DOCSLIB.ORG

Early Ceramic Period Residential Occupation At

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THESIS BRINGING IT ALL BACK HOME: EARLY CERAMIC PERIOD RESIDENTIAL OCCUPATION AT THE KINNEY SPRING SITE (5LR144C), LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO Submitted by Benjamin Perlmutter Department of Anthropology In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Spring 2015 Masters Committee: Advisor: Jason M. LaBelle Mary Van Buren Jennifer Fish Kashay Copyright by Benjamin Perlmutter 2015 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT BRINGING IT ALL BACK HOME: EARLY CERAMIC PERIOD RESIDENTIAL OCCUPATION AT THE KINNEY SPRING SITE (5LR144C), LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO The Kinney Spring site (5LR144c) was excavated by the Colorado State University archaeological field school during the summers of 1983 through 1985. Rich cultural deposits were recovered which indicated reoccupation of the site from the Middle Archaic period through the Early Ceramic period, however the densest concentrations of artifacts were associated with Early Ceramic occupations (A.D. 150-1150). This research focuses on the Early Ceramic period at the site. The first part of this thesis aims to define the Late Prehistoric period chronology for the site by first defining where the Late Prehistoric component begins in the stratigraphic column. Analysis determined that there is sparse evidence for Middle Ceramic and possibly Protohistoric period occupation of the site based on diagnostic artifacts, although this is not sufficient to define any Middle Ceramic or Protohistoric components. The second part of this thesis explores the Early Ceramic component in greater detail. Artifact accumulations and radiocarbon dates suggest that Kinney Spring was reoccupied multiple times during the Early Ceramic period, suggesting that the site was an important part of the regional Early Ceramic era settlement system. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that occupational intensity increased here during the Early Ceramic, likely in response to increasing regional population pressure. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without the contributions and hard work of a number of people. First and foremost, I would like to thank Jason LaBelle for pushing, challenging, supporting, and encouraging my thinking about Kinney Spring and all things archaeological. I consider it one of the great privileges to have had the opportunity to develop into an archaeologist under his mentorship, and I place great value on the relationship we have built over the course of my time at C.S.U. I would also like to thank my thesis committee members, Mary Van Buren and Jennifer Fish Kashay, for their helpful comments and suggestions on this work. This research was supported by generous grants from three local archaeological organizations. Thanks to the Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists Ward F. Weakly Scholarship, the Colorado State University Karen S. Greiner Scholarship, and the Loveland Archaeological Society Dorothy Mountain Memorial scholarship for awarding me funds to help pay for AMS dating of charcoal samples. Additional support for these dates came from the James and Audrey Benedict Fund for Mountain Archaeology, which continues to generously support archaeological research of the Colorado’s High Plains and Rocky Mountains. Thanks are also due to the Roberts family for their support of archaeological research and allowing C.S.U. access to their property. Gratitude must naturally be extended to Dr. Liz Morris and her field school students who conducted the original excavations and made this research possible. Field school students from the original excavations Mary Williams and “Trapper” John Rudd also generously shared their recollections of working at Kinney Spring with me. Dr. Jason iii LaBelle and students from several Anth 457/Lithic Technology classes were responsible for the initial organization and sorting of artifacts from the site. Numerous undergraduates contributed countless hours helping me count and weight thousands of flakes, and catalog hundreds of tools, but in particular I would like to thank Connor Johnen and Ashley Packard for their dedication and hard work. Chris Johnston generously donated his time and computer skills to helping with many of the graphics and maps in this thesis. My graduate school cohort has turned into a crew of life long friends and I am thankful for all of them, however I am especially indebted to Chris Johnston, Spencer Pelton, and Michael Troyer for so many engaging conversations on life and archaeology that made this experience so much fun. I would like to thank Susan Bender for introducing me to hunter-gatherer archaeology and Colorado. In the 10 years that we have known each other she has been a bottomless source of encouragement and support, and has provided me with so many invaluable experiences, opportunities, and great days in South Park. Finally, I owe everything to my parents, Richard and Barbara, who have supported me on every level throughout the writing of this thesis, and my entire life leading up to this point. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................... v LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ............................ 1 Physical Environment ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 2: NORTHERN COLORADO PREHISTORY AND THE EARLY CERAMIC PERIOD . 17 The Early Ceramic Period ............................................................................................................................................. 21 Early Ceramic Period Settlement Systems ............................................................................................................. 28 CHAPTER 3: THEORY AND METHODS ..................................................................................................... 31 Theoretical Perspectives ............................................................................................................................................... 31 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................................ 38 CHAPTER 4: DEFINING THE LATE PREHISTORIC COMPONENT................................................... 52 Diagnostic Artifacts ......................................................................................................................................................... 52 Radiocarbon dates ........................................................................................................................................................... 56 House Stratigraphy .......................................................................................................................................................... 58 Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 65 CHAPTER 5: IDENTIFYING MIDDLE AND LATE CERAMIC PERIOD COMPONENTS .............. 70 AT KINNEY SPRING ........................................................................................................................................... 70 Projectile Points ................................................................................................................................................................ 70 Pottery .................................................................................................................................................................................. 74 Radiocarbon Dates ........................................................................................................................................................... 77 Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 78 CHAPTER 6: EXPLORING EARLY CERAMIC PERIOD RESIDENTIAL STABILITY AT KINNEY SPRING ................................................................................................................................................................... 79 Radiocarbon Dates ........................................................................................................................................................... 81 Debitage ............................................................................................................................................................................... 83 Hearth Features ...............................................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Marsland Class III Cultural Resource Investigation (April 28, 2011)

    Marsland Class III Cultural Resource Investigation (April 28, 2011)

    NRC-054B Submitted: 5/8/2015 I AR CAD IS Marsland Expansion Cultural Inventory I I I I I I I I Figure4. Project overview in Section 35 T30N R51W, facing south. Photograph taken by N. Graves, on 12/02/2010. I I I I I I I I Figure 5. Project overview in Section 2 T29N R51W, facing northeast. Photograph taken by A. Howder on 12/03/2010. I 4 I -1- I ARCADJS Marsland Expansion Cultural Inventory I I I I I I I I I Figure 6. Project overview in Section 1 T29N R51W, facing southeast. Photograph taken by A. Howder on 12/04/2010. I I I I I I I I F. Topographic Map 5 I -2- I AR CAD IS Marsland Expansion Cultural Inventory I V. Environmental Setting I A. Present Environment 1. General Topographic Features I The MEAUP is located in the northern Nebraska Panhandle roughly 10 to 12 miles south of Crawford, Nebraska and five miles northeast of Marsland, Nebraska. This portion of the Nebraska Panhandle is dominated topographically by the Pine Ridge escarpment, a rugged, stony region of forested buttes and I deep canyons that divides the High Plains to the south from the Missouri Plateau to the north. The project area straddles the southernmost boundary of the Pine Ridge escarpment and another distinct topographic region to the south, the Dawes Table lands. Taken together, these regions form a unique local mosaic of I topography, geology, and habitat within the project area. I 2. Project Area a. Topography I The Pine Ridge escarpment covers more than one thousand square miles across far eastern Wyoming, northern Nebraska and extreme southern South Dakota (Nebraska State Historical Society 2000).
  • Lithic Raw Material Prospects in the Mojave Desert, California

    Lithic Raw Material Prospects in the Mojave Desert, California

    UC Merced Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Title Lithic Raw Material Prospects in the Mojave Desert, California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8np7g12w Journal Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 11(2) ISSN 0191-3557 Authors Wilke, Philip J. Schroth, Adella B. Publication Date 1989-07-01 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 146-174 (1989). Lithic Raw Material Prospects in the Mojave Desert, California PHILIP J. WILKE and ADELLA B. SCHROTH, Dept. of Anthropology, Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521. A HIS paper discusses lithic raw material THEORETICAL BACKGROUND prospects (or simply "prospects"), places where potentially flakeable tool stone was Acquisition of tool stone by aboriginal assayed or tested for quality. It characterizes peoples was an industry that in terms of scale this site type and contrasts it with quarries, varied greatly from one situation to another. places where stone was obtained consistently The large and well-known quarries of the and in quantity, and places where stone was western United States represent one end of picked up, used, and discarded with little the spectrum. These include the AUbates modification. We believe prospects represent silicified dolomite quarries, Texas; Spanish a major archaeological site type that has re­ Diggings quartzite quarries, Wyoming; ceived inadequate attention in the literature. Tosawihi opalite quarries, Nevada; and Casa We describe here a prospect site (CA- Diablo and Coso obsidian quarries, California, SBr-5872), characterize its assemblage, and to name a few.
  • La Junta, Colorado Contents

    La Junta, Colorado Contents

    33rd Annual Meeting of The Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists March 24—27, 2011 Otero Junior College La Junta, Colorado Contents Acknowledgements..................................................................................2 General.Information.................................................................................4 Summary.Schedule..................................................................................5 Banquet.Speaker......................................................................................6 Picket.Wire.Canyonlands.Field.Trip........................................................7 Annual.Business.Meeting.Agenda...........................................................8 Presentation.Schedule............................................................................10 Symposium.Abstracts............................................................................14 Paper.and.Poster.Abstracts.....................................................................15 Ward.F..Weakly.Memorial.Fund............................................................35 Ward.F..Weakly.Memorial.Fund.Awardees............................................36 Native.American.Scholarship.and.Awardees.........................................38 CCPA.Fellows........................................................................................39 2010-2011.Executive.Committee...........................................................40 Past.CCPA.Meeting.Locations...............................................................41
  • Ra Ising the Ba R

    Ra Ising the Ba R

    12 Ra ising the Ba r Lithic Analysis and Archaeological Research in the Southeast William Andrefsky Jr. When I was asked to provide comments on the collection of lithic analysis pa- pers presented at the Southeastern Archaeological Conference (included within this volume), I did not realize the extent to which lithic tools and debitage had been overlooked in the region as a medium for interpreting past aboriginal practices and behaviors. According to the session abstract, the goal of the lithic symposium and this volume is to highlight contemporary methods and theory in lithic analysis to encourage researchers in the Southeast to integrate lithic data into their site interpretations. After a quick perusal of the literature for the region, it was apparent that very few Southeast lithics-related publications have appeared in the national peer-reviewed literature (Daniel2001; Shott and Ballenger 2007); slightly more lithic research occurs in regional journal venues (Carr and Bradbury 2000; Franklin and Simek 2008; Peacock 2004); and other contributions are found in edited volumes not necessarily focused specifically on lithics in the region (Anderson and Sassaman 1996; Carr 1994a; Henry and Odell1989; Johnson and Morrow 1987). Similar to the case of Mesoamerica and the American Southwest, there is a relatively low proportion of lithics- based research relative to ceramics and architecture. Such a trend comes as a surprise to me. However, I have been hooked on stone tool technology since the sixth grade when I first began looking at Louis Leakey's Oldowan pebble tools and wondering whether the broken cobbles in my local creek could have been made by Australopithecus.
  • Plains Anthropologist Author Index

    Plains Anthropologist Author Index

    Author Index AUTHOR INDEX Aaberg, Stephen A. (see Shelley, Phillip H. and George A. Agogino) 1983 Plant Gathering as a Settlement Determinant at the Pilgrim Stone Circle Site. In: Memoir 19. Vol. 28, No. (see Smith, Calvin, John Runyon, and George A. Agogino) 102, pp. 279-303. (see Smith, Shirley and George A. Agogino) Abbott, James T. Agogino, George A. and Al Parrish 1988 A Re-Evaluation of Boulderflow as a Relative Dating 1971 The Fowler-Parrish Site: A Folsom Campsite in Eastern Technique for Surficial Boulder Features. Vol. 33, No. Colorado. Vol. 16, No. 52, pp. 111-114. 119, pp. 113-118. Agogino, George A. and Eugene Galloway Abbott, Jane P. 1963 Osteology of the Four Bear Burials. Vol. 8, No. 19, pp. (see Martin, James E., Robert A. Alex, Lynn M. Alex, Jane P. 57-60. Abbott, Rachel C. Benton, and Louise F. Miller) 1965 The Sister’s Hill Site: A Hell Gap Site in North-Central Adams, Gary Wyoming. Vol. 10, No. 29, pp. 190-195. 1983 Tipi Rings at York Factory: An Archaeological- Ethnographic Interface. In: Memoir 19. Vol. 28, No. Agogino, George A. and Sally K. Sachs 102, pp. 7-15. 1960 Criticism of the Museum Orientation of Existing Antiquity Laws. Vol. 5, No. 9, pp. 31-35. Adovasio, James M. (see Frison, George C., James M. Adovasio, and Ronald C. Agogino, George A. and William Sweetland Carlisle) 1985 The Stolle Mammoth: A Possible Clovis Kill-Site. Vol. 30, No. 107, pp. 73-76. Adovasio, James M., R. L. Andrews, and C. S. Fowler 1982 Some Observations on the Putative Fremont Agogino, George A., David K.
  • Grinding Stone Reuse 1983

    Grinding Stone Reuse 1983

    The Effects of Grinding Stone Reuse on the Archaeological Record in the Eastern Great Basin Author(s): STEVEN R. SIMMS Source: Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, Vol. 5, No. 1/2 (Summer and Winter 1983), pp. 98-102 Published by: Malki Museum, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27825137 Accessed: 30-11-2015 18:41 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Malki Museum, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 129.123.24.42 on Mon, 30 Nov 2015 18:41:26 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology Vol. 5, Nos. 1 and 2, pp. 98-102 (1983). The Effects of Grinding Stone on Reuse the Archaeological Record in the Eastern Great Basin STEVEN R. SIMMS are aware thatmany hunter-gatherer societies where the transpor ARCHAEOLOGISTSfactors change archaeological sites after tation of material culture is a limiting factor. they have been initially deposited. One kind Reuse can include the use of grinding stones of post-depositional phenomena that could from nearby, older sites or the caching of change the material record is the scavenging previously used grinding stones.
  • Skill and Cognition in Stone Tool Production F 695

    Skill and Cognition in Stone Tool Production F 695

    Current Anthropology Volume 43, Number 5, December 2002 ᭧ 2002 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. All rights reserved 0011-3204/2002/4305-0001$3.00 Assessing mental activity from the material residues of Skill and Cognition in behavior is a central problem for archaeologists working in any time period. In the case of Paleolithic archaeology, the endeavor is further weighted with evolutionary im- Stone Tool Production plications (e.g., Holloway 1969, Parker and Gibson 1979, Isaac 1986, Wynn 1993, Gowlett 1996, Ambrose 2001). Because of their persistence in the archaeological record An Ethnographic Case Study and because they provide evidence of individual tech- nical acts, knapped stone artifacts are commonly used from Irian Jaya1 as a source of information about prehistoric and pre- modern mental abilities. Although stone tools do not necessarily provide evidence of the full range of their makers’ mental abilities, they do indicate certain min- by Dietrich Stout imum required competences (Gowlett 1996). In order to assess these competences, we must ultimately rely upon models developed from actualistic research in the mod- ern world. Since it is impossible to observe the evolving Stone tools represent some of the best remaining evidence of pre- technological behaviors of extinct hominid species di- historic behavior and cognition. Interpreting this evidence prop- rectly, our reconstructions should at least be able to draw erly requires models based on observable phenomena in the mod- upon an understanding of the modern human condition. ern world. For this reason, ethnographic research was undertaken In order to contribute to the development of such among the adze makers of the village of Langda in Indonesian Irian Jaya.
  • Maize and Stone a Functional Analysis of the Manos and Metates of Santa Rita Corozal, Belize

    Maize and Stone a Functional Analysis of the Manos and Metates of Santa Rita Corozal, Belize

    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2011 Maize And Stone A Functional Analysis Of The Manos And Metates Of Santa Rita Corozal, Belize Lisa Glynns Duffy University of Central Florida Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Duffy, Lisa Glynns, "Maize And Stone A Functional Analysis Of The Manos And Metates Of Santa Rita Corozal, Belize" (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 1920. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/1920 MAIZE AND STONE: A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE MANOS AND METATES OF SANTA RITA COROZAL, BELIZE by LISA GLYNNS DUFFY B.A. University of South Florida, 1988 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Anthropology in the College of Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2011 ABSTRACT The manos and metates of Santa Rita Corozal, Belize are analyzed to compare traditional maize-grinding types to the overall assemblage. A reciprocal, back-and-forth grinding motion is the most efficient way to process large amounts of maize. However, rotary movements are also associated with some ground stone implements. The number of flat and trough metates and two handed manos are compared to the rotary-motion basin and concave type metates and one-handed manos to determine predominance and distribution.
  • Ohio Archaeologist 26 3

    Ohio Archaeologist 26 3

    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGIST VOLUME 26 SUMMER 1976 i I • • The Archaeological Society of Ohio Officers—terms expire 1978 Robert Harter, 1961 Buttermilk Hill, Delaware, Ohio President—Jan Sorgenfrei, Jeff Carskadden, 2686 Carol Drive, Zanesville, Ohio 2985 Canterbury Drive, Lima, Ohio 45805 Associate Editor, Martha P. Otto, Vice President—Steve Fuller, Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, Ohio 4767 Hudson Drive, Stow, Ohio 44224 All articles, reviews and comments on the Ohio Archae­ Executive Secretary—Dana L. Baker, ologist should be sent to the Editor. Memberships, re­ West Taylor St., Mt. Victory, Ohio 43340 quests for back issues, changes of address, and other Treasurer—Don Bapst, matter should be sent to the business office. 2446 Chambers Ave., Columbus, Ohio 43223 Recording Secretary—Mike Kish, PLEASE NOTIFY BUSINESS OFFICE IMMEDIATELY 39 Parkview Ave., Westerville, Ohio 43081 OF ADDRESS CHANGES. BY POSTAL REGULATIONS Editor—Robert N. Converse, SOCIETY MAIL CANNOT BE FORWARDED. P.O. Box 61, Plain City, Ohio 43064 Editorial Office Trustees P. O. Box, Plain City, Ohio 43064 Terms expire Ensil Chadwick, 119 Rose Ave., Business Office Mount Vernon, Ohio 1978 Summers Redick, 35 West River Glen Drive, Wayne A. Mortine, Scott Drive, Worthington, Ohio 43085 Oxford Heights, Newcomerstown, Ohio 1978 Charles H. Stout, 91 Redbank Drive, Membership and Dues Fairborn, Ohio 1978 Annual dues to the Archaeological Society of Ohio are Max Shipley, 705 S. Ogden Ave., payable on the first of January as follows: Regular mem­ Columbus, Ohio 1978 bership $7.50; Husband and wife (one copy of publication) William C. Haney, 706 Buckhom St., $8.50; Contributing $25.00. Funds are used for publish­ Ironton, Ohio 1980 ing the Ohio Archaeologist.
  • Excavations at the Green Lizard Site, Pp. 69-77

    Excavations at the Green Lizard Site, Pp. 69-77

    Excavations at the Green Liza_rd Site . Edgar K. Huber and William D. Lipe Introduction than Sand Canyon Pueblo, or was abandoned before the end of occupation at the larger site, does comparison of he Green Lizard site (5MT3901) is a small, Pueblo III artifacts and ecofacts from the two sites provide evidence T habitation site located in the middle reaches of Sand that may help us understand the shift from a dispersed to Canyon, approximately 1 km down canyon from Sand an aggregated settlement pattern and/or the eventual aban­ Canyon Pueblo (Figure 1.3). In the summers of 1987 and donment of the Sand Canyon locality? 1988, intensive excavation was carried out in the western In planning for the Green Lizard excavations, we de­ half of the site. A kiva, an adjacent masonry· roomblock, cided to excavate a full kiva suite (kiva and associated and the floors of several jacal structures were excavated; surface rooms) to obtain a data set fully comparable to those the midden lying to the south of these features was sampled being produced by the intensive excavations of kiva suites with test pits (Figure 6~ 1). at Sand Canyon Pueblo (Bradley, this volume; see also The Green Lizard site Was first recorded by Craw Adams 1985a; Bradley 1986, 1987, 1988a, 1990; Kleidon Canyon Center researchers in 1984 (Adams 1985a). The and Bradley 1989). layout of the site is essentially two adjacent Prudden units (Prudden 1903, 1914, 1918). It consists of two kivas, Environmental Setting approximately 20 more or less contiguous, masonry-walled surface rooms, and an extensive and reJatively deep midden The Green Lizard site is located within Sand Canyon on a deposit located to the south of the structures (Figure 6.1).
  • Program Wednesday Afternoon April 22, 2009 Wednesday Evening April

    Program Wednesday Afternoon April 22, 2009 Wednesday Evening April

    THURSDAY MORNING: April 23, 2009 23 Program Wednesday Afternoon April 22, 2009 [1A] Workshop NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PRESERVATION OF DIGITAL DATA FOR ARCHAEOLOGY Room: L404 Time: 1:00 AM−4:30 PM Wednesday Evening April 22, 2009 [1] SYMPOSIUM ARCHAEOLOGY BEYOND ARCHAEOLOGY Room: Marquis Ballroom Time: 6:00 PM−9:00 PM Organizers: Michael Smith and Michael Barton Chairs: Michelle Hegmon and Michael Barton Participants: 6:00 Michael Smith—Just How Useful is Archaeology for Scientists and Scholars in Other Disciplines? 6:15 Tim Kohler—Model-Based Archaeology as a Foundation for Interdisciplinary and Comparative Research, and an Antidote to Agency/Practice Perspectives 6:30 Michael Barton—From Narratives to Algorithms: Extending Archaeological Explanation Beyond Archaeology 6:45 Margaret Nelson—Long-term vulnerability and resilience 7:00 Joseph Tainter—Energy Gain and Organization 7:15 Patrick Kirch—Archaeology and Biocomplexity 7:30 Rebecca Storey—Urban Health from Prehistoric times to a Highly Urbanized Contemporary World 7:45 Carla Sinopoli—Historicizing Prehistory: Archaeology and historical interpretation in Late Prehistoric Karnataka, India 8:00 Michelle Hegmon—Crossing Spatial-Temporal Scales, Expanding Social Theory 8:15 Robert Costanza—Sustainability or Collapse: What Can We Learn from Integrating the History of Humans and the Rest of Nature? 8:30 Robert Costanza—Discussant 8:45 James Brooks—Discussant Thursday Morning April 23, 2009 [2] GENERAL SESSION RECENT RESEARCH IN CENTRAL AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY Room: International C Time: 8:00
  • An Analysis of 1He Lithic Artifact Assemblage From

    An Analysis of 1He Lithic Artifact Assemblage From

    AN ANALYSIS OF 1HE LITHIC ARTIFACT ASSEMBLAGE FROM THE FORBUSH CREEK SITE (31YD1), YADKIN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA by Jane Madeline McManus A thesis sul::mitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts with Honors in the Department of Anthropology. Chapel Hill 1985 Approved by: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the members of my committee, Dr. Dickens, Dr. Crumley, and Dr. Davis, whose support, help, and advice is greatly appreciated. I would especially like to thank Steve who helped me from the first day of this project to the last. You know I couldn't have done it without your help. I would also like to thank Dr. Dickens and Trawick for teaching me the ropes of photography. You all have made this a very rewarding learning experience. Finally, I would like to say thanks to Carol Anne and Lee for putting up with me and I'm sorry for the neglect. DEDICATION To Monnna and Daddy, with all my love and appreciation for the opportunity. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION • 1 RAW MATERIAL. 7 DEBITAGE. 8 CHIPPED STONE IMPLEMENTS • 15 CHIPPED STONE PROJECTILE POINTS. 22 GROUND STONE IMPLEMENTS. 28 DISCUSSION • 35 Characteristics of the Forbush Creek Assemblage • • 35 The Introduction of European Metal Tools. 36 The Subsistence Pattern. 37 Small Triangular Projectile Points. 38 SUMMARY. • 48 REFERENCES CITED. 50 APPENDICES • 51 Appendix A. Lithic Artifact Analysis Format. 52 Appendix B. Distribution of Lithic Artifacts by Feature. 58 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.