Identification of Activity Areas Through Lithic Analysis - The Longhorn Site (41KT53) in the Upper Brazos River Basin, Kent County, Texas

by

Kathryn Mira Smith, B.S.

A Thesis

In

Anthropology

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts

Accepted

Dr. Brett Houk Co-Chair

Dr. Eileen Johnson Co-Chair

Dr. Tamra Walter

Ralph Ferguson Dean of the Graduate School

December 2010

© 2010 Kathryn Mira Smith Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to thank my committee members for their advice and assistance throughout this project: Dr. Brett A. Houk, chair; Dr. Eileen

G. Johnson, co-chair; and Dr. Tamra L. Walter, member. Additional thanks goes to the Museum of Texas Tech University and Lubbock Lake Landmark for access to their collections and equipment, as well as the encouragement and support of their staff. Furthermore, special thanks go to the following individuals for their contributions to this research: Douglas K. Boyd, site information; Dr. Bernard A.

Schriever, photography; Dr. Stance Hurst, lithic expertise; Dr. Kevin Mulligan,

ArcGIS support; Cynthia Lopez, archival research; Richard Beres and Samuel

Thompson, database support. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the never-ending support of my family and friends.

ii Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii

ABSTRACT vi

LIST OF TABLES vii

LIST OF FIGURES viii I INTRODUCTION 1 Archaeological Background 1 Project Area Investigations 3 Research Orientation 5 Excavations at 41KT53 7 Results and Interpretations 9 Cultural Background 11 Paleoindian (11,500 RCYBP to 8,500 RCYBP) 11 Archaic (8,500 RCYBP to 2,000 RCYBP) 13 Ceramic (2,000 RCYBP to A.D. 1450) 13 Protohistoric (ca. A.D. 1450 to A.D. 1650) 13 Historic (A.D. 1650 to 1950s) 14 Environmental Setting 15 Geology 15 Lithic Raw Materials 18 Climate 18 Flora and Fauna 20 Water 20 Summary 23 II THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE 24 Behavioral Archaeology 24 Correlates 25 Culture Processes 26 Major Cultural Processes 28 N-transforms 30 C-transforms 30 Other Effects on Processes 31 Spatial Archaeology 32 Goals and Objectives 33 Research Questions 34 Tool Ratios 35 Thermal Alteration 35

iii Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Summary 36 III METHODOLOGY 38 Behavioral Chain Analysis 38 Step 1: Activities That Could Have Taken Place 40 Step 2: Identifying Activity Areas 65 Step 3: Additional Information 68 Step 4: Additional Activities 68 Step 5: Recurring Activities 69 Step 6: Aspects of Social Organization 69 Summary 70 IV DATA 71 Mapping 72 Features 72 Raw Material Source 75 Debitage 75 Raw Material Source 75 Flakes 78 Debris 82 Debitage Thermal Alterations 83 Tools 84 Informal/Expedient Tools 84 Formal Tools 85 Other Tools 95 Distribution Mapping 97 Procurement Distribution 98 Manufacture Debitage Distribution 98 Maintenance Debitage Distribution 101 Debris Distribution 101 Feature Debitage Density 104 Postmold Type Distribution 106 Tool Distribution 106 Tool Density 110 Thermal Alteration 112 Impact on Lithics 113 Summary 115 V DISCUSSION 117 N-Transforms 118 Activity Areas 120

iv Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Tool and Feature Association 122 Refuse Activity Area Types 131 Additional Information 143 Tool Ratio 143 Mobility 146 Additional Activities 148 Recurring Activities 149 Tool Manufacture 149 Tool Use/Maintenance 150 Cleaning Activities for Lithic Debitage 150 Postmold Disposal 150 Aspects Of Social Organization 150 Summary 153 VI CONCLUSIONS 156 Research Questions 157 Supplemental Data 160 Regional Perspective 161 REFERENCES CITED 162

v Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

ABSTRACT

The Longhorn site (41KT53) represents a Protohistoric Native American encampment positioned along the border between the Rolling Plains and

Southern High Plains of western Texas. Interpretations for the site are examined using lithic tool and debitage macroanalysis under the theoretical perspective of behavioral archaeology. Cultural and non-cultural processes are studied to determine their role in the creation, distribution, and disturbance of the site’s lithics and related features. Behavioral chain analysis is utilized to identify lithic activity areas that reflect the artifacts’ life history stages of procurement, manufacture, use, maintenance, and discard.

Research orientation is focused on the roles of these cultural and non- cultural processes concerning thermal alterations present on some lithics in addition to activities performed during the site’s occupation. Site function based on these activities is used to address a skewed unifacial-to-bifacial stone tool ratio, and ArcGIS maps assist in displaying the distribution of the activity areas to reveal patterns of the site’s spatial organization. Aspects of trade and mobility are inferred based on the site’s lithic content and position on the landscape, providing a broader representation of Late Holocene hunter-gatherer life.

vi Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

LIST OF TABLES 1.1. Source information for raw lithic materials found within the Justiceburg Reservoir area 6 1.2. Features uncovered during excavations 10 1.3. Some common plant and animal species in the upper Brazos River Basin 21 4.1. Raw material source by debitage type (frequency; count) 77 4.2. Thermal alteration by debitage type (frequency; count) 84 4.3. Raw material source by tool type (frequency; count) 87 4.4. Thermal alteration by tool type (frequency; count) 88 4.5. Raw material source by scraper type (frequency; count) 90 4.6. Debitage types exhibiting cortex (frequency; count) 99 4.7. Postmold types based on debitage and shim count 108 5.1. Contents of the site's drop and toss zones 129 5.2. Lithic and stake contents for postmold types 141

vii Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

LIST OF FIGURES 1.1. Location of the Longhorn site (41KT53) within the upper Brazos River Basin (modified from Boyd, 1997:Figure 4) 2 1.2. Proposed tipi stake made from a longhorn horn core after which the Longhorn site was named (Boyd et al., 1993, Figure 60) 8 2.1. The cultural element flow model that constitutes the life- history of most artifacts, here depicting hypothetical life-histories of a scraper (modified from Schiffer, 1995a:Figure 2.1) 27 3.1. Flake types typical of various flintknapping stages: a) core reduction flake; b) biface thinning flake; and c) resharpening flake 44 3.2. Common western Texas scrapers: a) concave scraper; b) convergent scraper; c) transverse scraper; d) side scraper; and e) end scraper 53 3.3. Bifacial lithic tools found in western Texas: a) four-sided beveled biface; b) graver; c) drill; and d) gunflint 54 3.4. Other tools that may indicate lithic-related activities: a) abrader; b) shaft straightener; and c) hammerstone 57 3.5. An informal tool modified to produce a single cutting edge 58 4.1. Site layout indicating all units within the area of focus 73 4.2. Flake types: a) core reduction flake; b) shaping flake; c) biface thinning flake; d) outré passé flake; e) finishing flake; and f) resharpening flake 79 4.3. Debris types: a) general debris; b) heat spall; c) heat shatter 82 4.4. Informal tool exhibiting original flake characteristics and used edge 85 4.5. Examples of tools representing the early stages of the flintknapping process: a) tested cobble; b) blank; and c) preform 89 4.6. Scraper types found at the Longhorn site: a) end; b) side; c) transverse; and d) convergent 91 4.7. Bifacial tools: a) beveled biface; b) possible graver; c) multi-use tool; d) gunflint; and e) untyped biface 93 4.8. Tools associated with the flintknapping process: a) abrader; b) shaft straightener; and c) hammerstone 97 4.9. Density distribution of all manufacture flakes 100 4.10. Density distribution of all maintenance flakes 102 4.11. Density distribution of all debris 103 4.12. Density distribution of all debitage associated directly with a feature 105 v iii Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

4.13. Distribution of postmold types: type 1) postmolds contain debitage and shim(s); type 2) postmolds contain debitage and no shims; and type 3) postmolds contain a shim and no debitage 107 4.14. Distribution of all tool types 109 4.15. Density distribution of all tools associated directly with a feature 111 4.16. Density distribution of all thermally altered debitage 114 5.1. Edwards Formation chert lithic exhibiting partial chromatic alteration 121 5.2. Distribution of groundstone objects 124 5.3. Patterns of overlapping concentric drop and toss zones as a result of hearth placement and wind direction (modified from Binford, 1978:Figure 5) 127 5.4. Placement of 1m and 2.5m buffers around hearths to replicate drop and toss zones, respectively 128 5.5. Distribution of tool manufacturing stations 133 5.6. Distribution of use/maintenance stations 137 5.7. Distribution of disposal activity areas 139 5.8. Distribution of all activity areas 151

ix Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Longhorn site (41KT53) is a 17th century Native American encampment located on the western border of the Rolling Plains of Texas (Boyd et al., 1993) within the upper Brazos River Basin (Figure 1). Original excavations by Prewitt and Associates uncovered a plethora of artifacts and features, whose analysis led to interpretations regarding how the site was utilized by its inhabitants. A large percentage of the recovered artifacts include lithics that represent the use of flintknapping technology. These lithics are reexamined in this research utilizing macroscopic lithic analysis and behavioral archaeology to study aspects of human activities and natural transforms that create the site as it is found in the archaeological record.

The study of aspects of human behavior and its effect on site creation can be a complicated yet fruitful endeavor. The horizontal distribution of artifacts and activity areas within a site can yield information concerning social organization and site creation. In turn, such information can be used to answer questions regarding the site’s inhabitants and their culture (Andrefsky, 2005; Clarke, 1977;

Schiffer, 1995). This research focuses on the identification of lithic-related activity areas, explores how they can be used to examine social organization, and offers additional insight into previous site and artifact interpretations.

Archaeological Background

The local region is defined here as encompassing the flow of the Brazos

River from its historic headwaters in the Yellowhouse system (Lubbock, Texas)

1 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 1.1. Location of the Longhorn site (41KT53) within the upper Brazos River Basin (modified from Boyd, 1997:Figure 4). 2 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

onto the western edge of the Rolling Plains. As such, this region’s landscape

encompasses parts of both the Southern High Plains and the Rolling Plains. The

site is situated on an alluvial floodplain along the west side of Grape Creek, a

tributary of the Double Mountain Fork of the Brazos River (Boyd, 1997; Boyd et

al., 1993).

Project Area Investigations

Interest in studying the archaeology within the general area began in the

1950s when members of the South Plains Archeological Society (SPAS) began documenting local sites (Boyd, 1997). By the 1970s, the early planning stages for the Justiceburg Reservoir, named for the nearby town of Justiceburg, Texas, had begun. The reservoir was to be built for the city of Lubbock and would result in the flooding of Grape Creek (Boyd, 2004; Boyd et al., 1993). This flooding would result in the destruction or inundation of potential sites within portions of

Garza and Kent counties, thus creating what is today known as Lake Alan Henry

(Boyd, 2004). The project was created under a Memorandum of Agreement among the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the State Historic Preservation Office

(SHPO), and the city of Lubbock. As a result, it was considered an Undertaking under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), in addition to requiring a Texas Antiquities permit (#954).

The reservoir’s proposal prompted an inventory of sites in a series of reports for the South Plains Association of Governments (SPAG) (Campbell,

1975, 1977; Campbell and Judd, 1977a, 1997b, Judd, 1977). To deter its construction, local landowners sponsored additional surveys through Grand River 3 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Consultants (GRC), who viewed the area’s importance as underestimated

(Alexander, 1982). Following GRC’s recommendations, Prewitt and Associates

(P&A) began their investigations of the Justiceburg Reservoir area in 1987, lasting until 1992 (Boyd, 1997; Boyd et al., 1992). Much of the earliest information from SPAS had been lost by this point, increasing the reliance on information gathered by P&A during their initial surveys (Boyd, 1997).

In 1987, surveyors recorded 330 sites on the project’s roughly 8,600 acres, including site 41KT53 (Boyd, 1997). Of these sites, 238 were potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, prompting testing to uncover whether their data could prove useful for research problems. Testing began in 1988 for 67 of these sites to determine their National Register eligibility, including proton magnetometer testing at 41KT53 to locate anomalies. As a result of the season’s testing investigations, 17 prehistoric and seven historic sites were recommended as being eligible. In August and September of 1990,

2,440 acres of Wildlife Mitigation lands were included, adding one historic and 32 prehistoric sites, nine of which were significant enough to be protected during the wildlife area’s development (Boyd, 1997).

The total project area was raised to 11,280 acres when season 1 data recovery examined four sites in 440 acres of the immediate construction zone

(Boyd, 1997). Season 2 data recovery began in 1991 with the excavation of two sites (41KT51 and 41KT53) while work on the reservoir’s dam began; two new sites also were discovered (Boyd, 1997). During season 3 data recovery in

1992, five of the recorded sites were examined and one rock art site was added

4 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

(Boyd, 1997). By the end of investigations, the entirety of the Justiceburg

Reservoir project covered only 1% of the total acreage in Garza and Kent counties, yet represented 45% of the total recorded sites in those counties (Boyd,

1997).

During investigations of the project area, raw lithic materials were collected from the sites and surrounding areas to examine local and non-local availability (Boyd, 1997; Boyd et al., 1993). This research resulted in 20 raw material types being defined, some ranging as far as Idaho (Table 1.1). Forty- eight percent (n=64) of the sites represented lithic procurement activities from the exposed outcrops of redeposited Ogallala gravels (Lingos Formation) (Boyd,

1997). Present at almost all of these outcrops were natural gravel nodules, tested nodules, cores, primary flakes, core choppers, and hammerstones (Boyd,

1997:112). Cobble testing and early stages of lithic reduction also were apparent

(Boyd, 1997).

Research Orientation

Researchers for P&A surveyed, tested, and excavated the Longhorn and neighboring Headstream sites to create a model of late Holocene human adaptation to identify whether the project area’s site represented collector or forager based subsistence strategies (Boyd, 1997). They hypothesized that: 1) resource distribution controls in large part subsistence strategies and settlement patterns; and 2) that human social groups gather resources as either “logistically oriented collectors or residentially mobile foragers” (Boyd, 1997; Boyd et al.,

5 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 1.1. Source information for raw lithic materials found within the Justiceburg Reservoir area. Non-Local Material Local Materials Non-Local Materials Sources Southern High Plains Fine-grained chert Alibates agate northeastern escarpment Southern High Plains Coarse-grained chert Tecovas jasper eastern escarpment Southern High Plains Fine-grained quartzite Dakota orthoquartzite western escarpment Coarse-grained Edwards Formation chert Central Texas quartzite Chalcedony Obsidian (sourced) New Mexico, Idaho

Silicified wood Novaculite Oklahoma, Arkansas

Opalized caliche Day Creek dolomite Oklahoma

Silicified caliche Flint Hills cherts Oklahoma, Kansas

Sandstone Undefined materials Pecos River gravels (?) Conglomerate sandstone Limestone

Limonite

Metallic hematite

Specular hematite

6 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

1992:10). Bison, the main resource affecting which strategy was selected, was in turn controlled by climactic changes, namely those that affected the prairie lands on which the bison subsisted (Boyd et al., 1992, 1993). The introduction of the horse and Euro-American goods also was examined in terms of their effects on the settlement and subsistence patterns (Boyd et al., 1989, 1991, 1993).

Excavations at 41KT53

Site 41KT53 became known as the Longhorn site with the discovery of a longhorn horn core (Figure 2) that was interpreted as a tipi stake (Boyd, 1997).

The site’s upper component consisted of a protohistoric campsite, while an isolated Archaic-age hearth was discovered in a lower component (Boyd, 1997;

Boyd et al., 1993). In 1992, large blocks were chosen for excavation that eventually would expand to uncover feature and artifact distribution patterns

(Boyd, 1997; Boyd et al., 1993).

A thin, buried cultural zone was uncovered in the primary alluvial deposits of eastern portions of the site, parallel to Grape Creek (Boyd, 1997; Boyd et al.,

1993). The association between artifacts, activity areas, and site structural information appeared to be preserved, and all of the recovered materials were associated with the same cultural component (Boyd, 1997; Boyd et al., 1993). A total of 340 1x1m units was excavated from isolated units and from within six

large blocks of contiguous units (Boyd et al., 1993). This sampling distribution

was determined to be “the most effective strategy to allow the definition of activity

areas and intrasite spatial patterning and to obtain a representative sample of the

full range of activities carried out at the site” (Boyd et al., 1993:15). A primary

7 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 datum set to an arbitrary elevation of 100.00m was positioned at the center of the site (Boyd et al., 1993).

Figure 1.2. Proposed tipi stake made from a longhorn horn core after which the Longhorn site was named (Boyd et al., 1993, Figure 60).

Units were excavated by trowel and shovel using 10-cm levels to a depth of 60cm (Boyd et al., 1993). Excavation record forms were kept for each level, while features were given unique numbers and recorded on a separate Feature

Record Form (Boyd et al., 1993). Plan and profile views were drawn, and in situ artifacts and features were mapped onto grid paper using transit, string line, or water level elevations (Boyd et al., 1993). All excavated fill was water screened through ¼”-mesh hardware cloth screens due to dense clayey sediments, and objects were bagged by unit and level provenience (Boyd et al., 1993). Black and white photographs were taken, various samples were collected, and field inventories were maintained for all collected artifacts (Boyd et al., 1993). In the

8 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 laboratory, all artifacts were washed and labeled with the site number and corresponding lot number that related to an excavation level from which the artifact was recovered, a special provenience associated with features, or an individually mapped specimen (Boyd et al., 1993).

Results and Interpretations

Fifty cultural features (Table 1.2) and 9,029 artifacts were recovered from the Longhorn site, interpreted as representing a tipi encampment occupied over a span of about 300 years, from A.D. 1400-1750 (Boyd, 1997). The most intensive occupation of the site appeared to occur during the 17th century, from about A.D. 1620-1690 based on radiocarbon dating on hearth features (Boyd,

1997; Boyd et al., 1993). These dates placed the main occupation of the site in the transitional period from the late Protohistoric to early Historic times.

Aboriginal artifact types included potsherds, pipe fragments, lithic debitage and tools, groundstone, shell, and novelty items (Boyd et al., 1993). Novelty items were defined as objects with uncertain functions that may represent tools, gaming pieces, curiosities, or ceremonial pieces. The site’s faunal remains indicated that low numbers of medium to large animals were being butchered at the site. Medium-sized animals such as deer or pronghorn represent the highest degree of biomass and clearly outnumber the single identified bison bone.

Rodents, rabbit, and box turtle represent small animal food sources that were utilized in the highest numbers (Boyd et al., 1993). Historic artifact types included a .37 caliber lead shot, Majolica ceramic sherds, an amber glass shard, and four possible gunflints (Boyd et al., 1993). 9 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 1.2. Features uncovered during excavations (based on Boyd et al., 1993). Number of Feature Type Feature Description Features

Unlined, basin-shaped fire pit containing ashy white Basin Hearth 3 sediment, burned clay lumps, cultural debris, and occasional charcoal flecks

Ephemeral Less defined basin hearths with minimal oxidation 2 Hearth and ashy sediment

Shallow, roughly circular concentrations of charcoal, Hearth Dump 3 burned clay lumps, and ash

At least five horizontally oriented sandstone rocks Rock Cluster 3 concentrated in an area of less then 1-m²

Pit of unknown function lacking in distinctive Unidentified Pit 1 characteristics and an irregular morphology

Bone Stake 1 Longhorn core positioned vertically in the ground

Basin-shaped pit containing slightly darker sediment, charcoal flecking, small gravels, and cultural debris Grinding Basin 1 including a large groundstone mano or pestle

Clusters of closely-spaced ceramics indicating the Ceramic Cluster 2 breaking or discard of a vessel

Concentrations of charcoal and burned clay Burned Stump 4 representing tree stumps that burned in situ

Filled holes where posts or stake once stood, Postmold 33 containing fill including charred wood, stained sediment, and cultural debris

10 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Analysis of the site’s artifacts and features indicated that the inhabitants were hunter-gatherers, whose main occupation at the site involved the final processing of bison hides and bone grease manufacturing during winter months

(Boyd et al., 1993). Furthermore, participation in trade with both Europeans and the Plains/Pueblo trade system was intense during the densest occupational range. The number of historic and trade items recovered from the site, however, was extremely low. Aspects of these interpretations, therefore, are reexamined using an analysis of the site’s lithics to determine their significance in the function of the site and the focus of the activities performed by its inhabitants.

Cultural Background

Due to reliable water sources such as those found at Lubbock Lake, evidence of continuous human occupation covering the last 11,500 years has been recorded on the Southern High Plains portion of the upper Brazos River

Basin (Johnson, 1987, 2008; Johnson and Holliday, 2004). Cultural periods have been divided into five main categories: Paleoindian, Archaic, Ceramic,

Protohistoric, and Historic (Johnson, 2008), with emphasis here on the time of the Longhorn site’s occupation.

Paleoindian (11,500 RCYBP to 8,500 RCYBP)

Known Paleoindian sites in the upper Brazos River Basin can be found on the Southern High Plains near reliable water sources (Johnson, 2008) as well as along the western border of the surrounding Rolling Plains (Holliday, 1997).

During the late Pleistocene, diverse game such as mammoth, camel, short-faced bear, ancient bison, wild turkey, and box turtle were hunted for tools and food

11 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

(Johnson, 2008). Due to the extinction of a number of forms, the focus narrowed on bison hunting by the end of the early Holocene (Johnson, 2008). Specific styles of spear points such as Clovis and Folsom were utilized for hunting large game, then refashioned for continued use as butchering tools (Johnson, 2008).

Archaic (8,500 RCYBP to 2,000 RCYBP)

While little is known for the early Archaic (Johnson and Holliday, 1986,

2004), various site types and isolated features provided evidence of continued occupation throughout this time (Backhouse, 2008; Boyd et al., 1993; Johnson,

2008; Johnson and Holliday, 2004). People were using the region for its natural shelter, game, and raw lithic materials (Johnson and Holliday, 2004). During the middle of this time, the general climate was shifting to the hotter and dryer climate of the Altithermal (Johnson, 2008). Bison continued to be hunted, represented by kill sites (Johnson, 1987), while known camp sites were located near water sources (Boyd et al., 1993; Johnson, 2008). Plant processing also was evident during this time by the presence of metates and baking ovens

(Johnson, 2008). While some areas of the Southern High Plains were abandoned as the water table dropped too low for hand-dug wells (Meltzer,

1995), the upper Brazos portion retained active springs and therefore continued occupation (Johnson, 2008). The shift from the Altithermal to a continental climate by the end of the period brought cooler and wetter (mesic) conditions and increased water availability throughout the region (Johnson, 2008).

12 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Ceramic (2,000 RCYBP to A.D. 1450)

The ceramic generally marks the introduction of ceramics and the bow and arrow, with some Late Archaic dart points retained into the beginning of the period (Boyd et al., 1989; Johnson, 2008). The influence of the Jornada

Mogollon of southeastern New Mexico can be seen through the spread of

Mogollon brownware pottery (Boyd, 2004; Johnson, 2008). Hearths, plant and animal processing, and retooling activities have been recorded during this time, and camps continued to be located near water sources such as draws and playas (Johnson, 2008).

Protohistoric (ca. A.D. 1450 to A.D. 1650)

During the Protohistoric, the surrounding regions began to see the arrival of Europeans (Johnson, 2008), whose influence had yet to be evidenced in any surviving cultural remains (Johnson and Holliday, 2004). When Coronado ventured into northwestern Texas in 1541 and 1542, he encountered and described the local inhabitants, naming them Querechos and Teyas (Boyd, 2001;

Flint and Flint, 1997, 2003). These groups may have represented bands of

Apachean people inhabiting Garza and Tierra Blanca complex sites (Boyd, 2001;

Flint and Flint, 1997, 2003; Johnson, 1992; Johnson et al., 1977).

The Garza complex dates from roughly A.D. 1400 to A.D. 1650, representing a bison-hunting nomadic lifestyle on the Southern High Plains and adjacent western Rolling Plains (Hughes, 1991; Johnson, 1992). A combination of Harrell, Washita, Fresno, and Talco-like arrow points is common in Garza complex sites (Hughes, 1991), yet the complex more commonly is identified by

13 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 the presence of Garza or Lott arrow points (Hughes, 1991; Johnson, 1987;

Johnson et al., 1977) and a lack of fixed dwellings (Hughes, 1991). Aboriginal people of this complex had a mixed plant- and meat-related subsistence base

(Johnson and Holliday, 2004). They lived in small groups with short-term residential usage and utilized the landscape’s features and resources throughout the year for hunting, animal processing, tool production, and tool rejuvenation

(Johnson and Holliday, 2004). Quarrying for Ogallala Formation materials occurred along the southeastern escarpment (Hurst et al., 2010) and within the

South Fork drainage just off the escarpment (Backhouse et al., 2009).

Nearby Lubbock Lake occupations, dated to the Protohistoric through radiocarbon ages and the presence of Garza points, reveal large game processing stations, and associated hearths and living surfaces (Johnson and

Holliday, 2004). The Longhorn and nearby Headstream sites also may represent

Garza complex campsites (Boyd et al., 1990, 1993; Johnson and Holliday, 2004).

Historic (A.D. 1650 to 1950s)

By the early 1700s, the Comanche arrived in the region, displacing the

Apachean inhabitants by the end of the century (Boyd et al., 1989; Hughes,

1991; Johnson, 1987, 2008; Johnson and Holliday, 2004). In addition, Anglo-

European material culture began to be evidenced within the archaeological record alongside aboriginal occupations (Johnson and Holliday, 2004). Remains included European trade goods and modern horse on the Southern High Plains and 18th century glass trade beads at several sites including the Headstream site on Grape Creek (Boyd et al., 1993; Johnson and Holliday, 2004). Buffalo

14 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 hunters and U.S. military units came to occupy the areas in the mid-1800s, followed by pastores (sheepherders), traders, ranchers, and finally settlers

(Johnson and Holliday, 2004).

Environmental Setting

The Rolling Plains portion of the upper Brazos River Basin is a region of undulating hills made of soft Permian mudstones that have been eroded from dissolution-induced subsidence (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday et al.,

2002). The Southern High Plains to the west is a flat and almost featureless expanse of short-grass prairie, dunes, lake basins, and dry valleys ranging from eastern New Mexico into western Texas (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989;

Holliday, 1997). Separating the two regions is a north-south rugged escarpment whose relief can exceed up to 305m (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989). Due to the escarpment’s geologic formations and increased biodiversity, the upper

Brazos River Basin may be considered an oasis of resources through time.

Geology

The caprock escarpment of the Southern High Plains has been created through the deposition of multiple geologic units over millions of years. The bottommost are Permian age formations, consisting of carbonates, clastic sediments, dolomite, limestone, salt, anhydrite, shales, sandstone, and redbeds

(Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday and Welty, 1981; Seni, 1980). The

Triassic Dockum Group, above the Permian deposits (Gustavson and Simpkins,

1989), includes the Tecovas and Trujillo formations, which contain lacustrine mudstones and sandstones (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday and Welty,

15 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

1981). These deposits may have formed in earlier flood-plain depressions created through subsurface salt dissolution (Lehman and Chatterjee, 2005). Due to the thick and well-cemented sandstones, these formations are resistant to erosion, resulting in a cliff-forming structure (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989;

Holliday and Welty, 1981; Lehman and Chatterjee, 2005).

Also in the Dockum Group is the Tertiary-age Ogallala Formation, whose bottommost unit contains Ogallala and Potter gravels from the Potter member that eventually was covered by aeolian sediments and alluvial and fluvial deposits (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty,

1981; Holliday et al., 2002; Johnson and Holliday, 2004; Seni, 1980). The upper part of the Ogallala Formation represents an ancient soil that is highly resistant and forms a ledge-forming unit (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997;

Holliday and Welty, 1981; Holliday et al., 2002). Intersecting the Ogallala

Formation are large basins filled with lacustrine dolomite and clastic sediment that form the Blanco Formation (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997).

The uppermost layer of the escarpment is a Pleistocene age deposit of thick, widespread aeolian sediments and clay loam known as the Blackwater

Draw Formation (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1989a, 1997). This

Formation consists of as many as six well-developed buried soils that indicate episodes of sedimentation during periods of aridity intersected by episodes of landscape stability over the last 1.4 million years (Holliday, 1989a). Data suggest that each cycle consisted of aeolian deposition from the Pecos Valley, landscape stability and soil formation with no deposition, and a possible period of erosion

16 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

(Holliday, 1989a). The most recent depositional event most likely occurred at least 40,000 RCYBP (Holliday, 1989a), although areas along the draw show smaller aeolian deposits as recent as about 5,000 RCYBP, probably due to reduced grassland vegetation during periods of drought (Holliday, 1989b).

Erosion has played a key factor in changing the eastern escarpment of the

Southern High Plains. The Brazos, Canadian, Red, and Colorado Rivers

(Holliday, 1997), as well as zones of active salt dissolution and runoff from heavy precipitation, have been eroding the deposits, slowly exposing Triassic and

Permian beds and eroding out Ogallala gravels that eventually are dumped as alluvial and colluvial fans (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday et al., 2002;

Lehman and Chatterjee, 2005; Seni, 1980). These Ogallala gravels then are redeposited during the Quaternary in the western Rolling Plains where they are known as the Lingos Formation and Seymour Formation, respectively

(Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981;

Holliday et al., 2002; Seni, 1980).

The valley relief immediately surrounding the Longhorn site is 18.3-30.5m, providing natural shelter from the elements, such as the region’s high winds

(Boyd, 2004; Boyd et al., 1992). The valley’s base extends almost 200m wide, creating an environment that provides thin strips of alluvial floodplain in between the valley walls and Grape Creek that meanders along the valley floor (Boyd et al., 1993, 1994).

17 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Lithics Raw Materials

Several outcroppings of various qualities of cherts and gravels are available both within the upper Brazos River Basin and in its surrounding regions.

At the northern edge of the Southern High Plains, high quality agatized dolomite known as Alibates agate crops out extensively along the Canadian River (Banks,

1990; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981). High quality Tecovas jasper is exposed on the eastern edge of the escarpment near Quitatque (Banks, 1990;

Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981; Hurst et al., 2010). The exposed

Ogallala Formation and Lingos gravels provide much lower quality cherts and quartzites along the escarpment and at localized outcrops within the draws

(Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981;

Holliday et al., 2002; Seni, 1980). Lastly, high quality Edwards Formation cherts are available to the southeast in the Abilene area and Edwards Plateau (Banks,

1990; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981).

Climate

During the Middle Holocene, the local environment experienced a warmer climate with reduced precipitation (Altithermal), contrasting the more mesic conditions of the Early and Late Holocene (Holliday, 1989b). The Altithermal resulted in warmer winds and aeolian sedimentation that affected all areas of the

Southern High Plains and ended by 4,500 RCYBP (Holliday, 1989b). Local vegetation was reduced, bison herd size may have decreased, and resulting droughts appear to have caused humans to excavate wells to reach lowered water levels (Hester, 1972; Holliday, 1989b; Meltzer and Collins, 1987).

18 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

With the onset of the Late Holocene (4,500 RCYBP to present), however, the climate experienced a marked change with the transition from the Altithermal to the continental climate that persists today (Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989;

Holliday, 1989b; Hughes, 1991; Johnson, 2008). During this time, cooler temperatures and increased moisture stabilized the plains. A cyclical drought pattern began around 2,000 RCYBP and continues today (Holliday, 1989b;

Johnson, 2008; Johnson and Holliday, 2004).

Today, the upper Brazos River Basin tends to experience a mild, semi-arid to subhumid climate throughout the year with short spans of intense heat or cold

(Bomar, 1995; Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997). Average monthly temperatures vary slightly (3°F to 5°F) between the Southern High

Plains and the western Rolling Plains (Haragan, 1983). Overall temperatures range from a low of 24.6°F in January to a high of 97°F in July, with extremes reaching –17°F to 114°F (recorded for Lubbock) (Bomar, 1995; Haragan, 1983).

Temperatures usually peak in late July to August, at times causing extreme heat waves (Bomar, 1995). Annual precipitation varies widely with mean annual precipitation of 43cm to 58cm, with the majority falling from the end of March through the beginning of October (Bomar, 1995; Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989;

Haragan, 1983). Snowfall is variable in the region; the higher Southern High

Plains receives 28.45cm on average annually, while the lower Rolling Plains portion may receive less than 15cm (Bomar, 1995).

Severe weather tends to occur as warm, dry air from the arid southwest meets the moist Gulf Coast air, creating a dry line where the moist air is lifted

19 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 above the dry air, producing frontal-type weather (Haragan, 1983). Results are varied and include thunderstorms that can result in flash floods, especially in the canyons along the escarpment (Bomar, 1995; Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989;

Haragan, 1983), large-scale tornadoes, and severe blizzards (Bomar, 1995).

The most recent period of major drought spans the last 500 years (Johnson,

2008; Johnson and Holliday, 2004), with smaller seasonal droughts causing mild to severe dust storms (Bomar, 1995; Haragan, 1983).

Flora and Fauna

Due to the generally mild fluctuations the upper Brazos River Basin has experienced since the onset of the continental climate, the majority of its plants and animals have remained the same since the Longhorn site’s occupation

(Johnson, 2007). The region is a mixed-prairie grassland dominated by short- grasses, with trees present primarily along the escarpment and in the canyon system (Holliday, 1989b, 1997; Johnson, 2007). Diverse water sources including salinas, playas (Holliday et al., 2002), and tributary rivers (Boyd et al., 1993) combined with the grassland create an ecosystem that provides a diverse floral and faunal community (Table 1.3).

Water

The Brazos River originates in the Tertiary, helping to form the Ogallala

Formation (Holliday et al., 2002). On the Southern High Plains, the landscape is dotted by playas (small basins) and salinas (large basins) providing surface water that in turn replenished the subsurface waters of the Ogallala aquifer

(Backhouse et al., 2009; Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday et al., 2002;

20 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 1.3. Some common plant and animal species in the upper Brazos River Basin (based on Dixon, 2000; Hatch and Pluhar, 1993; Johnson, 2007; Johnson and Hill, 2008; Lockwood and Freeman, 2004; Schmidly, 2004). Other Plant Mammal Mammal (continued) Black Bear Blue Grama Grass Virginia Opossum (now extirpated) (Bouteloua gracilis) (Didelphis virginiana) (Ursus americanus)

Buffalo Grass Nine-banded Armadillo Ringtail (Buchloe dactyloides) (Dasypus novemcinctus) (Bassaricus astatus)

Crown Grass Desert Cottontail Common Raccoon (Paspalum spp.) (Sylvilagus audubonii) (Procyon lotor)

Skunkbush Eastern Cottontail Long-tailed Weasel (Rhus armomatica) (Sylvilagus floridanus) (Mustela frenata)

Broadleaf Milkweed Black-tailed Jackrabbit American Badger (Asclepias latfolia) (Lepus californicus) (Taxidea taxus)

Sand Sagebrush Black-tailed Prairie Dog Eastern Spotted Skunk (Artemisia filifolia) (Cynomys ludovicianus) (Spilogale putorius)

Lotebush Plains Pocket Gopher Striped Skunk (Ziziphus obtusifolia) (Geomys bursarius) (Mephitis mephitis)

Prickly Poppy Yellow-faced Pocket Gopher Mountain Lion (Argemone spp.) (Cratogeomys castanops) (Felis concolor)

Buffalo Bur Porcupine Bobcat (Solanum rostratum) (Erethizon dorsatum) (Lynx rufus)

Honey Mesquite Coyote Mule Deer (Prosopis glandulosa) (Canis latrans) (Odocoileus hemionus)

Net-leaf Hackberry Swift Fox White-tailed Deer (Celtis reticulata) (Vulpes velox) (Odocoileus virginianus)

Texas Walnut Red Fox (Since 1895) Pronghorn (Jaglans microcapra) (Vulpes vulpes) (Antilocapra americana)

Common Gray Fox Bison (now extirpated)

(Urocyon cinereoargenteus) (Bison bison)

21 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 1.3. Some common plant and animal species in the upper Brazos River Basin (continued) (based on Dixon, 2000; Hatch and Pluhar, 1993; Johnson, 2007; Johnson and Hill, 2008; Lockwood and Freeman, 2004; Schmidly, 2004). Amphibian and Reptile Large Bird Fish

Red-eared Slider Canada Goose Gar (Trachemys scripta elegans) (Branta canadensis) (Lepisosteus spp.) Texas Toad Wild Turkey Catfish (Bufo speciosus) (Meleagris gallopavo) (Ictaluridae)

Plains Leopard Frog Scaled Quail Buffalo (Rana blairi) (Callipepla squamata) (Ictiobus spp.) Yellow Mud Turtle Turkey Vulture Green Sunfish (Kinosternon flavescens (Cathartes aura) (Lepomis cyanellus) flavescens) Ornate Box Turtle Mississippi Kite Orangespotted Sunfish (Terrapene ornata ornata) (Ictinia mississippiensis) (Lepomis humilis) Bald Eagle Pallid Spiny Soft-shelled Turtle Longear Sunfish (Haliaeetus (Trionyx spiniferus pallidus) (Lepomis megalotis) leucocephalus)

Texas Horned Lizard Northern Harrier Sunfish (Phrynosoma cornutum) (Circus cyaneus) (Lepomis spp.) Plains Blind Snake Sharp-shinned Hawk Largemouth Bass, Trout (Leptotyphlops dulcis dulcis) (Accipiter striatus) (Micropterus salmoides)

Bull Snake Cooper's Hawk Bass (Pituophus catenifer sayi) (Accipiter cooperii) (Micropterus spp.) Texas Long-nosed Snake Swainson's Hawk (Rhinocheilus lecontei (Buteo swainsonii) tessellatus) Plains Black-headed Snake Red-tailed Hawk (Tantilla nigriceps nigriceps) (Buteo jamaicensis) Western Diamondback Ferginous Hawk Rattlesnake (Buteo regalis) (Crotalus atrox) Prairie Rattlesnake Rough-legged Hawk (Crotalus viridis viridis) (Buteo lagopus) Golden Eagle

(Aquila chrysaetos)

22 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Seni, 1980). As water reaches the Rolling Plains, however, the sporadic water sources tend to become salinazied as the water passes through the Permian redbeds (Holliday et al., 2002). These factors make water in the western Rolling

Plains less reliable than those of the Southern High Plains. The natural resources of the upper Brazos River Basin, therefore, enabled the inhabitants of the Longhorn site to live in the area’s relatively warm and dry climate.

Summary

Survey, testing, and excavations at the Longhorn site were conducted to mitigate the adverse effects of floodwaters created during the construction of the

Justiceburg Reservoir. Completed investigations uncovered thousands of artifacts from a variety of categories and 50 cultural features within a thin occupational zone. This thesis research is focused on the 17th-century.

Examination of the horizontal distribution of the lithics may reveal insight into the inhabitants’ social and spatial organization, thereby offering additional, and possibly alternative, interpretations from those previously set forth by the original researchers (e.g., Boyd et al., 1993).

A combination of geologic and environmental factors affecting the upper

Brazos River Basin made the region ideal for nomadic peoples over the last

11,500 years. For the Longhorn site’s Protohistoric inhabitants, the undulating topography of the westernmost Rolling Plains provided shelter from the region’s high winds and lithics for tool-making. Other natural resources throughout the upper Brazos River Basin were varied and plentiful, offering water, wood, and plants and animals that provided food and additional materials for tool-making.

23 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

The Longhorn site’s lithic collection comprises the vast majority of the recovered artifacts. Examination of the site, therefore, will focus on those lithics representing flintknapping processes and how they can be used to reexamine interpretations posed by previous investigations. Such a dominant emphasis on lithics necessitates a theoretical framework based in material-culture. Artifacts are most commonly all that remains of a culture in a particular time (Schiffer,

1988). The durable nature of lithics allows them to survive much longer than many other materials. Like most artifacts, lithics can be studied in terms of their formal, quantitative, spatial, and relational properties to infer past phenomena

(Schiffer, 1988). Methods of study based on experimental research have been created and tested to examine the manufacture and use of stone tools. Theories such as behavioral archaeology (Schiffer, 1995a) and spatial archaeology

(Clarke, 1977) have created ways to link those tools’ inherent properties and spatial distribution to the behaviors and actions that created them.

Behavioral Archaeology

Behavioral archaeology describes the relationship between human behavior and the artifacts in the archaeological record (Schiffer, 1995a, 1995b).

Its applications cover identifying the life histories of artifacts and the activities of people in all time and in all places (Hill, 1970; Odell, 1980; Rathje et al., 1992;

Schiffer 1995a, 1995b). Aspects of behavioral archaeology can be applied to the

24 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Longhorn site to identify and examine the activities that were performed during its occupation as well as natural processes that may have affected it afterward.

Correlates

Correlates are a set of rules that can be applied to a cultural system’s materials, relating behavioral variables to variables of material objects, spatial relations, organization, or the environment (Schiffer, 1995c). Such correlates are used to derive inferences (Schiffer, 1995c). Regarding the flintknapping process, the behavioral variable of preparing and striking a platform can be related to the resulting debitage and tools (Schiffer, 1995c). As a result, when such artifacts are found at a site, the same correlates can be used to infer the type of manufacturing process (or behavior) that created them (Schiffer, 1995c).

Context is key when making inferences on the spatial relations of behavior and activities. The spatial context of particular artifact types can have various implications as to the activity or activities that occurred at that location (Schiffer,

1995a). A lithic biface found in-situ with a hammerstone and debitage indicates the manufacturing process; a used, but whole, knife found near cut bone may have been used to cut the bone; a broken knife is a trash midden most likely was part of the discard process (Schiffer, 1995a).

Some activities that occurred at a site are unclear and can only be determined based on indirect evidence (Schiffer, 1995b). A relevant principle states that “when two nonsequential activities in the behavioral chain of an element occur at a site, then the activities that took place between them on the chain also occurred at that site” (Schiffer, 1995b:62). In terms of lithics, if

25 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 hammerstones and numerous pieces of thinning flakes (indicating the creation of tools) are uncovered at the same site as a broken, retouched scraper of similar material, then the activities of the tool’s use and retouch must have taken place

(Schiffer, 1995b). Caution, however, must be taken with this principle’s application to lithics due to the fact that they can be procured and reduced at one location, further reduced and used at a second, then transported, used, and discarded at a third (Schiffer, 1995b). Each behavioral chain segment (culture process) must be analyzed critically before such a statement can be made confidently (Schiffer, 1995b).

Culture Processes The cultural element flow model (Schiffer, 1995c) posits that as artifacts pass through a cultural system, they follow various processes that constitute their life history (Figure 2.1). A process is defined as consisting of more than one stage, with a stage representing one or more activities (Schiffer, 1995a). This model may be used to account for the behaviors that created the archaeological record. Five major cultural processes, or behavioral chains, are covered: procurement, manufacture, use, maintenance, and discard (Schiffer, 1995a). In addition, minor cultural and non-cultural processes may act upon the site and its artifacts, thus altering their preservation and distribution. Further exceptions to this model include minor divergent processes that result in an alternative flow pattern and reduce the number of major processes experienced (Schiffer,

1995a).

26 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

This perspective is very similar to a more recent approach, the chaîne opératoire, that is prevalent in European lithic tool studies (Andrefsky, 2005;

Odell, 2003). The chaîne opératoire approach posits that lithic tools have undergone multiple processes including procurement, manufacture, and use that have shaped and reshaped the tool’s morphology throughout its life history, and that these changes can aid in the understanding of morphological variability

(Andrefsky, 2005). Behavioral archaeology, however, looks beyond the initial manufacturing stage, following an artifact through its maintenance and final discard (Schiffer et al., 2001).

Figure 2.1. The cultural element flow model that constitutes the life-history of most artifacts, here depicting hypothetical life-histories of a scraper (modified from Schiffer, 1995a:Figure 2.1).

27 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Major Cultural Processes

Procurement

Procurement represents the gathering of raw materials, whether from the source location, trade, or picking up an old tool to reuse (Odell, 2003; Schiffer,

1995a). Known deposits and quarries are helpful when identifying where a raw lithic material originated. The procurement process, therefore, can be studied through examining the distances and directions that may have been traveled to obtain non-local materials, and then comparing the materials to those that were procured locally. Tools can be studied in terms of which material was used predominately for their creation. Lastly, by comparing the frequencies of each material type, it may be possible to examine the most recent source visited, thereby suggesting potential mobility routes (Odell, 2003).

Manufacture

The manufacture stage covers the creation of an artifact from the procured raw material. For many lithic tools, the flintknapping process is required for the reduction and shaping of the objective piece. The process begins with the initial reduction of the raw material at a quarry or procurement location for removal of cortex and reducing the size of the core for easier transport (Andrefsky, 2005;

Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994). During the shaping of the objective piece, debitage is removed and deposited on the ground with other remains including broken and discarded tools (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell, 2003; Schiffer, 1995a;

Whittaker, 1994). Some debitage may be selected for further manufacture into

28 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 both formal and informal tools depending on their morphology and the need at the time (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994).

Use

Use refers to how an artifact was employed subsequent to its manufacture. Lithic tools can be used in many ways, including multiple purposes. For example, a small biface that can cut materials such as meat, plants, and hides, also can be hafted and used as an arrow point (Odell, 2003;

Turner and Hester, 1999)

Maintenance

Through an object’s use-life, its morphology will change as use and retouching reduces its size and alters its shape (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell, 2003;

Schiffer, 1995a; Whittaker, 1994). A scraper, for example, may be retouched until it no longer functions as a scraper, yet can be used as a different tool and for a different purpose (Schiffer, 1995a). Sometimes after a lithic tool has become part of the archaeological record, it is found by later peoples and retouched and/or reused, thus rerouting it through some of the processes

(Whittaker 1994; Schiffer 1995a). An indicator of this occurrence is the presence of flake scars with no patina in contrast to the remainder of the tool. This result is caused when retouching removes the outermost layer of the tool, thereby exposing the underlying raw material.

Discard

Normally when an object reaches the end of its use-life, it is discarded, thereby no longer participating in the behavioral system (Schiffer, 1995a). That

29 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 object then becomes refuse in the archaeological record (Schiffer, 1995a).

Inferring the life history of an object found on a site involves many variables that will affect how an object came to be in its final location. These forces are termed n-transforms and c-transforms (Schiffer, 1995d). N-transforms are noncultural formation processes (or natural forces) such as erosion, soils, or animal disturbance that can change the post-depositional morphology of a site and/or its artifacts (Schiffer, 1995c, 1995d). C-transforms are cultural forces such as clearing debris from an activity area or finding a biface and reusing it hundreds of years later (Schiffer, 1995d).

N-transforms

The first step in studying activity areas should be to assess the level of alteration that the n-transforms may have had on the site. This type of alteration may have a severe impact on the clustering of artifacts that can help to identify activity areas (Schiffer 1995a). Familiarity with the local environment, both past and present, is essential in understanding a site’s potential n-transforms

(Schiffer, 1995c). Burrowing animals, acidic soils, prairie fires, and more all attribute to morphological changes (Schiffer, 1995c). Consequently, site reports from original excavators are both vital in determining a site’s level of preservation at the time of excavation, and relevant for the Longhorn site, now submerged by

Lake Alan Henry (Boyd et al., 1993).

C-transforms

C-transforms may be difficult to interpret specifically. Multiple interpretations can be given to explain a single occurrence, increasing the

30 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 reliance on the context of surrounding artifacts and features. For example, whole, seemingly functional objects on a site can reflect accidental deposition, change (discarding obsolete items), or ceremonial objects such as those found with the dead (Schiffer, 1995a).

Primary refuse occurs when an object is discarded at the location of its use (Schiffer, 1995a), such as a tool that was broken during manufacture and included in a lithic scatter with the resulting debris. Conversely, an object that is picked up and carried from its location of use to be discarded elsewhere is an example of secondary refuse (Schiffer, 1995a). In areas of long-term or repeated use, such as a village, secondary refuse more likely is to be found as space becomes more limited, increasing the need for cleared areas (Schiffer, 1995a).

When sites are abandoned rapidly, artifacts may be deposited quickly with or without intent, thus leaving them potentially in every stage of manufacture and in both specialized and abnormal discard locations (Schiffer 1995a). This process creates de facto refuse, i.e., those artifacts that were discarded without the performance of discard activities (Schiffer, 1995a). Under normal circumstances, these artifacts would have been found in different locations, thus providing clues that abandonment may have occurred (Schiffer, 1995a).

Other Effects on Processes

Not all artifacts will follow the cultural element flow model exactly. Many situations exist that can prevent an object from experiencing all five processes, while other objects may experience more than the five processes. Such divergences from the basic pattern of an artifact’s life-history create a

31 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 complicated model of element flow. Storing and transporting artifacts play an important role in their life history as these processes provide a temporal or spatial displacement of the artifact at any point in the model (Schiffer, 1995a). While the artifact may still follow the model closely, it may not be obvious where it experienced each process. The acts of curating and trading objects also create divergences from the model, thus changing which processes an artifact will experience within a particular group or setting (Schiffer, 1995a). In regards to trade, this process is known as lateral recycling (Schiffer, 1995a).

Re-use or recycling occurs when an object is rerouted back to a process it already has experienced (Schiffer, 1995a). For example, a tool is recycled when it has completed the processes through use, reenters the manufacturing stage to be made into a different tool, and then finishes the cycles of maintenance and discard (Schiffer, 1995a). Lastly, some artifacts may not experience all processes (Schiffer, 1995a). One example would be a hammerstone used for percussion in flintknapping. This tool can go directly from the procurement process to the use process, thereby skipping manufacture, as hammerstones usually are used in the state in which they are found (Schiffer, 1995a). Broken tools on the other hand may be discarded before ever completing the manufacturing process if they are determined to be of no further use (Schiffer,

1995a).

Spatial Archaeology

Spatial archaeology provides a framework to examine aspects of culture ranging from a micro-scale (within structures), through a semi-micro scale (within

32 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 a site), to that of a macro-scale (between sites) (Clarke, 1977). The semi-macro scale, or site level, is appropriate for studying the relationship between its artifacts. A tenant of this framework states that a site’s remains are patterned spatially due to the behavioral patterns of the society that created them (Clarke,

1977). Both social and functional interpretations can be sought using the non- random distribution of artifacts, resource spaces, structures, and activities within the site (Clarke, 1977).

Elements here include raw materials, artifacts, features, and structures

(Clarke, 1977). Resource spaces on the semi-micro scale recognize that while one area of space may have been utilized for a particular means, another area, even one adjacent to the first, may not have been used at all (Clarke, 1977).

Examples of utilized spaces for the Longhorn site could include features such as hearths, tipi structures, and lithic scatters, as opposed to areas where little to no activity was detected. Acknowledging void space is a valuable addition to behavioral archaeology, that focuses on the presence of artifacts, rather than their absence.

Goals and Objectives

The overall goal of this thesis research is to examine hunter-gatherer social organization as reflected in the spatial organization of a late Protohistoric temporary camp in the upper Brazos River Basin. The objectives are to: 1) examine cultural and noncultural processes that may have affected the site; 2) analyze the lithics; 3) identify activity areas; 4) determine the significance of the unifacial to bifacial tool ratio; 5) compare the spatial layout of the activity areas; 33 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 and 6) identify patterns of spatial organization. These objectives should allow for the examination of two conclusions reached by Boyd et al. (1993), discussed below, to determine their significance. The results may reveal patterns concerning how the site’s inhabitants organized features such as living areas (tipi structures), processing areas (lithic production, use, and/or maintenance), disposal areas (hearths, hearth dumps, trash middens), and cleared areas in comparison to one another.

The study is focused on flintknapping technology and covers an analysis of the site centered on cultural and noncultural processes, as well as the behavioral chains that form an artifact’s life history. Analysis of the lithics may identify artifact types that can allow for the identification of activity areas.

Comparing these areas spatially may reveal patterns that can be used to understand the site’s layout. Schiffer’s (1995b) eight steps in the behavioral chain have been modified to six to fit this research and are outlined in terms of how they can be applied to the Longhorn site.

Research Questions

Due to the focus of the investigations, as well as time and budget constraints, the original researchers’ analysis of the lithic artifacts left potential questions unanswered and some conclusions open to further investigation.

These conclusions were: 1) the creation of a skewed tool ratio of unifaces to bifaces was the result of trading for metal tools that replaced bifaces and subsequently deteriorated over time; and 2) the thermal alterations present on some debitage was the result of hearth disposal (Boyd et al., 1993).

34 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Tool Ratios

Boyd et al. (1993:17) concluded that the low number of bifaces such as arrow points and beveled knives found at the Longhorn site combined with the high number of processing tools such as scrapers and other unifaces may be due to trade for Euro-American goods such as metal arrow points and knives. In turn, such metal tools might not be represented in the archaeological record due to their deterioration in the local sediments (Boyd et al., 1993). This explanation, however, leaves room for further investigation. By examining in closer detail the make-up of the site and how the artifacts compare spatially, it may be possible to determine whether or not the unifaces were more prevalent due to the activities being performed, rather than from trade.

Thermal Alteration

In the original analysis, the researchers used the presence of thermal alterations such as potlids and heat spalls to gauge the frequency of accidental or incidental heating or heat damage of the debitage (Boyd et al., 1993:30). This interpretation was based on the observation that many of these alterations were present on small pieces instead of larger flake blanks (Boyd et al., 1993). As a result, Boyd et al. (1993) dismissed the thermal alterations by concluding that their presence was the result of the debitage being disposed of into a hearth as opposed to being the remains of heat-treated nodules to improve the raw material’s quality. They also noted, however, that one or more natural fires burned through the area since the site’s occupation, but did not examine the impact that the burning had on artifacts across the site (Boyd et al., 1993).

35 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Examining the spatial distribution of the lithics exhibiting signs of moderate versus extreme thermal alteration may reveal alternative conclusions.

As a result, the following research questions have been posed:

1. What activities were being performed during the site’s occupation based on

the distribution and context of the features and flaked lithics?

2. What role did the activity areas play in the creation of the tool ratios?

3. What activities could explain the thermal alteration exhibited on some of the

debitage and tools based on their distribution and context?

4. What does the distribution of the activity areas reveal about the site’s spatial

organization?

Summary

Behavioral archaeology (Schiffer, 1995a, 1995b) goes beyond describing the functions of tools or the material from which they were made. It reveals insight into how the individual’s behavior acted on the artifacts that created the archaeological record. The five-step cultural element flow model allows for further understanding of how those individuals procured, manufactured, used, maintained, and discarded their artifacts. Spatial archaeology (Clarke, 1977) makes further contributions by detailing methods of displaying distributions and acknowledging the absence of artifacts. Distribution of both artifacts and void space can yield patterns of spatial organization, allowing insight into how people used and distinguished the space around them.

Cultural and noncultural disturbances acting upon the site must be understood first to compensate for changes from original context. Background 36 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 knowledge regarding common occurrences then provides guidelines toward identifying normal activities and highlighting anomalies. These data may be combined with original research to create a more comprehensive view of late

Protohistoric Native American life in the upper Brazos River Basin.

37 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Several methodologies were used to examine the characteristics and distribution of the debitage and tools from the Longhorn site (41KT53). Schiffer’s

(1995b) behavioral chain analysis provided a valuable framework in which to organize and understand the life histories of the lithics. Regional information for lithics supplemented a macroscopic analysis of the debitage and tools to identify general artifact types. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping of the debitage and tools provided a visual representation of artifact distributions. This information then was used to identify possible activity areas across the site.

Behavioral Chain Analysis

Behavioral chain analysis is a process used to determine what activity areas were created at a site by identifying clusters of artifact types (Schiffer,

1995b). This process is accomplished through observing “the sequence of all activities in which an element participates during its ‘life’ within a cultural system”

(Schiffer, 1995b:57). For flintknapping, each activity is a patterned interaction between two sources: the knapper or tool-user and the lithic. During the performance of the activity, cultural elements such as tools and debitage are created and pass through the cultural processes in the cultural element flow model. Behavioral chain analysis can aid in determining the activities that were conducted at the Longhorn site, as well as where they were performed, with reference to the life history of the lithics. The content and distribution of these

38 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 clusters can indicate the site’s spatial organization based on patterns of clusters both across the site and through excavated levels (Schiffer, 1995b).

The tools and debitage were examined using macroscopic analysis based primarily on Andrefsky (2005; 2008), Kooyman (2000), Odell (2003), and

Whittaker (1994). The process was monothetic (“classification . . . based upon the identification of a single attribute at any one time” [Andrefsky 2005:67]), divisive (a strategy dividing recognized groups into progressively smaller groups

[Andrefsky 2005:68]), and recognized nominal scale attributes (presence or absence of a trait [Andrefsky 2005:65]). Nominal scale attributes for debitage were platform remnant, cortex, platform preparation, edge modification/wear, and thermal alterations. Tool attributes were platform preparation, edge modification/wear, edge flaking, notches, steeply worked edge, remaining flake characteristic, beak-like protrusion, fine pressure flaking, U-shaped groove, V- shaped groove, battering, polish, and thermal alterations. Thermal alteration attributes for all lithics were potlid fracture, chromatic alteration, crazing, and bubbling. All artifacts were examined to study general stages of manufacture, resharpening, and disposal methods. The analysis relied on commonly accepted morphological traits for tools to identify their possible function (Andrefsky, 2005;

Odell, 2003; Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994).

Schiffer’s (1995b) eight steps in the behavioral chain analysis have been modified to fit the current research objectives. The original steps 6 and 7 that focus on the creation and testing of hypotheses have been removed, leaving a six-step analysis that remains sufficient in examining aspects of the site as they

39 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 relate to the proposed research questions. This omission was due to this study’s focus on answering research questions rather than the testing of hypotheses.

Step 1: Activities That Could Have Taken Place

The first step in behavioral chain analysis is determining what activities could have taken place at the Longhorn site (Schiffer, 1995b). This information derives from general anthropological knowledge of flintknapping processes and tool use (Andrefsky, 2001, 2005, 2008, 2009; Blades, 2008; Crabtree and Butler,

1964; Hester and Turner, 1999; Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994;

Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001; Wilson and Andrefsky, 2009) in addition to site- and region-specific information to deduce broad classes of activities (Boyd, 1997;

Johnson and Holliday, 2004; Logan and Hill, 2000; Odell, 1980; Perttula, 2004).

The majority of the research focuses on: 1) the sequence of flintknapping processes; 2) the potential uses of the manufactured tools; and 3) thermal alterations present on some debitage and tools.

Flintknapping processes

Debitage

Debitage refers to detached fragments of a core or lithic tool that were discarded without being used or modified into tools (Andrefsky, 2005:16). Flakes

(debitage exhibiting a platform remnant) are differentiated from debris (debitage lacking the platform remnant). Length, width, and thickness measurements and the presence of cortex are noted for debris. Characteristics useful for identifying the stage of manufacture are noted for flakes. These characteristics are length, width, and thickness measurements, presence of platform preparation, cortex,

40 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 edge modifications, and flake scars indicating resharpening. Additionally, context is noted to supplement manufacturing stage identifications. Debitage made during early stages of tool production more likely is to be in context with flintknapping tools such as hammerstones and partially or fully exhausted cores

(Kooyman, 2000).

Measurements

Given the variation in debitage sizes, flakes and debris were measured using separate criteria. A flake is defined as a piece of debitage retaining a platform or platform remnant. All measurements were taken using millimeters to account for the small size of most of the debitage. Flake length was measured from the proximal end of the flake (the platform remnant) to the farthest point of the distal end (the termination or broken edge). Maximum flake width was measured at a perpendicular angle from length at the widest point. Thickness represented the distance from the ventral to the dorsal side at the flake’s thickest point.

Debris can represent either a flake lacking a platform remnant or amorphous shatter, resulting in obscure points of measure. Length, therefore, was measured using the longest portion of the piece, regardless of any potential flake attributes, while width was measured perpendicular to length at the widest point. Due to the variability of debris, pieces range from thin to blocky, where no potential ventral or dorsal side exists. These situations can make identifying width versus thickness difficult. Width, therefore, was measured using the larger

41 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 of the two measurements’ broadest points, while thickness represented the lesser of the measurements.

Platform preparation

Platform preparation is the process of strengthening a tool’s edge in preparation for subsequent flake removals (Whittaker, 1994). Weak platforms can crush under the applied forces or create undesirable flakes (Whittaker,

1994). To prepare an edge, a hammerstone or billet is rubbed either along or across the tool’s edge (Andrefsky, 2005; Whittaker, 1994). These motions shatter the junction between the platform and dorsal surface of the flake, creating minute, compound, and sharp edges. The result is a rounded, yet sharp edge when felt by fingertip. Isolated patches of pebble-like textured rounding also may be present (Kooyman, 2000). In general, flakes from later sequences exhibit more platform preparation than flakes from earlier stages (Andrefsky, 2005).

Cortex

The amount of cortex (original calcareous surface covering a nodule) remaining on flakes or debris can indicate the relative stage of manufacture in which they were produced (Andrefsky, 2001, 2005; Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003;

Whittaker, 1994). Generally, debitage exhibiting cortex on at least one surface is created in an early stage of tool manufacture (Kooyman, 2000; Whittaker, 1994).

Relatively small debitage without cortex generally indicates removal later in the manufacturing process, although these can be found at any stage (Andrefsky,

2005; Kooyman, 2000). Due to unreliable variation in cortex cover, some finished tools still may exhibit small amounts (Odell, 2003). This situation makes

42 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 cortex cover a somewhat unreliable characteristic for studying reduction sequences (Andrefsky, 2001, 2005). Cortex, therefore, is recorded as either present or absent. It is considered with all noted physical characteristics of debitage to indicate if tools were being produced, finished, and/or resharpened at the site.

Flake types

Flake types are based on Andrefsky (2005, 2008), Kooyman (2000), Odell

(2003), and Whittaker (1994). Categories follow the basic stages of lithic reduction from initial reduction through use and maintenance. The categories are core reduction flake, shaping flake, blade, biface thinning flake, outré passé flake, finishing flake, and resharpening flake. In cases where a piece of debitage can fit into more than one category, it is assigned to the latest stage of manufacture it represents, as flakes can retain features from earlier stages

(Kooyman, 2000).

Core reduction flakes

The first stage of tool production occurs through the removal of thick, relatively large flakes from a core (Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003). The dorsal surface of these core reduction flakes exhibit only one or two flake scars with cortex covering more extensive amounts, up to the entire face (Figure 3.1a)

(Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003). Little to no platform preparation is necessary for the removal of these flakes, as the cores they are removed from generally have a

90° platform/core face angle (Kooyman, 2000; Whittaker, 1994). As a result, core reduction flakes exhibit a lower amount of crushing or grinding on the dorsal

43 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 face at the platform remnant (Kooyman, 2000). Longer flakes also are indicative of this stage (greater than 20mm) for the production of tool blanks (Kooyman,

2000).

Figure 3.1. Flake types typical of various flintknapping stages: a) core reduction flake; b) biface thinning flake; and c) resharpening flake. Blades

Blades are elongated flakes (length = 2x width) detached from a blade core (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell, 2003; Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994).

Each blade tends to have parallel margins, thin bodies, and sharp edges. Blades can be used for an immediate task, hafted into bone or wood handles, or knapped further into a tool such as a biface (Whittaker, 1994). The most efficient method of differentiating between an intentional blade and an elongated flake is to examine the assemblage as whole to determine if blade making was being

44 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 practiced at the site. The presence of blade cores and related debris usually indicates use of the technology.

Shaping flakes

Shaping flakes are small, rather thin flakes detached from the immediate edge of a tool during the early middle stage of tool production (Kooyman, 2000).

Their purpose is to give the objective piece a basic shape through the removal of irregularities (Kooyman, 2000). They tend to be oval-shaped or distally expanded, and will exhibit few flake scars on the dorsal surface (Kooyman,

2000). Tiny flake scars, however, on the platform from preparation (faceting) can be seen (Kooyman, 2000). Length ranges between 10 and 20mm with a thickness of no less than 2mm.

Biface thinning flakes

Biface thinning flakes are created during the final modifications of a tool near completion. Although the overall size may be variable, the primary indication of a thinning flake is an elongated length-to-width ratio due to its progression into the tool’s body (Kooyman, 2000). Other common characteristics are little to no cortex, a lip on a narrow platform remnant, a feather termination, and a body that is relatively thin, curved convex dorsally and concave ventrally, and expressing complex dorsal scarring (Figure 3.1b) (Andrefsky, 2005;

Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994).

Outré passé flakes

An overshot, or outré passé, flake usually indicates a manufacturing failure (Odell, 2003). These flakes occur when increased impact forces bend as

45 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 they travel through a tool and curve away from the edge (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell,

2003; Whittaker, 1994). The result is the removal of part of the tool’s opposite edge that is retained as the flake’s distal end (Andrefsky, 2005; Kooyman, 2000;

Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994). The resulting flake scar extends across the tool’s entire surface and may result in the tool’s disposal (Whittaker, 1994).

Finishing flakes

Finishing flakes are produced during the final stages of tool manufacture to remove irregularities created throughout the manufacturing process and to give the tool the desired final shape (Kooyman, 2000). As a result, they are small, complexly scarred, thin (i.e., less than 2mm), and exhibit lipping

(Kooyman, 2000).

Resharpening flakes

Resharpening flakes are created when a tool dulls from use and a new edge is flaked to resharpen the tool (Blades, 2008; Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003;

Whittaker, 1994). A key distinction of a resharpening flake is the presence of a dull and rounded edge from use, most commonly found on the proximal edge of the dorsal side, near the platform remnant (Figure 3.1c) (Kooyman, 2000; Odell,

2003). While some identifying characteristics are visible only through a microscope, well-developed rounding can be felt by fingertip (Kooyman, 2000) and identified visually when the flake is examined laterally. Generally, resharpening flakes are less than 20mm in length (Kooyman, 2000) and display a higher width-to-thickness ratio than production flakes (Wilson and Andrefsky,

2008).

46 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Tools

Tools are defined as lithics that have undergone any degree of modification beyond their natural state. Types of tools have been divided first into formal and informal tools, and then assigned a basic type or function based on morphology traits. Broken tools have been identified based on remaining identifiable characteristics when possible.

Measurements and weights

Knapped tools deriving from detached flakes have clear points of measure due to the striking platform, or proximal end. Even on partial or broken tools, it usually is possible to identify where the proximal and/or distal end(s) should have been. Length, width, and thickness measurements (in millimeters), therefore, can be taken on such tools using the same criteria as flakes. Tools created from a reduced core, however, do not exhibit flake features. Length is measured as the line perpendicular to the direction of the flake pattern. Width and thickness follow the same criteria as flakes. Weight is taken (in grams) for cores in addition to a maximum length measurement to account for the tool’s often amorphous state.

Formal tools

Formal tools represent those objects that were modified through the knapping process, usually with a predetermined shape in mind (Andrefsky,

2005). These tools also have been referred to as curated tools, as they have extended use-lives due to their ability to be resharpened, recycled, and transported to other sites (Kooyman, 2000). Analytical categories first cover the basic artifact type such as core, blank, preform, flake tool, and other tools 47 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 associated with the flintknapping process. Flake tools then are followed by more specific functions based on macroanalysis of the tool’s overall morphology traits.

As specific tool types do not pertain to this study, only a basic function such as projectile point or scraper is identified when possible.

Cores

The core is one of the most basic formal tools. It is the nodule of raw material that was selected as a source for detached pieces (Andrefsky, 2005). A core either can be formal (undergoing preparation to maximize cutting edge on detached flakes) or informal (with no preparation). Both types then are classified as either unidirectional (having a single platform from which flakes are detached in a roughly parallel manner) or multi-directional (having more than one platform with multi-directional flake removal) (Andrefsky, 2005). Unidirectional cores likely are formalized, such as blade cores, whereas multidirectional cores more likely are to be amorphous or represent core tools. The platform variety seen within cores can make normal measuring difficult. Each core instead is weighed and given a maximum length measurement to examine its basic manufacture stage.

A larger, heavier core more likely has undergone little reduction, whereas a smaller, lighter core may be near exhaustion of the material. Flake scar complexity can provide additional support to such conclusions.

Blade cores

Blade cores represent both unidirectional and multidirectional cores that can be identified by the presence of parallel flake scars detached from one or two large striking platform(s) that progress to the opposite end of the core where they

48 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 curve inward slightly (Andrefsky, 2005; Collins, 1999; Odell, 2003; Whittaker,

1994). This process allows long, narrow flakes, or blades, to be detached in a uniform fashion around the core’s body, giving the core either a pyramidal or cylindrical shape (Andrefsky, 2005; Collins, 1999; Odell, 2003; Turner and

Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994). Such unidirectional cores minimize material waste while maximizing the cutting edge of each tool obtained (Collins, 1999;

Turner and Hester, 1999). The technology is evidenced first during the Clovis period at sites such as Blackwater Draw Locality 1 (Green, 1962) in eastern New

Mexico and Gault (Collins, 1999) in central Texas. Evidence of blade core technology, however, has been found on sites into the late Holocene (Turner and

Hester, 1999).

Core tools

Cores were used to create tools and also could be used as tools. To minimize carrying weight and maximize potential tools, hunter-gatherers carried bifacially prepared cores that could be used in a variety of tasks (Andrefsky,

2005). Indications of use such as battering, pecking, or grinding would need to be present for a core to be considered a core tool.

Blanks and preforms

Blanks and preforms are early-stage tools. Both types usually are found as discards prior to the completion of a formalized tool (Odell, 2003; Turner and

Hester, 1999). They may have been abandoned purposefully for multiple reasons. Such reasons include: 1) imperfections in the material interfered with further flake removals; 2) an abundance of unsuccessful flake removals inhibited

49 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 further successful flake removals (i.e., flakes with step or hinge terminations, overshot or outré passé flakes); or 3) the object broke (Odell, 2003; Shelley,

1990; Turner and Hester, 1999).

In general, a blank is defined as the earliest stage of a tool’s manufacture that can be formed either from a core or detached flake (Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994; Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). It represents the initial reduction of the material to form the intended tool’s basic shape

(Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester, 1999). The presence of cortex, therefore, is possible. Blanks formed from a core or tabular cobble tend to be relatively thick (Turner and Hester, 1999). Those formed from detached flakes may be closer to the final outcome, thus retaining flake characteristics such as the bulb of percussion (Whittaker, 1994). Blanks can be difficult to identify during their earliest stages of manufacture if little working has been accomplished prior to discard (Whittaker, 1994). Blanks usually are formed at quarries to make the raw material a suitable size and weight for trade or transport to another location where they may be reduced further to create a tool (Turner and Hester, 1999).

A preform has progressed beyond the blank stage and begins to resemble the intended tool’s final size, shape, and thickness (Turner and Hester, 1999;

Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). When abandoned in its latest manufacturing stages, the intended outcome of the tool may be implied (Kooyman, 2000). A biface preform is fairly symmetrical, thin, and flat, but the edges are untrimmed and some ground platforms remain (Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). Projectile point preforms may be identified by signs of notching, although they are not the

50 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 only tool to exhibit such a feature (Tuner and Hester, 1999). Caution must be used when attempting to assign function to any unfinished tool, however, as multiple uses can arise from a single shape (Kooyman, 2000; Turner and Hester,

1999).

Flake tools

Any tool created from the knapping of a detached flake is considered a formal flake tool. Flake or blade properties such as a bulb of percussion, platform remnant, or percussion rings can be present on some less intensely knapped tools (Andrefsky, 2005).

Unifacial flake tools

Unifacial flake tools are created by the removal of material from one surface of the lithic (Odell, 2003; Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994).

After core reduction, a suitable flake chosen for reduction usually is an elongated flake or blade. Overall shapes generally are plano-convex on the dorsal side with a flat ventral side (Turner and Hester, 1999).

The scraper is one of the most common unifaces (Turner and Hester,

1999). It can be relatively simple to make, requiring only the modification of one side, or more complex if a particular shape is desired or the chosen flake’s shape necessitates further reworking (Turner and Hester, 1999). Specific forms are identified based on the location(s) of a steeply flaked working edge (75-90°) and the nature of the retouch (Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker,

1994). This steep edge allows the tool to be pushed or pulled over softer

51 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 surfaces without the risk of cutting it, such as with the scraping of hair off of hides

(Adams, 1988; Andrefsky, 2005; Blades, 2003; Creel, 1978; Frison, 1968).

The most common scrapers found in western Texas are concave, convergent, transverse, side, and end forms (Figure 3.2) (Tuner and Hester,

1999). Concave scrapers (Figure 3.2a) can be similar to a side scraper, except that the worked edge is concave rather than convex (Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester, 1999). The worked sides of convergent scrapers (Figure 3.2b) come together in a pointed fashion, while those of transverse scrapers (Figure 3.2c) are trimmed transverse to the proximal end (Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester,

1999). Side scrapers (Figure 3.2d) have one or two worked sides with side-and- end trimming (Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester, 1999). Lastly, end scrapers

(Figure 3.2e) exhibit a steep, convex working edge on the distal end.

Bifacial flake tools

Bifacial flake tools have edge modification on both faces that circumscribe the entire artifact (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell, 2003; Turner and Hester, 1999,

Whittaker, 1994; Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). The completed biface has regularized edges void of platforms (Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). Biface categories are dependant on the tool’s cultural context, shape, and various characteristics (Andrefsky, 2005; Odell, 2003; Turner and Hester, 1999;

Whittaker, 1994; Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). Shape does not necessarily imply function (Andrefsky, 2005). For this study, generic categories are applied only to the more obvious examples, always allowing for the possibility of multiple

52 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 functions for one tool. These categories are projectile point, beveled biface, drill, and graver (Figure 3.3).

Figure 3.2. Common western Texas scrapers: a) concave scraper; b) convergent scraper; c) transverse scraper; d) side scraper; and e) end scraper.

Projectile points

Arrow points are a common form of projectile point manufactured during

the latter part of the late Holocene. Beginning in the Ceramic period, these

points are made either from a thinned bifacial preform or a detached flake or

blade that are pressure-flaked bifacially along the edges to obtain the desired

shape. If a thin flake is used, the thickness may change only slightly throughout

the manufacturing process. The overall shape is bilaterally symmetrical, thin, 53 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 and pointed at the distal end. The proximal end, or base, varies stylistically, often reflecting a particular region through specific stem shapes and notching placements (Turner and Hester, 1999). Projectile point identifications made by

Boyd et al. (1993) has been followed.

Beveled bifaces

Beveling is the process of resharpening a tool’s margin to form an edge with a steep angle (Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994). Bifaces such as knives resharpened in this manner have been known to exhibit up to four beveled edges, creating a diamond-shaped tool (Figure 3.3a) (Turner and Hester, 1999).

Figure 3.3. Bifacial lithic tools found in western Texas: a) four-sided beveled biface; b) graver; c) drill; and d) gunflint. 54 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Gravers

A graver (Figure 3.3b) is a sharp beak-like protrusion on a reworked flake or tool that may have been used for cutting or engraving. The beak, however, must show signs of having been shaped by retouch (Odell, 2003).

Drills

Drills (Figure 3.3c) were used commonly as perforators for various tasks.

They were formed from a bifacial preform, a flake, or occasionally a reworked point. Proximal bases, therefore, can vary in shape. The cross section is diamond-shaped with a long, tapered distal end and bifacial flaking. The bodies may exhibit reworking, and the tips tend to be sharp or blunted from use (Turner and Hester, 1999).

Gunflints

Gunflints (Figure 3.3d), a more recent lithic tool, were created from the breaking or snapping of long flakes into general squared shapes to be used as ignition sources in flintlock firearms (Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994).

These guns were produced from the late 1600s into the 1800s in Europe

(Whittaker, 1994). During the late 18th century, Comanche traders procured guns from local horticultural groups and European trading parties traveling west across the Southern High Plains (Hämäläinen, 1998, 2003). Aboriginal gunflints were quite similar to their European counterparts, and were made from thin bifaces in addition to flakes or debris (Turner and Hester, 1999).

55 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Other tools

Other tools that are related to or affect the process of making and using stone tools can reveal pertinent information to the study of activity areas. Such tools, therefore, are identified and incorporated with the flaked lithics. This category consists of abrading stones, hammerstones, and shaft straighteners.

Abrading stones

Abrading stones (Figure 3.4a) were used to smooth the edge of a tool such as a biface during the manufacturing process. A coarse material such as sandstone was required to remove fragile overhangs along the manufactured tool’s edge. The process of rubbing the abrader along the tool’s edge resulted in a V-shaped longitudinal groove across the abrader’s surface (Turner and Hester,

1999). An abrader also could have been used for other tools such as bone awls and needles (Turner and Hester, 1999). The context of the tool must be taken into consideration when determining its significance.

Shaft straighteners

The purpose of a shaft straightener (Figure 3.4b) is to straighten and remove barbs from the shafts of darts and arrows. They can be made from bone, wood, ivory, or rough stone such as sandstone and exhibit a deep, transverse groove where the shaft is to be straightened subsequent to heating

(Cosner, 1951; Mason et al., 1891; Turner and Hester, 1999). The presence of this artifact implies arrow production, and thus arrow point production may have been occurring at the site.

56 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 3.4. Other tools that may indicate lithic-related activities: a) abrader; b) shaft straightener; and c) hammerstone.

Hammerstones

A hammerstone (Figure 3.4c) is the hand-held percussor used to detach flakes from an objective stone piece (Andrefsky, 2005). They usually are small, generally no more than 250-500g for tool production (Whittaker, 1994). Many hammerstones are made from basalt or rough-grained quartzite cobbles or pebbles in order to be harder than the knapped material (Andrefsky, 2005;

Turner and Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994). All hammerstones exhibit battering from use either on the end, around the edges, or both (Andrefsky, 2005; Turner and Hester, 1999). Small chips may detach from the end(s) of the hammerstone during the flintknapping process (Turner and Hester, 1999), and polish may be present on the area held repeatedly by the fingertips (Whittaker, 1994).

57 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Informal tools

Modifications seen on informal tools (Figure 3.5) are the result of the use of a piece of debitage (Andrefsky, 2005; Kooyman, 2000). Flake tools are the most common type of informal tool, formed when a particular task requires only the sharp edge of a newly detached flake. Based on how it was used, modifications can be bifacial or unifacial, and is identified by tiny flake scars along various portions of the flake edge that were created during its use

(Whittaker, 1994). Flake scar placement and tool context must be examined carefully to ensure that non-cultural causes such as trampling or plowing did not create the modification (Andrefsky, 2005).

Figure 3.5. An informal tool modified to produce a single cutting edge.

58 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Site and region-specific information

Raw materials

The material type and source was noted for purposes of examining raw material procurement. Local raw materials were defined as being available within a 50-mile radius of the site. The selection of raw material was an important factor for toolmakers; control and predictability were essential for the successful removal of flakes (Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994).

Nodules needed to be elastic to break in a controlled and predictable manner, yet strong enough to hold an edge (Odell, 2003). Further requirements restricted procurement to smaller-grained nodules that allow forces to travel through, rather than around, individual grains. Lastly, nodules required a lack of internal flaws or inclusions to avoid diverting forces in unpredictable directions (Odell, 2003). The most common materials in Texas to fit these requirements were cherts and quartzites (Odell, 2003).

Chert

Chert is a sedimentary rock formed as nodules in limestone and chalk deposits through the replacement of calcium carbonates with silica (Andrefsky,

2005; Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994). This process gives the material the high silica content and fine crystal grain size that allow forces to travel in a controlled and predictable pattern (Andrefsky, 2005; Kooyman, 2000;

Odell, 2003; Whittaker, 1994). The greater the amount of silica in the nodule, the better the material will be for making stone tools (Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003).

Unlike quartzite, the internal crystal structure of chert normally is not visible by

59 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 the naked eye (Kooyman, 2000), resulting in a smooth surface (Whittaker, 1994).

Weathering can leach silica and other materials from exposed portions of the material, creating a patina or rind on the outer surfaces (Whittaker, 1994). Types of chert often used for flintknapping are variable, including, but not limited to, agatized dolomite, jasper, and chalcedony (Kooyman, 2000).

Quartzite

Quartzite is a metamorphic rock formed from sandstone deposits that were heated and pressurized, welding the quartz sand grains together and creating an internal structure that allows forces to fracture through the grains rather than around them (Andrefsky, 2005; Kooyman, 2000; Odell, 2003;

Whittaker, 1994). The material tends to form into cobbles and can be identified without a microscope through visible grains of quartz that reflect light (Andrefsky,

2005; Kooyman, 2000).

Recovered materials

Both local and non-local source materials were used at the Longhorn site.

Local materials came from the Ogallala Formation. Non-local materials were

Alibates agate, Tecovas jasper, and Edwards Formation chert.

Ogallala Formation

The Ogallala Formation is a 750-foot thick section of the Llano Estacado, made up of aeolian and alluvial deposits that formed during the Miocene-

Pliocene (Banks, 1990; Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981; Holliday et al., 2002; Johnson and Holliday, 2004; Seni, 1980).

Materials found within the deposits consist of braided sands, silts, clays, and

60 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 gravels (Banks, 1990) that eroded out from the caprock and were deposited as alluvial and colluvial fans in the western Rolling Plains during the Quaternary

(Gustavson and Simpkins, 1989; Holliday, 1997; Holliday and Welty, 1981;

Holliday et al., 2002; Lehman and Chatterjee, 2005; Seni, 1980).

Materials suitable for flintknapping include silicified siltstone, silicified calcrete, fine-grained and coarse-grained quartzite, and varieties of chert and petrified wood (Banks, 1990; Holliday, 1997; Hurst and Rebnegger, 1999). In addition, Macy silcrete derives from the upper portion of the Ogallala Formation and in Ogallala gravel deposits (Hurst et al., 2010). Gravels consist of cobbles exhibiting a range of colors with variances of blue-green, purple, tan, gray, brown, and red (Holliday, 1997; Hurst and Rebnegger, 1999). Texture and color descriptions (Boyd et al., 1993:23) of Ogallala gravels local to the Longhorn site show that colors tended to be yellow-brown or gray with bands of lighter and darker color.

Edwards Formation chert

The Callahan Divide and adjacent portions of the Edwards Plateau of central Texas produce Edwards Formation chert (Banks, 1990; Holliday, 1997;

Vehik, 2002). The closest border places the source at a minimum of 60 miles southeast of the Longhorn site (Boyd et al., 1993). The source for Edwards

Formation chert is one of the largest in the United States, containing high-quality material mostly in shades of grey and brown (Banks, 1990; Turner and Hester,

1999). Basic color descriptions are available for some sections of the region and

61 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 nearby localities (Banks, 1990). Heat-treatment of the stone rarely is required due to its high quality, with some varieties not able to tolerate the process.

Edwards Formation chert fluoresces when exposed to long-wave and short- wave frequencies of UV light, providing an additional avenue for identification of the material (Hillsman, 1992; Hofman et al., 1991). Further research indicates that the effect is not altered when the material is subjected to heat exposures of up to 800°F (Odell, 2003). Difficulties exist, however, in standardizing and describing the variety of colors that result from fluorescing this chert (Andrefsky, 2009; Odell, 2003). Identifications based on color descriptions, therefore, are limited to orange in long-wave frequencies and yellow in short- wave frequencies.

Alibates agate

Alibates agate is a high-quality material originating in the Alibates

Formation on the northern edge of the Llano Estacado along the Canadian River

(Banks, 1990; Holliday, 2007; Johnson and Holliday, 2004; Shaeffer, 1958;

Turner and Hester, 1999). This source is approximately 200 miles north of the

Longhorn site. Alibates agate displays bands in shades of white, yellow, red, or purple. It is known mainly for its shades of red due to the internal iron oxidizing as it weathers (Holliday, 2007; Kooyman, 2000; Shaeffer, 1958; Turner and

Hester, 1999).

Tecovas jasper

Tecovas Jasper is a variety of chert found within the Tecovas Formation of the Dockum Group along the eastern escarpment of the Llano Estacado near

62 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Quitaque (Banks, 1990; Holliday, 1997; Johnson and Holliday, 2004; Turner and

Hester, 1999). This source is approximately 100 miles north of the Longhorn site. The jasper contains a high percentage of added materials such iron oxides from hematite (Banks, 1990; Holliday, 1997; Kooyman, 2000; Turner and Hester,

1999). These materials can alter the rock’s color to deep shades of red, as well as combinations of purple and brown with mottles of gray, yellow, and white

(Banks, 1990; Holliday, 1997; Kooyman, 2000; Turner and Hester, 1999). With this variety of colors, the material is quite similar in appearance to Alibates agate, especially in small artifacts such as flakes. Tecovas jasper, however, is entirely opaque with a dull luster (Holliday, 1997; Kooyman, 2000).

Thermal alteration

Understanding how chert and quartzite respond to heat alteration is essential to the lithic analysis. Each material type reacts in a variety of ways that are dependent on the material source and the level, duration, and type of exposure (Crabtree and Butler, 1964; Johnson, 2004; Whittaker, 1994). Heating the coarser micro-granular silica materials reduces their crystal sizes and increases the elasticity of the material (Crabtree and Butler, 1964).

Thermally altered chert tends to turn brighter hues of pink and red, usually due to the oxidization of iron within the material (Whittaker, 1994; Turner and

Hester, 1999). Cherts such as Edwards Formation, however, contain no iron and yet may exhibit chromatic alterations when exposed to heat. Other forms of exposure can lead to the presence of crazing and potlid fractures as well as the

63 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 separation of heat spalls (Andrefsky, 2005; Crabtree and Butler, 1964; Johnson,

2004; Purdy, 1975; Whittaker, 1994) and heat shatter.

Trapped moisture in the material expands during rapid temperature fluctuations. This situation causes internal crazing or cracking (Andrefsky, 2005;

Crabtree and Butler, 1964; Johnson, 2004; Purdy, 1975; Whittaker, 1994), as well as the separation of dome-shaped fragments, or heat spalls, from the lithic’s surface (Johnson, 2004; Whittaker, 1994). This latter process leaves a characteristic bowl-shaped scar called a potlid fracture on the lithic (Andrefsky,

2005; Purdy, 1975; Whittaker, 1994). At times, the heat spall is blocky or amorphous, yet still retains characteristics of thermal alteration such as potlid fractures and crazing. These pieces are referred to as heat shatter.

Categories for thermal alterations as defined by Johnson (2004), Purdy

(1975), and Whittaker (1994) were recorded. Their examination included noting which types are present, on what material, and on which face(s). Flakes exhibiting potlid fractures on the dorsal surface may indicate thermal alteration subsequent to knapping. GIS mapping was used to display the distribution of altered tools and debitage to examine potential correlations to known features

Several possible causes of thermal alteration were examined. The level of alteration that n-transforms may have had on the site was addressed prior to behavioral chain analysis to account for activity area distortion. A post- occupational natural fire had created a burned zone across much of the site

(Boyd et al., 1993). Radiocarbon dating of a burned stump using a 1-sigma range and intercepts yielded a set of dates (1651/1953) from Feature 55 (Boyd et

64 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 al., 1993:106), potentially placing it within the occupational range. The burning, therefore, was taken into consideration when interpreting the presence of the burned debitage in terms of occupational and post-occupational processes.

Heat-treating was used to heat lithics under controlled conditions to create more predictable flakes (Crabtree and Butler 1964; Kooyman, 2000; Turner and

Hester, 1999; Whittaker, 1994). When successfully executed, these alterations enabled flintknappers to control flake removals more efficiently, resulting in longer flakes and reduced waste (Kooyman, 2000; Whittaker, 1994). Early stage tools were buried underneath campfires for a few days to allow proper temperatures to be maintained (Crabtree and Butler, 1964; Turner and Hester,

1999). As a result, small pieces of heated materials were more common at a site as opposed to larger nodules (Crabtree and Butler, 1964).

Lastly, secondary discard into a hearth may explain the presence of thermally-altered lithics. Larger pieces of debris often are cleared from around hearths and maintained living areas to be placed in nearby crescentic zones of secondary refuse (Schiffer, 1995a; Whittaker, 1994). The smaller pieces of refuse, however, remain in their location of use or manufacture (Odell, 2003;

Schiffer, 1995a; Whittaker and Kaldahl, 2001). Finding relatively larger pieces of thermally altered lithics within a hearth as opposed to smaller, unaltered pieces nearby may indicate disposal behaviors.

Step 2: Identifying Activity Areas

The second step in Schiffer’s (1995b) behavioral chain analysis is to

determine those activities that actually took place at the site. This step, while 65 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 potentially the most difficult, is one of the most critical steps in the analysis. It is with this step that categories including the behavioral chains, correlates (general principles), c-transforms, and all data classes are examined together to create the list of activities specifically conducted. The life histories of the elements are created and each element is analyzed in terms of its behavioral chain (life history) and chain segments (activities that occurred during the life history).

Debitage is examined in terms of the clustering of its types and sizes.

Small debitage tends to remain in its location of primary discard, whereas larger pieces either are curated or removed and discarded elsewhere (Kooyman, 2000).

Clusters of microdebitage (debitage smaller than about 4.7mm), therefore, are indicative of a lithic reduction station (Kooyman, 2000). Clusters of resharpening flakes may indicate an area designated for tool use, tool maintenance, or both

(Kooyman, 2000).

Elements of an activity such as a hammerstone, nodule, core, debitage, or lithic tool are examined based on the nature of their association. Conjoined elements are those elements associated with the particular element that is under consideration during an activity (Schiffer 1995b). For example, a hammerstone and debitage are conjoined elements when examining the reduction sequence of a nodule or lithic tool. A behavioral description examines the relationships of these interacting elements with an energy source. The nature of the energy source for most of this study is human (Schiffer 1995b). Changes to the artifacts and site caused by post-occupational prairie fires, however, derive from a non- human energy source. 66 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

The life histories of the elements then are created and each element is analyzed in terms of its behavioral chain and chain segments. Artifact types are used here to classify each segment. The manufacturing stage consists of core reduction flakes, shaping flakes, biface thinning flakes, outré passé flakes, and finishing flakes. Resharpening flakes represent the use and/or maintenance stage(s). Debris can result from a variety of stages and is examined based on its distribution and context with other debitage, tools, and features. Debitage found within features is studied in terms of the feature type and the association with other relevant artifacts to determine if it represents use or discard. The examination of these distributions leads to implications for determining which specific activity was conducted (Schiffer, 1995b).

ArcGIS mapping

The ArcGIS program is essential for studying the context of the site’s tools and debitage through the creation of geo-referenced maps using the site’s UTM and unit coordinates. Artifact and feature distribution information is overlaid onto a geo-referenced unit location map to examine possible clusters and patterning.

Maps highlight the distributions of: 1) manufacturing flakes; 2) resharpening flakes; 3) debris; 4) tool types; 5) feature/debitage association; 6) feature/tool association; and 7) thermal alterations. The resulting data then are used to identify what activity each cluster most likely represents.

67 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Step 3: Additional Information

Once the activity areas have been uncovered, they are examined in terms of what additional information they can provide (Schiffer, 1995b). To determine the role that the activity areas played in the creation of the tool ratios, activity area types are examined to reveal what tool types may have been created, used, and/or resharpened. This information is based on distribution maps of debitage and tool type and their association with other tools, debitage, and features. Each tool’s function then is considered in conjunction with its associations to infer its most likely intended use through the examination of basic morphology traits. For example, the presence of a shaft straightener in context with biface thinning flakes and broken bifaces implies the manufacture of arrows and arrow points.

Used, discarded scrapers in context with resharpening flakes suggests the process of hide-scraping may have been occurring. Conclusions regarding the creation of a skewed tool ratio are based on which tools were required for various functions and how these requirements are reflected in the activity areas.

Step 4: Additional Activities

Step four is the re-examination of the data to look for additional activities for each unit of activity space, as each space can represent multiple activities

(Schiffer, 1995b). Debitage may be created in one location during a tool’s retouch, then gathered and moved to a disposal area away from the main occupation areas, thus representing manufacturing and cleaning (or disposal) activities. Two refuse types are examined to study how and where activities took place. Primary refuse is discarded in its original location of use, whereas 68 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 secondary refuse has been moved to a disposal location. Identifying these types requires an examination of the artifacts’ context within proposed activity areas.

Knowledge of the site’s type assists further in refuse identification as sites used intensely or repeatedly are more likely to require cleaning and disposal activities than a single-use site (Schiffer, 1995b).

Step 5: Recurring Activities

The resulting activities and activity areas are analyzed in the fifth step to produce activity area types and major sets of recurrent activities (Schiffer,

1995b). Activity area types are identified through the examination of any regularities in the data that may correspond to each space’s use based on its function. Distribution maps of the proposed activity areas are compared to one another to identify similarities in their use. Clusters of activity areas, not the artifacts, are examined in terms of how they relate to one another, thus creating major sets of recurrent activities (Schiffer, 1995b). General activity areas must refer to specific categories such as bifacial tool resharpening to avoid vague descriptions like flintknapping processes that can include many reduction methods.

Step 6: Aspects of Social Organization

This information then aids in the final step, determining aspects of social organization. A final map portraying the location of all activity areas and features is used to analyze the site’s layout. The use and partitioning of space is examined based on the relationship of the activity areas, features, and void space. Emphasis is placed on any patterning of these relationships to determine

69 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 which areas were used for particular tasks or perhaps cleared to maintain open space. Patterning in the correlation of an activity area type to specific features may reveal where such activities likely were to be performed. Groups of bifacial tool manufacture areas concentrated in proximity to one another may represent a general tool manufacturing area within the site. Correlated examples of disposal activities on the other hand may indicate how secondary refuse areas were organized. Variation in, or anomalous distributions of, activity areas then are compared to the activity area distribution to infer additional insight into the site’s social organization (Schiffer 1995b). Such cases can reveal new or unexpected information regarding how the inhabitants utilized and organized their space.

Summary

Lithics are addressed in terms of their physical and distributional characteristics. Behavioral chain analysis provides a methodological framework that allows for the examination of the artifacts and their life histories by applying macroscopic analytical methods to derive basic lithic tool and debitage types.

These results then are analyzed in terms of their site distribution using ArcGIS mapping to interpret the life histories of the artifacts and possible activity areas.

Additional information is inferred from the distributions, leading to further investigations into feature types and debitage uses. Major sets of recurring activity areas are created and examined in terms of their distributions to infer aspects of the site’s spatial organization. Lastly, exceptions to the layout of the activity areas including variations and anomalous distributions are examined in terms of their potential to yield further insight into the site’s spatial organization. 70 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

CHAPTER IV

DATA

As a result of sampling strategies, P&A excavated six large blocks of units based on artifact and feature patterning (Boyd et al., 1993). These blocks ranged between four and 116 units with an average depth of 22.75cm below the surface (Boyd et al., 1993). Horizontal provenience information was limited to the 1-m² unit from which the artifact was recovered, while vertical depth followed two methods. Elevations for the 13 shovel test levels were measured using centimeters below the surface, while excavated units levels were referenced to a datum set to an arbitrary level of 100.00cm. Most depths, therefore, were recorded using the latter method. The majority excavations were conducted in 5- or 10-cm levels. Some excavated units depths, however, were inconsistent with this methodology. It was not clear whether this situation was the result of differences in surface elevations or the ceasing of levels upon reaching natural features such as the burned zone. As a result of these inconsistencies, overlapping arbitrary levels were created, thus making it difficult to categorize the artifacts using their vertical distribution.

Due to the variety of these methods, vertical distribution was not taken into consideration. The outcome was a compressed view of the data that does not distinguish between potentially overlapping occupations. The site was occupied most intensively over a rough span of 80 years (Boyd et al., 1993). The majority of these occupations occurred in a discrete zone 10 to 25cm below the surface.

The restriction caused by the compressed view had the potential to distort

71 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 clusters of artifacts that are used in activity area identification. To minimize this effect, activity area analysis was limited to the densest concentrations of artifacts types and life history categories both in and around features. This method of analysis should retain the potential to identify clusters of lithics and/or activity areas based on the idea that such concentrations implies areas that were used more intensely than others, whether in a single activity or over time.

Mapping

The area of focus for the Longhorn site is reduced to its most intensively excavated portions (Figure 4.1). This area covers five of the six large blocks of

1-m² units. As a result, the vast majority of all artifacts and features were uncovered within the area of focus. ArcGIS maps are used to display the locations of various artifact and feature categories to examine their life histories and spatial patterning. This information then is combined to identify activity areas conducted at the site.

Features

The site’s cultural and natural features are added to distribution maps to examine if any association patterning is present. These features are hearths, hearth dumps, postmolds, a bone stake, rock clusters, ceramic sherd clusters, a grinding basin, an unidentified pit, and burned stumps. Maps displaying the distributions of life-history categories include only hearths, hearth dumps, postmolds, and the bone stake as these features are more likely to be associated with the flintknapping process. The remaining features are added into feature association maps to examine patterning with debitage and tools.

72 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.1. Site layout indicating all units within the area of focus.

Hearths have been defined as unlined fire pits dug into the ground that are oval in plan view and plano-convex in cross section (Boyd et al., 1993). Some hearths contain a well-defined, oxidized clay base that is thickest at the bottom and thins toward the edges. Other hearths are less defined with minimal oxidation at the base. Varied concentrations of fill include white ashy sediment, sandstone fragments, burned clay lumps, debitage and bone debris, and occasional charcoal flecks. Fill in the more defined hearths extends beyond the

73 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 rim of the burned basin. An abundance of ash and lack of organics in these hearths suggest intensive and extensive use and reuse of well-controlled and maintained fires. The hearth dumps that are found in close proximity to some hearths have been defined based on a lack of an oxidized base and basin walls and characterized by a roughly circular concentration of charcoal, burned clay lumps, and ash (Boyd et al., 1993).

Postmolds are roughly cylindrical filled holes where posts or stakes once stood. Fill can include sediment, cultural debris, organic debris (snails, charred wood, seeds, unburned wood), or vertical rock shims in the upper portion to stabilize or wedge the post. A bison horn core positioned vertically in the ground represents a possible bone stake.

Rock clusters are horizontally oriented sandstone slabs grouped in a less than 1-m² area (Boyd et al., 1993). It is unclear whether these are natural formations or cultural constructs. All three clusters include at least five slabs.

Ceramic sherd clusters are groups of refittable sherds in close proximity that may represent a vessel or bowl broken in a discrete location. The grinding basin is a basin-shaped pit containing charcoal flecks, gravel, and cultural materials. Of note is a complete mano with extensive battering positioned at an angle toward the bottom of the pit. The classification of the pit as a grinding basin is based on the presence of this distinctive groundstone object (Boyd et al., 1993).

An unidentified pit of unknown function has an irregular morphology and lacked any distinctive characteristics. Four burned stumps constitute a non-

74 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 cultural category and likely represent tree stumps that had burned below the ground during post-occupational burning episodes (Boyd et al., 1993).

Raw Material Source

Chert sources are divided into three categories: 1) Edwards Formation; 2)

Southern High Plains; and 3) unknown source(s). The remaining three sources are known to be available locally: 1) Macy silcrete; 2) Ogallala Formation quartzite; and 3) Potter member quartzite. Frequencies and counts for all sources are divided by debitage and tool type. This information is noted to determine which raw material source was used primarily for tool-making activities.

Debitage

A total of 7,644 pieces of debitage are in the Longhorn site (41KT53) collection (Table 4.1). A negligible number of debitage (ca. 0.20%) are excluded from the study due to a lack of complete provenience information. The remaining amount is separated into debris and flakes. Debris is separated into three categories, two of which are formed during thermal alteration. Flakes are divided into seven categories, each representing a stage or outcome during a tool’s manufacture.

Raw Material Source

Edwards Formation

Edwards Formation chert represents a high-quality, yet non-local, source for tool production. When exposed to short and long-wave fluorescent light,

84.04% (n = 6,424) of the site’s total debitage fluoresced shades of yellow and

75 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 orange, respectively (Table 4.1). This frequency indicates that a large majority of the site’s lithic debitage originated from the Edwards Formation in Central Texas.

Debitage types sourced to this Formation consist of 155 core reduction flakes,

904 shaping flakes, 154 biface thinning flakes, five outré passé flakes, 1,465 finishing flakes, 170 resharpening flakes, 215 heat spalls, 149 heat shatter, and

3, 207 debris. Those pieces exhibiting solid shades of pink show additional signs of thermal alterations. This shade, therefore, is most likely the result of exposure to heat, rather than a natural color.

Southern High Plains

Due to the small size of the debitage and similarities in overall appearance between Alibates agate and Tecovas jasper, confident distinctions between the materials cannot be made. Their close proximity within the Southern High Plains and distinction as non-local sources, however, allow for their combination as a general source area. When combined, only 0.47% (n = 36) of the total debitage can be identified as deriving from the Southern High Plains (Table 4.1). The largest debitage measures 22.18mm in length with the majority of pieces measuring 9 to 15mm in length. Debitage types sources to this area consist of eight shaping flakes, one biface thinning flake, six finishing flakes, three resharpening flakes, and 18 debris.

Unknown chert source

The unknown chert source category represents those pieces of chert debitage that either do not fluoresce as Edwards Formation chert or cannot be attributed to the Southern High Plains. It is likely many of these cherts represent

76 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 gravels from the Ogallala Formation (Boyd et al., 1993; Hurst et al., 2010). In total, 14.09% (n = 1,077) of all debitage derives from an unknown chert source(s)

(Table 4.1). Debitage types consist of 13 core reduction flakes, 145 shaping flakes, 2 biface thinning flakes, 106 finishing flakes, seven resharpening flakes,

121 heat spalls, 59 heat shatter, and 624 debris.

Table 4.1. Raw material source by debitage type (frequency; count). Southern Edwards Unknown Chert Debitage Type High Plains Formation Source Core Reduction Flake 0.00% 0 87.57% 155 7.34% 13 Shaping Flake 0.75% 8 84.49% 904 13.55% 145 Biface Thinning Flake 0.64% 1 98.09% 154 1.27% 2 Outré Passé 0.00% 0 100.00% 5 0.00% 0 Finishing Flake 0.38% 6 92.43% 1465 6.69% 106 Resharpening Flake 1.67% 3 94.44% 170 3.89% 7 Heat Spall 0.00% 0 62.50% 215 35.17% 121 Heat Shatter 0.00% 0 71.63% 149 28.37% 59 Unidentified Debris 0.46% 18 81.85% 3207 15.93% 624 Total Material 0.47% 36 84.04% 6424 14.09% 1077

Table 4.1 (continued). Raw material source by debitage type (frequency; count). Macy Ogallala Potter member Total Debitage Debitage Type Silcrete Quartzite Quartzite Type Core Reduction Flake 0.00% 0 3.39% 6 1.69% 3 2.32% 177 Shaping Flake 0.09% 1 1.03% 11 0.09% 1 14.00% 1070 Biface Thinning Flake 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.05% 157 Outré Passé 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.07% 5 Finishing Flake 0.06% 1 0.38% 6 0.06% 1 20.74% 1585 Resharpening Flake 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.35% 180 Heat Spall 0.00% 0 2.33% 8 0.00% 0 4.50% 344 Heat Shatter 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.72% 208 Unidentified Debris 0.00% 0 1.61% 63 0.15% 6 51.26% 3918 Total Material 0.03% 2 1.23% 94 0.14% 11 100.00% 7644

77 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Ogallala Formation quartzite

Ogallala Formation quartzites comprise the largest category of debitage available locally. The overall amount, however, is a marginal 1.23% (n = 94) of the total debitage (Table 4.1). Sizes vary highly, ranging from 4.32mm to

53.52mm in length. Debitage types consist of six core reduction flakes, 11 shaping flakes, six finishing flakes, and 71 pieces of debris.

Potter member

Less than 1% (0.14%, n = 11) of the total debitage can be identified as deriving from the Potter member of the Ogallala Formation (Table 4.1). Debitage types consist of three core reduction flakes, one shaping flake, one finishing flake, and six pieces of debris. These debitage range in size from 4.41 to

33.69mm in length.

Macy silcrete

Macy silcrete debitage represents the lowest count of all raw material sources. Only two pieces are identified, representing 0.03% of the total debitage

(Table 4.1). Both pieces are manufacturing flakes measuring 9.96mm and

14.48mm in length and represent a finishing flake and a shaping flake, respectively.

Flakes

In total, 3,174 flakes are present within the collection (Table 4.1).

Identified flake types are core reduction flakes, shaping flakes, outré passé flakes, biface thinning flakes, finishing flakes, and resharpening flakes. No

78 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 blades or associated blade-making debitage are identified from within the collection.

Core reduction flake

A total of 177 core reduction flakes are identified, representing 6.75% of the flakes and 2.32% of all debitage (Table 4.1, Figure 4.2a). Only 5.18% (n = 9) of these flakes represent either Ogallala Formation (n = 6) or Potter member quartzite (n = 3). Edwards Formation chert is identified for 87.57% (n = 155).

The remaining 7.34% (n = 13) are made from an unknown chert source(s).

Figure 4.2. Flake types: a) core reduction flake; b) shaping flake; c) biface thinning flake; d) outré passé flake; e) finishing flake; and f) resharpening flake. 79 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Shaping flake

The shaping flakes category comprises 33.7% (n = 1070) of all flakes and

14% of all debitage (Table 4.1). Flakes are identified primarily on size dimensions, then by overall shape (Figure 4.2b). Eleven flakes attributed to this category, however, do not fit the size requirements exactly. All 11 flakes have relatively thin bodies (less than 2mm) that would identify them as finishing flakes.

Their maximum lengths, however, place them within either the shaping flake or core reduction flake category dimensions. The combination of length and thickness measurements results in their placement within the shaping flake category.

Non-local sources are dominant within shaping flakes. The vast majority

(84.49%, n = 904) source to the Edwards Formation. Southern High Plains sources are rare at 0.75% (n = 8). Only 1.21% (n = 13) represent local sources, including one of only two debitage identified as Macy silcrete, 11 Ogallala

Formation quartzite flakes, and one Potter member quartzite flake. The remaining 13.55% (n = 145) are from an unknown chert source(s).

Biface thinning flake

A total of 157 biface thinning flakes are identified (Figure 4.2c). This number constitutes 4.9% of flakes and 2.05% of all debitage (Table 4.1). A predominance (98.09%, n = 154) of these flakes derive from Edwards Formation chert, whereas less than 2% derive from the Southern High Plains (n = 1) or an unknown chert source(s) (n = 2). No known local sources are present.

80 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Outré passé flake

Only five outré passé flakes are noted (Figure 4.2d), indicating a low frequency of this manufacturing error (Table 4.1). This count represents 0.1% of flakes and only 0.07% of all debitage. All five flakes are made from Edwards

Formation chert.

Finishing flake

Finishing flakes are pressure flaked to trim a tool’s edges during its final manufacturing stage (Figure 4.2e). These 1,585 minute flakes comprise a significant portion of both the flakes (49.9%) and total debitage (20.74%) (Table

4.1). As with other flakes types, the large majority (92.43%, n = 1,465) is made from Edwards Formation chert while the Southern High Plains sources represent only 0.38% (n = 6) of the category. A low frequency of local sources are present, totaling 0.5% (n = 8). This total includes the second piece of Macy silcrete. A flake measuring 20.03mm long, that exceeds the maximum length requirement, is identified as a finishing flake due to its very thin body (0.89mm).

Resharpening flake

The final flake category consists of resharpening flakes that are created to sharpen the dulled edges of a used tool. Tiny flake scars forming a rounded edge on the dorsal side of the platform remnant assist in identifying this flake type (Figure 4.2f). The 180 resharpening flakes constitute 5.6% of flakes and

2.35% of all debitage (Table 4.1). Material sources consist only of cherts, a large majority of which (94.44%, n = 170) derives from the Edwards Formation. The remaining materials source either to the Southern High Plains (1.67%, n = 3) or

81 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 an unknown chert source(s) (3.89%, n = 7). No known local sources were utilized to make the tools from which these flakes were removed.

Debris

A total of 4,470 debris (Figure 4.3a) are identified, representing 58.48% of the site’s total debitage (Table 4.1). The large majority (80.29%, n = 3,571) of the debris consists of Edwards Formation chert. Approximately 18% of the remaining material consists of an unknown chert material, while the remaining

2.12% originates from Southern High Plains cherts and local quartzites.

Figure 4.3. Debris types: a) general debris; b) heat spall; c) heat shatter.

Heat spalls and heat shatter

A total of 344 heat spalls (Figure 4.3b) and 208 heat shatter (Figure 4.3c) are identified (Table 4.1). Only eight heat spalls derive from Ogallala Formation quartzite. The remaining 336 pieces derive from Edwards Formation chert (n =

215, 62.50%) or an unknown chert source(s) (n = 121, 35.17%).

Heat shatter pieces are made entirely from Edwards Formation (n = 149,

71.63%) or unknown chert source(s) (n= 59, 28.37%). No local sources are 82 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 identified. These counts place the highest frequencies as Edwards Formation chert, although abnormally high amounts derive from an unknown chert source(s) as well. Combined, these types represent 7.22% of the site’s total debitage.

Debitage Thermal Alterations

Chromatic alteration is noted when materials other than Southern High

Plains sources contain pink to red coloration on all or part of the debitage.

Southern High Plains sources are excluded due to their natural red coloring. The frequency of this mild alteration is noted only on debitage exhibiting no type of extreme thermal alteration. Frequencies for extreme thermal alterations (i.e., potlid fracture, crazing, and/or bubbling) are noted in two ways: 1) debitage exhibiting at least one type; and 2) debitage exhibiting all three types. These alterations are not examined for heat spalls or heat shatter as these debris are classified as a form of thermal alteration as opposed to debitage exhibiting it.

In general, frequencies for thermal alterations are consistent throughout the debitage categories (Table 4.2). Chromatic alteration is present on 4.67% (n

= 357) of all debitage with a range of 4.10% to 20% within each debitage category. This high upper frequency is skewed by the inclusion of outré passé flakes, whose low total count results in a high frequency for one flake. Debitage exhibiting any form of extreme alteration yields a higher frequency at 18.41% (n =

1,407). A clustered range of 10.98 to 22.43% exists for this category with the exception of an outlier frequency of 4.46% for biface thinning flakes.

Examination of debitage exhibiting all extreme alterations, however, provides a low frequency of 1.52% (n = 116) with a range of 0.00 to 3.33%. Clearly, a

83 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 significant percentage of the debitage (23.07%, n= 1,764) exhibits some form of thermal alteration, be it minor or extreme.

Table 4.2. Thermal alteration by debitage type (frequency; count). Chromatic Any Extreme All Extreme Total Type Debitage Type Alteration Only Alteration Alterations Recovered Core Reduction Flake 7.91% 14 15.25% 27 2.26% 4 177 Shaping Flake 5.51% 59 22.43% 240 1.31% 14 1070 Biface Thinning Flake 5.10% 8 4.46% 7 0.00% 0 157 Outré Passé 20.00% 1 20.00% 1 0.00% 0 5 Finishing Flake 4.10% 65 10.98% 174 0.19% 3 1585 Resharpening Flake 10.56% 19 11.11% 20 3.33% 6 180 Debris 4.27% 191 20.98% 938 1.99% 89 4470 Total Alterations 4.67% 357 18.41% 1407 1.52% 116 7644

Tools

Informal/Expedient Tools

The expedient tool category is comprised of 37 complete or fragmented tools (Figure 4.4, Table 4.3). Fragments are identified as a piece of debitage exhibiting one or more snap fractures in addition to edge wear. A total of 78.38%

(n = 29) of the expedient tools are made using Edwards Formation chert. This source frequency is consistent with that of the rest of the site’s other tools and debitage. Southern High Plains and Ogallala Formation quartzite sources are used for only one tool each (5.40% total). The quartzite’s original color is yellow to tan with areas of chromatic alteration. The remaining 16.22% (n = 6) of the informal tools originates from an unknown chert source(s).

Thermal alterations present on expedient tools are consistent with that of the site’s debitage (Table 4.4). Overall, 24.32% (n = 9) of these tools exhibit at

84 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 least one form of extreme thermal alteration, yet only one tool exhibits all three.

Chromatic alteration is noted on 13.51% (n = 5) of the tools.

Figure 4.4. Informal tool exhibiting original flake characteristics and used edge.

Formal Tools

Formal tools are created for a variety of tasks. All tools are identified

based on morphological traits and macroscopic characteristics whose

combinations are common to a particular type. As with debitage, raw material

sources are identified to examine if patterns in manufacturing frequencies exist.

Cores

Only four cores are identified: one expended core, one bipolar core, and two tested cobbles (Table 4.3). The smallest core is identified as an expended core based on its size (12.5g) and many multi-directional flake scars. The material is Edwards Formation chert, although partial pink discoloration is present. This alteration, combined with the presence of crazing, indicates that

85 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 the core was exposed to a high degree of heat or sudden temperature fluctuations (Table 4.4).

The bipolar core is one half of an oblong white Ogallala Formation quartzite cobble that was split along its longest measurement. Slight crushing is apparent at both ends and the dorsal surface is covered completely by cortex. It is the second smallest core from the site at 26.3g. Both tested cobbles are made from unknown chert sources. The larger of the two (101.7g) exhibits a single flake removal. The second tested cobble weighs 86.6g and exhibits three flake removals (Figure 4.5a).

Blanks

Eleven blanks are identified based on their thick and rough tool shape and incomplete manufacturing state (Table 4.3). Only three appear to be complete.

Two blanks may have been discarded due to the presence of hinge fractures that restricted successful flake removals and resulted in an irremovable hump (Figure

4.5b). Refitting is possible between two of the blanks where heavy thermal alteration split the tool. Separate provenience information for the two refit pieces necessitates that they be treated as separate blanks for mapping purposes. Ten of the 11 tools are made from Edwards Formation chert with the final blank representing an unknown chert source. Extreme thermal alteration is noted on five (45.45%) of the 11 blanks, four of which (36.36%) exhibit all extreme alterations (Table 4.4). Only one blank (9.09%) exhibits chromatic alteration only.

86 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 4.3. Raw material source by tool type (frequency; count). Unknown Southern Edwards Ogallala Unknown Triassic Total Tool Tool Type Chert High Plains Formation Quartzite Sandstone Mudstone Type Source Expedient Tool 2.70% 1 78.38% 29 16.22% 6 2.70% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 22.98% 37 Core 0.00% 0 25.00% 1 50.00% 2 25.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.48% 4 Blank 0.00% 0 90.91% 10 9.09% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 6.83% 11 Preform 0.00% 0 66.67% 2 33.33% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1.86% 3 Scraper 0.00% 0 96.15% 50 3.85% 2 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 32.30% 52 Untyped Uniface 0.00% 0 88.89% 8 11.11% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 5.59% 9 Projectile Point 0.00% 0 94.12% 16 5.88% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 10.56% 17 Beveled Biface 0.00% 0 100.00% 2 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1.24% 2 Possible Graver 0.00% 0 100.00% 3 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1.86% 3 Multi-Use Tool 0.00% 0 100.00% 3 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1.86% 3 Gunflint 0.00% 0 100.00% 4 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.48% 4 Untyped Biface 0.00% 0 100.00% 11 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 6.83% 11 Abrading Stone 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 100.00% 2 0.00% 0 1.24% 2 Hammerstone 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.62% 1 Shaft Straightener 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 50.00% 1 50.00% 1 1.24% 2 Total Material 0.62% 1 86.34% 139 8.70% 14 1.86% 3 2.48% 4 0.62% 1 100.00% 161

87 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 4.4. Thermal alteration by tool type (frequency; count). Chromatic Any Extreme All Extreme Total Type Tool Type Alteration Only Alteration Alterations Recovered Expedient Tool 13.51% 5 24.32% 9 2.70% 1 37 Core 0.00% 0 50.00% 2 0.00% 0 4 Blank 9.09% 1 45.45% 5 36.36% 4 11 Preform 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 3 Scraper 5.77% 3 19.23% 10 7.69% 4 52 Untyped Uniface 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 44.44% 4 9 Projectile Point 5.88% 1 11.76% 2 0.00% 0 17 Beveled Biface 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2 Possible Graver 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 3 Multi-Use Tool 33.33% 1 66.67% 2 66.67% 2 3 Gunflint 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 4 Untyped Biface 27.27% 3 27.27% 3 9.09% 1 11 Abrading Stone 33.33% 1 33.33% 1 0.00% 0 3 Hammerstone 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1 Shaft Straightener 50.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2 Total Alterations 9.88% 16 20.99% 34 9.88% 16 162

88 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.5. Examples of tools representing the early stages of the flintknapping process: a) tested cobble; b) blank; and c) preform.

Preforms

Three preforms are differentiated from blanks due to their thinned bodies and overall shape (Table 4.3). Two pieces of Edwards Formation chert refit, forming a tool that may have been intended to become a projectile point. As with the refit blank, separate provenience information for these pieces necessitates their treatment as separate preforms. The last preform is made from an unknown chert source. It also is broken and may represent an intended projectile point (Figure 4.5c). No thermal alterations are noted on any of these tools (Table 4.4).

89 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Unifacial flake tools

Scrapers

A total of 36 scrapers are present within the collection (Table 4.3). This total includes convergent, end, side, and transverse types as well as 16 untyped scraper fragments (Table 4.5). The highest frequency of scraper type is the end scraper (Figure 4.6a) at 48.08% (n = 25), followed by the side scraper (Figure

4.6b) at 15.38% (n = 8). Only one transverse (Figure 4.6c) and two convergent scrapers (Figure 4.6d) are identified. No concave scrapers are present.

Table 4.5. Raw material source by scraper type (frequency; count). Southern Unknown Potter Total Scraper Edwards Macy Ogallala High Chert member Scraper Type Formation Silcrete Quartzite Plains Source Quartzite Type Concave 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 Convergent 0.00% 0 100.00% 2 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 3.85% 2 End 0.00% 0 100.00% 25 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 48.08% 25 Side 0.00% 0 100.00% 8 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 15.38% 8 Transverse 0.00% 0 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1.92% 1 Fragment 0.00% 0 87.50% 14 12.50% 2 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 30.77% 16 Total 0.00% 0 96.15% 50 3.85% 2 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 100.00% 52 Material

All 36 typed scrapers are made from Edwards Formation chert, as well as

14 of the 16 untyped fragments. The remaining two fragments are from an unknown chert source(s), resulting in a 100% frequency of chert sources used to make scrapers. Extreme thermal alterations are present on 10 (19.32%) scrapers, four of which (7.69%) exhibit all extreme alterations (Table 4.4). Three scrapers (5.77%) exhibit chromatic alteration only.

90 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.6. Scraper types found at the Longhorn site: a) end; b) side; c) transverse; and d) convergent.

Untyped/broken uniface

The remaining nine unifaces consist of complete objects that do not retain any identifiable characteristics as well as fragments that are too small for classification (Table 4.3). All untyped unifaces are made from chert. Eight source as Edwards Formation chert, representing 88.89% of this category. The last uniface is from an unknown chert source. Only one uniface is complete.

91 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

The remaining eight unifaces represent broken fragments of larger tools.

Thermal alterations are limited to four unifaces that exhibit all extreme alterations

(Table 4.4).

Uifacial flake tools

Projectile point

Of the 17 finished points, three types are identified: Washita (n = 2),

Fresno (n = 5), and Lott (n = 1). The remaining nine projectile points cannot be typed. Thermal alterations for these points is limited to one point (5.88%) exhibiting chromatic alteration only and two points (11.76%) exhibiting at least one extreme alteration (Table 4.4). No point exhibits all extreme thermal alterations.

Beveled biface

Two beveled bifaces are identified (Table 4.3). Both are made from

Edwards Formation chert and are missing only small portions of their bases. The larger of the two measures 56.88mm in length, is made from Edwards Formation chert, and is broken proximally (Figure 4.7a). The smaller beveled biface measures 37.96mm in length, is tear-drop shaped, and is made from Edwards

Formation chert. The extreme distal and proximal ends are missing. Neither beveled biface exhibits any thermal alterations (Table 4.4).

Graver

Three gravers are identified, all of which are made from Edwards

Formation chert (Table 4.3). All three tools are made on a piece of debitage and exhibit one beak-like protrusion. One graver is a tentative identification. The 92 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 debris on which it is present is quite thin (1.52mm) and may not support cutting or engraving forces (Figure 4.7b). Retouching on one face forms the protrusion that appears to be unused. No thermal alterations are present on any graver

(Table 4.4).

Figure 4.7. Bifacial tools: a) beveled biface; b) possible graver; c) multi-use tool; d) gunflint; and e) untyped biface.

Multi-use tool

An additional three gravers were created on tools and are given a separate category as a multi-use tool. These three tools were not included in any other tool counts. All three tools were made using Edwards Formation chert

93 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

(Table 4.3). One tool exhibited chromatic alterations while two exhibited all extreme thermal alterations (Table 4.4).

The first multi-use tool began as an end scraper and was retouched to form several used graver beaks (Figure 4.7c). The edges of this tool are extremely rugged, making exact graver count difficult. Exposure to extreme heat evidenced by potlid fractures, crazing, and surface bubbling altered the tool’s morphology, further complicating graver identification. The ventral surface of this tool shows only one flake scar and one example of material loss is due to thermal alteration. The remaining protrusions appear to be intentional and may represent up to five used graver beaks.

The second multi-use tool is identified as a bifacially modified side scraper with two graver beaks. A tan patina covers the majority of the tool’s gray chert material. Potlid fractures and bubbling are present on both faces. Lastly, the third tool is a possible broken blank exhibiting two graver beaks. Extreme thermal alterations also are present and include potlid fractures on one surface, crazing, and bubbling. No chromatic alteration is noted on either of these tools.

Drill

No drills are identified within the collection.

Gunflint

Four possible gunflints are noted, all of which are made from Edward

Formation chert and exhibit snap fractures at one or both ends (Table 4.3). The first gunflint exhibits a small amount of cortex on one face and wear on all four margins (Figure 4.7d). This pattern is opposed to a second gunflint that exhibits 94 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 wear only on its proximal and distal ends. Both tools are rectangular with slight tapering at one end. A third gunflint is rectangular and exhibits wear on both side margins. Lastly, the fourth gunflint is more obscure as a corner of its distal end is missing. Identification, therefore, is based on its remaining morphology that indicates a similar shape to the three other gunflints. No abrasion is evident on any of its margins. Thermal alterations are absent for all four objects (Table

4.4).

Untyped/broken biface

Eleven bifaces are in this category, all of which are made from Edwards

Formation chert (Table 4.3). These tools either have no identifying characteristics or are small fragments of larger tools. This category is composed of three complete bifaces, two tips, three body segments, and two edge fragments (Figure 4.7e). One biface represents Boyd et al.’s (1993) ambiguous fifth gunflint and is placed within this category due to a lack of identifying gunflint characteristics. Fine pressure flaking is present on eight bifaces, two of which exhibit margin wear. This wear also is present on two untyped bifaces that do not exhibit fine pressure flaking. Thermal alterations are present on six bifaces and include chromatic alteration, potlid fractures, bubbling, and crazing (Table

4.4). Only one biface, however, exhibits all four alterations.

Other tools

Abrader

Two abraders are identified, both of which consist of an unknown sandstone source (Table 4.3). The smaller abrader measures 68.16mm long x

95 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

50.55mm wide. It exhibits a diagonal v-shaped groove across one face of a square-shaped piece of tan sandstone (Figure 4.8a). Two v-shaped grooves are present on the second abrader that is made on a portion of thermally altered sandstone. This portion measures 144.00mm long x 89.64mm wide and is the end segment of a 3-part refit piece of sandstone. Chromatic alteration is present on all visible portions, suggesting post-breakage heating (Table 4.4). The abrading grooves likely have been formed after the stone was broken and heated based on the refit portion’s small size and the dark pink color of the grooves’ inner surface.

Hammerstone

Only one broken hammerstone is identified (Table 4.3). This tool is evidenced by a circular area of battering present on one end (Figure 4.8b). The cobble otherwise is smooth and exhibits small areas of chromatic alteration

(Table 4.4). Even broken, its size (105mm long x 76mm wide) and weight (547g) indicates that it is a larger example of this tool type (Whittaker, 1994).

Shaft straightener

Two shaft straighteners are identified based on the presence of this U- shaped groove (Table 4.3). The first shaft straightener is a clear example of this tool type (Figure 4.8c). It is made from an unknown source of sandstone and exhibits two parallel u-shaped grooves along its entire length of 60.88mm.

Chromatic alteration is present as the only thermal alteration (Table 4.4). The single u-shaped groove present on the second shaft straightener is less defined and indicates that this tool may have been in use for a shorter duration. It is

96 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 made from Triassic mudstone and is the only example of this material from the collection.

Figure 4.8. Tools associated with the flintknapping process: a) abrader; b) shaft straightener; and c) hammerstone.

Distribution Mapping

Each distribution map displays a specific category distribution and is quantified by color to represent its density per unit. This method is the most

97 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 effective manner in which to present a large amount of information for each unit while examining the artifacts’ horizontal distribution within the area of focus.

Procurement Distribution

Procurement represents the gathering of local raw materials either for transport, trade, or manufacture. For lithics, this stage can be identified by a high frequency of artifacts made from local raw materials including tested cobbles, cores, and debitage exhibiting cortex. One out of only four core types can be identified as deriving from a local source, and only 0.09% (n = 691) of the total debitage exhibits any cortex (Table 4.6). The majority (75.25%, n = 520) of this debitage originates from non-local chert, with an additional 19.39% (n = 134) deriving from an unknown chert source(s). Only 3.47% (n = 24) of the cortex- bearing debitage, then, can be attributed to local sources. Such low frequencies suggest that local or on-site procurement related activities almost are non- existent. Examination of procurement-related activity distribution reveals no patterning or significant association with other debitage, tools, or features.

Manufacture Debitage Distribution

The core reduction, shaping, biface thinning, outré passé, and finishing flake categories are combined to create a general manufacture category.

Examination of their distribution and densities (Figure 4.9) reveal that the highest concentrations (n = 49+) of manufacturing debitage are present in the western portion of Block 1 and the southern portion of Block 4. Lesser concentrations (n

= 33 to 48) are present in the central portion of Block 3, the northern and southern portions of Block 4, and the southwestern portion of Block 5. The close

98 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 4.6. Debitage types exhibiting cortex (frequency; count). Potter Southern High Edwards Unknown Chert Ogallala Debitage Type member Total With Cortex Plains Formation Source Quartzite Quartzite Core Reduction Flake 0.00% 0 83.72% 36 4.65% 2 4.65% 2 6.98% 3 6.22% 43 Shaping Flake 2.99% 4 77.61% 104 18.66% 25 0.75% 1 0.00% 0 19.39% 134 Biface Thinning Flake 0.00% 0 100.00% 7 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 1.01% 7 Outré Passé 0.00% 0 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.14% 1 Finishing Flake 0.00% 0 86.05% 74 10.47% 9 3.49% 3 0.00% 0 12.45% 86 Resharpening Flake 14.29% 2 85.71% 12 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.03% 14 Heat Spall 0.00% 0 30.43% 7 52.17% 12 17.39% 4 0.00% 0 3.33% 23 Heat Shatter 0.00% 0 20.00% 1 80.00% 4 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.72% 5 Unidentified Debris 1.85% 7 73.54% 278 21.69% 82 2.38% 9 0.53% 2 54.70% 378 Total Material 1.88% 13 75.25% 520 19.39% 134 2.75% 19 0.72% 5 100.00% 691

99 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.9. Density distribution of all manufacture flakes.

100 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 proximity of this debitage to postmold and hearth-related features indicates that a correlation may exist.

Maintenance Debitage Distribution

The maintenance category consists of resharpening flakes only. Their frequency is low (2.35%) and consists of 180 flakes. Examination of their density and distribution, however, reveals a clear concentration within Block 5 (Figure

4.10). No features are located near this block. The high frequency of manufacturing and maintenance flakes within it, however, indicate that at least two specific types of lithic reduction activities may have been taking place in its vicinity.

Debris Distribution

Due to a lack of identifying characteristics, debris cannot be included in a specific life history category, yet most likely represents the manufacture and/or maintenance processes. Additionally, its high frequency warrants the creation of a separate distribution map (Figure 4.11) to examine if any correlations exist when compared to other debitage distributions. This map reveals a strong similarity to the manufacturing debitage densities surrounding some postmold and hearth features within Blocks 1, 3, and 4. The densest concentration (n =

317), however, exists in the eastern portion of Block 1 as opposed to the western portion of Block 1 and the southern portion of Block 4 for manufacturing flakes.

Lesser concentrations of debris are present in two portions of Block 1, the hearth within Block 3, and the westernmost hearth within Block 4.

101 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.10. Density distribution of all maintenance flakes. 102 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.11. Density distribution of all debris.

103 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Feature Debitage Density

A feature debitage density map displays the relationship between the significant debitage densities and their surrounding features. This map includes only debitage that was recorded as having a direct association with a feature

(Figure 4.12). Each feature’s symbol is enlarged and overlaid with a colored dot quantifying its debitage density. This map reveals that large portions of the dense debitage concentrations noted in previous maps are associated directly with at least one of each feature type. The highest concentration is a hearth containing 519 pieces of debitage, but may be skewed due to processed flotation samples that counted for additional microdebitage flakes. Every hearth-related feature contains debitage ranging between 11 and 153 pieces.

Postmolds

Postmold densities revealed that a significant amount of debitage (n =

90+) is present in some of these features. This occurrence also was noted by

Boyd et al. (1993), but not examined further. In addition, flat stake shims were positioned vertically within some postmolds (Boyd et al., 1993). Postmold contents were examined further, therefore, to identify if the debitage represents use as additional stake support or secondary debris to fill the hole created by the removal of the stake. This information had the potential to reveal a divergence from the expected use-life segment of debitage as waste.

Postmold types are separated into three categories: type 1) containing both debitage and at least one shim; type 2) containing debitage but no shim; and type 3) containing at least one shim and no debitage. Postmolds containing

104 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.12. Density distribution of all debitage associated directly with a feature.

105 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 neither debitage nor shims are not included, as they provide no evidence for stake support methods. Additionally, the presence of the original stake’s remains within the postmold is noted.

Postmold Type Distribution

In total, 27 postmolds were documented during the excavations. Four type

1 postmolds are present (Figure 4.13). Debitage counts range from six to 52 with two or three shims (Table 4.7). Two stake remains are present, one is absent, and one is unclear (Boyd et al., 1993). Type 2 postmolds are the most frequent type, consisting of 22 examples (Figure 4.13). Distributions are most dense in

Blocks 1 and 4 and are marginal in Block 3. Debitage counts range from one to

153 with most totaling less than 12 (Table 4.7). Twelve stake remains are present, four are absent, and six are unclear. Lastly, type 3 postmolds are the least common type with only one example, the bison horn core (Table 4.7). This artifact represents a possible stake wedged in place by five shims near its top and in the surrounding fill (Boyd et al., 1993). It is located in Block 1 near five type 2 postmolds (Figure 4.13). Debitage association for this feature, however, is contrasting. Archived records associate four pieces of debris (Figure 4.11) and yet Boyd et al. (1993:127) state that no artifacts were recovered from the flotation fill surrounding the bone. For purposes of postmold typing, the bone stake will remain as having no associated debitage.

Tool Distribution

The distribution of the site’s tools is used to examine correlations between related tool types. Association between broken tools, hammerstones, and

106 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.13. Distribution of postmold types: type 1) postmolds contain debitage and shim(s); type 2) postmolds contain debitage and no shims; and type 3) postmolds contain a shim and no debitage.

107 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

abraders, for example, may indicate that tool-making activities were occurring at that location. Further emphasis is placed on the relationship between tools and features. This information may indicate whether activities were being conducted in specific locations.

Table 4.7. Postmold types based on debitage and shim count. Postmold Debitage Shim Stake Postmold Debitage Shim Stake Type Count Count Remains Type Count Count Remains 1 6 3 Present 2 3 0 Present 1 37 3 Present 2 6 0 Unclear 1 52 3 Absent 2 90 0 Present 1 28 2 Unclear 2 10 0 Present 2 1 0 Present 2 5 0 Unclear 2 2 0 Present 2 11 0 Unclear 2 9 0 Present 2 8 0 Unclear 2 1 0 Present 2 12 0 Present 2 6 0 Present 2 33 0 Absent 2 4 0 Unclear 2 153 0 Present 2 4 0 Unclear 2 1 0 Absent 2 6 0 Present 2 46 0 Absent 2 90 0 Present 2 13 0 Absent 3 0 5 Horn Core

A basic distribution map displaying all tool types (Figure 4.14) indicates that artifacts from 12 basic tool categories are scattered throughout the area of focus. Only all artifacts from the beveled biface and multi-use tool categories are in close proximity to one another. Blocks 1, 3, and 4 each contain hearth-related features and artifacts from a larger variety of tool categories. The combination of tool categories, however, differs for each block. Block 1 contains one hearth dump, one hearth, one abrader, two blanks, five expedient tools, one graver, four projectile points, 20 scrapers, a shaft straightener, and five untyped bifaces.

Block 3 contains one hearth, both beveled bifaces, three blanks, two cores, nine expedient tools, one graver, the only hammerstone, one multi-use tool, one 108 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.14. Distribution of all tool types.

109 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 preform, 10 scrapers, one shaft straightener, one untyped biface, and three untyped unifaces. Lastly, Block 4 contains two hearth dumps, three hearths, one abrader, six blanks, 16 expedient tools, one graver, two gunflints, both multi-use tools, two preforms, nine projectile points, 14 scrapers, three untyped bifaces, and five untyped unifaces.

Smaller varieties of tool types are found in Blocks 2 and 5, and the surrounding isolated units. No hearth-related features are present in any of these locations. Block 2 contains the next highest variety of tools types, yielding two expedient tools, two gunflints, three projectile points, one scraper, and one untyped uniface. The smallest variety of tool types is found in Block 5 with only one graver. Examination of the isolated features reveals only four scattered tools: one core, three expedient tools, and one scraper. Clearly, the vast majority of all tools are located in the largest four blocks, identified as the area of highest lithic activity.

Tool Density

The density of tools both in and surrounding hearth-related features is limited. A density of three tools is the highest density for any unit. Five of these nine units are located in or near the hearth dump in Block 1, one is located in

Block 3, and the remaining three are scattered throughout Block 4. Overall, densities are relatively low and do not always correlate with a known feature.

Tools associated with features, as listed during excavation, also are limited

(Figure 4.15). All feature types are examined, yet only one expedient tool and

110 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.15. Density distribution of all tools associated directly with a feature.

111 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

one end scraper are associated with any feature. This result may be low due to mismatching provenience information between five additional tools and the feature with which they are listed as associated. This error has resulted in their exclusion from the map.

Thermal Alteration

A significant portion of the site’s lithics exhibit extreme thermal alterations.

These changes may be the result of two possible causes: hearth disposal or prairie fire burning. Disposal of debitage or tools into a burning hearth can result in the sudden temperature fluctuation required to cause extreme thermal alterations. For prairie fires to create these changes to the lithics, temperatures would need to reach excess of 500º F.

The combination of temperature and duration results in the fire’s level of intensity. Levels will vary based on the amount of available fuel and time since the last fire (Gibson et al., 1990; Johnson, 2004). This range can result in grassland fires burning from around 181 to 1,256º F (Anderson, 2006; Gibson et al., 1990; Rice and Parenti, 1978). The majority of these temperatures, however, likely will reach 212 to over 550º F (Gibson et al., 1990; Rice and Parenti, 1978).

Prairie fires move relatively rapidly with little subsurface heat penetration beyond a few millimeters (Anderson, 2006; Johnson, 2004). Areas with tree stands, tall brush, and/or ample dead wood, on the other hand, tend to support intense, long- duration burns (Johnson, 2004).

112 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Impact on Lithics

Thermal alterations exhibited by grassland fires are more common in smaller objects such as debitage (Seabloom et al., 1991). Larger cobbles exhibiting thermal changes more likely are the result of cultural burning. The more drastic changes exhibited in smaller lithics usually derive from cultural sources such as open fire hearths as opposed to grassland fires. Furthermore, surface deposits are more likely to exhibit significant fire-related impacts as opposed to buried deposits, which are less likely to be affected (Seabloom et al.,

1991).

Trees including hackberry, willow, mesquite, and oak were utilized during the site’s occupations based on hearth fill containing charred plant remains and seeds (Boyd et al., 1993). These trees remained in the area post-occupationally and were identified from burned stumps. Of these species, hackberry trees continued to grow along the creek through to modern times (Boyd et al., 1993).

Tree density likely would have been low, that may have slightly increased the amount of available fuel, and, therefore, temperature and duration, for prairie fires.

Features and artifacts in areas affected by higher intensity burning suffer the most drastic changes (Johnson, 2004). A distribution map showing the locations and densities of all extremely altered debitage indicates four concentrations (Figure 4.16). All concentrations are located within the same unit

113 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 4.16. Density distribution of all thermally altered debitage.

114 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 as either a hearth or postmold feature. The densest concentration occurs in two units associated with a hearth feature in Block 1. In addition, a sparse scattering

(n < 23) of extremely altered lithics is present throughout blocks 1 through 5. The isolated units surrounding these blocks, however, indicate that these debitage may not be as common outside of the blocks.

Summary

The Longhorn site’s lithic collection consists primarily of debitage. The vast majority of all debitage is sourced as Edwards Formation chert, while only marginal frequencies are attributable to local or Southern High Plains sources.

Unknown chert sources represent a notable portion of around 14%. Debitage from procurement processes have little to no significant representation. Sizes for debitage generally are small and attributable to manufacturing processes, while a small amount most likely represent maintenance processes. Almost half of the debitage consists of broken debris that cannot be attributed to any specific process, yet likely represents manufacture or maintenance activities.

Tool types are varied and represent tools that can be used for both general and specific tasks. Overall, tools are made from high-quality Edwards

Formation chert with marginal frequencies attributable to local or Southern High

Plains sources. Unknown chert sources total less than 9%. These frequencies are comparable to those of the debitage, although the frequencies for tool raw materials are skewed slightly in comparison. This skewing is based on the inclusion of sandstone and mudstone tools whose source categories are not calculated in the debitage frequencies. 115 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Early stage manufacture tools likely have been discarded due to manufacturing errors. Most knapped tools appear to have been completed yet are no longer useable due to reduced size from breakage. A wide variety of knapped tools are present, consisting of beveled bifaces, blanks, cores, expedient tools, gravers, gunflints, multi-use tools, preforms, projectile points, scrapers, and untyped bifaces. Tools associated with the knapping process are abraders, a hammerstone, and shaft straighteners.

Thermal alterations are consistent between debitage and tools. The presence of chromatic alteration, potlid fractures, crazing, and bubbling is seen on all lithic types regardless of their life history category. Tools associated with the flintknapping process also exhibit both mild and extreme thermal alterations.

The distribution of these lithics reveals dense concentrations in and around hearths, hearth dumps, and postmolds in addition to a sparse scattering across the main blocks of units.

116 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

Original interpretations set forth by Boyd et al. (1993:209-210) posit that the inhabitants of the Longhorn site may have visited the area months after bison hunting and initial hide processing activities had occurred. Lithic scrapers were utilized to finish processing the hides that had yet to be tanned and prepared.

Use and maintenance activities, therefore, were dominant over tool manufacturing activities. This conclusion also was underscored by their identification of a higher frequency of resharpening debitage. A skewed uniface- to-biface tool ratio was interpreted as representing the inclusion of metal trade items that replaced lithic bifaces such as arrow points. Curation of these metal tools, coupled with the potential deterioration of the metal in the site’s corrosive soil, was put forward as a possible explanation for their absence at the site. The presence of debitage within postmold features was noted, although no interpretations were offered as to its cause (Boyd et al., 1993).

Lastly, interpretations for thermal alterations posited that both cultural and non-cultural processes acted on a portion of the site’s debitage (Boyd et al.,

1993). Burning of the debitage likely occurred during initial disposal into hearth features, resulting in potlid fractures, crazing, and broken, angular edges.

Removal of fill from the hearths then resulted in the debitage’s redistribution across the site and in hearth dumps. A second potential cause for these alterations was post-occupational prairie fire burning. The presence of heat spalls within the burned zone supported this interpretation (Boyd et al., 1993). 117 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

These interpretations are re-examined through a reanalysis of the lithic tools and debitage reflecting the cultural and non-cultural processes as well as their distribution across the area of focus. Specific activities conducted during the densest occupational range are identified and applied toward both the skewed uniface-to-biface ratio and thermal alterations present on some tools and debitage. Finally, the spatial distributions of the activity areas are examined to derive at conclusions concerning the site’s social organization.

N-Transforms

The first stage in studying activity areas is to assess the level of alteration that n-transforms may have had on the site. Such forces can alter the clustering of artifacts that are fundamental in activity area identification. Erosional forces such as flooding or fires have the potential to result in significant changes to the entire site. Minor factors such as wind displacement, on the other hand, may result in only minor artifact displacements.

The Longhorn site’s position along Grape Creek provided opportunity for floodwaters to damage the site. Alterations associated with flooding such as unidirectional artifact positioning, however, were not noted during excavations.

Features included intact hearths, a refittable ceramic sherd cluster, clear postmolds, and a fragile bison horn core that remained in a vertical position

(Boyd et al., 1993). It was unlikely, therefore, that floodwaters damaged the site’s artifact layout.

118 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

The most obvious alteration is a discrete subsurface burned zone present across portions of the site. Its depth ranges between 5 and 10cm below the surface, with a general thickness of 2 to 4cm. The most likely cause for this zone is natural prairie fire burning as evidenced by a thin layer of darkened sediment, burned clay lumps, and burned tree stumps with no associated artifacts.

Radiocarbon testing of the stumps using a 1-sigma range and intercepts yield two sets of dates of 1651/1953 and 1898/1955 (Boyd et al. 1993:106). These dates indicate that multiple prairie fires may have burned through the site both during and after its densest occupational range of 1620 to 1690.

These prairie fires could have reached temperatures high enough to cause the extreme thermal alterations that are visible on some of the site’s lithics.

The location of these alterations on the artifacts can be affected by the position of the artifact within the ground during a fire. Objects in a vertical or angled position will exhibit alterations only on their exposed surfaces. Chromatic alterations caused by natural fires, as opposed to heat-treating, are more likely to be patchy and inconsistent (Johnson, 2004). This latter occurrence can be seen in some of the Longhorn site’s lithics (Figure 5.1).

Lastly, high concentrations of thermally altered lithics unassociated with thermal features can indicate past fires (Johnson, 2004). The only dense concentrations of thermally altered lithics, however, are associated with either a hearth or postmold feature. A light (less than 23) scattering of thermally altered debitage is present across the entire area of focus. This distribution suggests that another cause for the lithics’ thermal alteration is likely. As the majority of all 119 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 debitage are less than 3cm in length, the individual pieces are small enough to have been displaced from their original clusters by aeolian forces. In cases where these clusters existed in hearth features, thermally altered debitage may have been displaced and spread across the area of focus. The result would be a combining of both burned and unburned debitage unassociated with a feature.

Post-occupational prairie fires then could have continued to alter those lithics exposed on the surface, resulting in a scatter of burned debitage across the area of focus. The compressed view of the data, however, does not allow for an examination of which debitage are associated with the burned zone. As a result, it cannot be determined which n-transform affected each lithic directly to create the scatter. Conclusions, therefore, are limited to stating that two separate n-transforms, prairie fires and aeolian erosion, likely acted most upon portions of the site’s lithics during its post-occupation. Other disturbances to the site such as bioturbation, trampling, and erosion from sedimentation were noted, although their effects were minimal. This observation addresses part of the causes for thermal alterations and is similar to the interpretations of Boyd et al.

(1993) in that some of the debitage may be the result of post-occupational burning. Aeolian displacement, however, was not considered in their study.

Activity Areas

Identification of c-transforms is the next stage in examining the site, beginning with an analysis of the activity areas. This step is a primary objective and aids in determining potential causes for a skewed tool ratio and lithic thermal

120 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 alterations. Activity area identification is based on evidence of human and lithic interactions across the area of focus. The data’s compressed view does not allow for the identification of separate areas through time. Any overlap created over multiple

Figure 5.1. Edwards Formation chert lithic exhibiting partial chromatic alteration.

occupations, therefore, may emerge as dense clusters of lithics. These clusters

are used to identify areas of intense lithic manufacture, use, or disposal.

Elements are examined in terms of their context with one another and the

pertinent surrounding features. Concentric circles of activity are examined first to

address the lack of tool and hearth association. The identified activity areas then

are classified as general tasks that represent primary refuse at tool manufacture 121 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 and use/maintenance stations, and secondary refuse within hearth and postmold features.

Tool and Feature Association

Tools were examined based on their association with a hearth as recorded during their excavation. Association is considered direct when the tool’s field tag designated a specific feature context. Evidence for tools in or around these features could indicate tool manufacture and/or use/maintenance activity areas.

No tools, however, were recorded as being associated directly with any of the five hearths within the area of focus. Hearth types, therefore, were examined further to account for this lack of tool-to-hearth association.

Hearth typing

Hearth typing is based on feature dimensions, presence of sediment oxidation, and fill. Possible types of fill include fire-cracked rock (FCR), ash, charcoal, and cultural debris (burned bone, tools, ceramic sherds, and debitage).

Burned bone commonly is the result of its use as a fuel source (Thoms, 2008a).

Other cultural debris tends to be present within various hearth types due to cleaning activities (Thoms, 2008a).

FCR features contain rocks used as heating elements for the processing of high-energy cost foods such as complex roots and bulbs (Thoms, 2003,

2008a, 2008b, 2009). These earth-oven features can measure around a meter in diameter (Thoms, 2008b) and are characterized by layers of angular rock fragments, oxidized sediment, and charred plant remains (Thoms, 2003).

Cooking foods in this manner takes up to two days (Thoms 2003, 2008a, 2008b, 122 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

2009) and creates a dirty, smoky atmosphere (Thoms, 2003). Placement of these hearths, therefore, tends to be away from living areas (Thoms, 2008a).

Surface hearths are smaller in dimension and cook foods directly in wood coals as opposed to cook stones (Thoms, 2003). FCR, therefore, is rare to absent. A paucity of FCR, however, does not indicate necessarily that plant foods were not important at that location. A large amount of low-energy cost foods such as lean meats and wild roots can be cooked without the use of cook stones (Thoms, 2003). Surface hearths are the most energy-efficient method of cooking, as they require little construction and cause minor thermal alteration from heat transfer to the foods being cooked (Thoms, 2003, 2008a, 2009).

The five hearths located within the Longhorn site’s area of focus most closely match the characteristics of surface hearths. Dimensions for the site’s hearths are less than 1m in diameter with a depth of no more than 12cm.

Sediment oxidization is common and fill tends to contain ash, charcoal pieces or flecks, burned bone, ceramic sherds, and debitage. Two hearths contain or are associated with a large sandstone cobble or groundstone tablet that may have been used to process plants (Boyd et al., 1993). In addition, 45 groundstone objects are scattered across the site (Figure 5.2), 25 of which are located within

5m of a hearth feature.

The site’s environment was not poor in fuel sources. Several species of trees based on charcoal within the hearths were used as fuel sources (Boyd et al., 1993). These species were mesquite (Prosopis), plum wood (Prunus),

123 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 5.2. Distribution of groundstone objects.

124 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), soapberry (Sapindus), and unidentified hardwood. Seeds consisted of goosefoot (Chenopodium), carpetweed (Mollugo), cocklebur (Xanthium), prickly pear (Opuntia), plum, ground cherry (Physalis), hackberry, sandbur (Cenchrus), panicgrass (Panicum), and needlegrass

(Achnatherum) (Boyd et al., 1993).

The combination of the groundstone, large cobble, wood, and seed remains indicate that cooking and simple plant-processing activities most likely were occurring within at least four of these hearths. Such activities would be minor and would not create the dirty and smoke-filled conditions that tend to occur with earth ovens. Surface hearths, therefore, need not be placed away from living areas or lithic manufacturing areas. The lack of tools associated with these thermal features, therefore, is not the result of complex plant-processing activities.

Drop and toss zones

Another method of examination centered on drop and toss zones (Binford,

1978). Ethnographic evidence of an Eskimo group revealed that patterns of concentric zones were present around hearths based on factors including wind direction, objects dropped within the working area, and objects tossed away from it. Men were positioned around the hearth with a gap present in the area through which the wind carried the hearth’s smoke. Objects dropped during crafting landed either between the legs or within 20cm of the crafter. This action created a drop zone closest to the hearth. Such a zone could be expected where stone knapping was occurring. 125 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Tossed objects were discarded behind or away from the crafter at a distance of 1.14 to 2.54m, depending on the object. This toss zone, therefore, was created farther from the hearth. As a result of these behaviors, predictable patterns of drop and toss zones were created around hearths. Patterning did not change around hearths located inside living structures, as sleeping areas were avoided in the same manner as areas of blowing smoke (Binford, 1978).

This information is used to examine the patterning of tools and debitage around hearths at the Longhorn site. In areas where hearths are located in close proximity, it is expected that overlapping drop and toss zones may exist (Figure

5.3). A 1m and 2.5m buffer is placed around the outer perimeter of each hearth from the Longhorn site to encompass the farthest dimension of any potential drop or toss zone, respectively (Figure 5.4). Next, the placement of all tools and debitage located outside of the hearth feature are examined to identify which are located within each buffer.

The contents for each hearth’s buffer are presented in Table 5.1.

Debitage counts are given as approximations due to the uncertain location of debitage within each unit. Counts for partially bisected units are decreased proportionally by the amount of the unit located within the buffer boundary. For example, a unit containing 60 pieces of debitage will be counted as 20 if only one third of the unit is located within the boundary. Tools are counted as inclusive to the 1m buffer when they are located within one of the four units surrounding the hearth feature. Tools are counted as inclusive to the 2.5m buffer when located in a unit that is at least mostly contained within the outer boundary and outside of

126 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 the four units from the inner buffer. Those tools located in partially included units are considered potentially inclusive due to their uncertain location within the unit.

Figure 5.3. Patterns of overlapping concentric drop and toss zones as a result of hearth placement and wind direction (modified from Binford, 1978:Figure 5).

Hearth 1

The drop zone surrounding hearth 1 contains only one tool in the northwestern portion (Figure 5.4). The surrounding toss zone contains five tools located in the southwestern and northwestern portions, as well as two possible

127 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 5.4. Placement of 1m and 2.5m buffers around hearths to replicate drop and toss zones, respectively.

128 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 tools in the northeastern portion. Debitage density is highest in the southern and western portions of both zones. Combined, the tools and debitage indicate that a concentric circle is possible surrounding the southwestern portion of this hearth.

Hearth 2

No tools are located within the drop zone located around hearth 2 (Figure

5.4). The overall debitage density is moderate with the densest area located in the northwest unit. Eight tools are located within the toss zone boundary, with an additional four tools potentially included. This zone’s densest units are located within the western portions. A concentric circle is possible surrounding the western portion of this hearth.

Table 5.1. Contents of the site's drop and toss zones. Hearth Debitage Possible Inclusive Zone Inclusive Tools No. Count Tools Drop Zone 1 134 1 scraper - 1 abrader, 1 blank, 1 scraper, Toss Zone 1 328 1 projectile point, 2 scrapers 1 untyped uniface Drop Zone 2 147 - - 1 blank, 2 expedient tools, 1 graver, 2 scrapers, Toss Zone 2 513 1 multi-use tool, 3 scrapers, 1 shaft 1 hammerstone straightener

Drop Zone 3 45 2 expedient tools - 1 blank, 1 expedient tool, 2 expedient tools, Toss Zone 3 204 1 scraper, 1 untyped biface 2 multi-use tools 1 blank, 1 expedient tool, Drop Zone 4 260 - 1 projectile point, 2 scrapers 1 abrader, 1 blank, 2 expedient tools, Toss Zone 4 480 1 preform, 2 projectile points, - 2 scrapers, 2 untyped unifaces 1 expedient tool, 1 scraper, Drop Zone 5 41 - 2 untyped unifaces Toss Zone 5 96 1 projectile point, 1 untyped biface 1 preform

129 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Hearth 3

Debitage densities are low in both the drop and toss zones surrounding hearth 3 (Figure 5.4). Only two tools are located within the drop zone. Four tools are located within the toss zone, with an additional four tools possibly included.

The densest units for debitage are located in the western portion of the toss zone, although almost all units are relatively sparse. No obvious concentric circle is visible for this hearth.

Hearth 4

Hearth 4 drop and toss zones contain the highest counts for both tools and debitage (Figure 5.4). While the densest units for debitage are located within the southern units of the drop zone, all four units contain relatively high counts. Five tools surround the hearth in this zone. The toss zone contains an additional 11 tools. All tools and the densest units for debitage are located within the southwestern and northeastern portions. Two concentric circles, therefore, may be located within these areas.

Hearth 5

The overall debitage density for hearth 5 drop and toss zones is the lowest of all the hearths (Figure 5.4). The densest unit between both zones is located in the southeastern unit of the drop zone. Four tools are located in the northern units of the drop zone. The toss zone also contains low counts, with only two tools present in the eastern and westernmost units, and a preform possibly included in the western portion. The southern portion of the toss zone was not

130 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 excavated. Using the available information, a concentric circle is unlikely for this hearth.

Overall trends

Three of the five hearths portray possible concentric circles. Four total circles are concluded based on one hearth exhibiting two concentric circles.

Three concentric circles surround the southwestern portion of their respective hearth. The remaining circle surrounds one northeastern portion. The nearby valley walls that protected the site’s inhabitants from the region’s high winds are located to the northwest (Boyd et al., 1993). This patterning suggests that any winds affecting the site when the features were in use likely were not extreme and may have blown hearth smoke toward the southeast.

Refuse Activity Area Types

Refuse activity areas are identified based on the debitage content and context of various feature types. Artifacts and features are separated into disposal categories that reflect primary and secondary refuse. Primary refuse remains in its location of creation or primary use (Schiffer, 1995). Secondary refuse represents the moving of discard from its primary location to a separate area for disposal. Such refuse can be the result of cleaning activities where primary refuse debitage is picked up and redeposited into an existing feature such as a cooking or plant-processing hearth. Evidence for de facto refuse is not present at the Longhorn site. This refuse type, therefore, is not included in a refuse area examination.

131 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Primary refuse disposal

Lithic reduction stations

Lithic reduction stations include tool manufacturing and maintenance/use areas. Manufacturing areas are identified based on clusters of early stage tools, tools associated with the flintknapping process, and/or at least 17 debitage not associated with a feature. This count is based on the clustering created when the density of the debitage across the area of focus is divided into six natural breaks (see Figure 5.4). Early stage tools include cores, blanks, and preforms.

Associated tools are hammerstones, abraders, and shaft straighteners.

Maintenance/use areas are identified based on the clustering of resharpening flakes and associated completed tools. Five tool manufacture and two use/maintenance areas are identified within blocks 1, 3, 4, and 5.

Tool manufacture station

Tool manufacture station 1 is identified based on the presence of early stage manufacturing tools and debitage (Figure 5.5). It contains a blank, an abrader, and 275 manufacturing flakes of 541 total debitage. The projectile points and scrapers present within the area’s boundary are excluded, as they are completed tools. Fifty-two additional manufacturing flakes are associated directly with the hearth located within the station’s boundaries. This number represents a small portion of the hearth’s 519 debitage count, however, which consists mainly of heat spalls, heat shatter, and debris. The additional presence of four groundstone objects suggests that this hearth’s primary use involved plant

132 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 5.5. Distribution of tool manufacturing stations.

133 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 processing activities, with a secondary use as a deposit location for debitage gathered during cleaning activities. The combination of broken tools and dense debitage clusters both inside and out of the hearth feature indicates that this station was used intensely for tool manufacture.

Tool manufacture station 2 is located within the western half of block 3

(Figure 5.5). It is identified based on the presence of a hammerstone, two cores, three blanks, an abrader, a shaft straightener, and 448 manufacturing flakes of

945 total debitage. A hearth and six groundstone objects are included within the boundary, although they do not appear to be associated with one another.

Around one-third of the 93 debitage within the hearth consists of manufacturing flakes, with the largest majority represented by debris. This hearth, therefore, likely represents a deposition location for debitage gathered during the clearing of nearby lithic reduction activity area(s).

Tool manufacture station 3 is situated on the western border of Block 4.

As it contains no hearth, identification for this station is based on the presence of a dense clustering of manufacturing flakes and debris. Of its 425 pieces of debitage, 194 are manufacturing flakes and 221 are general debris. The remaining 10 flakes are resharpening flakes, indicating that this area was used primarily for the manufacture of tools.

Cleaning activities within tool manufacture station 4 are less prominent.

Of the 19 debitage within the included hearth, seven are manufacturing flakes and 12 are debris. No heat spalls, heat shatter, or groundstone objects are

134 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 located within this hearth or in any of its surrounding units. The absence of groundstone indicates that the hearth may have been used for cooking food as opposed to plant-processing activities. A low debitage fill count indicates further that the hearth was not used as a repository for debitage gathered during cleaning activities. The adjacent hearth dump contains four pieces of debris and is bordered by three groundstone objects. This combination suggests that the dump derived possibly from a different hearth where plant-processing activities were occurring. The area’s non-feature debitage count, however, reveals a dense clustering of manufacture flakes surrounding the hearth. Almost half (n =

300) of the 670 pieces of debitage represent manufacturing flakes, indicating that this area was used intensively for manufacturing activities.

Tool manufacture station 5 is located within the four units that comprise block 5 (Figure 5.5). The presence of 115 manufacturing flakes of 300 total debitage within this small area indicates tool manufacture activities were occurring. No associated tools, however, are present. The only tool located within the block is a piece of debris tentatively identified as a graver. Its manufacture, therefore, would not require a blank or any of the lithic tools related with flintknapping. As a result, identification of this station for tool manufacturing is based on debitage alone.

Use/maintenance station

Use/maintenance station 1 is located within the eastern portion of block 1

(Figure 5.6). Identification as a tool resharpening area is based on the loose

135 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 clustering of 40 resharpening flakes in context with seven scrapers, one untyped uniface, and two projectile points. A preform located within the area’s boundary is excluded due to the fact that its early manufacturing state would not necessitate resharpening. This tool instead is included within tool manufacture station 1, above. Tool resharpening within use/maintenance station 1 appears to have occurred mainly on unifacial tools.

Overall, unit densities for resharpening flakes are relatively low when compared to those of other debitage types. Use/maintenance station 2 in block

5, however, contains a tight clustering of 45 resharpening flakes (Figure 5.6).

This area represents the highest concentration of resharpening flakes within the area of focus. It is identified as a tool resharpening area. The lack of used or reworked tools associated with this block is likely the result of tool curation, whereas the absence of broken tools may be the result of cleaning activities.

Secondary refuse disposal

Hearths

This secondary refuse disposal type addresses causes for thermal alterations on some of the site’s tools and debitage based on their association with hearth features. The presence of potlid fractures on a flake’s ventral surface provides evidence that the debitage were altered subsequent to knapping

(Johnson, 2004). These fractures otherwise would be present only on the dorsal surface (Whittaker, 1994). Ventral potlid fractures were identified on 176 flakes and on more than one surface of 270 pieces of debris. Such counts indicated

136 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 5.6. Distribution of use/maintenance stations. 137 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 clearly that debitage was being exposed to extreme or fluctuating temperatures such as those found in hearths. Finished tools exhibiting extreme thermal alterations also could indicate extreme thermal sources (Johnson, 2004). Many of the site’s tools display potlid fractures, crazing, and bubbling. The presence of these alterations on multiple surfaces of debitage and tools suggests that they may have been burned initially due to their discard into a hearth rather than from heat-treating.

Dense concentrations of these lithics imply either that the debitage was deposited directly into the hearth during the flintknapping process or that they were collected during cleaning activities and redeposited into the hearth. This latter activity aids in maintaining cleared use or living areas through the removal of larger lithics (Kooyman, 2000; Thoms, 2008). Inclusions of heat spalls and heat shatter further emphasize the extreme conditions under which the lithics were placed. The hearth located in block 1 is associated with the highest concentration of thermally altered debitage followed by the hearth in the center of block 3. Both hearths are interpreted as representing at least one occurrence where debitage was relocated into a cooking hearth (Figure 5.7). These interpretations follow closely those posited by Boyd et al. (1993).

Hearth dumps signify the removal of fill from a hearth and its disposal in another location. This behavior thus creates secondary refuse through yet another disposal activity. Such activity areas are found in the western portion of block 1 and in two locations in the southern portion of block 4 (Figure 5.7). Initial causes for many of the lithics’ burning appear to have been cultural hearth 138 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 5.7. Distribution of disposal activity areas. 139 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 disposal. Non-cultural aeolian forces likely acted to disperse some lithics, while post-occupational fires burned those lithics exposed across the area of focus.

Postmolds

Boyd et al. (1993) offered no interpretation as to the cause of debitage being found within postmold features. The possible utilization of debitage as additional stake support in postmolds, therefore, was examined as an intentional use. This examination was based on the context and contents of each postmold type (Table 5.2). Results indicated that over 30 pieces of debitage are present in seven of the 27 postmolds, most of which contained remnants of the original stake. Most of the remaining postmolds contained less than 10 pieces regardless of the presence or absence of the original stake. A high frequency

(92%) of all debitage, however, consisted of finishing flakes. Even in high counts, these tiny flakes were unlikely to provide the support required for a stake shim.

In addition, those postmolds with the highest debitage counts are located near at least one hearth or hearth dump. Debitage is present both within and outside of these thermal features. Furthermore, debitage left in its primary location of manufacture usually is small, as the larger pieces either are curated or cleared and disposed of elsewhere (Kooyman, 2000). It is more likely, therefore, that the fill found within the postmolds consists of cultural debris collected from cleared use areas as opposed to the intentional utilization of the debitage as

140 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Table 5.2. Lithic and stake contents for postmold types. Finishing Postmold Number Stake Debris Flake Total Finishing Flake Type of Shims Remains Count Count Debitage Flake Count Frequency 1 3 Absent 34 18 52 14 77.78% 1 3 Present 26 11 37 11 100.00% 1 3 Present 4 2 6 1 50.00% 1 2 Unclear 17 5 22 5 100.00% 2 0 Absent 1 0 1 0 0.00% 2 0 Absent 6 7 13 7 100.00% 2 0 Absent 16 17 33 13 76.47% 2 0 Absent 26 20 46 20 100.00% 2 0 Present 54 36 90 33 91.67% 2 0 Present 64 26 90 24 92.31% 2 0 Present 109 44 153 43 97.73% 2 0 Present 1 0 1 0 0.00% 2 0 Present 1 1 2 1 100.00% 2 0 Present 7 2 9 2 100.00% 2 0 Present 1 0 1 0 0.00% 2 0 Present 4 2 6 2 100.00% 2 0 Present 4 2 6 2 100.00% 2 0 Present 3 0 3 0 0.00% 2 0 Present 5 5 10 4 80.00% 2 0 Present 11 1 12 1 100.00% 2 0 Unclear 1 3 4 2 66.67% 2 0 Unclear 4 0 4 0 0.00% 2 0 Unclear 4 2 6 2 100.00% 2 0 Unclear 3 2 5 2 100.00% 2 0 Unclear 8 3 11 3 100.00% 2 0 Unclear 7 1 8 1 100.00% 3 5 Horn Core 0 0 0 0 0.00%

141 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 additional stake support. As a result, all postmolds containing debitage are interpreted as representing debitage clearing and disposal activities (Figure 5.7).

Trash middens

Trash middens are large areas of refuse disposal. These areas are signified by the presence of debitage concentrations, broken tools, discarded tools, and/or hearth dumps. The clearest indication of a trash midden is Trash midden 1, located in the northwestern portion of block 1 (Figure 5.7). It contains a hearth dump, 1,032 pieces of debitage (excluding those in postmolds), and a concentration of broken or discarded tools. Broken tools are 11 scrapers, three untyped unifaces, and three untyped bifaces. Discarded yet complete tools are two scrapers, an extremely thermally altered untyped biface, a blank, a projectile point, a graver, and five expedient tools.

Trash midden 2 in the northern portion of block 4 is evidenced by a concentration of broken or discarded tools, 589 debitage, and groundstone

(Figure 5.7). Broken tools are two blanks, two expedient tools, one gunflint, two projectile points, four scrapers, and two untyped bifaces. Complete, yet discarded, tools are one blank, one expedient tool, one projectile point, and one scraper. One additional tool is present, although its exact tool type is unclear.

Due to its small size and single broken margin, the tool may represent either a piece of utilized debris or an edge fragment from a formal tool. Groundstone pieces are six metate fragments and a mano. No features are located within this trash midden.

142 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Two other hearth dumps are present in the southern portion of block 4.

No tools, however, are located within the dumps or any of their surrounding units.

Only four pieces of debitage are noted in the southern hearth’s flotation sample; no debitage is present in that of the northern hearth dump (Boyd et al., 1993).

While their presence indicates secondary refuse activities for hearths, no clear lithic-related activities are evident. No additional trash middens, therefore, are identified.

Additional Information

Two aspects of the site are examined: 1) the uniface-to-biface tool ratio; and 2) what the site’s function reveals concerning landscape mobility. Activity area content is examined to determine the area’s role in the creation of the skewed uniface-to-biface tool ratio. A basic mobility route is posited based on the site’s lithic raw materials, activities, and location on the landscape.

Tool Ratio

Bifaces

The manufacturing of bifacial tools clearly is present within the three lithic reduction stations. This observation is based on concentrations of biface thinning flakes and 12 discarded bifacial blanks and preforms. Specific typing for bifaces being created is limited to projectile points. Their creation is based on the presence of two projectile point preforms and two shaft straighteners used in the creation of arrows. Although both beveled bifaces and gunflints were

143 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 present, it cannot be determined whether these artifacts were produced at the site or curated from another location.

Bifacial tool use is indicated by its distribution or association with resharpening flakes. One bifacially modified scraper has been reworked to produce two graver beaks along its steeply worked edge. Projectile point distribution is the only bifacial tool type whose use is indicated clearly. Every point is located either within or adjacent to a unit containing at least one resharpening flake that may have been removed from the points or the more prevalent unifaces located in these units. Projectile point use is indicated through the tool’s morphology. Many of the points either are small in size due to continued reworking or broken from use.

Unifaces

Uniface manufacture flakes are not used to examine the creation of unifaces as these flakes could not be identified within the collection. No partially completed unifaces were present, suggesting that they either were completed during manufacture and/or curated from another location. The use of these tools, however, is evident across the area of focus in both use/maintenance areas and trash middens. One unifacially modified scraper has been reworked into a graver, then subsequently burned and discarded. Units containing resharpening flakes tend to be in close context with these tools, further suggesting their use.

144 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Expedient tools

A scattering of 37 expedient tools exists throughout the area of focus. The presence of these tools suggests that many tasks being performed at the site did not require formal tools, only the sharp edge of a fresh flake (e.g., Whittaker,

1994). Smooth, unretouched edges can be more efficient in some tasks than formal bifaces, such as slicing motions used during the butchering of small or medium sized animals. Scraping motions also can be achieved using expedient tools (Whittaker, 1994). Drawbacks of using these tools include decreased maintainable leverage and control at higher pressures (Odell, 2003). The processing of large quantities of meats or hides, therefore, would require the tool to be hafted (Odell, 2003). Five expedient tools exhibit steeply worked edges from light use as scrapers. No grinding was evident to suggest hafting.

Expedient tools, therefore, appear to have been used to perform tasks that require low intensity or include a low quantity of processing.

Animal processing activities

The site’s faunal remains indicate that low numbers of medium to large animals were being butchered at the site (Boyd et al., 1993). Rodents, rabbit, and box turtle, on the other hand, represent small animal food sources that were utilized in the highest numbers (Boyd et al., 1993). Butchering of the smaller animals could be accomplished using simple tools such as expedient tools.

Medium sized bifaces, however, have stronger edges that can endure heavy

145 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 cutting around joints and prolonged use (Whittaker, 1994). These tools would be more suited for the processing of the larger game.

End scrapers commonly were used to process animal hides through the removal of hair and reduction of overall hide thickness (Creel, 1978). This tool was the most common tool type identified in both scraper and overall tool categories from the site. The two identified beveled bifaces further indicated these tasks as they also were used in hide processing (Creel, 1978).

Frequencies for these tool types, however, were low in comparison to the 70- year occupational range for the site.

Mobility

A portion of a mobility route is proposed based on the tools, frequencies of lithic raw material sources, and conducted activities. This route does not take into consideration the procurement of additional resources such as food or other trade goods. Their inclusions would expand on the route through additional stops and directions. That complexity, however, is beyond the scope of the current research.

Edwards Formation chert from central Texas represented the vast majority of all lithics. This source, therefore, appeared to have been visited most recently for retooling purposes. The inhabitants then traveled northwest along the upper

Brazos River basin, stopping at the Longhorn site. Tool manufacturing from

Edwards Formation chert blanks occurred at this point in addition to small amounts of animal butchering and hide preparation, likely for personal

146 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 consumption. The site’s inhabitants then continued following the river basin west up onto the Southern High Plains for hunting and hide acquisition.

The presence of hide scraping tools at the site resembles trends set by

Protohistoric and aboriginal historic Southern Plains peoples, who were specialized bison hide producers (Flint and Flint, 2003; Vehik, 2002). Trade for bison hides has been well documented for the Southern Plains and was part of a larger trade network that included other artifacts such as ceramics, obsidian, turquoise, and shell (Creel, 1978; Vehik, 2002). The inclusion of a Puebloan

Pecos ceramic bowl, shell, and obsidian sourced to both New Mexico and Idaho indicates that the site’s inhabitants participated in this trade network. The low frequency of Southern High Plains chert indicates that its source area had not been visited recently for raw material procurement. This fact suggests that the

Southern High Plains was the next destination on the mobility route, as participation in the trade network had not yet occurred. Trade items recovered from the site may have been curated from the last trading episode on the plains.

These interpretations both agree with and vary from those set forth by

Boyd et al. (1993). Tool production utilizing Edwards Formation chert blanks is in agreement, yet conclusions vary as to when and why the site was occupied.

Boyd et al. (1993) suggest that the site was occupied subsequent to hunting and hide procurement as opposed to prior. They propose that processed skins would be transported to the site for tanning and preparation, explaining the lack of bison bones coupled with the presence of manufactured and used unifaces. This interpretation, however, does not acknowledge that the uniface count is relatively 147 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 low when compared to the extent of the site’s occupation. Used tools may be curated to another location if their morphology allows for further use. Broken or exhausted tools, however, are likely to remain at the site. The use of the

Longhorn site specifically for hide preparation over the course of roughly 70 years thus should have resulted in the discarding of more than the 52 broken scrapers and fragments recovered from the site’s core area. The purpose of the site, therefore, could not have involved a strong emphasis on hide tanning and preparation processes.

Additional Activities

Portions of all five blocks contain evidence of overlapping activities per unit of activity space. Block 1 contains manufacture and use/maintenance activity areas that share overlapping boundaries. Resulting debitage likely has been cleared from the immediate area and deposited into hearth 1 as refuse, while broken or discarded tools either were tossed farther away or deposited into the nearby trash midden. The midden’s hearth dump adds an additional cleaning activity through the removal of fill from a hearth and its nearby disposal. It cannot be certain from where the hearth dump’s fill was removed, although its contents are similar to that of hearth 1. This hearth indicates intense use based on its burned clay and complex plant fill, well-defined walls, and oxidized clay base. It is possible that hearth dump 1 represents one occurrence of hearth fill removal.

Lastly, the two features’ close proximity and lack of other located hearth features provides additional evidence that they may be associated with one another.

148 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Block 5 contains concentrations of both manufacture and maintenance flakes, indicating that manufacture, use, and maintenance activities may have been occurring in that general area. Identification as a disposal area is excluded due to the lack of other refuse such as broken or discarded tools, hearth fill, or broken groundstone. The lack of excavated units surrounding the block, however, restricts examination of the area’s outer boundaries.

Finally, trash middens, hearths, and postmolds containing secondary debitage refuse reveal additional disposal activities during which debitage was removed from its location of primary creation or use. The production of the primary debitage represents the initial activity, whereas its removal creates a subsequent action within the same location. This occurrence is noted in trash middens, all five hearths, and 27 of 33 postmolds. While primary contexts are unknown, the presence of debitage in secondary locations indicates that cleaning or collection activities were the cause of their relocation.

Recurring Activities

Tool Manufacture

The most prominent activity to occur appears to be the production of tools from imported Edwards Formation chert blanks. Locations for this activity are present across the area of focus with the exception of block 2. Large portions of blocks 3 and 4 were utilized significantly for tool manufacture based on their varied tool and dense debitage content.

149 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Tool Use/Maintenance

Use/maintenance areas are not common across the area of focus and are represented clearly only in two locations. Both areas are located within portions of the site also used for tool manufacturing. Tool use/maintenance, therefore, does not appear to be a major activity for the site’s inhabitants and likely was conducted on a limited basis.

Cleaning Activities for Lithic Debitage

Cleaning activities that remove larger lithic refuse are present in some of the hearths and in the two trash middens. Debitage has been disposed of into both feature types. Tools, on the other hand, appear to be tossed away from hearths or disposed of into a trash midden.

Postmold Disposal

The inclusion of finishing flakes and debris in postmolds may be circumstantial. Smaller lithics often are left behind during cleaning activities. This occurrence may have left the debitage in the sediment that was collected later to fill the space created when a stake was inserted into or removed from the ground. This disposal activity occurs at 27 locations across the area of focus.

Aspects of Social Organization

The activity area distribution was examined to address aspects of the site’s social organization. Tool manufacturing was conducted across the majority of the five blocks (Figure 5.8). Drop and toss zones indicated that this activity was occurring in close proximity to three of the hearth features. The remaining 150 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Figure 5.8. Distribution of all activity areas. 151 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 two debitage clusters, one in each of blocks 4 and 5, were not associated with a hearth. Due to the clusters’ positioning along the edges of their respective block, however, their borders most likely extend farther outward. Tool manufacturing activities tended to occur within a few meters of a hearth.

Blocks 1 and 5 illustrate that manufacture and use/maintenance activities can occur within the same area. This observation suggests that varying tasks involving stone tools and debitage are carried out in similar use spaces.

Additionally, all but one of these areas is located relatively close to a trash midden. The only exception is tool manufacturing station 2, whose borders may extend to the three denser units within the southeastern corner of block 2.

Drop and toss zones surrounding hearths reveal little patterning concerning the deposition of discarded tools without a point provenience.

Various tool types were located in both zones with no correlation as to where each tool landed. Most tools, however, remained roughly within the outer zone’s boundaries. This occurrence resulted in space around activity areas that remained clear of large refuse.

Areas of secondary hearth and postmold disposal tend to cluster in close proximity. This trend suggests that postmold fill likely was collected from nearby hearths and the immediate area as structures were being built or removed.

Constructions that potentially included drying racks and tipi structures, therefore, appear to have been rebuilt in similar locations over time with a preference toward their creation near a hearth.

152 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Activities involving the creation or use of stone tools occurred within parts of these living and use areas. The distribution of the activity areas, however, was not consistent with all hearth/postmold clusters. Hearths 3 and 5 in block 4 are not associated with any lithic activity area. Both debitage and tool counts are low for this portion of the block. These hearths may indicate living areas where cleared space was maintained. Areas used in daily activities, conversely, retained a higher proportion of lithic debitage and tools. Hearth dumps located between these areas contained extremely low debitage counts, suggesting that they were removed from the living area hearths.

Summary

Both cultural and non-cultural transforms have acted on the site. C- transforms performed during its occupation are varied and include both primary and secondary contexts. The manufacture, use, and maintenance of stone tools created areas of primary debitage and discarded tools. The clearing of these use areas removed the larger objects from their primary context, resulting in their disposal in a hearth, where they were burned, or a trash midden. Subsequent removal of the hearths’ fill relocated these lithics yet again into an ensuing hearth dump. Lastly, the gathering of sediment to fill stake holes may have relocated tiny pieces of debitage from their primary location of creation.

Conversely, few n-transforms have acted upon the site since its abandonment. In general, features and large clusters of tools and debitage remained intact. Artifacts altered through natural forces were limited and

153 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 included small, aeolian- affected debitage, and tools and debitage altered thermally by prairie fires.

Hearth typing revealed both cooking and small-scale plant-processing hearths were utilized at the site. Shallow to dense clusters of debitage were located within hearths while tools are absent. Surrounding some of these hearths were debitage and tools that had been dropped or tossed away during manufacture, use, and maintenance activities.

Several lithic activity area types were identified within the area of focus.

Tool manufacturing was a prominent activity that occurred across large portions of the excavated blocks. Animal butchering and hide processing also occurred to a limited degree from small and medium-sized animals that were hunted for food.

Disposal of the resulting tools and debitage occurred largely in hearths and trash middens as the result of space clearing activities. Debitage identified within postmolds, on the other hand, likely were circumstantial. The gathering of sediment to fill stake holes likely occurred in cleared spaces that contained only the smallest lithics.

Edwards Formation chert from central Texas was the dominant raw material source. The inhabitants had traveled most recently to that area for retooling purposes and had stopped at the Longhorn site to reduce further their tool blanks for tool production. Examination of the tools being created and used indicated that the site’s function primarily was for tool manufacturing, possibly in preparation for hunting on the Southern High Plains. Projectile points and larger bifaces useful in hunting and butchering activities were being created in five

154 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 manufacturing stations. Areas of tool use and maintenance, however, were present in only two locations.

In general, activities were separated spatially based on their function.

Activity areas involving the manufacture, use, and maintenance of lithic tools occurred in similar locations. Disposal of broken or discarded tools tended to include tossing or dropping of the tool at its location of primary context or relocation of the tools to trash middens during cleaning activities. Debitage, conversely, was disposed of in its primary context, a nearby hearth, or a trash midden. Secondary refuse activities were the gathering of sediment for placement in stake holes and the creation of a hearth dump through the removal of hearth fill.

The spatial layout of these activities appears to create areas of varied lithic content. Trash middens, manufacturing, use, and maintenance areas can all contain large concentrations of tools and debitage. Hearths within daily use areas contain only debitage. Living areas, on the other hand, are cleared of the larger pieces of refuse for continued use. Hearth fill from these areas contain few debitage and are disposed of near activity areas. The resulting site, therefore, maintains segregated living and daily activity areas for continued use.

155 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS

Site 41KT53 represented a late Protohistoric to early Historic Native

American encampment positioned in the upper Brazos River Basin in western

Texas. Its location along the border between the eastern escarpment of the

Southern High Plains and western edge of the Rolling Plains provided the inhabitants a wide variety of natural resources. These resources included lithic raw materials, small to large game, plants, wood, and shelter. Water also was available through springs and creeks fed by the Ogallala Aquifer. An Archaic- age hearth indicated that the site had been inhabited at least by 2,000 RCYBP.

The majority of the excavated site, however, dated to within the last 400 years.

Original investigations examined the site using survey, magnetometer and shovel testing, trenching, and hand excavation techniques. These methods uncovered thousands of artifacts and a variety of features that represent the daily lives of nomadic groups traveling through the region. The majority of these artifacts were lithic remains such as debitage and tools resulting from episodes of flintknapping activities. Other materials included faunal remains, ceramic sherds, groundstone, and sparse historic artifacts.

The focus of current research centered on lithic tools and debitage created or used during flintknapping processes. All research was conducted under the theory of behavioral archaeology, utilizing behavioral chain analysis as a methodological framework. Six steps in this process were utilized to identify activity areas based on the distribution of 7,644 pieces of debitage and 161 tools

156 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 identified through macroscopic analysis. Raw material sources were noted to study procurement locations for these lithics.

Research Questions

Both lithics and features were studied to answer research questions covering the creation of the site’s activity areas, tool ratios, tool and debitage thermal alterations, and activity area layout. Maps created using ArcGIS were essential in portraying area distributions necessary to investigate the site’s spatial organization. During the course of the research, additional information was uncovered leading to implications toward a possible mobility route section and causes for the unanticipated inclusion of debitage within postmold features.

This information was used to supplement the research questions initially posited.

The first research question examined the activities being performed during the site’s occupation based on the distribution and context of the features and flaked lithics. Tool manufacturing represented the primary activity performed at the site. Bifacial tools were identified as the most commonly produced tool type.

Unifacial tool production, on the other hand, could not be identified. The majority of manufactured tools were created using Edwards Formation chert blanks from

Central Texas. Tool use and/or maintenance activities were evident in broken and discarded unifacial scrapers and their context with one of two resharpening flake concentrations. These activity areas suggested that hide processing activities were occurring across portions of the area of focus.

Refuse disposal was evidenced in more than one context. Two concentrations of debitage, discarded tools, and/or a hearth dump unassociated

157 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 with a hearth feature revealed areas of refuse disposal, or trash middens. Three of five hearths were located within lithic reduction activity areas and indicated space clearing activities that resulted in their high debitage content. Two hearths and two hearth dumps containing little debitage, conversely, indicated that some hearths were unassociated either with lithic reduction or cleaning activities.

These hearth dumps, however, represented additional examples of hearth cleaning activities where fill was removed and placed in a separate location.

Lastly, the inclusion of tiny debitage within postmold features indicated that debitage waste likely was removed unintentionally from its location of primary creation and redeposited within stake holes during sediment collection activities.

The second research question examined the role activity areas played in the creation of the skewed uniface-to-biface tool ratio. This examination is to address Boyd et al.’s (1993) conclusion that lithic bifaces were being replaced with metal counterparts acquired through trade with Europeans. A lack of evidence for these metal tools at the site necessitates that further investigation into the site’s lithic content be conducted, thus offering a potential alternative explanation.

Activity area types are used to interpret the overall function of the site, thereby indicating which tools would have been necessary for use. Based on this information, the function of site is interpreted as an encampment for the manufacture of tools from materials gathered mainly on the Edwards Plateau, possibly in preparation for subsequent bison hunting on or along the nearby

158 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Southern High Plains. The hides from these bison then could be processed and prepared as trade items.

Only a low degree of medium or large game hide processing was evident.

While the number of both scrapers and expedient tools was low in comparison to that of the site’s occupational range, it is sufficient to complete the small game butchering and/or skinning activities that apparently occurred for personal use.

The necessity for biface utilization, then, was significantly lower than that of unifaces or expedient tools. Bifaces including projectile points, instead, were being manufactured, as evident both in the site’s debitage and tools. Their low count at the site, therefore, likely was due to the fact that functional bifaces would have been curated and carried away for hunting purposes, leaving only those that were exhausted or broken from previous use.

The third research question explored activities that could explain the thermal alterations exhibited on some of the debitage and tools based on their distribution and context. Thermal alterations were the result of a complex sequence of both cultural and noncultural sources. The clearing of living and use space that occurred during the site’s occupation redeposited some of the larger lithic refuse into nearby hearth features, leaving the smallest objects in their primary context. The sudden exposure to high and fluctuating temperatures within the hearths would have resulted in extreme thermal alterations on these redeposited pieces. Over time, the hearth fill was removed for the continued use of the feature. Such redeposition was evident in the site’s hearth dumps.

159 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Debitage within both hearths and hearth dumps also would have been vulnerable to aeolian forces. The smallest and lightest of these debitage could have been redeposited across portions of the area of focus due to blowing winds.

This act would combine the secondary debitage with the small, primary debitage refuse to create a large scatter of burned and unburned debitage. Repeated prairie fires burned the site during its post-occupational period, possibly increasing the number of thermally altered lithics across the site.

The fourth research question addressed what the distribution of the activity areas revealed about site spatial organization. Activities tended to be organized across the area of focus based on their relation to specific feature types. The majority of the primary lithic activity areas were created in close proximity to a known hearth. The surrounding vicinity then was cleared to maintain usable space. Resulting refuse was disposed of either in a nearby hearth or trash midden. Hearth fill also was disposed of in a relatively close location. Hearth dumps were positioned both within trash middens and near the outer edges of living areas. Lastly, the distribution of postmold features revealed a correlation between the locations of staked structures and hearth features.

Supplementary Data

Additional insight on the site’s inhabitants was based on the accumulated results. The abundance of Edwards Formation chert revealed a likely mobility route from Central Texas toward the Southern High Plains. The inclusion of debitage within postmold features was examined as a potential new use for lithic waste as stake support. Negative results for this use then indicated a possible

160 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010 deposition activity where small debitage was removed incidentally with sediment used to fill holes made during a stake’s insertion in or removal from the ground.

Regional Perspective

The Protohistoric inhabitants of the Longhorn site likely were nomadic

Apachean bison hunters that followed a complex mobility round involving multiple stops to procure and trade resources. They utilized the Edwards Plateau to gather high-quality lithic raw materials before following the Double Mountain Fork of the Brazos River across the Rolling Plains. Traveling through the upper

Brazos River Basin provided a variety of natural resources including food, water, wood, and shelter. This region also provided the site’s inhabitants with a location in which to prepare for bison hunting on the Southern High Plains. Hides acquired during these activities could be exchanged later in a vast trade network for additional goods. Research into other material types gathered from the

Longhorn site may indicate further potential resource destinations, creating a more intricate depiction of their mobility round. In doing so, it may be possible to connect the Longhorn site to others within those areas, thus providing a broader depiction of late Holocene hunter-gatherer mobility.

161 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

REFERENCES CITED

Adams, Jenny L. 1988 Use-Wear Analyses on Manos and Hide-Processing Stones. Journal of Field Archaeology 15(3):307-315.

Alexander, Robert K. 1982 Archaeological Site Reconnaissance in the Proposed Justiceburg Reservoir Area, Garza County, Texas. Grand River Consultants, Grand Junction, Colorado.

Anderson, Roger C. 2006 Evolution and Origin of the Central Grassland of North America: Climate, Fire, and Mammalian Grazers. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 133(4):626-647.

Andrefsky, William, Jr. 2001 Lithic Debitage. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.

2005 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. 2nd ed. Cambridge University, New York.

2008 Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use, and Curation. Cambridge University, New York.

2009 The Analysis of Stone Tool Procurement, Production, and Maintenance. Journal of Archaeological Research 17(1):65-103.

Backhouse, Paul 2008 Campfires in Context: Hunter-Gatherer Fire Technology and the Archaeological Record of the Southern High Plains, USA. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Bournemouth University, England.

Backhouse, Paul, Eileen Johnson, and Doug Cunningham 2009 Lithic Technology and Toolstone Variability at Two Gravel Exposures Neighboring the Eastern Llano Estacado. Plains Anthropologist 54:259-279.

Banks, Larry 1990 From Mountain Peaks to Alligator Stomachs: A Review of Lithic Sources in the Trans-Mississippi South, the Southern Plains, and Adjacent Southwest. Memoir No. 4. Oklahoma Anthropological Society, Leedy.

Binford, Lewis R. 1978 Dimensional Analysis of Behavior and Site Structure: Learning from an Eskimo Hunting Stand. American Antiquity 43(3):330-361.

162 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Blades, Brooke S. 2003 End Scraper Reduction and Hunter-Gatherer Mobility. American Antiquity 68(1):141-156.

2008 Reduction and Retouch as Independent Measures of Intensity. In Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use, and Curation, edited by William Andrefsky, Jr., pp. 136-149. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Bomar, George W. 1995 Texas Weather. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Boyd, Douglas K. 1997 Caprock Canyonlands Archeology: A Synthesis of the Late Prehistory and History of Lake Alan Henry and the Texas Panhandle-Plains. 2 vols. Reports of Investigations, 110. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

2001 Querechos and Teyas: Protohistoric Hunters and Gatherers in the Texas Panhandle-Plains, A.D. 1540-1700. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 72:5-22.

2004 The Palo Duro Complex: Redefining the Early Ceramic Period in the Caprock Canyonlands. In The Prehistory of Texas, edited by Timothy K. Perttula, pp. 296-330. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.

Boyd, Douglas K., James T. Abbott, William A. Bryan, Colin M. Garvey, Steve A. Tomka, and Ross C. Fields 1990 Phase II Investigation at Prehistoric and Rock Art Sites, Justiceburg Reservoir, Garza and Kent Counties, Texas. 2 vols. Reports of Investigations, 71. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

Boyd, Douglas K., Jay Peck, Steve A. Tomka, Karl W. Kibler, and Martha Doty Freeman 1994 Data Recovery at Lake Alan Henry (Justiceburg Reservoir), Garza and Kent Counties, Texas: Phase III, Season 3. Reports of Investigations, 93. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

Boyd, Douglas K., and Martha Doty Freeman 1991 Archeological Survey of Wildlife Mitigation Lands, Justiceburg Reservoir, Garza County, Texas. Reports of Investigations, 79. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

163 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Boyd, Douglas K., Martha Doty Freeman, Michael D. Blum, Elton R. Prewitt, and J. Michael Quigg 1989 Phase I Cultural Resource Investigations at Justiceburg Reservoir on the Double Mountain Fork of the Brazos River, Garza and Kent Counties, Texas. 2 vols. Reports of Investigations, 66. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

Boyd, Douglas K., Steve A. Tomka, C. Britt Bousman, Karen M. Gardner, and Martha Doty Freeman 1992 Data Recovery at Justiceburg Reservoir (Lake Alan Henry), Garza and Kent Counties, Texas: Phase III, Season I. Reports of Investigations, 84. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

Boyd, Douglas K., Steve A. Tomka, and Karl W. Kibler 1993 Data Recovery at Justiceburg Reservoir (Lake Alan Henry), Garza and Kent Counties, Texas: Phase III, Season II. Reports of Investigations, 88. Prewitt and Associates, Austin, Texas.

Campbell, Robert G. 1975 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Portions of the South Plains Region. Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.

1977 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Portions of the South Plains Region. Report No. 2: Corrections and Additions. Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.

Campbell, Robert G., and Sharon J. Judd 1977a Archaeological Reconnaissance of Portions of the South Plains Region. Report No. 3: Tabulation of Archaeological Sites and Materials. Department of Anthropology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.

1977b Archaeological Reconnaissance of Portions of the South Plains Region. Report No. 4: Analysis of Archaeological Materials. Department of Anthropology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.

Clark, David J. 1977 Spatial Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.

Collins, Michael B. 1999 Clovis Blade Technology. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Cosner, Aaron J. 1951 Arrowshaft-Straightening with a Grooved Stone. American Antiquity 17(2):147-148.

164 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Crabtree, D.E., and B. R. Butler 1964 Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 1- Heat Treatment of Silica Materials. Tebiwa 7(1):1-6. Creel, Darrell 1978 Bison Hides in Late Prehistoric Exchange in the Southern Plains. American Antiquity 56(1):40-49.

Davis, William B., and David J. Schmidly 1994 The Mammals of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas.

Dixon, James R. 2000 Amphibians and Reptiles of Texas. Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

Flint, Richard, and Shirley Cushing Flint (editors) 1997 The Coronado Expedition to Tierra Nueva: The 1540-1542 Route Across the Southwest. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

2003 The Coronado Expedition: From the Distance of 460 Years. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Frison, George C. 1968 A Functional Analysis of Certain Chipped Stone Tools. American Antiquity 33(2):149-155.

Gibson, David J., David C. Hartnett, and Gary L. S. Merrill 1990 Fire Temperature Heterogeneity in Contrasting Fire Prone Habitats: Kansas Tallgrass Prairie and Florida Sandhill. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 117(4):349-356.

Green, F. Earl 1963 The Clovis Blades: An Important Addition to the Llano Complex. American Antiquity 29(2):145-165.

Gregg, Michael L., and Richard J. Grybush 1976 Thermally Altered Siliceous Stone from Prehistoric Contexts: Intentional versus Unintentional Alteration. American Antiquity 41(2):89-192.

Gustavson, Thomas C., and William W. Simpkins 1989 Geomorphic Processes and Rates of Retreat Affecting the Caprock Escarpment, Texas Panhandle. Reports of Investigations, 180. Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas, Austin.

165 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Hämäläinen, Pekka 1998 The Western Comanche Trade Center: Rethinking the Plains Indian Trade System. The Western Historical Quarterly 29(4):485-513.

2003 The Rise and Fall of Plains Indian Horse Cultures. The Journal of American History 90(3):833-862.

Haragan, Donald R. 1983 Blue Northers to Sea Breezes. Texas Weather and Climate. Hendrick- Long, Dallas, Texas.

Hatch, Stephan J., and Jennifer Pluhar 1993 Texas Range Plants. Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

Hester, J. J. 1972 Blackwater Locality No. 1: A Stratified, Early Man Site in Eastern New Mexico. Fort Burgwin Research Center, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas.

Hill, James N. 1970 Broken K Pueblo: Prehistoric Social Organization in the American Southwest. Anthropological Paper No. 18. University of Arizona, Tucson.

Hillsman, Matthew J. 1992 Evaluation of Visible and Ultraviolet-Excited Attributes of Some Texas and Macroscopically Similar New Mexico Cherts. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales.

Hofman, Jack, Larry Todd, and Michael B. Collins 1991 Identification of Central Texas Edwards Chert at the Folsom and Lindenmeier Sites. Plains Anthropologist 36:297-308.

Holliday, Vance T. 1989a The Blackwater Draw Formation (Quaternary): A 1.4-plus m.y. Record of Eolian Sedimentation and Soil Formation on the Southern High Plains. Geologiocal Society of American Bulletin 101:1598-1607.

1989b Middle Holocene Drought on the Southern High Plains. Quaternary Research 31:74-82.

1997 Paleoindian Geoarchaeology of the Southern High Plains. University of Texas Press, Austin.

166 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Holliday, Vance T., and Curtis Welty 1981 Lithic Tool Resources of the Llano Estacado. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 52:210-214.

Holliday, Vance T., James C. Knox, Garry L. Running IV, Rolfe D. Mandel, and C. Reid Ferring 2002 The Central Lowlands and Great Plains. In The Physical Geography of North America, edited by Anthony R. Orme, pp 335-362. Oxford University Press, New York.

Hughes, Jack T. 1991 Prehistoric Cultural Developments on the Southern High Plains. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 60:1-55.

Hurst, Stance, Eileen Johnson, Zaneta Martinez McCoy, and Doug Cunningham 2010 The Lithology of Ogallala Gravels and Hunter-Gatherer Procurement Strategies Along the Southern High Plains Eastern Escarpment of Texas, USA. Geoarchaeology 25(1):96–121.

Hurst, Stance, and Karin J. Rebnegger 1999 The Hidden Virtues of Ogallala Quartzite. Paper presented at the 57th Annual Plains Anthropological Conference, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

Johnson, Clay 2004 Archaeological Sites and Fire-Induced Changes. Electronic document, http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/ashley/heritage/publications/arc-sites-fire-induced- change.pdf, accessed December 09, 2008. Ashley National Forest.

Johnson, Eileen 1987 Lubbock Lake: Late Quaternary Studies on the Southern High Plains. Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

1992 Cultural Encounters and Episodic Droughts. The Protohistoric Period on the Southern Plains. Quaternary Research Center Series Vol. 2. Lubbock Lake Landmark, Museum of Texas Tech University.

2007 Grassland Ecosystems of the Llano Estacado. In Shrubland Dynamics: Fire & Water, edited by Ronald E. Sosebee, David B. Wester, Claude M. Britton, E. Durant McArthur, and S. Kitchens, pp. 11-23. Proceedings RMRS-P-47. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

2008 Landscapes and Peoples of the Llano Estacado. In Archaeological Landscapes on the High Plains, edited by Laura L. Scheiber and Bonnie J. Clark, pp 115-156. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

167 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Johnson, Eileen, and Frederick C. Hill 2008 The Lubbock Lake Landmark Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene paleoichthyofauna. Southern High Plains of Texas (USA). Quaternary International 185(1):12-25.

Johnson, Eileen, and Vance T. Holliday 1986 The Archaic Record at Lubbock Lake. Plains Anthropologist Memoir 21:7-54.

2004 Late Quaternary Environments of Southern High Plains. In The Prehistory of Texas, edited by Timothy K. Perttula, pp 283-295. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.

Johnson, Eileen, Vance T. Holliday, Michael J. Kaczor, and Robert Stuckenrath 1977 The Garza Occupation at the Lubbock Lake Site. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 48:83-109.

Judd, Sharon J. 1977 Prehistoric Cultural Resources in the Central Llano Estacado and Western Rolling Plains of Texas. Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.

Kooyman, Brian P. 2000 Understanding Stone Tools and Archaeological Sites. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Lehman, Thomas, and Sankar Chatterjee 2005 Depositional Setting and Vertebrate Biostratigraphy of the Triassic Dockum Group of Texas. Journal of Earth System Science 114(3):325-351.

Lockwood, Mark W., and Brush Freeman 2004 The Texas Ornithological Society Handbook of Texas Birds. Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

Logan, Brad, and Matthew E. Hill, Jr. 2000 Spatial Analysis of Small Scale Debris from a Late Prehistoric Site in the Lower Missouri Valley, Kansas. Journal of Field Archaeology 27(3):241-256.

Mason, Otis T., W. H. Holmes, Thomas Wilson, Walter Hough, Weston Flint, W. J. Hoffman, and John G. Bourke 1891 Arrows and Arrow-Makers. American Anthropologist 4(1):45-74.

168 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

Meltzer, David J. 1995 Modeling the Prehistoric Response to Altithermal Climates on the Southern High Plains. In Ancient Peoples and Landscapes, edited by Eileen Johnson, pp 349-368. Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.

Meltzer, David J., and Michael B. Collins 1987 Prehistoric Water Wells on the Southern High Plains: Clues to Altithermal Climate. Journal of Field Archaeology 14(1):9-28.

Odell, George H. 1980 Toward a More Behavioral Approach to Archaeological Lithic Concentrations. American Antiquity 45(3):404-431.

2003 Lithic Analysis. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory, and Technique. Springer, USA.

Perttula, Timothy K. (editor) 2004 An Introduction to the Texas Prehistoric Archeology. In The Prehistory of Texas, edited by Timothy K. Perttula, pp. 5-14. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.

Purdy, Barbara A. 1975 Fractures for the Archaeologist. In Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, edited by Earle Swanson, pp. 133-141. Mouton, The Hague.

Quigg, Michael J. 1998 A Late Archaic Bison Processing Event in the Texas Panhandle. Plains Anthropologist 43(166):367-383.

Rathje, W. L., W. W. Hughes, D. C. Wilson, M. K. Tani, G. H. Archer, R. G. Hunt, and T. W. Jones 1992 The Archaeology of Contemporary Landfills. American Antiquity 57(3):437-447.

Rice, Elroy L., and Robert L. Parenti 1978 Causes of Decreases in Productivity in Undisturbed Tall Grass Prairie. American Journal of Botany 65(10):1091-1097.

Schiffer, Michael B. 1988 The Structure of Archaeological Theory. American Antiquity 53(3):461- 485.

1995a Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. In Behavioral Archaeology: First Principles, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 25-34. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

169 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

1995b Behavioral Chain Analysis: Activities, Organization, and the Use of Space. In Behavioral Archaeology: First Principles, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 55-66. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

1995c A Synthetic Model of Archaeological Inference. In Behavioral Archaeology: First Principles, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 35-45. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

1995d Archaeology as Behavioral Science. In Behavioral Archaeology: First Principles, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 46-54. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Schiffer, Michael Brian, James M. Skibo, Janet L. Griffitts, Kacy L. Hollenback, and William A. Longacre 2001 Behavioral Archaeology and the Study of Technology. American Antiquity 66(4):729-737.

Schmidly, David J. 2004 The Mammals of Texas. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Seabloom, Robert W., Rodney D. Syler, and Stanley A. Ahler 1991 Effects of Prairie Fire on Archaeological Artifacts. Park Science 11(1):1- 3.

Seni, Steven J. 1980 Sand-Body Geometry and Depositional Systems, Ogallala Formation, Texas. Report of Investigations, 105. Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas.

Shaeffer, James B. 1958 The Alibates Flint Quarry, Texas Author(s): Source: American Antiquity 24(2):189-191.

Shelley, Phillip H. 1990 Variation in Lithic Assemblages: An Experiment. Journal of Field Archaeology 17(2):187-193.

Thoms, Alston V. 2003 Cook-Stone Technology in North America: Evolutionary Changes in Domestic Fire Structures during the Holocene. In Colloque et Experimention: Le Feu Domestique et Ses Structures au Neolithic aux Auges des Metaux, edited by Marie-Chantal Frere-Sautot, pp. 87-96. Collection Prehistories No. 9. Editions Monique Mergoil, France.

170 Texas Tech University, Kathryn Smith, December 2010

2008a The Fire Stones Carry: Ethnographic Records and Archaeological Expectations for Hot-Rock Cookery in Western North America. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 27:443-460.

2008b Ancient Savannah Roots of the Carbohydrate Revolution in South- Central North America Plains Anthropologist 53(205):121–136.

2009 Rocks of Ages: Propagation of Hot-Rock Cookery in Western North America. Journal of Archaeological Science 36:573-591.

Turner, Ellen Sue, and Thomas R. Hester 1999 A Field Guide to Stone Artifacts of Texas Indians. Taylor Trade, Lanham, Maryland.

Vehik, Susan C. 2002 Conflict, Trade, and Political Development on the Southern Plains. American Antiquity 67(1):37-64.

Whittaker, John C. 1994 Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Whittaker, John C., and Eric J. Kaldahl 2001 Where the Waste Went: A Knapper’s Dump at Grasshopper Pueblo. In Lithic Debitage, edited by William Andrefsky Jr., 32-60. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Wilson, Jennifer, and William Andrefsky Jr. 2008 Exploring Retouch on Bifaces: Unpacking Production, Resharpening, and Hammer Type. In Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use, and Curation, edited by William Andrefsky, Jr., pp. 86-105. Cambridge University Press, New York.

171