINCH SITE (47 JE-0902) IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN by Zachary R. Stencil A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Anthropology at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2015 ABSTRACT VERTEBRATE EVIDENCE FOR DIET AND FOOD-PROCESSING AT THE MULTICOMPONENT FINCH SITE (47 JE-0902) IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN by Zachary R. Stencil The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2015 Under the Supervision of Dr. Jean Hudson The focus of this study is the intrasite analysis of the vertebrate faunal assemblage from the Finch Site. The Finch Site (47JE-0902) is located in Jefferson County, southeastern Wisconsin, roughly one mile east from Lake Koshkonong’s southeastern shoreline and the Rock River drainage. Stratigraphy and diagnostic artifacts from numerous cultural features indicate that the site was repeatedly occupied over a temporal span of several thousand years including Paleoindian, Archaic, and Woodland periods. Faunal remains were recovered from 169 excavated units and 119 cultural features across the full horizontal extent of the site. Investigations of faunal remains from archaeological sites can yield interpretations about prehistoric diet, resource acquisition strategies, food processing, and site function. The multicomponent nature of the Finch site assemblage offers an exceptional opportunity to analyze and explore possible chronological shifts in diet and resource utilization at a single locale. This thesis focuses on the following questions. ii What vertebrate resources were utilized by occupants of the Finch site? Does vertebrate resource use change through time? What evidence is there for food processing at the site? Does food processing intensity change through time? Where is vertebrate resource use identified spatially at the Finch site? Does vertebrate use change spatially through time? The total sample analyzed consists of 14,544 vertebrate remains collected from a combination of dry-screen, water-screen, and flotation recovery techniques. Temporal comparisons are made between proveniences using vertebrate class-level identifications. Species level identifications are used in an attempt to identify the season of occupation for the site. A Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis is applied to taxonomic identifications, fragmentation data, and categories of burned bone to investigate differences in the spatial and temporal utilization of the site and to identify patterning in food processing. iii © Copyright by Zachary Stencil, 2015 All Rights Reserved iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures viii List of Tables xi Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Research Goals 1 Significance 3 Layout of the Thesis 3 Chapter 2: Site Background 6 Site Discovery and History 6 Physical Setting 11 Geography 13 Pedology 16 Environment 18 Expected Fauna 22 Oak Openings/Oak Savannas 27 Aquatic Zones 28 Marshes and Wetlands 29 Oak Forests 31 Deciduous Forests 32 Prairies 33 The Paleo-Environment 35 Archaeological Work at the Site: Survey and Excavation 38 Previous Faunal Study 45 Chapter 3: Cultural Background 47 Early Paleoindian Period 47 Late Paleoindian Period 50 Early Archaic Period 53 Middle Archaic Period 55 v Late Archaic Period 59 Early Woodland Period 62 Middle Woodland Period 65 Late Woodland Period 70 Chapter 4: Methods 76 Excavation Methods 76 Defining the Temporal Components 77 Identification 86 Quantification 88 NISP 88 Bone Weight 89 Seasonality 90 Bone Modification 91 Cut Marks 91 Gnaw Marks 91 Worked Bone 92 Fragmentation 92 Burned Bone 96 Statistical Analysis 103 Spatial Analysis 104 Chapter 5: Results 106 Complete Faunal Assemblage Overview 106 NISP 106 Weight 108 Species Identification 109 Mammal Size Differentiation 111 Fish Scales and Shellfish Remains 112 Bone Modification 113 Cut Marked Bone 113 Worked Bone 114 Bone Fragmentation 115 vi Burned Bone 117 Seasonality 124 Faunal Assemblage by Time Period 127 Paleoindian and Archaic Period Faunal Assemblages 127 Woodland Period Faunal Assemblages 129 NISP, Weight, and Taxonomic Comparisons 133 Bone Modification 143 Cut Marked Bone 143 Bone Fragmentation 144 Burned Bone 146 Summary 159 Chapter 6: Discussion and Conclusions 162 Paleoindian and Archaic Assemblages 162 Woodland Period Assemblages 163 Early Woodland Period Assemblage 164 Middle Woodland Period Assemblage 166 Late Woodland Period Assemblage 168 Woodland Assemblage Comparisons 171 Taxonomic Abundance 171 Food Processing Intensity 173 Utilization of Space 179 Intersite Comparisons 181 The Cooper’s Shore Site (47 RO-0002) 181 The Plantz Site (47 WN-0325) 184 Conclusions 187 References Cited 190 Appendix A: Expected Fauna List 207 Appendix B: Finch site Faunal Assemblage 214 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1. The Finch site, located in the southwest corner of Jefferson county, Wisconsin. 7 Figure 2.2. The site boundaries of the Finch site. 8 Figure 2.3. “Finch Land.” 9 Figure 2.4. Location of Pritchard’s Pond on the 1870 Plat Map of Koshkonong Township. 10 Figure 2.5. Sketch map of T-5N R-14E in the Township of Koshkonong, with the location of the Finch site outlined. (from Brink 1835). 12 Figure 2.6. Finch Site Digital Elevation Model based off of USGS two- foot contour lines. 15 Figure 2.7. Soil-type map. 17 Figure 2.8. Notebook entry along north-south survey line bisecting the Finch site. 20 Figure 2.9. Ten kilometer catchment ring using Finley 1976. 25 Figure 2.10. Ten kilometer catchment ring using Goldstein and Kind 1987. 26 Figure 2.11. Phase III excavation at the Finch site. – 420 excavation units. 40 Figure 2.12. Folsom type Paleoindian projectile point from the Finch site. 42 Figure 2.13. Late Archaic points. 43 Figure 2.14. Middle Woodland points. 43 Figure 2.15. Early Woodland Beach/Dane Incised Zoned. 44 Figure 2.16. Middle Woodland Havana. 44 Figure 2.17. Late Woodland Madison Cord-Impressed. 44 Figure 4.1. Early Woodland diagnostic Kernel Densities and Mean Center distributions from Haas 2013. 80 Figure 4.2. Single temporal component excavation units. 82 Figure 4.3. Units with fauna compared to units with a single temporal component and fauna. 83 Figure 4.4. Single component excavation units with faunal remains. 84 Figure 4.5. Features with fauna compared to features with a single temporal component and fauna. 85 viii Figure 5.1. Taxonomic class represented by percent of identified NISP. 107 Figure 5.2. Spatial distribution of units and features containing burned bone. 118 Figure 5.3. Interpolated density representation of burned bone NISP across the site using Kriging Interpolated surface trend analysis. 119 Figure 5.4. Density representation of burned bone NISP across the site using Kernel Density. 114 Figure 5.5. Kernel Density of mixed color burned bone spatial distribution. 124 Figure 5.6. Kernel Density of single color burned bone spatial distribution. 124 Figure 5.7. Distribution of temporally associated excavation units atop the southern knoll. 128 Figure 5.8. Distribution of Woodland Period associated units and features. 130 Figure 5.9. NISP comparison of unit and feature Woodland period assemblages. 134 Figure 5.10. Singly ordinal non-symmetrical biplot comparing dispersion statistical distance. 138 Figure 5.11. Kernel Density comparison of Early Woodland faunal distribution. 139 Figure 5.12. Kernel Density comparison of Middle Woodland faunal distribution. 140 Figure 5.13. Kernel Density comparison of Late Woodland faunal distribution. 141 Figure 5.14. Distribution of cut marked bone and cultural associated provenience. 144 Figure 5.15. Early Woodland total burned bone Kernel Density. 148 Figure 5.16. Early Woodland single color burned bone Kernel Density. 149 Figure 5.17. Early Woodland mixed color burned bone Kernel Density. 150 Figure 5.18. Middle Woodland total burned bone Kernel Density. 152 Figure 5.19. Middle Woodland single color burned bone Kernel Density. 153 Figure 5.20. Middle Woodland mixed color burned bone Kernel Density. 154 Figure 5.21. Late Woodland total burned bone Kernel Density. 156 Figure 5.22. Late Woodland single color burned bone Kernel Density. 157 Figure 5.23. Late Woodland mixed color burned bone Kernel Density. 158 Figure 6.1. Early Woodland single color and mixed color burned bone density clusters. 166 Figure 6.2. Middle Woodland single color and mixed color burned bone density clusters. 168 ix Figure 6.3. Late Woodland single color and mixed color burned bone density clusters. 170 Figure 6.4. Ten km catchment of the Cooper’s Shore site. 182 Figure 6.5. Ten km catchment of the Plantz site. 185 x LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1. Total numbers of diagnostic artifacts by cultural period and excavation level. 78 Table 5.1. Taxonomic class represented by NISP totals and percentage of total NISP. 108 Table 5.2. Taxonomic class represented by weight totals and percentage of total weight. 108 Table 5.3. Identified taxa faunal assemblage. 110 Table 5.4. Mammal size differentiation by NISP and weight. 111 Table 5.5. Cut marks by taxa and element. 113 Table 5.6. Fragmentation comparing unit and feature provenience. 116 Table 5.7. Fragmentation comparing unit and feature provenience by recovery technique.

Load more