PENNSYLVANIA ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA SYNTHESIS: The Raccoon Creek Watershed (Watershed D of the River Subbasin 20)

Bridge Replacement Project T-319 Beaver County Bridge No. 36 (Links Bridge) Independence Township, Beaver County, PA

Prepared for Department of Transportation Engineering District 11-0

Submitted by GAI Consultants, Inc. 570 Beatty Road Monroeville, PA 15146-1300

GAI Project No. 2002-441-10

DECEMBER 2003

PENNSYLVANIA ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA SYNTHESIS: The Raccoon Creek Watershed (Watershed D of the Subbasin 20)

Bridge Replacement Project T-319 Beaver County Bridge No. 36 (Links Bridge) Independence Township, Beaver County, PA

Prepared for Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Engineering District 11-0

Written by ______Douglas H. MacDonald, Ph.D., RPA Lead Archaeologist

With Contributions by Jonathan C. Lothrop, Ph.D, RPA David L. Cremeens, Ph.D., C.P.S.S.

GAI Consultants, Inc. 570 Beatty Road Monroeville, PA 15146-1300

GAI Project No. 2002-441-10

DECEMBER 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures ...... ii List of Photographs...... v Acknowledgements...... vii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT SUMMARY...... 1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 B. PROJECT SETTING ...... 1 C. PREHISTORY OF THE RACCOON CREEK WATERSHED: AN INTRODUCTION ...... 3

CHAPTER II PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...... 5 A. DRAINAGE ...... 5 B. PHYSIOGRAPHY AND LANDFORMS (BY D.L. CREMEENS)...... 6 C. GEOLOGY (BY D.L. CREMEENS) ...... 8 D. PREHISTORIC LITHIC SOURCES ...... 9 E. PALEOENVIRONMENTS...... 12

CHAPTER III BACKGROUND AND KEY PROJECTS ...... 15 A. PASS FILES DATA ...... 15 B. KEY PROJECTS...... 15 C. SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION TO PREHISTORY CHAPTERS...... 19

CHAPTER IV PALEOINDIAN PERIOD...... 21 A. PALEOINDIAN OVERVIEW ...... 21 B. PALEOINDIAN MATERIAL CULTURE, CHRONOLOGY, AND SUBSISTENCE ...... 21 C. PALEOINDIAN SITES ...... 25 D. PALEOINDIAN SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE ...... 31 E. RESEARCH ISSUES ...... 32

CHAPTER V EARLY ARCHAIC PERIOD...... 35 A. EARLY ARCHAIC MATERIAL CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY ...... 35 B. EARLY ARCHAIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ...... 36 C. EARLY ARCHAIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE ...... 39 D. EARLY ARCHAIC: CONCLUSION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS...... 39

CHAPTER VI MIDDLE ARCHAIC PERIOD ...... 41 A. MIDDLE ARCHAIC OVERVIEW...... 41 B. MIDDLE ARCHAIC MATERIAL CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY...... 41 C. MIDDLE ARCHAIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE TYPES AND LOCATION TRENDS ...... 42 D. MIDDLE ARCHAIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE ...... 45 E. MIDDLE ARCHAIC: CONCLUSION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS...... 47

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed i CHAPTER VII LATE ARCHAIC PERIOD ...... 49 A. LATE ARCHAIC OVERVIEW ...... 49 B. LATE ARCHAIC MATERIAL CULTURE, SUBSISTENCE, AND CHRONOLOGY ...... 49 C. LATE ARCHAIC SITE TYPES AND LOCATION TRENDS ...... 53 D. LATE ARCHAIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE ...... 64 E. LATE ARCHAIC: CONCLUSION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ...... 66

CHAPTER VIII EARLY ...... 69 A. EARLY WOODLAND OVERVIEW ...... 69 B. EARLY WOODLAND MATERIAL CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY ...... 69 C. EARLY WOODLAND, SUBSISTENCE, SITE TYPES, AND LOCATION TRENDS...... 73 D. EARLY WOODLAND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE ...... 83 E. EARLY WOODLAND: CONCLUSION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ...... 84

CHAPTER IX MIDDLE WOODLAND PERIOD...... 87 A. MIDDLE WOODLAND OVERVIEW ...... 87 B. MIDDLE WOODLAND MATERIAL CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY ...... 87 C. MIDDLE WOODLAND SITE TYPES, LOCATIONS, AND SETTLEMENT ...... 89 D. MIDDLE WOODLAND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE...... 93 E. MIDDLE WOODLAND: OVERVIEW AND RESEARCH ISSUES ...... 93

CHAPTER X LATE WOODLAND PERIOD...... 95 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 95 B. LATE WOODLAND MATERIAL CULTURE, CHRONOLOGY, AND KEY REGIONAL SITES...... 95 C. LATE WOODLAND SITES IN WATERSHED D...... 98 D. LATE WOODLAND LITHICS AND SETTLEMENT...... 100 E. LATE WOODLAND: SUMMARY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS...... 102

CHAPTER XI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...... 104 A. DEMOGRAPHY AND SETTLEMENT ...... 104 B. LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS...... 106 C. CONCLUSION: FUTURE AVENUES OF RESEARCH IN WATERSHED D, SUBBASIN 20...... 106

REFERENCES ...... 109

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. West-Central Pennsylvania (gray) and Raccoon Creek ...... 1 Figure 2. Map of the Raccoon Creek Watershed and Vicinity...... 2 Figure 3. Geomorphological Cross-Section of Raccoon Creek at Links Bridge, Independence Township ...... 7 Figure 4. Lithic Raw Materials in Southwestern Pennsylvania...... 11 Figure 5. Map of Key Archaeological Sites & Projects in the Study Area and Vicinity...... 17 Figure 6. Miller Type Point from Stratum IIa. Point is Actual Size (from Boldurian 1985:284)...... 23 Figure 7. Comparison of the Miller Type Point from Meadowcroft (far right; Boldurian 1985:284) with Steubenville Points from the East Steubenville Site (46Br31). All Points at Same Scale. Steubenville Point images courtesy of the West Division of Highways...... 23 Figure 8. Map of Paleoindian Sites...... 26 Figure 9. Possible Preform Fragment from Site 36Wh1312 (Scale: 1 in. equals 2.5 cm; 2000a)...... 29 Figure 10. Early Archaic Kirk Corner-Notched (left) and Stemmed (right) Points, Actual Size (from Michels and Smith 1967:683; East and Beckman 1992:46)...... 35 Figure 11. Changing Site Counts in the Early Holocene: Comparison of Site Counts (top) and Site Density per Decade (bottom), Watershed D (PASS files)...... 41 Figure 12. Middle Archaic Bifurcate Point, Actual Size (from Custer et al. 1996:31)...... 42 Figure 13. Early Woodland/Adena Artifacts (from Dragoo 1963:179)...... 70 Figure 14. Location of Early Woodland Sites Discussed in Text...... 72 Figure 15. Profiles of Cresap Mound (from Dragoo 1963:21)...... 76 Figure 16. Profile and Planview of McKees Rocks Mound (from McMichael 1956:148)...... 78 Figure 17. Comparison of Late Archaic and Early Woodland Artifact Counts, Sites in Cross Creek Drainage (Vento and Donohue 125-127)...... 83 Figure 18. Comparison of Late Archaic and Early Woodland Lithic Raw Material Use at (top) and Mungai Farm (bottom) (after Vento and Donahue (1982:124-125)...... 86 Figure 19. Raccoon Notched Points (from Lantz 1989:9, 11)...... 87 Figure 20. Late Woodland Levanna Triangle Point (from Michels and Smith 1967:669)...... 96 Figure 21. Quantity of Late Woodland Radiocarbon Dates Over Time in the Upper Ohio Valley (data from Nass and Hart 2000:132-133)...... 97 Figure 22. Site Densities per Period from the End of the Late Archaic to the Late Woodland, Watershed D...... 98 Figure 23. Site Counts per Decade Per Period, Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 105 Figure 24. Variation in Site Location, Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 105

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Archaeological Sites by Time Period in Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 3 Table 2. Lithic Raw Materials in Southwestern Pennsylvania...... 12 Table 3. Comparison of Raw PASS File Data with Checked PASS File Data in Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 15 Table 4. Paleoindian Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files) ...... 25 Table 5. Paleoindian Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files) ...... 27 Table 6. Paleoindian Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS files)...... 27 Table 7. Site 36Wh1312: Data...... 30 Table 8. Lithic Raw Material Use at Paleoindian Sites in the Raccoon Creek Watershed D and Vicinity...... 31 Table 9. Site 36Wh1312: Cross-Tabulation of Chert Type by Artifact Type...... 32 Table 10. Early Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 37 Table 11. Early Archaic Site Location Data, Raccoon Creek Watershed (PASS Files) ...... 37 Table 12. Early Archaic Site Location Data, Raccoon Creek Watershed (PASS Files)...... 38 Table 13. Lithic Raw Material Use at Single Component Early Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 39

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed iii Table 14. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material Type for Early Archaic Artifacts (Vento and Donohue 1982:124-127)...... 39 Table 15. Middle Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 43 Table 16. Middle Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files) ...... 44 Table 17. Middle Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files) ...... 46 Table 18. Cross-Tabulation of Single Component Middle Archaic Sites and Lithic Raw Materials, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 47 Table 19. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material Type for Middle Archaic Artifacts (Vento and Donohue 1982:124-127)...... 47 Table 20. Late Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 54 Table 21. Cross-Tabulation of Site Setting by Nearest Water, Watershed D Sites (PASS data)...... 55 Table 22. Cross-Tabulation of Site Setting by Diagnostic Artifact Type at Late Archaic Sites, Watershed D Sites (PASS data)...... 56 Table 23. Cross-Tabulation of Nearest Water by Type of Diagnostic Artifact at Late Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 56 Table 24. Late Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 56 Table 25. Late Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 57 Table 26. Cross-Tabulation of Site by Lithic Raw Material (Presence or Absence) at Single Component Late Archaic Sites (PASS Files; X=present; --=absent)...... 64 Table 27. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material Type for Late Archaic Artifacts (Vento and Donohue 1982:124-127)...... 65 Table 28. Early Woodland Sites, Watershed D, Subbasin 20 (PASS Files) ...... 81 Table 29. Early Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D, Subbasin 20 (PASS Files)...... 81 Table 30. Early Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 82 Table 31. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material for Early Woodland Artifacts...... 84 Table 32. Middle Woodland Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 89 Table 33. Middle Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 90 Table 34. Middle Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)...... 91 Table 35. Cross-Tabulation of Middle Woodland Site by Lithic Raw Material (Percent), Watershed D...... 93 Table 36. Late Woodland Sites, Raccoon Creek Watershed (PASS Files)...... 99 Table 37. Late Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 101 Table 38. Late Woodland Site Location Data, PASS Files (Watershed D)...... 101 Table 39. Cross-Tabulation of Late Woodland Site by Lithic Raw Material (Percent), Watershed D...... 102 Table 40. Site Location Data, All Periods, Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 105 Table 41. Lithic Raw Material Use over Time, Watershed D, Subbasin 20...... 106

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Photograph 1. Traverse Creek within Raccoon Creek State Park. View East...... 1

Photograph 2. The Confluence of Raccoon Creek and the Ohio River. View South across the Ohio River from Route 68...... 5

Photograph 4. Cross Creek near Site 36Wh298, Cross Creek Village, in the Southern Portion of Watershed D. View Southeast...... 6

Photograph 5. Typical Upland Setting in Project Area. View South across Mungai Farm in the Southern Portion of Watershed D...... 6

Photograph 6. The Raccoon Creek Valley near Links Bridge, Independence Township. View South...... 6

Photograph 7. Blades found in Association with the Miller Point, Stratum IIa, Meadowcroft Rockshelter (http://people.delphiforums.com/McConaughy /meadowcroft/.htm)...... 24

Photograph 8. View of Meadowcroft Rockshelter from above Cross Creek. View Northeast (photo courtesy of J. Herbstritt and J. Adovasio)...... 28

Photograph 9. Setting of Site 36Wh1312 within the Wolf Fun Valley. View North...... 30

Photograph 10. Brewerton Points (Left; from York County, Pa); and Steubenville Points (Right; from East Steubenville Site, 46Br31). Steubenville Point Photo courtesy of Division of Highways...... 49

Photograph 11. Aerial Photograph of the Leetsdale Site. View Northeast (www.lrp.usace.army.mil/.htm). Photograph courtesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers...... 61

Photograph 12. Aerial Photograph of the East Steubenville Site. View North. Courtesy of West Virginia Division of Highways...... 62

Photograph 13. View of McKees Rocks Mound Prior to the 1896 Excavations (from Dragoo 1963:153)...... 78

Photograph 14. Excavator holding Stone Bowl/Mortar from Leetsdale Site (www.lrp.usace.army.mil/.htm; Photo Courtesy of the U.S. Corps of Engineers...... 79

Photograph 15. View Northwest toward the Georgetown Site (36Bv29) and the Ohio River...... 82

Photograph 16. View of Hill in the Former Location of Avella Mound. Excavations at the Site Removed Most of the Mound which was on top of the Hill. View Northwest...... 92

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed v

(This page intentionally blank) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Scope of Work for this data synthesis was coordinated by Patrick Roberts (Environmental Manager) and Joseph Verbka (Qualified Professional Archaeologist) of PennDOT District 11-0, Chan Funk of the Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission (PHMC) Bureau for Historic Preservation (BHP), and GAI’s Ben Resnick, M.A., RPA, Jonathan C. Lothrop, Ph.D., RPA and Douglas H. MacDonald, Ph.D., RPA.

Ben Resnick, M.A., RPA, was project manager, while Douglas H. MacDonald, Ph.D., RPA, was Principal Investigator and author of the technical report. Jonathan C. Lothrop contributed sections of this report as well. Lisa Dugas conducted background research at the State Museum in Harrisburg. David L. Cremeens, Ph.D., CPSS, conducted the geomorphological study for the Links Bridge project (MacDonald 2003b) which is included in Chapter II of this report.

GAI would like to express its gratitude to the following individuals at the PHMC-BHP in Harrisburg who facilitated completion of the project in one way or another: Chan Funk, Pete Van Rossum, and Kurt Carr. Each of these individuals went out of their way to provide assistance during the course of this project. In addition, James Adovasio of Mercyhurst College and Conrad Weiser of the Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh Division, provided access to artifacts, reports, and unpublished documents from the Meadowcroft and Leetsdale projects, respectively.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed vii

(This page intentionally blank) CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT SUMMARY

A. INTRODUCTION Ohio River northwest of Pittsburgh near the This document is a prehistoric archaeological Beaver and Allegheny County line (Figure 2). data synthesis for the Raccoon Creek Watershed Traverse Creek (see Photograph 1), Little (Watershed D) of the Ohio River Subbasin 20, Traverse Creek, and Service Creek are its major prepared by GAI Consultants, Inc. (GAI) for tributaries in the watershed. South of Raccoon PennDOT District 11-0 (Figures 1 and 2). For Creek, the watersheds of Harmon Creek and comparative purposes, the report also includes Cross Creek drain westward into the Ohio River, research report information from areas peripheral but are included in Watershed D. to Watershed D, including the Upper Ohio Valley and southwestern Pennsylvania, in general. The report should prove useful for archaeologists or laypersons interested in the Native American prehistory of and the Upper Ohio River Valley. This document also provides contextual information and research questions for reviewers of archaeological projects at PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission’s (PHMC) Bureau for Historic Preservation (BHP) for assessing the (National Register) significance of identified sites. Figure 1. West-Central Photograph 1. Traverse Creek within Raccoon Creek Pennsylvania (gray) and State Park. View East. Raccoon Creek (dot). (http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/st ateparks/parks/racc.htm) As noted above, the PHMC-BHP and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental B. PROJECT SETTING Protection (2002) also include Cross Creek and Harmon Creek within the Raccoon Creek The Ohio River (PA Subbasin 20) encompasses Watershed D, even though both of these creeks 3,084 sq. miles of total drainage area in flow westward directly into the Ohio River; they Pennsylvania and includes hundreds of are not feeder streams of Raccoon Creek. watersheds along its 981 mile-long trajectory Nevertheless, to be consistent with the between Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Cairo, Pennsylvania Archaeological Site Survey (PASS) Illinois. The Raccoon Creek watershed files (administered by the PHMC-BHP), we also (Photograph 1) (Watershed D of Ohio River include Cross Creek and Harmon Creek in Subbasin 20) comprises 327 square miles within Watershed D. The implications of this inclusion the Pittsburgh Low Plateau Section of the are great, as extensive research has been unglaciated Appalachian Plateaus Province, conducted within Cross Creek by the University including northern Washington County, southern of Pittsburgh at sites such as Meadowcroft Beaver County, and western Allegheny County. Rockshelter (Carlisle and Adovasio 1982),

providing a wealth of data by which to assess the Raccoon Creek begins near Burgettstown, in history of the region. northern Washington County, and gently meanders northward to its confluence with the

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 1

MAP OF WATERSHEDS D, E, AND F SUBBASINFigure 2. Map of 20the Raccoon Creek Watershed and Vicinity Pittsburgh D Ohio River Ohio River A2 -

C Subbasin 20 --

10 Beaver County - A Shenango

441 Allegheny County - Ohio River Washington County

C Harmon Cr. Slippery Raccoon Creek B Rock

DWG. NO 20 02 Beaver Cross Creek F G 10/03 D Ohio Buffalo Creek Raccoon F Chartiers Creek DATE 7/ Chartiers jcl E Buffalo/Wheeling PENNSYLVANIA E

Shaded Area WEST VIRGINIA See Map at Right Wheeling Creek DRAWN DHM APPROVED To Ohio River Scale 0 5 10 miles

Ohio River C0NSULTANTS, INC. Subbasin 20 gai

Pennsylvania Figure 2 Map of the Raccoon Creek Watershed and Vicinity

2 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed C. PREHISTORY OF THE RACCOON crafted fluted spear points and atlatls CREEK WATERSHED: AN INTRODUCTION (spearthrowers) and traveled over a wide area. The cultural historical chronology used in this This mobile forager lifestyle continued through report differs from the traditional Upper Ohio the end of the Early Archaic period until Valley sequence first defined by Mayer-Oakes approximately 8,800 or so years ago. At this (1955); namely, we do not include a Late time, Native American populations steadily Prehistoric period in the sequence, as is increased and there was a change in subsistence common in southwestern Pennsylvania and and settlement pattern. In contrast to the West Virginia. Instead, we use the traditional Paleoindian period, Native Americans of the Pennsylvania chronology as established by Early and Middle Archaic (ca. 8,000 years ago) Raber (1985) in the Comprehensive State Plan occasionally lived in base camps on terraces of for the Conservation of Archaeological rivers for a few months of the year. From these Resources. In this sequence, the Upper Ohio base camps, Native Americans traveled to Valley “Late Prehistoric Period” is subsumed in uplands and low-mid-order tributaries to collect the larger Late Woodland period. In so doing, seasonally available resources. Travel in the the report maintains consistency with the local area increased at this time, as reflected by chronology used in the Pennsylvania the use a wide variety of cherts from Archaeological Site Survey (PASS) files. southwestern Pennsylvania, including Ten Mile, Uniontown and Monongahela cherts. For at least the last 12,000 years, Native Americans have occupied Watershed D of the The change in subsistence pattern led to a Ohio River Subbasin. More than 200 prehistoric dramatic population increase during the initial site components from seven different time portion of the Late Archaic period, periods have been identified at archaeological approximately 5,200-4,000 years ago. Late sites in Watershed D (Table 1). Prehistoric Archaic Native Americans utilized Brewerton occupation was initiated during the Paleoindian side- and corner-notched projectile points and period, at the end of the Pleistocene epoch, traveled extensively within western when small bands of Native Americans migrated Pennsylvania rivers and stream corridors. into the previously uninhabited region. Meadowcroft Rockshelter (36Wh297), located By the end of the Late Archaic period (ca. 4,000 in the Cross Creek drainage of Watershed D, is to 3,000 years ago), evidence from Panhandle one of the most important Paleoindian Archaic/Steubenville sites along the Ohio River archaeological sites in North America and may and Raccoon Creek indicate increased date to as early as 14,500 years ago. nucleation of populations and increased riverine subsistence. In other parts of Pennsylvania, this Table 1. Archaeological Sites by Time Period in Watershed D, Subbasin 20. transition to increased sedentism and riverine adaptations is called the Transitional or TIMEFRAME (YEARS SITE COMPONENTS* IN PERIOD BP) WATERSHED D Terminal Archaic. However, typical artifacts of Paleoindian 16,000-10,000 8 the Transitional Period, including steatite, Early Archaic 10,000-8000 18 , horticultural remains, and broadspear Middle Archaic 8000-5300 45 projectile points, are not well represented at Late Archaic 5300-3000 69 Early Woodland 3000-2100 22 sites in western Pennsylvania. As such, this Middle Woodland 2100-1200 23 report does not include a chapter on the Late Woodland 1200-400 30 Transitional/Terminal Archaic Period. Instead, TOTAL -- 215 the Transitional is included in the Late Archaic. *No. of Sites from PASS data with components for respective periods, based on type of diagnostic artifacts at sites. During the Early Woodland period (3,000 to Subsequent to the occupations at Meadowcroft, 2,100 years ago), Native Americans of the Native Americans of the region used beautifully first produced pottery and incorporated small amounts of domesticated

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 3 foods into their diets, including corn, beans, yielded Late Woodland components, only a few squash, and sunflower, as well as a variety of sites along the Ohio River are true Late other wild seed crops. Meadowcroft Rockshelter Woodland villages within Watershed D. No on Cross Creek has yielded some of the earliest Late Woodland villages have been excavated evidence of pottery use and plant domestication along Raccoon Creek, suggesting that it may in the Upper Ohio Valley. Increased sedentism have been used primarily for hunting and and ceremonialism is a hallmark of the Early gathering. At villages along the Upper Ohio Woodland Adena culture, as reflected in the River, Chartiers Creek and the Monongahela large burial mounds with human burials and River, Native Americans used domesticated wealth items along the Ohio River and its major crops and abundant wild resources to subsist, tributaries. including fish, shellfish, animals, and wild plants. During the Middle Woodland (2100 to 1200 BP/800 A.D.), the Adena culture gave way to This report provides a comprehensive overview the Hopewell, another mound-building culture of the prehistory of the Raccoon Creek thought to be either a cultural continuation of watershed and is organized into 12 chapters, Adena or a population replacement. During the including four background/summary chapters Middle Woodland, mound building continued, and seven chapters that summarize prehistory by as did the reliance on agriculture and sedentism. time period. Chapter II describes the project Raccoon Notched projectile points are well setting and provides information on the represented at sites in the Raccoon Creek landscape and resources available to prehistoric drainage and vicinity (Lantz 1989). These points Native Americans. A comprehensive overview are typically recovered with Watson Farm of paleoenvironments and lithic raw materials is pottery at sites along the main stem of Raccoon also provided in Chapter II. Chapter III provides Creek, as well as much of central and western an overview of methods utilized during the Pennsylvania. collection of data for the report and summarizes the key archaeological projects and sites in By approximately 800 A.D. (1,200 years ago), Watershed D of Subbasin 20. Chapters IV Late Woodland site counts increased in through X provide overviews of the Paleoindian, southwestern Pennsylvania, especially to the Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, south and east of Raccoon Creek in areas Early Woodland, Middle Woodland, and Late occupied by the Late Woodland Monongahela Woodland periods. The final chapter provides a culture (see Figure 1). Some researchers in the summary overview of major cultural and Upper Ohio River Valley call this period the demographic trends over time in the study area. “Late Prehistoric Period.” For all intent and purposes, the Late Woodland discussed in this The ultimate goal of this report is to provide a report and the “Late Prehistoric” are the same. context for future research in the region. By using the information gathered in this report, The Late Woodland population increase was future archaeologists will hopefully be able to likely spurned by the increased availability of better understand the important research issues resources due to agriculture and the increasing and cultural historical milestones of the last use of semi-sedentary villages. Populations in 12,000 years of Native American lifeways in the the Raccoon Creek watershed, as well as in the study area. nearby Ohio River and watersheds, relied extensively on agriculture and sedentism during the Late Woodland. The Raccoon Creek watershed contains fewer Late Woodland sites than the Monongahela River watershed and the Upper Ohio River in West Virginia. While several sites in Cross Creek

4 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed CHAPTER II PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

This chapter provides an overview of the natural 10 km northwest of Canonsburg in northern environment of the Raccoon Creek watershed Washington County. Raccoon Creek meanders and vicinity, including descriptions of the northerly to its confluence with the westward- region’s physiography, drainage, soils, bedrock, flowing Ohio River, 10 km northwest of floral and faunal resources, as well as past and Aliquippa in central Beaver County (see present environments. In addition, this chapter Photograph 2). includes a detailed overview of lithic raw materials available to prehistoric Native Americans in the sub-basin. Analysis of the variety of cherts and other stones used by Native Americans provides insight into prehistoric use of the landscape.

A. DRAINAGE Ohio River Subbasin 20 begins in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as a result of the confluence of the Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers; it subsequently flows northwesterly past its confluence with the Beaver River north of Aliquippa and past the mouth of Raccoon Creek just east of Shippingport. Subbasin 20 Photograph 2. The Confluence of Raccoon Creek and encompasses seven watersheds in Pennsylvania the Ohio River. View South across the Ohio River from (Watersheds A-G; DEP 2002): A) Shenango Route 68. River; B) Beaver River; C) Slippery Rock Several large tributaries, including Wingfield Creek; D) Raccoon Creek; E) Wheeling and Run, Traverse Creek, Little Traverse Creek and Buffalo Creeks; F) Chartiers Creek; and G) Service Creek make it a relatively high-order Upper Ohio River. The current project area stream by the time it reaches the Ohio River, encompasses Watershed D—Raccoon Creek and approximately half-way between Shippingport Cross Creeks, among others—but will also and Beaver, Pennsylvania. The majority of the discuss pertinent archaeological sites from land located south and west of the Ohio River in peripheral areas as well. Beaver County drains into Raccoon Creek. Raccoon Creek State Park in the center of the Watershed D of the Ohio River Subbasin 20 watershed is one of the largest state parks in encompasses a total drainage area of 327 sq. Pennsylvania, encompassing a total acreage of miles. The northern border of the watershed is 7,323 acres, including the 100-acre Raccoon the Ohio River between the mouth of Raccoon Creek Lake, formed by the damming of Traverse Creek (Photograph 2.) and the Ohio border (see Creek (see Photograph 1). Figure 2). The Ohio and West Virginia state lines form the western watershed boundary. The The other major drainage in Watershed D is Cross Creek watershed is the most southern in Cross Creek (Photograph 3), which forms the Watershed D, while Raccoon Creek forms the southern border of the watershed and flows watershed’s eastern border. westerly for ca. 32 km to the Ohio River (Carlisle et al. 1982:6). Cross Creek’s major Raccoon Creek is the main stream within tributaries include the North, Middle, and South Watershed D; it forms at the confluence of Forks of Cross Creek. Each of these creeks has Burgetts Fork and Cherry Run in Burgettstown, its headwaters at springheads in the uplands of

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 5 northern Washington County. Photograph 4 rolling interfluves separated by relatively shows a typical upland setting at Mungai Farm narrow, steep-walled, moderately incised valleys on a ridge divide between the Cross Creek and (Figure 3; Briggs 1999). Raccoon Creek watersheds southwest of Burgettstown. Landforms As depicted in Figure 3, the general landform shape throughout the Raccoon Creek Valley is that of a maturely dissected plateau with relatively broad ridgetops (see Photograph 4) and narrow, deep valleys (Photograph 5). In general, slopes are relatively steep to very steep along the lower portions of the valley walls, and then become more moderate closer to the ridgetops (Ellyson et al. 1974).

Photograph 3. Cross Creek near Site 36Wh298, Cross Creek Village, in the Southern Portion of Watershed D. View Southeast

B. PHYSIOGRAPHY AND LANDFORMS (BY D.L. CREMEENS) Physiography Subbasin 20 occurs within the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province, specifically within the Unglaciated Appalachian Plateaus Photograph 4. Typical Upland Setting in Project Area. section. The Appalachian Plateaus province is View South across Mungai Farm in the Southern characterized by relatively flat-lying, Portion of Watershed D. predominantly clastic rocks that are higher in elevation, and younger in age than surrounding provinces (Thornbury 1965). The plateau is bounded on all sides by outward facing escarpments, subtle to the south and west, and prominent to the north and east (Allegheny Front). The boundary or division between the Glaciated Appalachian Plateau and the Unglaciated Appalachian Plateau sections is the Late Wisconsin glacial boundary, approximately 20 km north of the Ohio River.

The study area is entirely within the unglaciated

Pittsburgh Low Plateau section. Within Pennsylvania, the Pittsburgh Low Plateau Photograph 5. The Raccoon Creek Valley near Links section is the lowest in the Appalachian Plateau Bridge, Independence Township. View South. province, and has a relatively narrow range of depth of dissection. The upland surface of the prototypical area forms a true plateau of broad,

6 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Scale

0 0.5 1.0 miles

Figure 3. Geomorphological Cross-Section of Raccoon Creek at Links Bridge, Independence Township

WEST-EAST CROSS-SECTION, RACCOON CREEK West Upland East Residuum

Pennsylvanian Bedrock

Early Pleistocene Terrace Strath Historic Floodplain/Low Terrace Late Historic/Late Holocene Holocene Alluvial Fan Raccoon Abandoned Low Terrace Creek Channel Natural Natural Levee Levee Pennsylvanian Bedrock Silty Clay Late Silty Late Holocene Holocene/Historic Alluvium Alluvium Not to Scale

Figure 3 Geomorphological Cross-Section of Raccoon Creek at Links Bridge, Independence Township

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 7 With the exception of the Ohio River and a few Groups. In general, the Middle Pennsylvanian of its large tributaries, the valley floors of most represents upper delta plain facies, while the streams are very narrow with little to no flood Upper Pennsylvanian Conemaugh Group and plain development. The Raccoon Creek valley is Monongahela Group represent a change back to approximately 150 to 300 meters wide with a lower delta facies (Wagner et al. 1970). The relatively level valley floor easily distinguished Monongahela Group, divided into the Pittsburgh from the valley wall (see Figure 3; see and Uniontown Formations, is a sedimentary Photograph 5). Valley walls are near-vertical-to sequence that as a whole is dominated by -vertical bedrock outcrops to the uplands or to limestones and dolomitic limestones, calcareous terrace straths. Relief in the valley ranges from mudstones, shales, and thin-bedded siltstones 91-107m from the upland ridgetops to the valley and laminites (thin-bedded rocks). Rocks of the floor. The terrace straths are 9 to 27m above the Monongahela Group are only present at the valley floor, and approximately 60m below the surface as isolated knobs or hills in adjacent ridgetops. Within the valley floor, Raccoon south Hopewell Township, and in southern Creek meanders broadly across the valley floor Hanover Township near Frankfort Springs. The with large cutbanks into the uplands and straths. Pittsburgh coal was stripmined out of the base Tributaries enter the Raccoon Creek valley floor of the Monongahela Group rocks in Hanover in the form of alluvial fans. Many of these fans Township; the resultant strip-mined lands are have pushed Raccoon Creek from one side of contained in Raccoon Creek State Park and in the valley to the other. The overall drainage Hillman State Park in Washington and Beaver pattern of Raccoon Creek with its tributaries is Counties. The Conemaugh Group, which covers dendritic. Several large rectangular bends or much of the study area, is divided into two meanders of the creek are present upstream and formations, the stratigraphically higher downstream of the project area (see Photograph Casselman Formation and the Glenshaw 5). These large rectangular bends are associated Formation. The Ames limestone separates the with well-developed terrace straths. two formations. The Glenshaw Formation is distinguished by having several widespread Independence Township in Beaver County has marine units, both limestone and shale, in the no documented glacial sediments, including stratigraphic succession (Edmunds et al. 1999). outwash, associated with any of the Pleistocene glaciations. However, there are erosional The Casselman Formation consists of shales, landforms (terrace straths) associated with fluvial sandstones, marine limestones and thin Pleistocene stream downcutting (see Figure 3). coals formed in a lower delta plain environment The uplands consist predominantly of residual (Vento 2001). The bedrock units at the bridge Gilpin Series soils (Smith 1982). The terrace crossing have been ascribed to the Birmingham straths are mapped with the Monongahela, Tyler shale member of the Casselman Formation and Allegheny soils, all with well-developed (Vento 2001). The only exposure of Allegheny profiles containing argillic Bt horizons and Group rocks in Independence Township is in the fragipan Bx horizons. Colluvial soils, northeast corner, north of the town of represented by the Ernest Series, are mapped at Independence, where the Allegheny Group is the base of some slopes. The valley floor of exposed in the Raccoon Creek valley. Raccoon Creek is mapped with the weakly Structurally, the Pittsburgh Low Plateau developed Pope, Philo and Atkins alluvial soils. prototypical area has a very gentle southwest dip into the Dunkard Basin, overprinted by gentle, C. GEOLOGY (by D.L. Cremeens) northeast-trending folds that decrease in The rocks within the southern portion of Beaver amplitude northwestward (Briggs 1999). County belong to the Middle Pennsylvanian Allegheny Group, as well as the Upper In the pre-glacial (pre-Pleistocene) landscape Pennsylvanian Conemaugh and Monongahela the major steams generally drained northwest to the Erie basin. Based on work done by Leverette

8 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed (1934), most geologists believe that the master from a typical terrace near Parker, Pennsylvania, stream for the southwestern Pennsylvania region and from the Scottish word “strath” meaning a was the pre-glacial Monongahela River (Wagner wide flat valley (Wagner et al. 1970; Kaktins et al. 1970). The pre-glacial Monongahela River and Delano 1999). A terrace strath implies a headed in central West Virginia, just as the bedrock-cored valley floor, elevated and modern stream does, and flowed north to dissected, that may be mantled by alluvium or present day Pittsburgh (Harper 1997; Wagner et other deposits. al. 1970; Leverette 1934). From Pittsburgh, the river flowed northwest to near Beaver, A map by Marine (1997) shows the extent of Pennsylvania, along a course now followed by glacial Lake Monongahela, based on elevation, the modern Ohio River downstream from as extending upstream in the Raccoon Creek Pittsburgh. At Beaver, the pre-glacial Valley. This suggests that some of the terrace Monongahela River continued to flow straths may have a mantle of fine-grained northward toward New Castle, Pennsylvania. lacustrine deposits. The new base level of the North of New Castle, the river turned westward reversed, south-flowing Ohio drainage, and the and flowed into Ohio near Youngstown where it increased drainage area for the basin resulted in finally turned northward again and flowed into a “deep stage” erosion event that isolated the the “Erie Basin.” Parker Strath as much as 15-20m above the riverbed. The erosion event is believed to have The north-flowing Monongahela system existed occurred in the late portions of the Illinoisan for a long enough period of time that broad Stage or in the Sangamon Interglacial Stage meanders developed in the streams in its (approximately 132,000 to 79,000 years ago). drainage basin, and the streams were widening Erosion and downcutting continued throughout rather than deepening their valleys (Wagner et the Wisconsin Stage until the Parker Strath was al. 1970). Sometime in the early Pleistocene, isolated as much as 90m above modern stream continental glaciers moved into northwest levels. Vento (2001) indicated that the terrace Pennsylvania and effectively blocked the north- straths, described as a broad structural bench at flowing streams. The blockage resulted in a nominal elevation of 900 feet above mean sea ponding, and in the establishment of a new level and 20-30m above the active stream drainage outlet to the south. The modern Ohio channel (Raccoon Creek), likely correspond to River was formed taking with it the drainage the Parker/ Carmichaels strath terrace. basin of the pre-glacial Monongahela River at Beaver, Pennsylvania. Work by Jacobson et al. D. PREHISTORIC LITHIC SOURCES (1988) place the timeframe for the flow A variety of primary (bedrock) and secondary direction reversal sometime between the early (stream cobble) lithic toolstone sources were Pleistocene magnetic reversal at 772,000 years available to prehistoric Native American groups BP and the Illinoisan Stage (302,000 to 132,000 inhabiting the Raccoon Creek watershed and years BP). vicinity (Figure 4). Most primary sources of lithic raw materials were available in the The new south-flowing Ohio system rapidly southern portion of Watershed D, while downcut the valley floor. The pre- or early- secondary sources were available in the north. Pleistocene drainage is preserved in the modern As such, Native Americans in the Raccoon Monongahela, Allegheny, and Ohio basins in a Creek Valley likely curated high-quality stone series of abandoned stream channels and cutoff from other regions and used local glacial cobble meander bends (Kaktins and Delano 1999). chert for expedient daily tasks. Regional sources These geomorphic features are partially of chert are described below. preserved as a series of relatively high- elevation, flat-topped terraces, often as great as Western Pennsylvania 90-95m above the present stream levels. These Uniontown chert or flint occurs in Late remnant valleys are known as the Parker Strath, Paleozoic Uniontown formation limestone

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 9 deposits of southwestern Pennsylvania, the Racoon Creek study area, primary outcrops distributed predominantly southwest of the of Onondaga chert occur within the Lower- project area near Canonsburg. Uniontown chert Middle Devonian Onondaga Formation across is the most prominent primary source chert in the glaciated region of New York, and the Ohio River subbasin. Uniontown chert discontinuously in the Ridge and Valley of cobbles were recovered by Eisert (1974) in both Pennsylvania, , and West Virginia Chartiers Creek and Little Chartiers Creek near (Luedtke 1992:129). Secondary cobbles of Canonsburg in Watershed F of Subbasin 20. Onondaga chert are distributed much more Uniontown is light-gray to light olive-gray widely, occurring across northwest (5Y6/1), very pale orange (10YR8/2), and Pennsylvania within the boundaries of the yellowish-gray (5Y8/1) of medium to fine grain. terminal Pleistocene glaciation, and was locally The chert occurs in nodules ranging from 2.5 to available to Native Americans in the northern 30.5cm in diameter (Eisert 1974). portions of the Raccoon Creek drainage (Holland 1999). Scattered cobbles of Onondaga As with the Uniontown chert described above, chert were likely distributed as secondary Monongahela chert outcrops within the deposits within the Raccoon Creek and Upper Uniontown member of the Pennsylvanian Ohio River valleys. Monongahela Group. Vento and Donohue (1982:119) note its presence along Cross Creek Gull River (Yellow Onondaga/Huronian) Chert within the current study area, while Eisert is most typically dusky yellow (5Y 6/4) to (1974) observed outcrops near Chartiers and moderate yellow (5Y 7/6) with an opaque, Little Chartiers Creeks near Canonsburg. coarse grain. Gull River is also known as Monongahela chert is described as being dark to Huronian, or Yellow Onondaga (Fogelman light gray with “limonite staining on weathered 1983), and derives from Ordovician deposits in surfaces and bedding planes” (Vento and Ontario, Canada. Gull River was distributed Donohue 1982: 120). The current author also widely as secondary cobbles across western observed Monongahela chert near the New York, northeastern Ohio, and western headwaters of Wolf Run, a tributary of Buffalo Pennsylvania, within the boundaries of the Creek, northwest of Washington, Pennsylvania terminal Pleistocene glacial advance (Holland in Watershed E. The chert was of a fairly low 1999). Gull River chert is common at quality within limestone nodules eroding on the archaeological sites in western Pennsylvania. ground surface of a steep sideslope. Scattered cobbles of Gull River chert are likely Ten Mile chert occurs as thin lenses within the present as secondary cobbles within the lower member of the Greene Formation and the Raccoon Creek Valley. upper member of the Washington Formation along the Ten Mile Creek drainage, Green Sewickley Chert is found within the Pittsburgh County, southwestern Pennsylvania. Outcrops of Formation of the Pennsylvanian Monongahela Ten Mile chert have been observed along the Group in southwestern Pennsylvania. This chert Cross Creek drainage in the current study area. is gray to very dark-gray moderate quality chert Ten Mile chert has dark, carbonaceous with occasional freshwater ostracod fossils. laminations within a dark grayish-brown, olive- Cortex typically is gray to tan (Vento and brown or grayish-blue matrix. Weathering Donahue 1982). causes a patina rind of pale greenish-gray to grayish-white (Vento and Donahue 1982).

Onondaga Chert--a high-quality chert of dark to bluish-gray with microfossil striations of lighter colors (Vento and Donahue 1982). The stone has a medium texture, a shiny luster, and is moderately translucent. To the north and east of

10 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Figure 4. Lithic Raw Materials in Southwestern Pennsylvania.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 11 Table 2. Lithic Raw Materials in Southwestern Pennsylvania.

MATERIAL AGE GENERAL LOCATION REFERENCE Uniontown Chert Pennsylvanian Canonsburg, SW PA Eisert 1974 Monongahela Chert Pennsylvanian Canonsburg, SW PA Eisert 1974; Vento and Donohue 1982 10-Mile Chert Permian Southwest PA Holland 1999 Onondaga Chert Pleistocene cobbles Northwest PA Vento and Donohue 1982 Gull River Chert Pleistocene cobbles Northwest PA Holland 1999 Sewickley Chert Pennsylvanian Southwest PA Vento and Donohue 1982 Brush Creek Chert Pennsylvanian SE Ohio/NE Kent/SW PA Gatus 1985;Olafson 1964 Flint Ridge Chert Mid-Pennsylvanian East-central Ohio Lepper et al. 2001 Upper Mercer Chert Lower Pennsylvanian East-central Ohio Luedtke 1992 Kanawha Chert Penns/Kanawha F. Central WV; SW Pa? Reger 1921; Reppert 1978

Northern West Virginia and Eastern Ohio approximately 100 km (93 miles) to the west of Brush Creek Chert, or Hughes River chert, is a the Links Bridge project area. Flint Ridge is high-quality chert from the Brush Creek variably homogenous, mottled, laminated, or limestone member of the Pennsylvanian brecciated and often has small veins of Conemaugh Group. Its primary source areas are chalcedony or quartz crystals. Color ranges from southeastern Ohio, northeastern Kentucky, white to dark-gray, with yellow, pink, red, and northwestern West Virginia, and far blue not uncommon. This stone was widely southwestern Pennsylvania (Gatus 1985; distributed during prehistory, occurring at sites Olafson 1964; Vento and Donahue 1982). Brush greater than 200 kilometers (124 miles) distant Creek occurs within limestone as nodules and (Tankersley 1989:269). lenses up to 60cm (2 feet) in diameter. It is medium to fine grained with a translucency of Upper Mercer/Coshocton Chert derives from 0.5mm (Luedtke 1992:118; Shott 1990; Vickery the Upper Mercer Limestone member of the 1996: 74). Brush Creek is typically gray-brown Lower Pennsylvanian System of east-central (N3/ to N4/) to tan (10YR 5/1) with fine texture Ohio. Upper Mercer frequently has inclusions of and moderate translucency. white or blue chalcedony and typically is black to dark-gray (Luedtke 1992:136; Tankersley Kanawha chert is bluish-black to black to light 1989:289). This stone was distributed widely gray and is of medium to fine grain (Reger along the Ohio River and its tributaries, 1921: 226-240; Reppert 1978). This chert is a extending well into northwestern Pennsylvania member of the Pennsylvanian Kanawha (Lantz 1984; Tankersley 1989:270). Several Formation (see Figure 4) and occurs in a basin surface-collected Late Woodland sites in the approximately 42 km (70 miles) by 64 km (40 project vicinity possessed triangle points miles) in parts of Boone, Kanawha, Clay, produced from Upper Mercer/Coshocton chert. Nicholas, Webster, and Fayette Counties, West Virginia (Reger 1921:227; Reppert 1978:3). E. PALEOENVIRONMENTS Reppert (1978:4) identifies three Kanawha chert The climate of southwestern Pennsylvania is facies in the primary source area, with the classified as humid continental (Trewartha quality of stone declining within secondary 1967). Winters are cold and snowy at high alluvial settings and as one progresses eastward elevations, but thaws typically prohibit from the central primary source basin. permanent snow pack in low elevation river valleys. Summers are occasionally warm at high Flint Ridge/Vanport Formation Chert occurs elevations, but are frequently warm in valleys. within the Vanport Formation of the Middle Mean summer temperature for Beaver County is Pennsylvanian System of east-central Ohio, 20°C (70°F), with a January mean of –1.6°C

12 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed (30°F). The growing season in Beaver County Subsequently, white ash invaded the area, along ranges between 119 and 177 days. Annual with beech and chestnut (Castanea) (Watts precipitation averages 98cm (38 inches) per 1979:452). Upland sites in northcentral year, and is heaviest between May and August Pennsylvania, such as Tannersville Bog (Smith 1982). (Monroe County) and Longswamp (Berks County), revealed deciduous forest by 10,000 Between 21,000 and 17,000 BP, the Laurentide BP (Davis 1984:172). These data suggest that ice sheets reached their maximum extent in lowland sites likely have supported a Mixed eastern North America, with the Kent Moraine Mesophytic forest suite for at least 11-12,000 of the Erie Lobe extending as far south as years. central Ohio and the Beaver/Lawrence County line in western Pennsylvania (Crowl and Sevon As climates ameliorated during the hypsithermal 1999:226). The southern boundary of the 304- interval, between 10,000 and 5000 BP, cool- meter- (1,000-foot-) thick ice sheets was located adapted boreal forest species declined in approximately 20 km (12 miles) north of importance in the upland Appalachian Plateau, Raccoon Creek’s confluence with the Ohio including such paleoenvironmental sites as Mt. River. Davis Marsh, Tannersville Bog, and Potts Mountain Pond (Davis 1984:178; Joyce Northeastern North America experienced 1988:197). Glaciers completed their retreat relatively rapid warming between 14,000 and northward to the Arctic and many of the species 11,000 years ago (Gates 1993:84; Stingelin of flora and fauna of central Appalachia spread 1965). The northward retreat of the glaciers and rapidly northward to colonize the once-glaciated a steady succession of vegetative types in portions of the Appalachia Plateau (Gates 1989; Greater Appalachia reflect this dynamic Gaudreau 1988:218; Watts 1979). transition (Gates 1989; Gaudreau 1988:218; Watts 1979). During the late Glacial period, Approximately 5,000 years ago, climates began tundra was widespread at areas adjacent to to cool slightly across eastern North America glaciers and at higher elevations in Appalachia (Gajewski 1988:259), resulting in an increase in (Larabee 1986; Maxwell and Davis 1972:506; red spruce at upland sites such as Tannersville Whitehead 1973:625). Bog and Cranberry Glades. This transition marked the end of the middle Holocene By 12,000 BP, paleoenvironmental sites in hypsithermal warm episode (Davis 1984:178). Pennsylvania revealed pollen assemblages that suggested widespread boreal forest of spruce Increases in charcoal are noted in pollen and pine. Data from New Paris No. 4, Bedford diagrams across eastern North America during County, Pennsylvania (Guilday et al. 1964) and the late Holocene (Davis 1984; Fredlund 1989). Hartstown Bog, Crawford County, Pennsylvania Between 4,000 to 2,200 years ago at Gallipolis (Walker and Hartman 1960), suggest Locks and Dam on the mid-Ohio River in ameliorating boreal forest conditions at Mason County, West Virginia, charcoal flecking approximately 11,000 BP The pollen diagram at increases in sediments, likely due to increased Mt. Davis Marsh, near Meyersdale in Somerset fire disturbance related to human modification County, Pennsylvania, was dominated by of the landscape for agriculture. Between 2200 spruce, pine, and fir (Stingelin 1965:50). years ago and the present, the dominating pollen type was Ambrosia, or ragweed, associated with By 11,500 BP, in southwestern Pennsylvania, the fluorescence of regional agricultural Meadowcroft Rockshelter (Washington County) practices. Pollen from corn and other vertebrate remains (Adovasio et al. 1998:11) domesticates begins to appear in the revealed a temperate “Carolinian” fauna, as well paleoenvironmental record, while other regional as oak, hickory, and pine, suggesting the initial sites show dramatic increases in grasses with the emergence of the Mixed Mesophytic forest. rise in agriculture (Davis 1984:178).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 13

(This page intentionally blank)

14 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed CHAPTER III BACKGROUND AND KEY PROJECTS

GAI reviewed archaeological and historical only the 61 single component sites with reports and publications, as well as PASS files diagnostic artifacts are useful in assessing lithic data on recorded sites to develop overviews of raw material use. These 61 sites are comprised the prehistory of the Raccoon Creek Watershed of 2 Paleoindian, 4 Early Archaic, 18 Middle and vicinity. Pertinent archaeological sites in Archaic, 20 Late Archaic, 5 Early Woodland, 6 adjacent areas, including the Upper Ohio River Middle Woodland, and 6 Late Woodland Valley, are also included to provide a components. This sub-sample of sites will be comparative context. These summaries provide used to assess lithic raw material use within the an archeological and historical context for PASS files data. assessing potential site significance and for Table 3. Comparison of Raw PASS File Data with predicting the locations and types of Checked PASS File Data in Watershed D, Subbasin 20. archaeological sites that might be present in the PERIOD RAW PASS DATA1 CHECKED DATA2 sub-basin. Paleoindian 12 8 Early Archaic 15 18 A. PASS FILES DATA Middle Archaic 56 45 Late Archaic 76 69 PASS files data were kindly provided by the General Archaic 169 -- Bureau for Historic Preservation (BHP) for all Transitional 13 -- Early Woodland 55 22 archaeological sites in Watershed D. These data Middle Woodland 61 23 proved invaluable in understanding the Late Woodland 36 30 prehistory of the study area, as more than 450 General Woodland 96 -- General Prehistoric 430 -- prehistoric sites were recorded in Watershed D, Total Components 1019 215 including information on site type, location, age, Total Sites 492 141 lithic raw materials, and artifacts. 1=raw unchecked data as presented in PAS Chronol table within BHP 2 PASS files; =PASS data checked for diagnostic artifacts As reflected in Table 3, 1,019 prehistoric site B. KEY PROJECTS components were identified at the 492 archaeological sites in the Raccoon Creek To supplement PASS files data and collections watershed. Site forms for many of these sites did analysis, GAI reviewed all available not include information regarding diagnostic archaeological reports from Watershed D to artifacts to support the component designation. better evaluate the types of sites found in the For the purposes of data integrity, GAI utilized project area. Forty-three cultural resource only the sub-sample of sites that listed management (CRM) projects (with available diagnostic artifacts from a specific time period reports) have been completed within Watershed on the archaeological site form. In so doing, the D, several of which identified archaeological total number of useable components was sites with diagnostic artifacts. Nevertheless, reduced to 215 at 141 sites in the Raccoon these cultural resource management reports Creek watershed. consist entirely of Phase I surveys with an occasional project conducting limited Phase II PASS files data regarding lithic raw material testing. Outside of the Meadowcroft and related type were useful only for a small sub-sample of Cross Creek studies, only one data recovery the 141 sites with diagnostic artifacts. Within excavation (Dravo Site; Davis 1988) has been PASS files, lithic raw material use is not conducted within Watershed D. The CRM segregated by component; thus, for sites with reports provide little if any data regarding multiple components it is not possible to specialized research issues, such as Native determine which raw materials were utilized American subsistence, lithic raw material use, or during the respective site occupations. Thus, technology. This lack of data is, in and of itself,

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 15 an important finding of this report. The total Among the more important sites identified lack of data recovery investigations within the during the Cross Creek Survey is Meadowcroft Raccoon Creek Valley proper is astounding, Rockshelter (36Wh297), which yielded given the sheer number of previously recorded evidence of the earliest human occupation in archaeological sites. Clearly, more work needs eastern North America, as well as some of the to be conducted in the watershed at the data earliest recorded evidence of plant recovery level. domestication and pottery in southwestern Pennsylvania. Other sites investigated by the Information regarding important sites can be Cross Creek project include the Krajacic Site found in regional-scale studies, including: (36Wh351), Cross Creek Village (36Wh298), Adovasio’s Cross Creek project (Carlisle and Avella Mound (36Wh415), and Mungai Farm Adovasio 1982; Adovasio and Page 2002); (36Wh106). These sites provide a wealth of data Mayer-Oakes’ (1955) Prehistory of the Upper to assess the entire span of Native American Ohio River Valley; Dragoo’s studies of the occupation of the study area. Archaic Hunters of the Upper Ohio Valley (1959) and the Adena (Mounds for the Dead, Georgetown Site (36Bv29) 1963); Lantz’s 1989 Raccoon Notched Point Mayer-Oakes (1955:178-184) and Davis (1988, study; and Herbstritt’s (1981b) archaeological n.d.; Davis and Lantz 1987) report the site survey within southwest Pennsylvania. Georgetown Site (36Bv29) as being located on the south side of the Ohio River in the Given the dearth of archaeological research data northwesternmost corner of the Raccoon Creek within the Raccoon Creek Valley proper, watershed. The site yielded an array of pottery research reports from peripheral areas, including styles spanning the Woodland Period, including the Upper Ohio Valley, Chartiers Creek, and the Early Woodland Half-Moon Cordmarked, Monongahela River were incorporated into the Middle Woodland Watson Cordmarked, and study to provide “meat to the bones” of regional Late Woodland Monongahela Plain, from prehistory. Together with data provided in the discrete strata with radiocarbon dates. Mayer- Cross Creek study, these data provide a means Oakes (1955) used this ceramic assemblage to to assess general trends in the prehistory of help refine Woodland pottery types in the Upper southwestern Pennsylvania. Ohio River Valley (Johnson 1977:61). The site is near a recently built, man-made lake and Key Studies and Sites in the Raccoon Creek industrial development. Based on a recent field Watershed (Watershed D) (Figure 5) view, intact portions of the landscape are present, but much of the area nearby the site has Cross Creek Survey been destroyed; it is uncertain whether intact Between 1973 and 1982, the University of portions of the site are present. Pittsburgh’s Archaeological Research Program, led by James Adovasio, conducted an in-depth Lower Field/Shippingport Site (36Bv4) study of archaeological sites within the Cross Another Woodland village site investigated by Creek drainage of the southern portion of Mayer-Oakes (1955), the Lower Field/ Watershed D (see Photograph 3). Cross Creek Shippingport site was located on the floodplain flows westerly into the Ohio River in northern of the Ohio River. The Shippingport Nuclear West Virginia from its headwaters in northern Power Plant was built in the former site Washington County. Adovasio and his location. Davis (1988) reports that the skull of colleagues (Boldurian 1985; Carlisle and one of the Late Woodland burials at the site Adovasio 1982) conducted an intensive survey yielded a projectile point. of the drainage, identifying 236 prehistoric sites. Additional details regarding this site are This catalog of sites provides an outstanding provided by Mayer-Oakes (1955). window into prehistoric settlement and site-use patterns in Watershed D.

16 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Key Sites in and Near Figure 5. Map of Key Archaeological SitesGeorgetown/Dravo & Watersheds D, E, and F Lower Field/Shippingport Projects in the Study Area and Vicinity. Outdoor Theater Watson Farm Leetsdale D Ohio River A5 - Crivallero C -- McKees Rocks

10 Beaver County - Pittsburgh

441 Allegheny County - Map Key Ohio River Washington County Sites outside of Watershed D Sites in Watershed D Harmon Cr.

Watershed Boundary Raccoon Creek F East Steubenville River/Stream not in Watershed D County Line Avella Mound MayviewBend/ Peters DWG. NO 20 02 River/Stream in Watershed D Mayview Depot Creek Meadowcroft Cross Creek Mound Mungai Farm Morganza 10/03 Cross Creek Village Village Crall Buffalo Creek Mound Krajacic 36Wh924 Chartiers Creek

DATE 7/ Kelso Royal Wylie

jcl Tartan

Ohio River PENNSYLVANIA E

Monongahela River

Wheeling Creek Crawford

WEST VIRGINIA Grist #2

DRAWN DHM APPROVED Grave Creek Mound To Ohio River Scale Cresap Mound 0 5 10 miles

Ohio River C0NSULTANTS, INC. Subbasin 20

gai Pennsylvania

Figure 5 Map of Key Archaeological Sites and Projects in the Study Area and Vicinity

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 17 Outdoor Theater Site (Raccoon Notched USACOE. The Leetsdale Site yielded multiple Point Study) stratified components that provide information Raccoon Notched points were first identified at regarding Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, the Outdoor Theater Site (36Bv24) on a terrace Transitional Archaic, and Early Woodland of Raccoon Creek near Aliquippa. Lantz (1989) lifeways in the Upper Ohio Valley. provides a detailed description of the site and its lithic assemblage, as well as artifact studies East Steubenville Site (46Br31) from several other sites within the Raccoon Located approximately five miles west of the Creek Valley. In addition to Mayer-Oakes’ Pennsylvania state line in the Northern (1955) seminal study, Lantz’s synthesis on Panhandle of West Virginia, the East Raccoon Notched points provides the bulk of Steubenville Site (46Br31) was excavated by Middle Woodland data for the study area. The GAI Consultants, Inc. on a bluff top overlooking Outdoor Theater Site was destroyed by the Ohio River (Lothrop 2001a; Mohney 2002). industrial and transportation development in This site is just south of the confluence of Aliquippa. Harmon Creek and the Ohio River; thus, it is only 5 miles removed from the boundaries of Crivallero Site (36Bv122) Watershed D. East Steubenville is the type site Excavated by Louis Berger and Associates, Inc. for the Panhandle Archaic complex of the Upper (1998), this site yielded evidence of Late Ohio River Valley and yielded dozens of Archaic and Early Woodland occupations in an Steubenville Stemmed, lanceolate, and alluvial setting near the confluence of Traverse Brewerton points. Several well-dated, Late Creek and Raccoon Creek. The site was Archaic burials excavated at the site provide interpreted to be a short-term lithic scatter and information regarding burial practices, did not proceed beyond the Phase I/II level. subsistence, and other social issues of Late These excavations for PennDOT yielded Archaic Native Americans in the region. pertinent information regarding lithic raw material use during the mid-late Holocene. McKees Rocks (36AL16) and McKees Rocks Mound Sites Located on a hilltop overlooking the confluence Pertinent Sites in Nearby Areas of Chartiers Creek and the Ohio River, the Leetsdale Site (36AL480) McKees Rocks Site (36AL16) contains an The Leetsdale archaeological project was and a late-Late Woodland village funded by the United States Army Corps of (Buker 1968). Located in Watershed G of Engineers (USACOE) as a mitigation of adverse Subbasin 20, the site was excavated first in 1896 effects to Site 36AL480, the construction area and later by the Allegheny Chapter of the for the new Braddock Dam (Davis 2001; Fenicle Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology in the 2003; Hardlines 2001; Schuldenrein et al. 2003; early 1960s. Buker (1968) interprets the Vento et al. 2002). Site 36AL480 is located on McKees Rocks site to be a late manifestation of the northern shore of the Ohio River, the with close ties to Fort downstream approximately five miles west of Ancient peoples. The village site contained a the three rivers confluence in Pittsburgh. This stockade with a central plaza and multiple site is located in Watershed G of Subbasin 20, burials. less than 1 mile north and east of the Watershed D boundary. As the crow flies, the Leetsdale An Adena mound—the McKees Rocks Site is less than five miles east of Raccoon Mound—was excavated on the same landform Creek as it flows near Aliquippa. by the Carnegie Museum in 1896, but was apparently destroyed prior to the 1960s Excavations at Site 36AL480 were conducted excavations. Several regional syntheses (Dragoo between 2001 and 2003 by several 1963; Mayer-Oakes 1955:145-152; McMichael archaeological consultants working for the

18 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 1971) have included discussions of the mound. demography, settlement patterns, site types, Both McKees Rocks and McKees Rocks Mound stone tool manufacture, and lithic raw material yielded Steubenville stemmed points as well, use. indicative of prior Late Archaic occupations (Mayer-Oakes 1955:139-141).

Watson Farm (46Hk34) The Watson Farm Site (46Hk34) is a late Middle Woodland to early Late Woodland village site on the Upper Ohio River in Hancock County, West Virginia. First investigated by Dragoo (1956) and the Carnegie Museum, the type site for the Watson phase of the Middle Woodland period in the Upper Ohio Valley. The site yielded small stone and earth burial mounds associated with multiple occupations characterized by small villages and hamlets.

Wylie Site (36Wh247; 36Wh283) The Wylie Site is a Late Woodland Monongahela village within the nearby Chartiers Creek Valley (Watershed F of Subbasin 20). George (1995) reports on three other similar villages of likely Monongahela cultural affiliation in the valley. These sites, along with McKees Rocks, Georgetown, and Watson (see above) are the closest sites with Monongahela affinities to Raccoon Creek. No Monongahela sites have been excavated within the Raccoon Creek Valley proper.

C. SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION TO PREHISTORY CHAPTERS The following chapters provide an overview of the prehistory of the study area, utilizing research reports and PASS files data. The chapters are organized by time period: Paleoindian, Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, Early Woodland, Middle Woodland, and Late Woodland. As noted earlier, this cultural historical sequence follows that established by Raber (1985) to maintain consistency with PASS files. The review encompasses the last 14,000 years of prehistory in the Raccoon Creek Watershed, comparing and contrasting data from the nearby Upper Ohio Valley and vicinity to better understand prehistoric Native American subsistence,

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 19 (This page intentionally blank)

20 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed CHAPTER IV PALEOINDIAN PERIOD 14,000 to 10,000 BP

A. PALEOINDIAN OVERVIEW B. PALEOINDIAN MATERIAL CULTURE, Until recently, the , with its CHRONOLOGY, AND SUBSISTENCE famous fluted spear points, was thought to be Pre-Clovis Chronology the oldest Native American culture of the Americas at ca. 11,000 BP (Bonnichsen and If humans occupied Chile 12,000 years ago and Turnmire 1991). However, excavations at sites arrived via a northern migration route across the throughout the Americas have challenged the Bering Strait, pre-12,000-year-old archaeologi- well-established “Clovis-first” paradigm and cal sites should exist across North America, stimulated extensive debate regarding the nature although controversy surrounds the issue (Jones of the original founding population of the et al. 2002; Turner 2003). Few sites have Americas (Adovasio and Page 2002; Clark et al. survived the scrutiny demanded of such early 2004). Excavations at Monte Verde, Chile Paleoindian sites (Meltzer 1989); however, indicate that Native Americans occupied coastal Meadowcroft Rockshelter (36Wh297) in the South America at least 12,000 years ago Cross Creek drainage of Watershed D yielded a (Adovasio and Pedler 1997; Dillehay 1997; Miller lanceolate point, blades, and features Meltzer 1989, 1995), suggesting the occupation from Stratum IIa with associated uncalibrated of North America several hundred years prior. dates of (Carr and Adovasio 2002:8; Recent excavations at sites along the California Stuckenrath et al. 1982:80): coast (Jones et al. 2002:215) propose that Paleoindian populations were coastally adapted, · 9350±700 BC (10,600-12,000 BP; SI- suggesting a coastal migration with subsequent 2491), charcoal from firepit/fire floor middle 1/3 of F46 migrations to the interior and to eastern North · 10,850±870 BC (11,930-13,670 BP; SI- America (Fladmark 1983). 2489) , charcoal from firepits/ lower 1/3 of F46 Early Paleoindian sites along the eastern seaboard—including Meadowcroft (Adovasio et These two dates provide a conservative estimate al. 1978; Carr and Adovasio 2002a), of the earliest Paleoindian occupation of (McAvoy and McAvoy 1997), and a handful of Meadowcroft, between 10,600 and 13,670 years others (Adovasio and Page 2002:263-275)— ago (Carr and Adovasio 2002:8). Stuckenrath et support the likelihood of a pre-Clovis al. (1982:80) list five additional uncalibrated population in North America. The early dates dates from stratum IIa that suggest even earlier from Monte Verde and these east coast sites, occupations of the shelter; however, these dates and the generally slow nature of prehistoric are less well accepted and not typically human population migrations (Housley et al. discussed as being associated with human 1997; MacDonald 2004), suggest that the activity: founding population of North America may have been present as early as 14,000 to 16,000 · 11,290±1010 BC (14,250-12,230 BP; SI- years ago, with populations reaching the eastern 2065), charcoal from firepits/ lower 1/3 of seaboard and western Pennsylvania soon F46 thereafter (Carr and Adovasio 2002a). · 11,320±340 BC (13,590-12,910 BP; SI- 2480), charcoal from firepits/ lower 1/3 of F46 · 12,975±620 BC (15,545-14,305 BP; SI- 1872), charcoal from firepits/ lower 1/3 of F46

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 21 · 13,170±165 BC (15,285-14,955 BP; SI- Using data compiled by Cushman (1982), 1606), charcoal from firepits/ lower 1/3 of Adovasio and Page (2002:178) refute this F46 position, arguing that · 14,225±975 BC (17,150-15,200 BP; SI- 2354), charcoal from firepits/ lower 1/3 of “even at the glacial maximum, in many F46 instances the forest composition was not unlike

Since the publication of these early dates its modern composition [and that]…some (Adovasio et al. 1977), the site has experienced 11,000 years ago, oak, elm, and ash were intensive scrutiny, with some not accepting the growing amid the spruce a mere fifteen miles early dates (Haynes 1980; Mead 1980) and from the limit of the glacier.” others supporting them (Adovasio et al. 1980, 1990). The dates have been questioned due to The controversy surrounding the environmental the presence of coal seams near the rockshelter setting of the Cross Creek drainage during the which are hypothesized to have contaminated Pre-Clovis occupations at Meadowcroft will charcoal within features at the site (Haynes likely continue until enough data are presented 1980; Mead 1980). Adovasio (Carr and to support one side or the other. More data are Adovasio 2002; Adovasio and Page 2002), as necessary from additional paleoenvironmental well as an independent study by Goldberg and sites before a final judgment can be made Arpin (1999), has provided evidence to regarding the forest composition during the sufficiently refute objections to the early dates, latest Pleistocene in southwestern Pennsylvania; including studies of soils that found no evidence however, the data collected to date tend to of coal contamination within the cultural support the hypothesis that Cross Creek in the deposits of the rockshelter. Based on these data, vicinity of Meadowcroft was comprised of a this report accepts the two bracketing dates of temperate forest quite similar to that existing in 10,600-13,670 BP for the Miller point and the region today. associated artifacts.

Another objection to the Late Pleistocene age of Pre-Clovis Technology Meadowcroft is that the faunal and botanical The Pre-Clovis lithic assemblage from assemblages from the Pre-Clovis occupations of Meadowcroft is comprised of flaking debris, the shelter are essentially modern and may not blades, a large flake knife (the Mungai Knife), reflect the types of environments thought to and a lanceolate projectile point—the Miller have been present in the terminal Pleistocene of Point. The Miller point from Meadowcroft (see southwestern Pennsylvania (Guilday and Figure 6) is small, lanceolate, and was produced Parmalee 1982:172). Guilday and Parmalee from fine-grained local chert. While the (1982:172), in the Meadowcroft synthesis geologic provenance for the chert is uncertain, it volume, state that: is found locally (pers. comm.. J. Adovasio, June 2003) and is opaque and light gray, with yellow “In view of the age of the dates associated with and purple striations on both faces. Boldurian (1985:298) describes the Miller point as having the lower Stratum IIa material and the location a distinctive base with straight margins that of Meadowcroft in relation to the Laurentide Ice “articulate with the straight basal attribute Front, the absence of boreal species is margin at angles of 97 degrees.” The point was surprising… [as] the effects of glacial cooling produced via the removal of parallel, extended far south of Pennsylvania in eastern overlapping biface thinning flakes, most of which traverse the centerline to create a and central North America.” lenticular cross-section. Personal examination of the point revealed slight unifacial beveling

22 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed along two lateral margins, suggesting possible Stemmed points from the East Steubenville Site retouching for use as a knife. (46Br31) in the Panhandle of West Virginia. The Steubenville points in this figure were collected by GAI during data recovery excavations for the West Virginia Division of Highways. Meadowcroft and East Steubenville are less than 10 miles from one another.

Surface-collected Miller points were found with Steubenville points at the Krajacic, Pershina, and Mungai Farm Sites (Boldurian 1985:303). At Meadowcroft, a Steubenville Stemmed point was found in Stratum III, stratigraphically above the Miller point. The general dearth of Miller Figure 6. Miller Type Point from Stratum IIa. (from Boldurian 1985:284). points from well-excavated contexts—only Meadowcroft has yielded a Miller point from a According to Boldurian (1985:298), thinning of stratified context—and the abundance of the base is “unique,” including lateral thinning Steubenville points at sites in the Upper Ohio on one face, and lateral and end thinning on the Valley (Lothrop 2001a; Mohney 2002; Mayer- opposite face. Slight grinding is also present on Oakes 1955) has raised doubts as to the cultural all portions of the base to prepare it for hafting. affinities of some of the Miller points from open The Krajacic Site (36Wh351), located on a sites, including Krajacic, Pershina, and Mungai hilltop ca. 10 miles southeast of Meadowcroft, Farm (Boldurian 1985; Gardner 2002). yielded fragments of possible Miller points in Boldurian (1985:292-308) confirms that the two various stages of biface reduction, each of point types are very similar and difficult to which contribute to the notion that the points fit distinguish based on morphological traits a Paleoindian reduction pattern (Boldurian (Adovasio 1983). 1985:308-325). Probable Miller points and point preforms from the Krajacic Site resemble Late Paleoindian lanceolate point forms from the North American Plains, including Hell Gap and Agate Basin (see Carr and Adovasio 2002:12; Frison 1991:60-63). Other sites with possible Miller points include Pershina Farm (36Wh608; Raccoon Creek drainage; Boldurian 1985:303) and Mungai Farm (36Wh106; Burgetts Fork; Carlisle and Adovasio 1982), both of which were identified during the Cross Creek Survey. Figure 7. Comparison of the Miller Type Point from Meadowcroft (far right; Boldurian 1985:284) with Steubenville Points from the East Steubenville Site While Miller points are considered to be of (46Br31). All Points at Same Scale. Steubenville Point Paleoindian age by the Meadowcroft and images courtesy of the West Virginia Division of Krajacic Site researchers (Adovasio and Carr Highways. 2002a; Boldurian 1985), their morphological similarity to Late Archaic Steubenville Blades were also recovered in association with Stemmed points is noteworthy, and highlights the Miller Point at Meadowcroft (Photograph 6) potential problems in their identification (see and at the Krajacic Site (Boldurian 1985). Figure 7). Figure 7 compares the Miller type Prismatic blades from the Krajacic and point from Meadowcroft and four Steubenville Meadowcroft Sites are morphologically similar

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 23 and suggest standardization of blade production associated with the Miller point in Stratum IIa. during the early Paleoindian occupations of the While feature dates and stratigraphic context Upper Ohio Valley. According to Boldurian support the hypothesis that the artifacts in (1985:93), most specimens have either two or Stratum IIa—including the Miller point, blades, three parallel flake scars on the dorsal surface, debitage, and the Mungai Knife—are with flat or multifaceted platforms. The Paleoindian, more data need to be provided to prismatic blades “appear to have been removed evaluate the Meadowcroft lithic assemblage. from small prepared blade cores” (Boldurian Specifically, blades in the various site levels 1985:94). The Miller point, a heavily retouched need to be compared and contrasted to evaluate Kanawha chert flake tool (the Mungai Knife), the hypothesis that the Stratum IIa toolkit is and the blades comprise a Pre-Clovis toolkit unique to the Paleoindian levels. with an “Eurasiatic, Upper Paleolithic” flavor, according to Carr and Adovasio (2002:8). Clovis Material Culture and Chronology Subsequent to the possible pre-Clovis occupations in Watershed D, Native American hunters utilized a variety of fluted points, including Clovis, Gainey, and Barnes in the East and Midwest. The Clovis culture (ca. 11,800- 11,000 BP) was widely spread across the Americas, including Pennsylvania, while the Gainey and Parkhill phases were focused in the Great Lakes (Lantz 1984; Shott 1993). The Clovis tool kit is characterized by fluted spear points (Figure 8), largely produced from exotic cherts indicative of long-distance mobility.

Photograph 6. Blades found in Association with the According to Howard (1991:257), Clovis points Miller Point, Stratum IIa, Meadowcroft Rockshelter are comparatively large lanceolate points with (http://people.delphiforums.com/McConaughy lenticular to oval cross-sections. The points /meadowcroft/.htm). have “slightly convex edges, gradually tapering tips, and their greatest width is at or Nevertheless, blades were also found at near…midpoint. Moderate sharpening and Meadowcroft in Stratum IIa (upper), Stratum III, reshaping” is common, often blunting the tip. Stratum IV, Stratum V, Stratum VII, and the The flutes are the most characteristic trait of the near-surface Stratum XI (Fitzgibbons 1982:100- Clovis point, but they are not as visually 101). In addition, blades of similar morphology impressive as Folsom points from western North to the Paleoindian blades from Meadowcroft America. In contrast to the , which (Boldurian 1985:236) were found with a entailed the removal of one broad, long flute, Steubenville point at Cross Creek Village, Clovis points include the removal of multiple approximately four miles upstream from channel flakes from the base (Mounier et al. Meadowcroft on Cross Creek near Avella. 1993), presumably a strategy to reduce the chances of point breakage during final fluting Adovasio et al. (1998:19) state that “the only (Ellis and Payne 1995). No Clovis sites with ‘blades’ recovered from any Archaic contexts radiocarbon dates have been excavated in are so dissimilar to the Paleoindian forms and so western Pennsylvania. The most proximate well- unstandardized as to suggest that most of them dated site is -Minisink on the Delaware are ‘accidents.’” Adovasio (pers. comm. 2003) River. This eastern Pennsylvania site dates to also states that the blades from above Stratum 10,940±90 BP (Dent 2002: 56). IIa are morphologically different from those

24 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed Fluted-point sites typically yield a variety of 1980:579), as most climatic reconstructions other lithic tools as well, including finely shaped indicate that boreal forest species should have endscrapers, sidescrapers, spokeshaves, limaces, been dominant at the time of Paleoindian blades (Collins 1999), piece esquillees occupation (ca. 14,000-12,000 BP). (wedges), and an assortment of other cutting tools (Custer 1996:104). This tool kit suggests a C. PALEOINDIAN SITES subsistence pattern largely oriented toward the hunting of game. In formerly glaciated regions, Paleoindian Site Locations: Trends from PASS including areas north of the Ohio River, Files Data subsistence was likely oriented toward the PASS files indicate the presence of 8 previously hunting of megafauna (Meltzer 1988:15), while recorded Paleoindian sites within the Raccoon in unglaciated areas (including the entire project Creek Watershed (Table 4), including five sites area), a wider variety of game were likely with fluted points and three with possible pre- procured, including woodland caribou, deer, Clovis Miller Points (see Figure 8). Two bear, and other smaller game (Carlisle and additional Paleoindian sites (Royal Tartan and Adovasio 1982). Krajicic) were identified nearby in Watershed E, both of which are shown in Figure 8. The locations and types of Paleoindian sites in the Paleoindian Subsistence Raccoon Creek watershed and vicinity indicate Archaeological evidence indicates that eastern that Paleoindians traveled frequently on ridge North American Paleoindians practiced a divides of river and stream corridors, while generalized hunting and gathering economy, camping mainly on uplands overlooking stream including collection of a variety of wild plants valleys (see Figure 8; Table 5 and Table 6). and nuts and the hunting of a variety of game (Carlisle and Adovasio 1982; Dent and Table 4. Paleoindian Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files) Kauffman 1985; Dent 1991; Lepper 1983; Meltzer 1988). In unglaciated portions of SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT COUNTY MUNICIPALITY TYPE Pennsylvania, including the current study area, Mungai Pre-Clovis Washington Smith Twp. Late Pleistocene environments likely were 36Wh0106 Farm /Miller Pt comprised of mixed hardwood forests in Mungai Fluted Washington Smith Twp 36Wh0110 Saddle Points lowlands and mixed conifer-spruce-hardwood Washington Cross Creek forests in higher elevation uplands between 36Wh0223 Cuprik Clovis Twp. 14,000 and 10,000 years ago (for more details, Pre-Clovis Washington Jefferson 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft /Miller Pt Twp. see Chapter II). These wooded settings favored Washington Cross Creek a more universe diet breadth, such as that used 36Wh0375 MS #66 Clovis Twp. by contemporary Native Americans in Marosi Washington Cross Creek 36Wh0407 Farm Clovis Twp. deciduous and boreal forest settings (Steegman Pershina Washington Robinson 1983). 36Wh0608 Farm Miller Twp. Washington Cross Creek Faunal and floral remains from Meadowcroft 36Wh1032 C V Cowden Paleoindian Twp. Rockshelter support the contention of a mixed diet breadth between 14,000 and 10,000 years ago. While botanical and faunal remains were limited, they indicate use of a variety of plants and animals adapted to a temperate climate during the Paleoindian occupation of the rockshelter (Guilday and Parmalee 1982:173). However, the temperate faunal assemblage has raised serious questions regarding the antiquity of the lower Paleoindian levels (Mead

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 25

Figure 8. Map of Paleoindian Sites.

D Ohio River

A8 Paleoindian Sites in and - C -- Adjacent to Watershed D

10 Beaver County - Pittsburgh

441 Allegheny County - Ohio River Washington County

Harmon Cr. Map Key Raccoon CreekPershina Farm Marosi Farm Sites with Fluted Points Mungai Saddle DWG. NO 20 02 Sites with Miller Points F Meadowcroft Cross Creek Watershed Boundary Cuprik Mungai Farm

10/03 River/Stream in Watershed D MS 66 Buffalo Creek River/Stream not in Watershed D Krajacic Chartiers Creek County Line DATE 7/ Royal Tartan jcl

PENNSYLVANIA E

Monongahela River

Ohio River WEST VIRGINIA

Wheeling Creek DRAWN DHM APPROVED To Ohio River Scale 0 5 10 miles

Ohio River C0NSULTANTS, INC. Subbasin 20 gai

Pennsylvania Figure 8 Map of Paleoindian Sites

26 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed Table 5. Paleoindian Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)

SITE NO. SITE NAME SITE TYPE SETTING LANDFORM ELEV. NEAREST WATER 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Open Slopes Mid-Slopes 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0110 Mungai Saddle Open Saddle Upp. Slopes 1240 Burgetts Fork 36Wh0223 Cuprik Village Upland Hilltop 1320 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Rockshelter T0/T1 Terrace 850 Cross Creek 36Wh0375 MS #66 Open Upland Ridgetop 1300 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0407 Marosi Farm Isolated Find Slopes Mid-Slopes 1200 N Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0608 Pershina Farm Village T0/T1 Terrace 1160 Raccoon Run 36Wh1032 C V Cowden Open Upland Ridgetop 1380 Cross Creek

Table 6. Paleoindian Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS files).

DIST. TO DIRECTION OF STREAM DIST. TO DIR. OF SITE NAME NEAREST WATER WATER WATER ORDER CONF. (M) CONF. (FT) Mungai Farm Trib Burgetts Fk. 50 North 1 710 East Mungai Saddle Burgetts Fk. 400 Southeast 1 600 East Cuprik Raccoon Creek 230 Northeast 1 1220 Northwest Meadowcroft Cross Creek 60 South 5 400 Southwest MS #66 Trib Cross Crk 360 Southeast 1 1230 Northwest Marosi Farm N Fk Cross Crk 280 Northwest 3 500 West Pershina Farm Raccoon Run 115 West 2 150 Southwest C V Cowden Raccoon Creek 200 Southwest 1 1500 Northeast

The eight Paleoindian sites in Watershed D are ft. amsl (see Table 5). Meadowcroft is located at all within Washington County; no previously an elevation of 850 ft. amsl on Cross Creek, a identified Paleoindian sites (with confirmed high-order tributary of the Ohio River. Six sites diagnostic artifacts) are present within Beaver are on upland ridgetop, slopes, or saddles County’s portion of the study area (see Table 4). overlooking creek valleys, while only two sites Four of the sites are located within the Raccoon are located directly on floodplain/terrace Creek watershed, while three sites are within the settings. Each of the sites, regardless of Cross Creek Watershed (see Table 5). Within landform, occurs within 400m of a water source, Watershed D, five of the sites are on small with a mean of 212m from nearest water. upland tributaries, while three overlook Cross Distance to the nearest stream confluence varied Creek or Raccoon Creek proper. An additional from 150 to 1,500m (mean, 789m) and does not site—36Wh520—in the Cross Creek drainage appear to have been a factor in Paleoindian site near Avella is supposed to have yielded a late placement (see Table 6). Paleoindian Dalton-like point (Carlisle and Adovasio 1982:258-259); however, PASS files Key Paleoindian Sites in Watershed D data only describe “Archaic” artifacts at this site. No additional information is available to Meadowcroft Rockshelter (36Wh297) confirm the presence of a late Paleoindian Meadowcroft Rockshelter (36Wh297; artifact at the site and, thus, it is not discussed Photograph 7) is the most important further in this study. archaeological site in Watershed D, as it contains stratified deposits possibly extending Each of the eight Paleoindian sites in Watershed as far back as 14,000 years ago (see discussion D is located within approximately 20 miles of of site chronology above). Meadowcroft is one another, in or near the Cross Creek discussed above, as it represents the type site for drainage. Even the sites within the Raccoon the Miller point and its associated blades. The Creek watershed are within a few miles of Cross site is located 2.5 miles northwest of Avella on Creek. All but one of the sites (Meadowcroft) the north bank of Cross Creek. The rockshelter occur at elevations of between 1,000 and 1,380 faces south overlooking the creek at an elevation

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 27 of 850 ft. amsl (see Photograph 7). The interior reduction camp for Pre-Clovis hunters traveling shelter measures approximately 700 sq. ft., through the Upper Ohio Valley and vicinity. while the overhang is ca. 43 ft. above the extant cave floor. Details of excavations can be found Adovasio has stated that the stratigraphic in Adovasio et al. (1977), Carlisle and Adovasio context of the various occupations is sound and (1982), and Carr and Adovasio (2002a; see that each component, from Paleoindian to Late References for other sources of information as Woodland, is represented by clusters of artifacts well). and features on distinct living floors within the rockshelter (pers. comm., 2003; Adovasio et al. 1977, 1978; Carlisle and Adovasio 1982). Adovasio also notes the general lack of bioturbation, including rodent digging, in the Archaic and Paleoindian strata (pers. comm. J. Adovasio 2003). Preliminary data within the various published articles support these assertions regarding the stratigraphic integrity of the site. However, bioturbation has been noted in other levels (Adovasio et al. 1977:66) and its effects at the site need to be evaluated in the final report. The lack of refits between the various site components (pers. comm. J. Adovasio 2003) also suggests minimal vertical artifact displacement at the site; if this is the case, presentation of these refitting data in a formal publication would support the stratigraphic integrity of artifacts at the site. A technical report would be most beneficial in that it would provide details regarding: cultural materials associated with each living floor; stratigraphy and the effects of bioturbation; and Photograph 7. View of Meadowcroft Rockshelter from features (including profiles, planviews, and above Cross Creek. View Northeast (photo courtesy of associations with specific artifacts), although J. Herbstritt and J. Adovasio). data regarding the latter are available in Diane As discussed above, the Meadowcroft toolkit Landers’ dissertation (Beynon 1981). from the middle portion of Stratum IIa (Boldurian 1985:131) is projected to date to Mungai Farm (36Wh106) between 11,300±700 and 12,800±870 BP (Carr Mungai Farm is on a ridge divide between the and Adovasio 2002a:8) and minimally includes Burgetts Fork, a tributary of Raccoon Creek, the above-described Miller projectile point, and the South Fork of Cross Creek (see blades, the Mungai Knife and flaking debris (see Photograph 4). The farm contains a group of site Figure 6 and Photograph 7). A cursory review of localities with extensive artifact assemblages the flaking debris assemblage by the author in near the headwaters of upland streams. Miller June 2003, suggests an emphasis on late-stage points are the only Paleoindian artifacts biface and projectile point production at the site; recorded at the site, although several varieties of most flakes were less than 0.25 inches in Archaic and Woodland point forms were also maximum dimension. Along with the Miller collected by the landowner and Adovasio’s team point, the blades, and the knife, the late-stage (Fitzgibbons 1982:108). Vento and Donohue flaking debris suggests that Meadowcroft was (1982:125) provide an overview of the lithic the location of a short-term hunting and lithic assemblages at the site.

28 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed Mungai Saddle (36Wh110) radiocarbon dates were obtained from the site. Lantz (1984:211) reports that the Mungai Artifacts include Miller points in various stages Saddle Site has “yielded three fluted points and of reduction along with stemmed and lanceolate several rejects.” This site is near Mungai Farm Steubenville points. As discussed above, lithic (above) on uplands above the headwaters of the artifacts from the site were examined by Burgetts Fork, within the Raccoon Creek Boldurian (1985) for his doctoral dissertation. Watershed. No additional information is The main focus of the study was a comparison available regarding this surface-collected site. of the Miller points, blades, and blade cores, with similar artifacts from Meadowcroft, located Pershina Farm Site (36Wh608) approximately 5-6 miles northwest. As with Mungai Farm, the only Paleoindian artifacts recovered at the Pershina Farm Site Royal Tartan #2 (36Wh1312) were “Miller” type points (Boldurian 1985:303). GAI’s excavations at the Royal Tartan Site This site, along Raccoon Creek in Watershed D, (36Wh1312) yielded a small Clovis-like point “contains an extensive Steubenville component fragment (MacDonald 2000a; Figure 9). The site as well” (Boldurian 1985:303). The previous is located at an elevation of 1204-1208 feet amsl discussion regarding the similarity of Miller and on the first terrace overlooking Wolf Run, Steubenville points is especially pertinent for approximately 5-10 miles southeast of Cross Site 36Wh608. Creek (Photograph 8). Wolf Run’s headwaters are a spring approximately 400 meters to the southeast of the site; a seasonal tributary of Paleoindian Sites in Nearby Areas Wolf Run bisects the terrace 50 meters to the Based on data from PASS files, an additional east of the site. seven sites, including Sites 36Wh351 (Krajacic) and 36Wh1312 (Royal Tartan #2), were A small spring, the source of this seasonal run- identified in Watersheds E and F of Subbasin off stream, is approximately 150 meters to the 20. Lantz (1984) also reports on the presence of northeast of the site. This site location is typical a cluster of some 20 Paleoindian sites along of Paleoindian sites in the region, given its Chartiers Creek in Watershed F east of Cross proximity to water sources and its position Creek. within an upland setting overlooking a low- order stream valley. The site would have been Krajacic Site (36Wh351) an ideal hunting overlook (see Photograph 8). Site 36Wh351—the Krajacic Site—is on an upland hilltop that was identified by the University of Pittsburgh during the Cross Creek project (Carlisle and Adovasio 1982; Boldurian 1985). “Miller” points and blades from this site are discussed above. The hilltop is the drainage divide for the Buffalo and Cross Creek watersheds. Within PASS files, the site is placed Figure 9. Possible Clovis within Watershed E, due to its proximity to Point Preform Buffalo Creek; however, the site is less than a Fragment from Site mile from the southern boundary of Watershed 36Wh1312 (Scale: 1 in. D. equals 2.5 cm; MacDonald 2000a). The Krajacic Site yielded a wide variety of artifacts from different time periods within a plowed field. No features were identified and no

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 29 lateral biface reduction flake was likely intended to guide the possible channel flake, which overlies the smaller biface thinning flake and measures approximately 22.8mm from the base. This method of setting up a channel flake removal is typical of most Eastern Clovis fluted points (Callahan 1979). The base of the point and the intact lateral edge possesses fine pressure flaking, as well as some minor grinding to facilitate hafting. Remnant biface thinning flake scars extend across the centerline on both faces of the biface. Fine, parallel pressure flaking extends along the slightly excurvate Photograph 8. Setting of Site 36Wh1312 within the Wolf edge of the biface. In this interpretation, the Fun Valley. View North. original tip of the artifact is no longer intact and the broken edge was reworked via fine pressure

flaking into an oblique cutting edge. This edge Five positive shovel tests mark the boundaries resembles a projectile point tip, and is a source of the 2,500 square foot (232 sq. meters) Royal of confusion regarding the artifact’s orientation. Tartan Site. A natural gas pipeline marks the eastern boundary of the site, while double Based on the schematic diagram in Figure 9, the negative STPs mark the other directional width of the original point was approximately boundaries. All STPs revealed an Ap-Bt horizon 33.6mm, with a thickness of 8.1 to 8.9mm, and a sequence and extended approximately 50cm width-to-thickness (w:t) ratio of 3.73. A Clovis below surface and 15cm into sterile subsoil point from the Flint Run Site in Virginia had a (Figure 6). STP H5 revealed one lithic artifact, a comparable w:t ratio of 3.84; however, most probable Flint Ridge chert Clovis projectile complete Clovis points have w:t ratios of point fragment (Table 7; see Figure 9). The between 5 and 10 (Callahan 1979). The point current author interprets the point as Clovis, an from Site 36Wh1312 is likely a preform that interpretation confirmed by Tom East and Ken broke during channel flaking and was Mohney of Skelly and Loy, Inc., and Stan Lantz, subsequently resharpened to function as a knife a Field Associate with Carnegie Museum of (see Figure 9); thus, the w:t ratio calculation Natural History; nevertheless, Jon Lothrop of may not be pertinent for this point. Ten other GAI believes the point is too fragmentary to lithic artifacts (all flakes) were recovered during type. shovel testing at the site. Results of lithic raw

material analysis are presented in the next The projectile point has several traits that are section. typical of Clovis. The base is slightly concave, with extensive pressure flake retouching. Two flake scars on one face extend from the base parallel to the central axis of the point. The most

Table 7. Site 36Wh1312: Projectile Point Data.

FS STP COND. MAT. TYPE STRAT WGT LTH WIDTH* THICK 1 H5 Base F.Ridge projectile point Bt 10.5 44.5 33.6 8.8

*Width is projected based on reconstruction of the point.

30 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

D. PALEOINDIAN SETTLEMENT PATTERNS information regarding Paleoindian lithic raw AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE material use. Only the Cross Creek studies Based on the data presented above, Paleoindian (Boldurian 1985; Carr and Adovasio 2002a; populations in the Raccoon Creek Watershed Vento and Donohue 1982) provide lithic raw and vicinity used upper terraces of small streams material data for Paleoindian sites in Watershed and upland flat areas near streams and springs as D. short-term camp locations. These locations typically provided excellent viewsheds for At Meadowcroft, the Paleoindian levels of the hunters looking for game in the nearby stream site yielded a variety of lithic raw materials, valleys (see Photograph 8). summarized in Table 8. (Vento and Donohue 1982:124). Carr and Adovasio (2002a:7-9) state Data regarding lithic raw materials at these that the flaked stone inventory in Paleoindian Paleoindian sites are useful in interpreting levels of the site was produced from local settlement patterns and trade/travel realms. Monongahela chert and non-local stones, PASS files provide only general information including Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts regarding lithic raw material use, rather than from east-central Ohio and jasper from central specific raw material types. Another limitation Pennsylvania. Vento and Donahue (1982:124), of PASS data is the fact that raw materials are however, fail to identify jasper or Monongahela not differentiated based on the type of projectile chert in the Paleoindian assemblage. point; thus, only single component Paleoindian Nevertheless, Adovasio confirmed in a recent sites can be used to assess lithic raw material discussion (pers. comm., June 2003) that these use at Paleoindian sites identified in PASS files. two lithic raw materials were in fact recovered in the Paleoindian levels of the site. Vento and Within Watershed D, single component Donahue (1982:124) identify local Brush Creek Paleoindian sites include 36Wh223 (the Cuprik chert (31.6%) as the dominant material in the Site) and 36Wh375 (MS #66). Site 36Wh375 Paleoindian levels at the site. Upper Mercer identifies chert/flint as the only lithic raw (20.4%) and Flint Ridge (17.3%) cherts material recovered at the site, while Site comprise a high percentage of the lithic 46Wh223 does not have information regarding assemblage, suggesting the curation of exotic lithic raw materials. One other site—36Wh407 materials. Other local cherts, such as 10 Mile (the Marosi Farm Site)—contained multiple (2.0%), and Uniontown (1.0%) comprise only a components, but identifies Flint Ridge chert as small portion of the lithic assemblage. The high the material for the single Clovis point found at percentages of chert from the Ohio Valley the site. (Brush Creek) and east-central Ohio (Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer) suggests travel to Of the more than 40 cultural resource Meadowcroft from the west along the Ohio management reports available for review at the Valley. BHP for Watershed D, none contained

Table 8. Lithic Raw Material Use at Paleoindian Sites in the Raccoon Creek Watershed D and Vicinity.

SITE WATER- UNION- 10 MILE MONON. BRUSH UPPER FLINT OTHER SHED TOWN CHERT CREEK MERCER RIDGE Mungai Farm D ------100% ------Meadowcroft D 1.0% 2.0% -- 31.6% 20.4% 17.3% Onondaga, Kanawha MS #66 D ------Chert/flint Marosi Farm D ------100% -- Royal Tartan E 18.2% 45.5% -- -- 27.3% 9.1% -- Krajacic E -- -- 100% ------

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 31 The lone Paleoindian artifact at the nearby flaking debris and projectile point data show an Mungai Farm Site (36Wh106) was a reported emphasis on the use of non-local cherts in the Miller Point produced from Brush Creek chert finishing of late-stage bifaces (see Table 9). (Vento and Donohue 1982:125). At Krajacic (36Wh351), the Miller point was produced from Data from these various sites indicate use of a Monongahela chert. Several other Miller point variety of local cherts during the Paleoindian “preforms” in various stages of reduction were period in Watershed D and vicinity (see Table also recovered at Krajacic; lithic raw materials 8). Of the non-local cherts, Flint Ridge and for these bifaces were Monongahela chert Upper Mercer cherts were recovered at several (n=12) and 10 Mile chert (n=1; Boldurian sites, indicating the curation of high quality 1985:309). Lantz (1984) provides an overview lithic raw material during travels from east- of Paleoindian projectile points in western central Ohio. Site location data indicate that Pennsylvania, including information on lithic travel likely occurred along upland drainage raw material use. Upper Mercer, Flint Ridge and divides and ridges overlooking tributaries of the Onondaga cherts were used to produce most of Upper Ohio Valley (Lantz 1984). the points in his sample.

Outside of Watershed D, GAI’s report E. RESEARCH ISSUES (MacDonald 2000a) of the Royal Tartan #2 site This summary of data regarding Paleoindian on a tributary of Buffalo Creek (see Photograph sites in and near the Raccoon Creek Watershed 8) provided lithic raw material data for a small D has generated several research issues which Clovis lithic scatter. Of the 11 artifacts from the should be considered when conducting site, seven were produced from local cherts, archaeological work in the area. Thirteen including five 10 Mile chert flakes and two Paleoindian research questions are listed below. Uniontown chert flakes (Table 9). As stated by Meltzer (2002:162), most of these questions could be resolved by publication of a Four artifacts were produced from non-local final report of investigations from Meadowcroft. cherts, including three Upper Mercer flakes and The questions surrounding the Miller point and the Flint Ridge Clovis point. Of the seven flakes associated blades have tremendous implications which were identifiable to type, five were biface for several of the sites discussed above, reduction or shaping flakes, indicative of the including Pershina, Mungai Farm, and Krajacic. late-stages of biface reduction, while two Uniontown flakes were decortication flakes. The

Table 9. Site 36Wh1312: Cross-Tabulation of Chert Type by Artifact Type.

RAW MATERIAL DECORT BIFACE SHAPING FLAKE INDET. POINT TOTAL

FLAKE REDUCTION FLAKE FRAGMENT Uniontown 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Upper Mercer 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 10 Mile 0 1 2 2 0 0 5 Flint Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total 2 1 4 2 1 1 11

32 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

This list of research questions is by no means 13. What does the presence of fair amounts of comprehensive, and should be used only as a Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts at starting point for generating additional research Paleoindian sites in the watershed tell us about issues. Archaeological sites which can provide settlement patterns and travel routes? information pertaining to these research questions will likely meet National Register Criterion D; thus, unless they lack integrity, sites which address these research questions will be eligible for listing in the National Register for Historic Places:

1. When did Native Americans first occupy Watershed D of Subbasin 20?

2. Are there any other Pre-Clovis Meadowcroft- like sites in the Raccoon Creek Valley? If so, where are they?

3. How can we explain the similarity between Miller and Steubenville points?

4. Is the Clovis toolkit a “descendent” of that used by Native Americans at sites like Meadowcroft? Or, is population replacement responsible for the technological changes that occurred between the pre-Clovis and Clovis sub-periods?

5. What types of features were excavated in the Paleoindian levels of Meadowcroft?

6. How do the blades in the Paleoindian site levels compare to those in other strata of Meadowcroft?

7. What types of tools were produced and utilized by Paleoindians in the watershed and what do they indicate about a region of origin?

8. How can we explain the apparent Paleoindian preference for locating sites in upland settings, including hilltops, saddles, and upper terraces of small streams and springs?

9. Is this site location preference unique compared to later periods? If so, why?

10. What types of features were utilized by Paleoindians?

11. What types of foods were exploited by Paleoindians?

12. What do lithic raw materials tell us about Paleoindian travel and trade patterns?

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 33 (This page intentionally blank)

34 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

CHAPTER V EARLY ARCHAIC PERIOD 10,000 to 8800 BP

A. EARLY ARCHAIC MATERIAL predominance of Early Archaic projectile point CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY types, including Kirk stemmed and corner- Approximately 10,000 years ago, eastern North notched points and Palmer corner-notched America experienced the final transition from a points (Figure 10). cool, boreal environment of the Pleistocene to one dominated by the modern-like Mixed Figure 10. Early Archaic Mesophytic forest (Carr 1998a), as described in Kirk Corner-Notched (left) Chapter II. At this time, Native Americans and Stemmed (right) Points, (from Michels and Smith apparently began to schedule their activities and 1967:683; East and Beckman specialize in methods of seasonal resource 1992:46). extraction in response to the existence of a more diversified resource base. Although archeological research on the Early Archaic Eighteen Early Archaic sites in the Raccoon period in the region is limited, it is likely that Creek watershed were identified as such due to patterns characterizing the Northeast in general the presence of Kirk corner-notched or stemmed were also typical of western Pennsylvania and points or Palmer points (see Figure 10). Kirk the Upper Ohio Valley (Carr 1998a). As during corner-notched points have medium-large, the Paleoindian period, Early Archaic Native serrated triangular blades with straight to Americans likely continued their use of a concave bases with corner notches. According forager subsistence system, gradually becoming to Justice (1987:78), Palmer corner-notched collectors by the end of the period (Binford points and Kirk corner-notched points are 1979, 1980). Carr (1998a:49, 60) and Stewart morphologically identical. Flaking patterns on and Katzer (1989) suggest that the region likely Kirk/Palmer points are largely random, while sustained a slight population increase during this edges were thinned by removal of long, narrow period, likely due to ever-increasing familiarity pressure flakes resulting in a flat face lacking a with the Holocene resource base. medial ridge. Edges have deep serrations, measuring 2-mm-wide and 3-mm-deep on Early Archaic Material Culture average. Bases of Kirk/Palmer corner-notch During the Early Archaic, fluted and unfluted points were thinned via pressure flaking, while lanceolate projectile points were replaced in tangs on notches are predominantly rounded Native American toolkits by notched and (Broyles 1971:65). Kirk stemmed points are stemmed points with deep lateral edge serrations medium sized with slightly expanding stems. (Figure 10). This transition in point types may The blades are long, narrow and, as with Kirk reflect changes in hafting technologies due to a corner-notched points, have very deep and change in hunting strategies or prey. pronounced serrations. Stems expand toward the Alternatively, the switch from fluted points to base which ranges from flat to slightly concave. notched points represents a purely stylistic Sides to the stem are straight to slightly change, in which the high costs of fluted point concave, with bases thinned by pressure flaking. production were rejected in favor of a more efficient mode of production. Some estimates of In addition to projectile points, lithic eastern fluted point production indicate that 15- assemblages from Early Archaic sites, such as 20 percent of attempts at fluting ended in failure St. Albans on the Kanawha River in West (Ellis and Payne 1995: 471). The costs of fluting Virginia (Broyles 1971), include a variety of may have been deemed too expensive by Early hafted drills, knives, endscrapers, and Archaic Native Americans, resulting in the sidescrapers. Sites typically have high

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 35 proportions of bifaces in various stages of information regarding the context of the date reduction, depending on proximity to stone was available in the PASS files. sources. B. EARLY ARCHAIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES Bifurcate points are typically considered Middle Archaic diagnostics, but they have been dated to PASS Files Data as early as 9400 BP from the Sandts Eddy Site PASS files indicate that 18 sites within on the upper Delaware River, eastern Watershed D contain Early Archaic site Pennsylvania (Bergman et al. 1998:72-73). components with diagnostic artifacts (Table 10). These points typically date to circa 8000 BP Tables 10-12 provide detailed site location data throughout the east and, for the purposes of this on the sites. Kirk and Palmer corner-notched report, are considered to be Middle Archaic and Kirk stemmed points were the predominant artifacts and are discussed in the next chapter diagnostic artifacts at each of the sites (Table (Justice 1987:82-99). 10). As these tables show, a majority of sites (n=11) are within fairly level (<5% slope) According to Adovasio et al. (1998:19), the floodplains (T0) or terraces (T1) of creeks or Early Archaic tool kit at Meadowcroft included rivers, with six sites located on upland hilltops, “utilized flakes, limited numbers of other saddles, or slopes (Table 11). Seventeen of the bifaces and unifaces, modified bone and wood, sites are open sites (including one lithic and basketry.” If details regarding the reduction location and two isolated finds), while association of these artifacts with features were Meadowcroft is the only rockshelter with Early unavailable, they would facilitate a better Archaic artifacts in the watershed. understanding of the Early Archaic culture. The prevalence of sites in river and creek Early Archaic Chronology and Radiocarbon floodplains/terraces is a contrast to Paleoindian Dates sites, which are predominantly on uplands, Carr (1998a:62) and Gardner (1987) suggest slopes, or saddles overlooking stream valleys. that the Early Archaic persisted between 10,000 Adovasio et al. (1998:1) report a similar Early and 8800 years BP in the northeast. Broyles Archaic site distribution pattern within the (1971) identified Kirk corner-notched points in Cross Creek drainage of Watershed D. Perhaps Early Archaic levels at the St. Albans Site on this change in site placement is a reflection of the Kanawha River, West Virginia, with travel patterns, with Early Archaic Native bracketing radiocarbon dates of between Americans preferring to travel along river approximately 9850 and 8750 BP (6800 BC; terraces, while Paleoindians traveled Kinsey 1972), while Carr (1998a) reported a predominantly along upland ridges. Another date of 9250 BP at the Fifty Site in Virginia. hypothesis would be that Early Archaic populations began to establish longer-term base The only Early Archaic radiocarbon date in camps in alluvial settings, with uplands used for Watershed D is 7165±115 BC (9000-9230 BP; seasonal food procurement. If this is the case, SI-2491), obtained from “charcoal from then the switch from a forager to a collector firepit/firefloor, middle 1/3 of unit” within the subsistence strategy occurred earlier than upper portion of Stratum IIa at Meadowcroft proposed in the region. Cowin (1991) suggests Rockshelter (Stuckenrath et al. 1982:80). Two that this change in subsistence was fully other dates from this stratum are 6060±110 BC entrenched by the Middle Archaic in western (7900-8120 BP; SI-2064) and 9350±700 BC Pennsylvania. (10,600-12,000 BP; SI-2491).

An additional date of 10,000 BP is listed in PASS files for Site 36Wh559—the Point Site— in Hanover Township, Washington County. No

36 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Table 10. Early Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT TYPE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY 36Bv0026 Kochanioski Kirk Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0040 Crevallero Kirk Beaver -- 36Bv0050 St. Joe #2 Kirk Beaver Potter Township 36Bv0060 Philles Island Kirk Beaver Shippingport Borough 36Bv0241 Dravo #2 Kirk Beaver Greene Township 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Palmer/Kirk Washington Smith Township 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Kirk Washington Jefferson Twp. 36Wh0401 MS #96 Kirk Washington Independence Township 36Wh0475 Berrinski Camp Kirk Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0501 FB 50 Palmer Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0565 Beadling No. 1 Kirk Washington Hanover Township 36Wh1046 Kirk Site Kirk Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh1088 Fort City Kirk Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1093 Davidson Site Kirk Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1118 Lowry #9 Palmer/Kirk Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1152 Vanzin Kirk Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1156 Luba #2 Kirk Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1191 Lowry #12 Kirk Washington Mount Pleasant Township

Table 11. Early Archaic Site Location Data, Raccoon Creek Watershed (PASS Files)

SITE NO. SITE NAME SITE TYPE SETTING TOPO ELEV. NEAREST WATER 36Bv0026 Kochanioski Open T0/T1 Floodplain 780 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0040 Crevallero Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 920 Trib. Racc. Creek 36Bv0050 St. Joe #2 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 700 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0060 Philles Island Open T0/T1 Island 680 Ohio River 36Bv0241 Dravo #2 -- T0/T1 Floodplain 680 Ohio River 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Rockshelter T0/T1 Terrace 850 Cross Creek 36Wh0401 MS #96 Open Saddle Saddle 1180 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0475 Berrinski Camp Open T0/T1 Terrace 1080 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0501 FB 50 Isolated Find Slopes Middle Slopes 1120 S Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0565 Beadling No. 1 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 940 -- 36Wh1046 Kirk Site Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1250 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1088 Fort City Open T0/T1 Terrace 1220 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1093 Davidson Site Open Upland Ridgetop 1280 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1118 Lowry #9 Lith.Red. T0/T1 Terrace 1120 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1152 Vanzin Open Slopes Hillslope 1200 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1156 Luba #2 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1160 -- 36Wh1191 Lowry #12 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1100 --

For both the Paleoindian and Early Archaic, the Paleoindian. In contrast to the Paleoindian access to water was a key to site placement. period, in which sites were mostly on uplands Fifteen of the 18 Early Archaic sites are within near low-order streams, Early Archaic sites are 100m of a water source, while the remaining mostly located in the Raccoon Creek drainage three sites are less than 310m from a water (n=8), including five along Raccoon Creek itself source. The mean distance to a water source for and three along feeder streams (Table 12). Five the sites is 102 meters for Early Archaic sites, of the Early Archaic sites are within the Cross compared to a mean of 212 meters for sites Creek watershed, including four on feeder during the Paleoindian period. This decrease in streams and one on Cross Creek. Two sites are mean distance to water likely reflects the on the main stem of the Ohio River between the placement of sites within stream valleys during mouth of Raccoon Creek and the West Virginia the Early Archaic, as opposed to uplands during state line.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 37 Table 12. Early Archaic Site Location Data, Raccoon Creek Watershed (PASS Files).

DIST. TO DIRECTION OF STREAM DIST TO DIR. TO SITE NO. NEAREST WATER WATER WATER ORDER CONF. CONF. 36Bv0026 Raccoon Creek 60 South 1 570 -- 36Bv0040 Trib. Raccoon Creek 120 Northeast 2 180 -- 36Bv0050 Raccoon Creek 40 South 1 1120 Southeast 36Bv0060 Ohio River 90 North 9 880 Northeast 36Bv0241 Ohio River 10 Northwest 9 440 Southwest 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork 50 North 1 710 East 36Wh0297 Cross Creek 60 South 5 400 Southwest 36Wh0401 Trib Cross Creek 0 On-site -- 830 Southeast 36Wh0475 Raccoon Creek 70 West 3 120 Southeast 36Wh0501 S Fk Cross Creek 80 North 2 220 Northeast 36Wh0565 -- 100 West 2 220 Northeast 36Wh1046 Raccoon Creek 200 Southwest 1 1300 South 36Wh1088 Raccoon Creek 180 South 1 340 Northwest 36Wh1093 Raccoon Creek 290 Southeast 1 440 North 36Wh1118 Trib Cross Creek 100 Southeast 2 180 Southwest 36Wh1152 Trib Cross Creek 310 South 1 2120 Northeast 36Wh1156 -- 80 Northeast 1 340 North 36Wh1191 -- 10 North 1 180 Southwest

As during the Paleoindian period, access to a the upper portion of stratum IIa. This portion of stream confluence was not a determining factor stratum IIa, unfortunately, did not yield any in Early Archaic site placement in Watershed D, diagnostic artifacts; however, immediately with sites ranging between 120 and 2,120m above stratum IIa, stratum IIb yielded a wide from a confluence (mean=588m). This mean range of projectile points and pottery spanning distance to a confluence is 200m less than the entire Archaic and Woodland. The only during the Paleoindian period, likely another Early Archaic artifacts in stratum IIb were a reflection of the movement of sites from uplands Kirk Stemmed point and a “Kirk-like” serrated to lowlands during the Early Archaic. blade fragment. Lithic raw materials used in production of Early Archaic points are described Adovasio et al. (1998:18) state that Early below. Archaic site locations in Cross Creek reflect a preference for site placement near stream Mungai Farm (36Wh106) confluences. While Early Archaic sites were Mungai Farm (36Wh106) yielded a collection of generally closer to stream confluences than 85 Early Archaic projectile points, according to Paleoindian sites, Adovasio et al’s (1998:18) Fitzgibbons (1982:109) and Vento and Donohue data for Cross Creek are not matched by PASS (1982:125). Limited information regarding this file data shown in Table 12. PASS files data for site is also available in Boldurian’s (1985) Early Archaic sites in the Cross Creek doctoral dissertation on the nearby Krajacic watershed indicate an average distance of 750 Site. meters from a confluence. Key Early Archaic Sites Site 36Wh1309 (Watershed F) Site 36Wh1309 (Watershed F, Subbasin 20) was Meadowcroft (36Wh297) identified along Robinson Run, a tributary of As described above, the lone Early Archaic Chartiers Creek, during a sewerline survey south radiocarbon date in Watershed D is 7165±115 of the town of McDonald (Skinner 1999). BC(9000-9230 BP; SI-2491) from Meadowcroft Shovel test excavations at the site yielded a Rockshelter (Stuckenrath et al. 1982:80). The Palmer Corner-Notched point produced from an date from the site was obtained from “charcoal indeterminate chert type and 12 flakes produced from firepit/firefloor, middle 1/3 of unit” within

38 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

mainly from Monongahela chert. The site was River Valley and east-central Ohio. Settlement avoided during sewer line construction and no patterns and trade realms were clearly similar additional work was conducted at the small open for Early Archaic and Paleoindian Native site. Americans in the Upper Ohio Valley, including Watershed D. C. EARLY ARCHAIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE D. EARLY ARCHAIC: CONCLUSION AND PASS files include data for four single- RESEARCH QUESTIONS component Early Archaic sites in Watershed D that are useful in the evaluation of lithic raw Early Archaic Summary material use (Table 13)). In addition, Vento and The 18 sites with diagnostic Early Archaic Donohue (1982:124-127) include detailed data artifacts in Watershed D are a significant regarding lithic raw material use for projectile increase compared to the earlier Paleoindian points in the Cross Creek drainage. The four period (8 sites). This is especially true if the single component Early Archaic Sites are listed number of sites is averaged per decade of the in Table 13, with chert/flint being the only lithic period. When this is done, the Early Archaic raw material identified in PASS files data for (120 decades; 18 sites) has 0.13 sites per Early Archaic artifacts. decade, compared to only 0.03 sites per decade

during the Paleoindian (250 decades; 8 sites). As described in Table 14, a variety of lithic raw Population densities during the Paleoindian materials were utilized for Early Archaic period were in all likelihood extremely low projectile point manufacture at the Cross Creek across North America (MacDonald 2004), with sites, including Upper Mercer, Brush Creek, increasing site counts during the Early Archaic Flint Ridge, Onondaga, Kanawha, 10 Mile, and period likely reflecting real population increases Uniontown cherts. These data indicate a high over time, rather than site preservation bias. degree of travel for Early Archaic Native Americans, especially along the Upper Ohio

Table 13. Lithic Raw Material Use at Single Component Early Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files).

POINT TYPE SITE NO. SITE NAME LITHIC NEAREST WATER 36Bv0050 St. Joe #2 Kirk Chert/Flint Raccoon Creek 36Bv0060 Philles Island Kirk Chert/Flint Ohio River 36Bv0241 Dravo #2 Kirk -- Raccoon Creek 36Wh1088 Fort City Kirk -- Raccoon Creek

Table 14. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material Type for Early Archaic Artifacts (Vento and Donohue 1982:124-127).

LOCATION ONOND KANAWHA FLINT UPPER BRUSH CRK 10 MILE UNIONTOWN OTHER TOTAL AGA RIDGE MERC PTS. Meadowcroft* % 16.6 50.2 -- 16.6 16.6 ------6 Mungai Farm % 9.4 7.1 18.8 28.2 24.7 7.1 3.5 1.2 85 Cross Cr. Sites % 9.1 -- 27.3 18.2 9.1 18.2 -- 18.2 11 Total Points (n) 10 9 19 27 23 8 3 3 102 Total % 9.8 8.8 18.6 26.5 22.6 7.8 2.9 2.9 100 *For Meadowcroft, data is for Early and Middle Archaic points

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 39 Another major difference between the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods is the 1. Was there cultural/demographic continuity distribution of the previously recorded sites. between the Paleoindian and Early Archaic Whereas the 8 Paleoindian sites in PASS files periods or was this a time of cultural were in or near the Cross Creek drainage, only transition? five of the 18 Early Archaic sites are within the 2. Was there a significant increase in Cross Creek watershed. Most of the Early population during the Early Archaic period, Archaic sites are distributed fairly evenly across as suggested by increasing site counts? Watershed D, with the majority in the Raccoon 3. Why did Early Archaic populations place Creek drainage. Mean distances to nearest water sites mostly in alluvial settings, while and nearest stream confluence were reduced Paleoindians apparently preferred upland during the Early Archaic period as well, settings? confirming the movement of most sites from 4. Do the differences in projectile point types uplands to alluvial settings. and site placements indicate a change in subsistence strategy (e.g., from forager to Based on the data in Watershed D, thus, the collector)? Early Archaic appears to represent a distinct 5. What types of foods were procured during cultural/demographic break from the the Early Archaic? Paleoindian period, as reflected by: 1) increases 6. What types of tools were produced and in population; 2) movement of most sites into utilized by Early Archaic Native Americans? alluvial settings, as opposed to uplands; and 3) increased use of a wide variety of landforms. 7. Was the change in projectile point technology precipitated by a change in prey The two periods share similar patterns of lithic species and/or hunting strategies or are the raw material use, however, as reflected in changes stylistic? projectile point assemblages. Points of the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods indicate 8. Were bifurcate points used during the Early Archaic in Watershed D? wide-ranging travel patterns within southwestern Pennsylvania, northern West 9. What types of lithic raw materials were used Virginia, and east-central Ohio, as reflected in during the Early Archaic? the use of Kanawha chert, Flint Ridge chert, 10. Why do lithic raw material use patterns Upper Mercer chert, and Brush Creek chert. remain consistent between the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods? Early Archaic Research Questions 11. What do lithic raw materials tell us about Early Archaic travel and trade patterns? This summary of Early Archaic archaeological How do they compare to the Paleoindian and data in and near Watershed D of Subbasin 20 Middle Archaic? has generated several research issues which should be considered when conducting archaeological work in the area. Eleven Early Archaic research questions are listed below; this list is by no means comprehensive and should be used only as a starting point for generating additional research issues. Archaeological sites which can provide information pertaining to these and other research questions will likely meet the National Register Criterion D; thus, unless they lack integrity, sites which address these research questions will be eligible for listing in the National Register for Historic Places:

40 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

CHAPTER VI MIDDLE ARCHAIC PERIOD 8800 to 5300 BP

A. MIDDLE ARCHAIC OVERVIEW near bedrock outcrops of stone exploited for Middle Archaic sites are characterized by the tool manufacture. As noted in the previous presence of projectile points with bifurcate point chapter, this settlement system likely was bases, a distinctive stylistic change compared to initiated during the Early Archaic and became the predominantly corner-notched bases of the further entrenched during the Middle Archaic. Early Archaic. Bifurcate points appear to date to the latter portion of the Early Archaic to the 50 45 Middle Archaic and may suggest technological continuity between the two periods (Bergman et 40 al. 1998:70; Stewart and Cavallo 1991). 30 However, others (Carr 1998a:60-64, 1998b:79; 18 20

Gardner 1987) dispute the cultural continuity Site Count 8 between the Early and Middle Archaic, as there 10 appears to be a significant increase in 0 population that corresponds to the switch to Paleo EA MA bifurcate points. These changes may reflect Period additional cultural transitions, including subsistence and settlement pattern shifts. 0.15 0.16 Watershed D experienced a 2.5-fold increase in 0.14 0.13 the number of recorded Middle Archaic sites 0.12 0.1 compared to the Early Archaic period (Figure 0.08 11), supporting Carr’s (1998a:61; 1998b:88) 0.06 0.03 assessment of a “significant increase in 0.04 population.” Nevertheless, if duration of the 0.02 0 respective periods is considered (as per Fiedel Paleo EA MA 2001), site count densities are similar between Period the Early Archaic (0.15 sites per decade per period) and Middle Archaic (0.13 sites), with the Early Archaic actually having a slightly Figure 11. Changing Site Counts in the Early Holocene: higher site density. No site count increase was Comparison of Site Counts (top) and Site Density per observed within the Cross Creek drainage either, Decade (bottom), Watershed D (PASS files). as Adovasio et al. (1998:1-2) note a “decline in intensity of occupation” during the Middle B. MIDDLE ARCHAIC MATERIAL Archaic, similar to the site density data CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY presented here. Middle Archaic Material Culture Cowin (1991:48) characterizes the Middle Bifurcate point production is the major Archaic settlement system as consisting of base technological change between the Early and camps positioned on Holocene-age river Middle Archaic periods (Figure 12). Middle terraces, smaller resource procurement stations Archaic point forms in the Raccoon Creek for seasonal plant and animal exploitation in drainage are predominantly Kanawha stemmed, upland settings, and lithic-reduction stations Neville/Stanly and LeCroy, with fewer examples of MacCorkle and St. Albans (Broyles

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 41 1971; Kuhn 1985). LeCroy bifurcate points are St. Albans Site dated to approximately 8300 BP the most common projectile points at Middle (Broyles 1971). An extensive Middle Archaic Archaic sites in the study area (Cowin 1991; component at the West Water Street Site on the Broyles 1971). According to Broyles (1971:69), West Branch of the Susquehanna River in north- LeCroy points are fairly small with trianguloid central Pennsylvania yielded a date of ca. 7400 blades with straight edges. Blades are serrated BP (Custer et al. 1996:33), associated with on most points (but not all) and the bases are Neville/Stanly and LeCroy bifurcate points (see deeply notched by the removal of a large central Figure 12). Cowin (1991) reports a suite of flake with surrounding pressure flakes. Stems radiocarbon dates of between approximately are straight to slightly flared with no basal 5500 and 7400 BP for bifurcate points at the grinding. State Road Ripple Site (36CL52) in Clarion County, northwestern Pennsylvania. Figure 12. Middle Archaic Bifurcate As with the preceding Paleoindian and Early Point, Actual Size Archaic periods, Meadowcroft Rockshelter (from Custer et al. provides the only radiocarbon dates for Middle 1996:31). Archaic sites in the study area. Stratum IIb at the site yielded two features with Middle Archaic radiocarbon dates:

1) 4720±140 BC (6530-6810 BP; SI-2055) from “charcoal from firefloor/lower 1/3 of unit” (Stuckenrath et al. 1982:80).

While some researchers place Otter Creek 2) 4340±355 (6645-5935 BP; SI-2358) from “charcoal from firepit, middle 1/3 of unit” points in the Middle Archaic (East and Beckman (Stuckenrath et al. 1982:80). 1992:69-70; East et al. 1999:4-6), others discuss them in the context of the Late Archaic (Carr Cowin (1991:47) includes two additional 1998a, 1998b; Kinsey 1972). In addition, Cowin radiocarbon dates of 6630±70 BP (PITT-292) (1991) states that Brewerton points, considered and 6315±280 BP (PITT-122) from by most to be of Late Archaic age, are Meadowcroft; however, these dates are not diagnostic of the Middle Archaic. For the sake included in lists published in Stuckenrath et al. of consistency with PASS files data, this report (1982) and Adovasio et al. (1998). discusses Brewerton and Otter Creek points within the contexts of the Laurentian tradition of Due to the general lack of specific feature data the Late Archaic period. in Meadowcroft publications, the context and proveniences of the features (and associated In addition to projectile points, lithic radiocarbon dates) in relation to Middle Archaic assemblages from Middle Archaic sites include artifacts is uncertain. As stated by Cowin a variety of hafted drills, knives, endscrapers, (1991:48), Meadowcroft researchers, as of 1990, and sidescrapers, as well as cores and utilized were “not able…to relate a specific point to a flake tools (Custer et al. 1996). Sites typically specific date” at the site. have high proportions of bifaces in various stages of reduction, depending on proximity to C. MIDDLE ARCHAIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL stone sources. SITE TYPES AND LOCATION TRENDS Middle Archaic Chronology As with the preceding two chapters, only sites Carr (1998b:79) cites radiocarbon dates of 8900 with diagnostic point types are included in the and 8888 BP for bifurcate point levels from the discussion of PASS files data. Forty-five sites in Fifty Site (Virginia), while LeCroy levels at the Watershed D contained Middle Archaic

42 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

bifurcate projectile points (Table 15), a decades; 18 sites) have nearly identical site significant increase in site counts compared to count densities, with 0.15 and 0.13 sites per the Paleoindian (n=8) and Early Archaic (n=18) decade, respectively. These data in Watershed periods (see Figure 11). As noted above, D, thus, contrast that presented by Carr however, if site counts are averaged by total (1998a:61; 1998b:88) for Pennsylvania as a decades per period (as per Fiedel 2001:107), the whole, which suggest significant population Middle Archaic (8800-5300 BP; 350 decades; increases during the Middle Archaic. 45 sites) and Early Archaic (10,000-8800; 120

Table 15. Middle Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files).

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT TYPE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY 36Bv0003 Old Indian Fort Bifurcate Beaver Shippingport Borough 36Bv0013 Circle Rock Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0014 Mc Micale Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0016 -- Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0017 McElhaney Hog Farm Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0019 -- Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0020 Wilson Triangle Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0022 Boyscout Camp Bifurcate Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0025 Deadend Bifurcate Beaver Center Township 36Bv0026 Kochanioski Bifurcate Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0037 -- Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0039 New Pottery Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0052 John Bush Farm Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0107 Raccoon Ch. Gyd. Bifurcate Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0123 Big Travers Creek Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0133 McHaffic Farm Bifurcate Beaver Greene Township 36Bv0162 Emil Alam Bifurcate Beaver Center Township 36Bv0178 George Frey Bifurcate Beaver -- 36Bv0210 Lower Circle on Rock Bifurcate Beaver Raccoon Township 36Bv0221 Hilltop Bifurcate Beaver Potter Township 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Bifurcate Washington Smith Township 36Wh0110 Mungai Saddle Bifurcate Washington Smith Township 36Wh0187 Clair Cowden Bifurcate Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0293 Cross Creek Bifurcate Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Bifurcate Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0392 -- Bifurcate Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0399 MS #94 Bifurcate Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0400 MS #95 Bifurcate Washington Burgettstown Borough 36Wh0409 MS #104 Bifurcate Washington Smith Township 36Wh0508 -- Middle Archaic Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0512 -- Bifurcate Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0688 Lowry #4 Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0720 Hillside Site Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0986 Lutz #1 Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1002 Scott Site Bifurcate Washington Smith Township 36Wh1096 Lutz #7 Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1112 Cumer Site Bifurcate Washington Smith Township 36Wh1115 Murgel Site Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1118 Lowry #9 Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1148 Brezinski #5 Bifurcate Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1151 Lowry #11 Bifurcate Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1152 Vanzin Bifurcate Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1161 Gregorski Bifurcate Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh1201 Vanzin #3 Bifurcate Washington Mount Pleasant Township

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 43 As with the Early Archaic, many Middle Compared to the Early Archaic (mean Archaic sites are open camps or lithic reduction elevation=1,027 ft. amsl), the mean elevation of sites on the floodplains or terraces of creeks and Middle Archaic sites (1,052 ft. amsl) suggests a rivers (Table 16). Of the 45 Middle Archaic slightly greater preference for upland site sites, 21 are in alluvial settings, with an placement. Overall, PASS data indicate that site additional 12 sites on upland flats, hilltops, or locations comprise the entire suite of landforms ridges. An additional 10 sites are on slopes, in Watershed D, suggesting wide ranging use of while two sites are in saddles between upland the landscape during the Middle Archaic. ridges. Table 16. Middle Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)

SITE NO. NEAREST WATER SITE TYPE SETTING TOPOGRAPHY ELEV. 36Bv0003 Ohio River Open T0/T1 Floodplain 660 36Bv0013 Raccoon Creek Petroglyph T0/T1 Terrace 940 36Bv0014 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Floodplain 820 36Bv0016 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 900 36Bv0017 Trib Raccoon Creek Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 860 36Bv0019 Raccoon Creek Lithic Red. T0/T1 Terrace 880 36Bv0020 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Floodplain 800 36Bv0022 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Terrace 860 36Bv0025 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Terrace 820 36Bv0026 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Floodplain 780 36Bv0036 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Terrace 920 36Bv0037 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 940 36Bv0039 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 880 36Bv0052 Trib Raccoon Creek Isolated Find Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 960 36Bv0107 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 940 36Bv0123 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Floodplain 840 36Bv0133 Mill Creek Open Upland Hilltop 1060 36Bv0162 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Floodplain 780 36Bv0178 Trib Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 1160 36Bv0210 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Terrace 960 36Bv0221 Trib Raccoon Creek Open Upland Upland Flat 1100 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1220 36Wh0110 Burgetts Fork Open Slopes Upper Slopes 1240 36Wh0187 S Fk Cross Creek Open Slopes Lower Slopes 1340 36Wh0293 Raccoon Creek Lithic Red. T0/T1 Terrace 1000 36Wh0297 Cross Creek Rockshelter T0/T1 Terrace 1000 36Wh0392 S Fk Cross Creek Open T0/T1 Floodplain 960 36Wh0399 N Fk Cross Creek Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1200 36Wh0400 Trib Burgetts Fk Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 1140 36Wh0409 Raccoon Creek Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1230 36Wh0508 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 1100 36Wh0512 N Fk Cross Creek Open Upland Hilltop 1240 36Wh0688 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Ridgetop 1300 36Wh0720 Chartiers Creek Open Slopes Upper Slopes 1340 36Wh0986 Raccoon Creek Open T0/T1 Terrace 1100 36Wh1002 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Ridgetop 1340 36Wh1096 Raccoon Creek Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1260 36Wh1112 Raccoon Creek Open Upland Upland Flat 1360 36Wh1115 Chartiers Creek Open Saddle Saddle 1300 36Wh1118 Trib Cross Creek Lithic Red. T0/T1 Terrace 1120 36Wh1148 -- Open Slopes Hillslope 1120 36Wh1151 -- Open T0/T1 Floodplain 1080 36Wh1152 Trib Cross Creek Open Slopes Hillslope 1200 36Wh1161 Trib Scott Run Open Saddle Saddle 1160 36Wh1201 -- Open Slopes Lower Slopes 1130

44 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

As during the Early Archaic, Middle Archaic largely resemble those of the preceding sites are located mostly within the Raccoon Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods. Creek drainage (n=29 sites), including 22 along Raccoon Creek itself and 7 along feeder At the time of this writing, investigations at the streams. Eight sites are located within the Cross Leetsdale Site (Watershed G, Subbasin 20) had Creek watershed, including seven on feeder just been completed in Spring, 2003, with the streams and one on Cross Creek. These data identification of Middle Archaic occupations at may indicate a contrasting settlement pattern the base of excavations (pers. comm., P.Funk, between Cross Creek and Raccoon Creek, with PHMC-BHP, 2003; Schuldenrein et al. 2003). Early Archaic sites being located on low-order However, no detailed information regarding this tributaries in the former and on the main branch cultural component has been made available for in the latter. dissemination due to the recent date of discovery. Results of excavations at Leetsdale Similar to the Early Archaic, access to water will provide a rare window into early-mid was crucial to site placement with most sites Holocene lifeways in the Upper Ohio River within 100m (mode/median) to 150m (mean) of Valley. a water source (Table 17). As during the preceding periods, access to stream confluences D. MIDDLE ARCHAIC SETTLEMENT was not an important factor in Middle Archaic PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE site placement. Most sites were located between PASS files and research reports provide data on 360m (mode) and 621m (mean) from a lithic raw material use during the Middle confluence (compared to 789m during the Archaic in Watershed D. Sixteen sites in PASS Paleoindian period). While Early and Middle files are single-component Middle Archaic sites; Archaic sites were clearly more proximate to thus, lithic raw material data from PASS files stream confluences than Paleoindian sites, this can be used for these sites without corruption by appears to be due to a general preference for site occupation during other time periods. In locating sites near water. addition, two sites —Meadowcroft and Mungai Farm—have specific lithic raw material data for The Cross Creek survey report (Vento and Middle Archaic projectile points. Data from Donohue 1982:124-127) provides the only other PASS files indicate a nearly complete reliance available information to understand Middle on chert/flint in stone tool production at the 16 Archaic lithic raw material use in Watershed D. single-component Middle Archaic sites. Lithic raw material data are provided for Middle Onondaga chert, chalcedony, and slate were Archaic points from Meadowcroft, Mungai present at one site each, while two sites did not Farm, as well as for sites in the Cross Creek include information regarding lithic raw drainage as a whole (Table 19). At materials. None of the 16 single-component Meadowcroft, Kanawha chert was preferred for Middle Archaic sites in PASS files identified Early and Middle Archaic points, while Upper the use of Flint Ridge or Upper Mercer cherts Mercer chert was preferred at Mungai Farm. (Table 18). Seven different lithic raw materials were utilized for points at Mungai Farm, suggesting a While these data are limited, they suggest the wide-ranging settlement pattern, with travel use of chert, several varieties of which were and/or trade throughout southwestern locally available for Middle Archaic Native Pennsylvania and east-central Ohio. Only three Americans. Onondaga chert was also available other Cross Creek sites contained diagnostic in secondary cobble form throughout regional Middle Archaic points, with two produced from drainages and should be considered a local lithic Flint Ridge chert and one from Uniontown raw material. The presence of slate as a material chert. These patterns of lithic raw material use used in tool production at Site 36Wh720 is the first evidence of its use in stone tool production.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 45 Table 17. Middle Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files)

DIST. SITE NO. NEAREST WATER WATER DIRECT. WATER STREAM ORDER DIST. CONF. DIREC. CONF. 36Bv0003 Ohio River 120 Southwest 3 340 Northwest 36Bv0013 Raccoon Creek 150 Northwest 1 260 Southwest 36Bv0014 Raccoon Creek 60 Southeast 4 200 Northeast 36Bv0016 Raccoon Creek 100 Southwest 1 440 South 36Bv0017 Trib Raccoon Creek 0 On-site 1 360 Northeast 36Bv0019 Raccoon Creek 80 Northeast 4 170 Northwest 36Bv0020 Raccoon Creek 120 East 4 360 North 36Bv0022 Raccoon Creek 0 On-site 1 320 -- 36Bv0025 Raccoon Creek 160 Northeast 4 360 -- 36Bv0026 Raccoon Creek 60 South 1 570 -- 36Bv0036 Raccoon Creek 80 Southeast 1 1000 North 36Bv0037 Raccoon Creek 140 West 1 780 East 36Bv0039 Raccoon Creek 140 North 1 240 Southeast 36Bv0052 Trib Raccoon Creek 140 West 1 340 North 36Bv0107 Raccoon Creek 100 South 1 540 West 36Bv0123 Raccoon Creek 20 North 2 60 North 36Bv0133 Mill Creek 190 East 1 860 South 36Bv0162 Raccoon Creek 60 Northeast 4 240 Southeast 36Bv0178 Trib Raccoon Creek 160 South 1 1240 Southeast 36Bv0210 Raccoon Creek 100 West 2 140 Northwest 36Bv0221 Trib Raccoon Creek 100 East 1 880 Southeast 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork 50 North 1 710 East 36Wh0110 Burgetts Fork 400 Southeast 1 600 East 36Wh0187 S Fk Cross Creek 220 Northwest 1 1400 Northwest 36Wh0293 Raccoon Creek 0 On-site 3 50 Northwest 36Wh0297 Cross Creek 60 South 5 400 Southwest 36Wh0392 S Fk Cross Creek 20 Southeast 3 320 Northeast 36Wh0399 N Fk Cross Creek 280 Southeast 1 620 Southeast 36Wh0400 Trib Burgetts Fk 150 Southeast 1 700 Southeast 36Wh0409 Raccoon Creek 50 East 1 870 East 36Wh0508 Raccoon Creek 15 East 1 180 South 36Wh0512 N Fk Cross Creek 100 West 1 490 Northwest 36Wh0688 Raccoon Creek 380 Northwest 2 790 Southwest 36Wh0720 Chartiers Creek 260 East 1 1050 East 36Wh0986 Raccoon Creek 80 West 2 100 Southwest 36Wh1002 Raccoon Creek 375 West 1 1300 North 36Wh1096 Raccoon Creek 220 South 1 480 Northwest 36Wh1112 Raccoon Creek 60 North 1 1200 North 36Wh1115 Chartiers Creek 160 South 1 1140 Southwest 36Wh1118 Trib Cross Creek 100 Southeast 2 180 Southwest 36Wh1148 -- 310 West 1 390 West 36Wh1151 -- 260 Southwest 1 480 Northwest 36Wh1152 Trib Cross Creek 310 South 1 2120 Northeast 36Wh1161 Trib Scott Run 800 West 1 1980 North 36Wh1201 Other 10 East 1 700 Southwest

46 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Table 18. Cross-Tabulation of Single Component Middle Archaic Sites and Lithic Raw Materials, Watershed D (PASS Files)

SITENO CHALCEDONY CHERT/FLINT ONONDAGA CHERT SLATE MAT. NOT IDENTIFIED TOTAL 36Bv0013 -- X ------1 36Bv0020 -- X X -- -- 2 36Bv0039 -- X ------1 36Bv0107 -- X ------1 36Bv0178 -- X ------1 36Wh0110 -- X ------1 36Wh0392 ------X 1 36Wh0399 ------X 1 36Wh0400 -- X ------1 36Wh0508 -- X ------1 36Wh0512 -- X ------1 36Wh0688 -- X ------1 36Wh0720 X X -- X -- 3 36Wh0986 -- X ------1 36Wh1002 -- X ------1 36Wh1096 -- X ------1 Total 1 14 1 1 2 30

Table 19. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material Type for Middle Archaic Artifacts (Vento and Donohue 1982:124-127).

LOCATION ONONDAGA KANAWHA FLINT UPPER M. BRUSH C. 10 MILE UNION- OTHER TOTAL RIDGE TOWN PTS. Meadowcroft*(%) 16.6 50.2 -- 16.6 16.6 ------6 Mungai Farm(%) 8.3 16.7 8.3 20.8 12.5 12.5 12.5 8.3 24 Crs Cr. sites (%) -- -- 66.6 ------33.3 -- 3 Total Points (n) 3 7 4 6 4 3 4 2 33 Total % 9.1 21.2 12.1 18.2 12.1 9.1 12.1 6.1 100 *For Meadowcroft, data is for Early and Middle Archaic points

E. MIDDLE ARCHAIC: CONCLUSION AND was also consistent between the Early and RESEARCH QUESTIONS Middle Archaic, with Native Americans of both periods using local cherts from southwestern Middle Archaic Summary Pennsylvania, as well as fair amounts of The increase in site counts is the most notable Kanawha chert, Flint Ridge chert, and Upper difference between the Early Archaic and Mercer chert. Middle Archaic; however, this increase disappears when the duration of each period is Based on these data, the Middle Archaic taken into consideration. Settlement patterns and continued trends initiated during the Early site locations are also similar for the two Archaic. Only the increase in site counts of the periods, with Early and Middle Archaic Native Middle Archaic separates it from the Early Americans preferring use of a wide range of Archaic; however, as noted above, if site counts landscapes, including river and stream terraces, are averaged by total decades per period (Fiedel as opposed to uplands/slopes/saddles, which 2002), the Middle Archaic and Early Archaic were preferred site locations during the have nearly identical site count densities, with Paleoindian period. Compared to the 0.13 and 0.15 sites per decade, respectively, Paleoindian period, Early and Middle Archaic compared to .03 Paleoindian sites. These data in sites are located closer to water and closer to Watershed D, thus, contrast that presented by stream confluences, likely reflecting the Carr (1998a:61; 1998b:88) who suggests a movement of sites from uplands to lowlands population increase between the Early and near streams and rivers. Lithic raw material use Middle Archaic periods. While this population

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 47 increase may have occurred in other portions of 8. Are any other types of stone tools—beyond the state, such as the Upper Juniata sub-basin of bifurcate points—diagnostic of Middle south-central Pennsylvania (MacDonald 2003a), Archaic occupations? the Upper Ohio Valley appears to have 9. Was the change in projectile point sustained a population increase between the technology between the Early and Middle Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods, rather Archaic—from notched and stemmed points than between the Early and Middle Archaic. to bifurcate points—caused by a change in prey species and/or hunting strategies or are the changes simply stylistic? Middle Archaic Research Questions 10. What types of lithic raw materials were used This summary of Middle Archaic archaeological during the Middle Archaic? data in and near Watershed D of the Ohio River Subbasin 20 has generated several research 11. What do lithic raw materials tell us about Middle Archaic travel/trade patterns? issues which should be considered when conducting archaeological work in the area. 12. Why were patterns of lithic raw material use Twelve Middle Archaic research questions are similar between the Paleoindian, Early listed below; this list is by no means Archaic, and Middle Archaic periods in comprehensive and should be used only as a Watershed D? Does this reflect the establishment and continued use of starting point for generating additional research territories and trade networks between issues. Archaeological sites which can provide 12,000 and 5,300 years ago? information pertaining to these and other research questions will likely meet the National Register Criterion D; thus, unless they lack integrity, sites which address these research questions will be eligible for listing in the National Register for Historic Places:

1. Does the Middle Archaic represent a distinct change from the Early Archaic or was there cultural continuity between the two periods? 2. Why were Paleoindian sites located further from water and stream confluences than Early and Middle Archaic sites? 3. Why did Early and Middle Archaic Native Americans move their sites from mostly in uplands (as during the Paleoindian period) to mostly in alluvial settings? 4. Was there a population increase or decrease (or neither) between the Early and Middle Archaic? 5. Was there a change from a forager to a collector subsistence strategy during the Middle Archaic or did it occur sooner (Early Archaic)? 6. What types of foods were procured during the Middle Archaic? 7. What types of tools were produced and utilized by Middle Archaic Native Americans?

48 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

CHAPTER VII LATE ARCHAIC PERIOD 5300 to 3000 BP

A. LATE ARCHAIC OVERVIEW Late Archaic issues within Watershed D, as The Late Archaic period witnessed several reflected in PASS files data and regional dynamic changes in population, culture, and research reports. environment in eastern North America. The Late Archaic is generally considered to persist B. LATE ARCHAIC MATERIAL CULTURE, between approximately 5,300 and 3,800 years SUBSISTENCE, AND CHRONOLOGY ago (MacDonald 2002b). Subsequent to the Late Late Archaic Material Culture Archaic, the Transitional, or Terminal, Archaic period persisted between 3,800 and 3,000 years Within western Pennsylvania, diagnostic ago (Raber 1985: 31). In western Pennsylvania, artifacts of the Late Archaic period include however, the Transitional Archaic is not well- Laurentian point types (Dragoo 1959; Kinsey defined, as several of the key diagnostic 1972:403-408; Ritchie 1965), such as Otter artifacts—broadspears, pottery, steatite, and Creek and Brewerton (Photograph 9, left), as evidence of incipient agriculture—are rare to well as Panhandle Archaic artifacts, such as virtually non-existent at sites in this region. As Steubenville Stemmed and lanceolate points such, only two sites in PASS files include (Mayer-Oakes 1955; Mohney 2002) (see components dating to the Transitional Archaic. Photograph 9, right). For the purposes of this report, thus, we include these sites with Transitional Period artifacts within the Late Archaic.

During the Late Archaic, population increases are noted across the Middle Atlantic (Custer 1988) and Pennsylvania (Raber et al. 1998). The continued rise in sea levels due to environmental warming apparently increased available biomass (Turnbaugh 1977), including estuarine resources. According to Custer (1988; Custer and Wallace 1982) and Turnbaugh (1977), resulted in the increased availability of resources: 1) stimulated Photograph 9. Brewerton Points (Left; from York population growth; 2) increased use of logistic County, Pa); and Steubenville Points (Right; from East Steubenville Site, 46Br31). Steubenville Point Photo subsistence/settlement patterns; and 3) led to the Courtesy of West Virginia Division of Highways widespread establishment of regional exchange networks. Late Archaic Native Americans developed a well-defined schedule of resource (Ritchie 1971/Mohney 2002) states that exploitation (Cowin 1991; Raber 1995, 1999, Steubenville stemmed and lanceolate points 2000) with the increased exploitation of riverine include a biconvex to lenticular cross-section resources at sites such as East Steubenville on with a medial maximum thickness. Lateral the Upper Ohio River (Lothrop 2001a; Lothrop margins are ovate to excurvate, with some and Mohney 2003; Mayer-Oakes 1955; Mohney specimens having apparent parallel flaking. 2002). The following chapter examines these

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 49 Point bases are laterally, rather than basally, Late Archaic. These artifacts and features, if thinned. Following Boldurian (1985:288), recovered at archaeological sites, imply Mohney states that Steubenville stemmed and extended stays at one location by entire family lanceolate points are largely similar, with the groups. Sites with these features and artifacts differences due to secondary resharpening are often interpreted as base camps from which within the haft. This sharpening will eventually Native Americans made daily forays for eliminate the stem, by reducing the point’s blade resource procurement, a typical characteristic of width. a logistic settlement pattern, as defined by Binford (1980). Mohney (2002:24; Ritchie 1971) describes Late Archaic Chronology Brewerton points (Photograph 9, left)) as “one of the most ubiquitous forms in the Upper Ohio Late Archaic Radiocarbon Dates in Valley….” The points are notched and produced Watershed D via staged biface reduction. According to Justice Within the Upper Ohio Valley and vicinity, (1987:115), Brewerton points have triangular Brewerton points have been recovered at sites blades with straight to convex bases. Two dating between 6090 and 4150 BP, while variants are known, side-notched and corner- Steubenville points have been found at sites notched, with the former perhaps representing a dating between 4270 to and 3400 BP (Mohney resharpened variant of the latter. Brewerton 2002:47). These dates suggest very little overlap points likely served as the tips to atlatl darts between Brewerton and Steubenville, with the (Mohney 2002:28). former occurring in the early portion of the Late Archaic and the latter being transitional between Within the Cross Creek drainage, Cross Creek Brewerton and the Early Woodland. In this Village (36Wh293) yielded blades in sense, Steubenville may represent the “lost” association with a Steubenville point Transitional period in the Upper Ohio Valley (Applegarth and Cowin 1982). The coincidence and vicinity. As discussed earlier, only two sites of blades with the points suggests that blades in Watershed D of Subbasin 20 yielded typical were perhaps part of the Late Archaic Transitional Period artifacts (e.g., steatite and technological repertoire. Seven blades were broadspears). As such, researchers in the Upper recovered at the site, predominantly of the Ohio Valley may want to consider including prismatic type (Boldurian 1985:232). Transverse Steubenville/Panhandle Archaic sites within the cross-sections of the blades are triangular and Transitional Archaic rather than the Late trapezoidal. Blade curvature is less than 5mm on Archaic. the blades, which average 3.4 cm (length), 1.5cm (width), and 0.4cm (thickness) in Few radiocarbon dates are available for Late dimension. Archaic occupations in Watershed D of Subbasin 20. The only dates from the watershed Additional technological changes of the Late are from several features at Meadowcroft Archaic, especially the Panhandle Archaic, Rockshelter. Eleven uncalibrated radiocarbon include increased use of groundstone tools, such dates from Stratum III and the upper portion of as manos and metates and pitted cobbles, for Stratum IIb indicate fairly extensive Brewerton food processing (Dragoo 1959; Mayer-Oakes and Transitional Period occupations at the site: 1955; Lothrop 2001a). These objects are often referred to as site furniture (Schiffer 1983), · 1140±115 BC (2975-3205 BP; SI-2053); meaning that they were produced and used at a charcoal from firepits/upper 1/3 of Stratum III residence for an extended period or were (F-18; Transitional/Terminal Archaic) curated at that location for future use. In consort · 1150±90 BC (3010-3190 BP; SI-3030); with site furniture, large storage pits and food charcoal from firepits/upper 1/3 of Stratum III processing features, such as hearths and smudge (F-18; Transitional/Terminal Archaic) pits, are also used more frequently during the

50 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

· 1165±70 BC (3045-3185 BP; SI-2044); relatively narrow window of time at the site charcoal from firepits/upper 1/3 of Stratum III (pers. comm., J. Lothrop, 2003): (F-18; Transitional/Terminal Archaic) · 3800±60 BP (Cal BP 4420 to 4080; Cal BC · 1305±115 BC (3154-3470 BP; SI-1679); 2470-2130; Beta 163725) from Feature 13 charcoal from firepit/middle 1/3 of Stratum III (from deer bone collagen) (F-18) · 3740±60 BP (Cal BP 4400 to 3980; Cal BC · 1260±95 BC (3115-3305 BP; SI-1681); 2450 to 2030; Beta 163727) from Feature 46 charcoal from firepit/upper 1/3 of Stratum IIb (from deer bone collagen) (F-46 upper) · 3680±70 BP (Cal BP 4230 to 3840; Cal BC · 1820±90 BC (3680-3860 BP; SI-1680); 2280 to 1890; Beta 163728) from Feature 60 carbonized basketry fragment/upper 1/3 of (from charred nutshell) Stratum IIb (F-46 upper) · 3350±110 BP (Cal BP 3910 to 3390; Cal BC 1960 to 1440; Beta 163726) from Feature 49 · 2000±240 BC (3710-4190 BP; SI-2063); (from deer bone collagen) charcoal from firepits/middle 1/3 of Stratum IIb · 3810+40 BP (human bone, Feature 5) (F-46 upper; Late Archaic) · 3780+40 BP (human bone, Feature 5) · 2020±85 BC (3885-4055 BP; SI-2058); charcoal from firepits/middle 1/3 of Stratum IIb · 3860+40 BP (human bone, Feature 5) (F-46 upper; Late Archaic) · 2055±85 BC (3920-4090 BP; SI-2054); Eight additional dates are available from shell charcoal from firepits/middle 1/3 of Stratum IIb from East Steubenville. Conventional age (F-46 upper; Late Archaic) ranges for the shell dates are 4630-5310 BP, · 2430±500 BC (3880-4880 BP; SI-2354); while corrected age ranges are 3040-3720 BP. charcoal from firepits/middle 1/3 of Stratum IIb Finally, two dates are available from fish (F-46 upper; Late Archaic) bone—4590+40 BP and 4240+40 BP— · 2870±85 BC (4735-4905 BP; SI-1685); indicating possible fish use during the charcoal from firepits/middle 1/3 of Stratum IIb Brewerton Site occupations. (F-46 upper; Late Archaic) The Leetsdale site on the Ohio River just east of Late Archaic Radiocarbon Dates in Watershed D also has yielded evidence of Peripheral Areas several Late Archaic Brewerton occupations. While few sites within the study area have Late Recent excavations during the 2002-2003 field Archaic radiocarbon dates, two important sites season yielded three features associated with adjacent to Watershed D, East Steubenville Brewerton projectile points. Dates for the (46Br31) and Leetsdale (36AL480), were respective features are (pers. comm., P.Miller, successful in providing dates. Mayer-Oakes 2003): (1955) reports dates of 2270 BC (4220 BP) on shell from Site 46Br31, indicating a Late · 5480±50 BP (Feature 484/Brewerton levels) Archaic age for the East Steubenville Site, only · 5600±50 BP (Feature 488/Brewerton levels) a few miles west of Watershed D in the northern · 5450±40 BP (Feature 494/Brewerton levels) Panhandle of West Virginia.

Conventional radiocarbon dates are available for Panhandle Archaic/Steubenville features excavated by GAI at 46Br31. The eight dates are listed below, and suggest a single occupation or several repeated occupations during a

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 51 Two additional Phase II dates are reported for a occupants. Excavations at the Brown Site in hearth feature in the Late Archaic component as Armstrong County, Pennsylvania, yielded well (Fenicle 2003). The dates of 3370±40 BP Brewerton points radiocarbon dated to 4140 (cal BC 1760-1600; Beta 177514) and 2940±40 +240 BC (George and Davis 1986). (cal BC 1280-1010; Beta 177992) from wood charcoal also suggest a substantial terminal Late Based on these radiocarbon dates and associated Archaic occupation at the site, indicated also by projectile points from sites in Pennsylvania and the presence of steatite artifacts. West Virginia, the following date ranges are likely for Late Archaic sites with Brewerton and Radiocarbon Dates in Other Areas of Steubenville point associations in western Western Pennsylvania Pennsylvania: In confirmation of these radiocarbon dates, which suggest temporal variation between · Laurentian/Brewerton Sites: ca. 5300 to Brewerton and Steubenville projectile points 4000 BP and associated occupations, several sites across Pennsylvania have similarly dated Late Archaic · Panhandle Archaic/Steubenville sites: ca. components. 4000 to 3000 BP

The Wiser Site (36Ce442) was excavated during expansion of S.R. 220 along North Bald Eagle Late Archaic Subsistence Creek north of Altoona. This site yielded an Numerous researchers (Cowin 1991; Custer extensive Late Archaic occupation with 1988; Raber 1995, 1999) propose generally Brewerton and other Late Archaic points. Eight similar Late Archaic models of land-use that radiocarbon dates ranged between ca. 5200 and entail an increase in logistic subsistence patterns 3900 BP (East et al. 1999:7-44). One of the within Pennsylvania. Rather than being dates—5220±70 (Beta-86174)—was directly foragers, thus, in which families moved associated with a Brewerton side-notched point. frequently to obtain resources (as was the pattern during the preceding Paleoindian, Early The (36Cn164) in Lock Archaic, and Middle Archaic), Late Archaic Haven on the West Branch of the Susquehanna Native Americans were collectors, in which River yielded a variety of Late Archaic points families were seasonally sedentary at one from well-dated contexts (GAI 1995:191-202). location (base camps) for extended periods Twenty features, including hearths and smudge (Binford 1979, 1980). From these base camps pits, yielded radiocarbon dates of between ca. (typically thought to be located along major 5200 and 4900 BP for its late Laurentian waterways), individuals procured resources component. The recovery of large numbers of (plants, animals, lithics, etc.) during short trips groundstone tools confirmed that the site likely to uplands and to low-mid-order tributaries. In functioned as a base camp with a fairly western Pennsylvania, as discussed below, permanent population. reliance on riverine resources increased during the latter portion of the Late Archaic (Lothrop Excavations at the Canfield Island Site (36Ly37; 2001a). Terminal Archaic settlements in nearby Bressler 1989), approximately 15 miles regions also indicate the increased use of base downriver from Memorial Park on the West camps for logistic subsistence (Custer 1996; Branch, yielded an extensive Late Archaic Raber 1995). component dated to ca. 5100 BP. Thirteen Brewerton points were recovered, as were Limited Late Archaic ethnobotanical data are features containing butternut and hickory nut available for Subbasin 20. Cushman (1982: shells. In addition, 12 netsinkers suggest that 217) provides evidence for fruit and seed use at fishing was important to Late Archaic site Meadowcroft. Associated with dates of circa

52 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

3700-4000 BP, Meadowcroft Stratum IIb rock pavements may be associated with the yielded two Chenopodiaceae sp. (pigweed) smoking, roasting, or drying of fish (Bressler fragments and two Rubus sp. (cloudberry) 1989:72; Custer 1996; Wall et al. 1996). fragments, indicative of wild plant processing during the Steubenville portion of the Late C. LATE ARCHAIC SITE TYPES AND Archaic. In Stratum III (associated with dates of LOCATION TRENDS circa 3200 BP, six Cheneopodiaceae sp., 41 A total of 69 sites in Watershed D have yielded Rubus sp., 11 Vaccinum sp. (cranberry), and one diagnostic Late Archaic artifacts, an increase of Cercis sp. (a deciduous shrub) fragment were 24 sites over the Middle Archaic. The increase recovered, along with basketry fragments. in site counts is even more significant if the These data, while limited, suggest increasing length of the respective periods is taken into plant use over time at Meadowcroft—a pattern consideration. The Middle Archaic (45 sites; reflected elsewhere during the Archaic to 350 decades/3,500 years) yielded 0.13 sites per Woodland transition (Smith 1987). decade, while the Late Archaic (69 sites; 180 decades/1,800 years) yielded 0.38 sites per While sites with subsistence remains are rare decade, an almost three-fold increase. Of the 68 within the boundary of the study area, data from Late Archaic sites, 46 yielded Brewerton points, adjoining regions provides some clue as to 11 yielded Steubenville points, and 16 sites potential food resources. Evidence from yielded unspecified Late Archaic diagnostic Panhandle Archaic/Steubenville point sites in artifacts. Included in these totals are five sites the Upper Ohio Valley suggests a wide diet that yielded both Brewerton and Steubenville breadth, including hunting and gathering of points. One site also yielded a Savannah River shellfish, fish, turkey, and various small and Terminal Archaic point. large fauna. Mayer-Oakes’ (1955) reports that sites also yield a wide range of tool types, As discussed above, Cowin (1991) and others including bone and antler tools (fish hooks, (Custer 1988; Raber 1995, 1999), propose bone points, and needles), as well as generally similar Late Archaic models of groundstone and cobble tools (netsinksers and settlement that entail an increase in logistic hammerstones) and stone tools, including subsistence patterns. In this subsistence system, Steubenville points. The range of tool types also Late Archaic Native Americans likely utilized a suggests a diverse array of site activities, likely wider range of landforms. Base campsites related to food processing and procurement of a should be in alluvial settings near large-order wide range of foods. More details regarding the streams, while smaller resource extraction sites East Steubenville Site are presented later in this should be in upland settings or near small chapter. drainages. As shown in Table 24 and Table 25, and summarized in Tables 21-23, 29 sites in Elsewhere in central and western Pennsylvania, Watershed D are in alluvial settings, including excavations in Late Archaic levels at Memorial stream and river terraces, floodplains, and Park (GAI 1995:516) on the West Branch benches. Slopes above streams (n=17), upland Susquehanna River yielded hickory, bitternut, settings overlooking streams (n=15) and saddle hazelnut, butternut, walnut, acorn, grape, and settings (n=7) comprise the remainder. Access elderberry. Faunal remains at sites in adjoining to water continued to be important during the regions suggest the frequent use of fish and Late Archaic (mean=126m to nearest water), other aquatic resources. At Canfield Island in while access to stream confluences (mean= 691) Williamsport, on the West Branch of the was of minimal importance. Mean elevation for Susquehanna River, over 400 netsinkers were Late Archaic sites was slightly higher than found in Terminal Archaic levels (Bressler during the Middle Archaic (1,128 ft. amsl versus 1989:46). Several caches of 16-30 netsinkers 1,052 ft.), suggesting a wider use of landforms. suggest the use of fairly large nets for large- scale fish collection. Large platform hearth and

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 53 Table 20. Late Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files)

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT COUNTY MUNICIPALITY 36Bv0003 Old Indian Fort Brewerton Beaver Shippingport Borough 36Bv0017 McElhaney Hog Farm Brewerton Beaver -- 36Bv0022 Boyscout Camp Steubenville Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0035 Wassler #1 Brewerton Beaver -- 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Brewerton Beaver -- 36Bv0040 Crevallero Brewerton Beaver -- 36Bv0052 John Bush Farm Steubenville Beaver -- 36Bv0122 Crivallero Site Brewerton Beaver Independence Township 36Bv0171 Thompson #2 Brewerton Beaver Independence Township 36Bv0210 Lower Circle on Rock Late Archaic Beaver Raccoon Township 36Bv0221 Hilltop Brewerton Beaver Potter Township 36Bv0230 St. Joe #1 Brewerton Beaver Potter Township 36Bv0240 Dravo Brew/Steub Beaver Greene Township 36Bv0250 Thomas Pate Brewerton Beaver -- 36Wh0001 Moore Farm Late Archaic Washington Smith Township 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Brew/Steub Washington Smith Township 36Wh0170 J Alrutz #2 Late Archaic Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0181 Reservoir Late Archaic Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0183 Nukon #1 Late Archaic Washington Smith Township 36Wh0187 Clair Cowden Late Archaic Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0293 Cross Creek Steubenville Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Brew/Steub Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0313 Kaposey #2 Steubenville Washington Independence Township 36Wh0314 Kaposey #3 Steubenville Washington Independence Township 36Wh0348 MS #38 Late Archaic Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0349 MS #39 Late Archaic Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0355 MS #45 Late Archaic Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0357 MS #47 Late Archaic Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0365 Yee Farm Brew/Steub Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0374 Rex Smith Farm Steubenville Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0389 Carter Farm Brew/Steub Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0390 Bertovich Farm Brewerton Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0391 -- Brewerton Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0398 MS #93 Late Archaic Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0401 MS #96 Brewerton Washington Independence Township 36Wh0422 FB #6 Late Archaic Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh0475 Berrinski Camp Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0549 McNinch Site No. 1 Brewerton Washington Hanover Township 36Wh0565 Beadling No. 1 Brewerton Washington Hanover Township 36Wh0566 Beadling No. 2 Brewerton Washington Hanover Township 36Wh0608 Pershina Farm Late Archaic Washington Robinson Township 36Wh0757 Capuzzi #2 Late Archaic Washington Robinson Township 36Wh0821 Stacko Site Brewerton Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0992 Lowry #7 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1007 Carter #3 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1031 Pritts Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1037 Cross Creek Park #1 Brewerton Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh1093 Davidson Site Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1095 Scott Site Brewerton Washington Smith Township 36Wh1111 Hamilton Twins Site Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1112 Cumer Site Brewerton Washington Smith Township 36Wh1115 Murgel Site Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1147 Brezinski #4 Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1148 Brezinski #5 Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1151 Lowry #11 Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1152 Vanzin Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1155 Luba #1 Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1156 Luba #2 Brewerton Washington Hopewell Township

54 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT COUNTY MUNICIPALITY 36Wh1161 Gregorski Brewerton Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh1191 Lowry #12 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1192 Lowry #13 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1193 Lowry #14 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1194 Lowry #15 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1195 Lowry #16 Sav. River Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1200 Vanzin #2 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1201 Vanzin #3 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1202 Martin #2 Brewerton Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1316 Herbst #1 Late Archaic Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1318 Cherry Run Terrace Late Archaic Washington Mount Pleasant Township

Table 21. Cross-Tabulation of Site Setting by Nearest Water, Watershed D Sites (PASS data).

NEAREST WATER ALLUVIAL SLOPES SADDLE OTHER UPLAND TOTAL Cross Creek 3 ------3 S Fk Cross Creek -- 1 -- 1 2 N Fk Cross Creek -- 1 -- -- 1 Trib Cross Creek -- 6 2 1 9 Trib Scott Run -- -- 1 -- 1 TOTAL: CROSS CREEK WATERSHED 3 (18.8%) 8 (50.0%) 3 (18.8%) 2 (12.5%) 16 Raccoon Creek 12 4 1 6 23 Trib Raccoon Crk -- -- 1 4 5 Raccoon Run 1 ------1 Little Traverse Creek 1 ------1 Cherry Run 1 ------1 Trib Burgetts Fork -- 1 -- 3 4 TOTAL, RACCOON CREEK WATERSHED 15 (42.9%) 5 (14.3%) 2 (5.7%) 13 (37.1%) 35 Chartiers Creek -- -- 2 -- 2 Ohio River 2 ------2 Kings Crk (Ohio River Trib.) 1 ------1 Other 9 4 -- -- 13 TOTAL, OTHER WATERSHED 12 (66.7%) 4 (22.2%) 2 (11.1%) 0 (0%) 18 GRAND TOTAL 30 (43.5%) 17 (24.6%) 7 (38.9%) 15 (21.7%) 69

Sites within Cross Creek and its tributaries are uplands, saddles, and slopes (n=25; Table 22). generally on slopes above creeks, likely due to Similarly, Steubenville sites are fairly evenly the narrow floodplain and terrace settings along distributed between alluvial (n=6) and upland Cross Creek. In contrast, sites in the Raccoon (n=4) settings. Sites with Steubenville points are Creek drainage are predominantly in alluvial evenly distributed between Cross Creek (n=4) settings or uplands, rather than slopes. The and Raccoon Creek (n=6), while sites with distribution of sites within the respective Brewerton points are predominantly within drainages of Watershed D likely reflects the Raccoon Creek (n=21) or other drainages topography of the drainages, rather than (n=17), while only eight sites in Cross Creek settlement pattern preferences. Within Raccoon yielded Brewerton points (Table 23). Creek, wide valley bottoms and upland flats are common, but slopes between the two landforms Overall, these data indicate a higher density of are fairly steep and are generally inhospitable Brewerton occupation compared to Steubenville (see Figure 3 in Chapter II). occupation during the Late Archaic in Watershed D of Subbasin 20. If the number of As shown in Table 21, twice as many Late sites is averaged based on the duration of each Archaic sites are located within the Raccoon sub-period, the results are similar, with Creek watershed than within Cross Creek, Brewerton (5300-4000 BP; 130 decades; 46 similar to the Early and Middle Archaic periods. sites) yielding 0.34 sites per decade compared to Sites with Brewerton points are evenly 0.16 for Steubenville (4000-3300 BP; 70 distributed between alluvial settings (n=21) and decades; 11 sites).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 55 Table 22. Cross-Tabulation of Site Setting by Diagnostic Artifact Type at Late Archaic Sites, Watershed D Sites (PASS data)

ARTIFACT ALLUVIAL SADDLE SLOPES UPLAND TOTAL Brew/Steub 2 -- 1 2 5 Brewerton 19 6 7 9 41 Late Archaic 5 1 8 2 16 Sav. River -- -- 1 -- 1 Steubenville 4 -- -- 2 6 Grand Total 30 7 17 15 69

Table 23. Cross-Tabulation of Nearest Water by Type of Diagnostic Artifact at Late Archaic Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files).

NEAREST WATER BREW/STEUB BREWERTON STEUBENVILLE LATE ARCHAIC SAV. RIVER GRAND TOTAL Cross Creek Shed 1 7 3 5 -- 16 Raccoon Creek Shed 3 18 3 11 -- 35 Other 1 16 0 -- 1 18 Grand Total 5 41 6 16 1 69

Table 24. Late Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files).

SITE NO. SITE NAME SITE TYPE SETTING LANDFORM ELEV. NEAREST WATER 36Bv0003 Old Indian Fort Open T0/T1 Floodplain 660 Ohio River 36Bv0017 McElhaney Hog Farm Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 860 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Bv0022 Boyscout Camp Open T0/T1 Terrace 860 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0035 Wassler #1 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 800 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Open T0/T1 Terrace 920 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0040 Crevallero Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 920 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Bv0052 John Bush Farm Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 960 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Bv0122 Crivallero Open T0/T1 Terrace -- Little Trav. Cr. 36Bv0171 Thompson #2 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 790 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0210 Lower Circle on Rock Open T0/T1 Terrace 960 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0221 Hilltop Open Upland Upland Flat 1100 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Bv0230 St. Joe #1 Open T0/T1 Terrace 710 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0240 Dravo Open T0/T1 Terrace 760 Ohio River 36Bv0250 Thomas Pate Open T0/T1 Floodplain 800 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0001 Moore Farm Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1020 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0170 J Alrutz #2 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1140 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0181 Reservoir Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 1110 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0183 Nukon #1 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1050 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0187 Clair Cowden Open Slopes Lower Slopes 1340 S Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0293 Cross Creek Village Lithic Red. T0/T1 Terrace 1000 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Rockshelter T0/T1 Terrace 1000 Cross Creek 36Wh0313 Kaposey #2 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 780 Cross Creek 36Wh0314 Kaposey #3 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 780 Cross Creek 36Wh0348 MS #38 Open Upland Ridgetop 1120 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0349 MS #39 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1120 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0355 MS #45 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1160 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0357 MS #47 Open Slopes Upper Slopes 1270 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0365 Yee Farm Open Upland Ridgetop 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0374 Rex Smith Farm Lithic Red. Upland Ridgetop 1180 S Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0389 Carter Farm Open Upland Ridgetop 1260 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0390 Bertovich Farm Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1180 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0391 -- Open Slopes Lower Slopes 1120 N Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0398 MS #93 Open Slopes Upper Slopes 1300 Raccoon Creek

56 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

SITE NO. SITE NAME SITE TYPE SETTING LANDFORM ELEV. NEAREST WATER 36Wh0401 MS #96 Open Saddle Saddle 1180 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0422 FB #6 Open Slopes Upper Slopes 1240 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0475 Berrinski Camp Open T0/T1 Terrace 1080 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0549 McNinch Site No. 1 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 960 Other 36Wh0565 Beadling No. 1 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 940 Other 36Wh0566 Beadling No. 2 Open T0/T1 Terrace 920 Kings Crk 36Wh0608 Pershina Farm Village T0/T1 Terrace 1160 Raccoon Run 36Wh0757 Capuzzi #2 Open T0/T1 Terrace 940 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0821 Stacko Site Open Upland Ridgetop 1270 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0992 Lowry #7 Open Upland Ridgetop 1230 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1007 Carter #3 Open Saddle Saddle 1270 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Wh1031 Pritts Open Upland Ridgetop 1390 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh1037 Cross Creek Park #1 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1040 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1093 Davidson Site Open Upland Ridgetop 1280 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1095 Scott Site Open Upland Ridgetop 1280 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh1111 Hamilton Twins Site Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1120 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1112 Cumer Site Open Upland Upland Flat 1360 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1115 Murgel Site Open Saddle Saddle 1300 Chartiers Creek 36Wh1147 Brezinski #4 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 1120 36Wh1148 Brezinski #5 Open Slopes Hillslope 1120 36Wh1151 Lowry #11 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 1080 36Wh1152 Vanzin Open Slopes Hillslope 1200 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1155 Luba #1 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1140 Other 36Wh1156 Luba #2 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1160 Other 36Wh1161 Gregorski Open Saddle Saddle 1160 Trib Scott Run 36Wh1191 Lowry #12 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1100 Other 36Wh1192 Lowry #13 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 1080 Other 36Wh1193 Lowry #14 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 1200 Other 36Wh1194 Lowry #15 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1140 Other 36Wh1195 Lowry #16 Open Slopes Lower Slopes 1120 Other 36Wh1200 Vanzin #2 Open Saddle Saddle 1340 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1201 Vanzin #3 Open Slopes Lower Slopes 1130 Other 36Wh1202 Martin #2 Open Saddle Saddle 1370 Chartiers Creek 36Wh1316 Herbst #1 Open Saddle Saddle 1290 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1318 Cherry Run Terrace Open T0/T1 Terrace 1260 Cherry Run

Table 25. Late Archaic Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files).

SITE NO. NEAREST WATER DIST. WATER DIR. WATER DIST. CONF. DIR. CONF. 36Bv0003 Ohio River 120 Southwest 340 Northwest 36Bv0017 Trib Racc. Crk. 0 On-site 360 Northeast 36Bv0022 Raccoon Crk. 0 On-site 320 -- 36Bv0035 Raccoon Crk. 130 Northwest 740 Southeast 36Bv0036 Raccoon Crk. 80 Southeast 1000 North 36Bv0040 Trib Racc. Crk. 120 Northeast 180 -- 36Bv0052 Trib Racc. Crk. 140 West 340 North 36Bv122 Little Traverse Cr. ------36Bv0171 Raccoon Crk. 0 East 900 West 36Bv0210 Raccoon Crk. 100 West 140 Northwest 36Bv0221 Trib Racc. Crk. 100 East 880 Southeast 36Bv0230 Raccoon Creek 0 On-site 960 Southeast 36Bv0240 Ohio River 140 Northwest 520 North 36Bv0250 Raccoon Crk. 20 Southeast 80 Southwest 36Wh0001 Raccoon Crk. 150 West 170 Southwest 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork 50 North 710 East 36Wh0170 Trib Cross Creek 140 Southeast 250 South 36Wh0181 Raccoon Crk. 100 Southwest 175 South 36Wh0183 Raccoon Crk. 160 Southwest 450 Northwest 36Wh0187 S Fk Cross Creek 220 Northwest 1400 Northwest

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 57 SITE NO. NEAREST WATER DIST. WATER DIR. WATER DIST. CONF. DIR. CONF. 36Wh0293 Raccoon Crk. 0 On-site 50 Northwest 36Wh0297 Cross Creek 60 South 400 Southwest 36Wh0313 Cross Creek 20 Northwest 60 Southwest 36Wh0314 Cross Creek 20 West 300 East 36Wh0348 Trib Cross Creek 140 Southeast 560 South 36Wh0349 Raccoon Crk. 80 Northwest 720 South 36Wh0355 Raccoon Crk. 140 East 810 South 36Wh0357 Trib Cross Creek 120 Southwest 1020 South 36Wh0365 Trib Burgetts Fork 330 Southeast 860 Northeast 36Wh0374 S Fk Cross Creek 5 North 490 West 36Wh0389 Raccoon Crk. 0 East 750 Northwest 36Wh0390 Trib Cross Creek 90 Southwest 840 Southwest 36Wh0391 N Fk Cross Creek 0 -- 150 East 36Wh0398 Raccoon Crk. 200 South 1020 Northeast 36Wh0401 Trib Cross Creek 0 On-site 830 Southeast 36Wh0422 Trib Cross Creek 150 Southeast 510 North 36Wh0475 Raccoon Crk. 70 West 120 Southeast 36Wh0549 Other 100 Northwest 120 West 36Wh0565 Other 100 West 220 Northeast 36Wh0566 Kings Cr. 20 West 120 Northwest 36Wh0608 Raccoon Run 115 West 150 Southwest 36Wh0757 Raccoon Crk. 120 South 255 Southwest 36Wh0821 Raccoon Crk. 280 Southwest 940 Northeast 36Wh0992 Raccoon Crk. 400 Southeast 700 Southwest 36Wh1007 Trib Racc. Crk. 180 South 675 West 36Wh1031 Trib Burgetts Fork 400 Northwest 970 Southwest 36Wh1037 Raccoon Crk. 0 On-site 130 South 36Wh1093 Raccoon Crk. 290 Southeast 440 North 36Wh1095 Trib Burgetts Fork 330 Northwest 1100 Southwest 36Wh1111 Trib Cross Creek 90 North 6880 Southwest 36Wh1112 Raccoon Crk. 60 North 1200 North 36Wh1115 Chartiers Creek 160 South 1140 Southwest 36Wh1147 -- 160 South 460 Northwest 36Wh1148 -- 310 West 390 West 36Wh1151 -- 260 Southwest 480 Northwest 36Wh1152 Trib Cross Creek 310 South 2120 Northeast 36Wh1155 Other 20 Northwest 320 Northeast 36Wh1156 Other 80 Northeast 340 North 36Wh1161 Trib Scott Run 800 West 1980 North 36Wh1191 Other 10 North 180 Southwest 36Wh1192 Other 20 South 300 Southeast 36Wh1193 Other 60 West 800 Southwest 36Wh1194 Other 10 West 700 Southwest 36Wh1195 Other 60 East 500 Southwest 36Wh1200 Trib Cross Creek 120 Southwest 540 Northwest 36Wh1201 Other 10 East 700 Southwest 36Wh1202 Chartiers Creek 20 Southwest 1400 Northwest 36Wh1316 Raccoon Crk. 100 ------36Wh1318 Cherry Run 100 ------

36Bv17—McElhaney Hog Farm Key Late Archaic Sites in Watershed D Site 36Bv17, the McElhaney Hog Farm Site, Research reports provide additional data yielded grooved adzes in association with large regarding Late Archaic settlement patterns and numbers of Steubenville stemmed and site types. Key Late Archaic sites within lanceolate points (Mayer-Oakes 1955:141, 144). Watershed D include a series of Panhandle The site is located at an elevation of 860 ft. amsl Archaic sites identified by Mayer-Oakes on an upland hill ridge/toe overlooking a (1955:139) within Beaver County. tributary of Raccoon Creek near the town of

58 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Aliquippa, Pennsylvania—location typical of 36Bv240—Dravo many Steubenville sites, including East The Dravo Site (36Bv240; Davis 1988) is Steubenville. The site likely served as a camp located on a high upper gravel terrace of the during the Late Archaic, the remains of which Ohio River just west of the town of were extensively collected by Emil Alam Georgetown. The site yielded an extensive lithic (Mayer-Oakes 1955). assemblage, including more than 14,000 artifacts, much of which was related to the 36Bv52—John Bush Farm reduction of locally collected secondary chert Site 36Bv52, the John Bush Farm Site, also cobbles during the Laurentian Late Archaic. yielded grooved adzes in association with large More discussion of Late Archaic lithic raw numbers of Steubenville stemmed and material use at the site is discussed below. lanceolate points (Mayer-Oakes 1955:141, 144). The site is located only a few miles southeast of 36Wh106—Mungai Farm 36Bv17 (see above) and was also extensively The Mungai Farm Site (36Wh106) is located at collected by Emil Alam and studied by Mayer- an elevation of 1,220 ft. amsl overlooking the Oakes (1955). As with 36Bv17, 36Bv52 is Burgetts Fork south of Burgettstown. The located on an upland hill ridge/toe overlooking a upland site yielded the largest collection of Late tributary of Raccoon Creek a few miles south of Archaic projectile points of any site within Aliquippa. This site likely served as a resource Watershed D. The site was excavated by the procurement camp during the Late Archaic. University of Pittsburgh during their Cross Creek survey (Fitzgibbons 1982:108-109). 36Bv122—Crivallero Together with the surface collection by the Site 36Bv122, the Crivallero Site, is located on landowner, the site has yielded 52 Brewerton Little Traverse Creek near its confluence with Corner-Notched, 39 Brewerton Side-Notched, Raccoon Creek. Excavated by Berger (1998) for 53 Brewerton-like, one Buffalo Stemmed and PennDOT along SR 30 near Raccoon Creek four Steubenville Stemmed points. Interestingly, State Park, the site yielded a small lithic few debitage or other tools were recovered assemblage (n=242) during Phase I and II during excavations or surface collection of the excavations. Four Brewerton points were site (Fitzgibbons 1982:108). recovered, as were an Adena stemmed and five untyped point fragments. No features were 36Wh293—Cross Creek Village identified, but the prevalence of Brewerton Cross Creek Village (36Wh293) yielded a points indicates that it was the most substantial Steubenville point in horizontal association with occupation. Because of the low artifact density, 11 possible house structures and evidence of the lack of features, and the presence of multiple blade production (Applegarth and Cowin 1982; unstratified components, the site was not Boldurian 1985). The site is located on a deemed eligible to the National Register. floodplain/terrace above Cross Creek, approximately 5 miles east of Avella (see 36Bv230—St. Joe #1 Photograph 3). Morphologically, the blades In 1986, NPW Consultants, Inc. (Cosgrove and from Cross Creek Village resemble those from Michael 1986) conducted Phase I/II testing at the Paleoindian levels of Meadowcroft, four sites for the St. Joe Resources Company suggesting similar technological origins fly-ash disposal project in Potter Township, near (1985:237). One difference was in platform Monaca. Site 36Bv230 was identified on a first preparation, however, with Meadowcroft blades terrace of Raccoon Creek via the discovery of being prepared and generally multifaceted and 22 lithic artifacts, including one Brewerton side- Cross Creek Village blades being unprepared notched point and one untyped side-notched and flat. Raw material type was also distinct point base. Lithic raw materials included between the sites, with the Meadowcroft blades Onondaga and Uniontown chert. being produced from a variety of local cherts

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 59

(including Monongahela, Ten Mile, Upper on an upland hilltop and was identified by the Mercer, Brush Creek and Uniontown) and the University of Pittsburgh during the Cross Creek Cross Creek Village blades being produced only project (Carlisle and Adovasio 1982; Boldurian from Monongahela chert (Boldurian 1985:231- 1985). The Krajacic Site yielded a wide variety 236) which is available from an outcrop near the of artifacts from different time periods within a site (Mohney 2002:13). The differences in raw plowed field. No features were identified and no material type likely reflect its differential radiocarbon dates were obtained from the site. availability, rather than the technological Artifacts include Miller points in various stages preferences of individuals at the two sites. of reduction along with stemmed and lanceolate Steubenville points. At Krajacic, the surface The presence of 11 possible house structures at association of blades with both Steubenville and Cross Creek Village and the lack of blades from Miller points raises significant issues regarding other Steubenville sites in the region raise the validity of the supposed Miller point and doubts that Cross Creek Village is a single associated blades as a distinct early Paleoindian component site. If this is the case, and multiple toolkit (Gardner 2002). components are represented at the site, then the age of the blades is in doubt and may be related 36AL480—Leetsdale to another occupation of the site not represented Site 36AL480 is on the northern shore of the by diagnostic artifacts. The coincidence of Ohio River, within Watershed G of Subbasin 20 structures and blades at Cross Creek Village less than 1 mile northeast of Watershed D may reflect a Middle Woodland age of the site, (Photograph 10). The site is approximately 13 with the Steubenville point possibly miles upstream from the mouth of Raccoon representing an earlier occupation disturbed Creek and less than 5 miles east of Raccoon during structure construction during the Middle Creek as it flows near Aliquippa. Excavations at Woodland occupation. Site 36AL480 were conducted between 2001- 2003 by several archaeological consultants 36Wh297—Meadowcroft working for the USACOE; excavations yielded No specific descriptions of the Late Archaic multiple stratified components dating to the component at Meadowcroft have been Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, published, although compilations of point types Transitional Archaic, and Early Woodland. by period indicate that the Late Archaic occupations were among the most intensive of Based on data available to date, a Brewerton any of the site visits (Adovasio et al. 1977). Late Archaic component was identified within Seven Brewerton, five Buffalo Stemmed, and Stratum III, including at least four Brewerton four Steubenville Stemmed-like points were points and a possible “open-faced hearth” recovered at the site, predominantly (Hardlines 2002:25). concentrated in Strata IIb and III. Radiocarbon dates for the Late Archaic occupations span the More recent excavations in Area 3 have entire Late Archaic period, including earlier identified three Late Archaic occupations, Brewerton and later Steubenville point including one which contained shellfish occupations (see radiocarbon dates above). remains. During much of the Late Archaic period, the site was an island in the Ohio River. Key Late Archaic Sites near Watershed D The abundance of flaking debris in the Late Archaic component indicates that Native 36Wh351—Krajacic Americans were collecting and reducing chert While not as well known as the possible Pre- cobbles at the site (www.lrp.usace.army.mil/ Clovis assemblage from the site, the Late lmon/late_archaic.htm). Radiocarbon dates of Archaic Steubenville assemblage was fairly 5480±50 BP, 5600±50 BP, and 5450±40 BP extensive at the Krajacic Site (36Wh351). As were assayed from three Late Archaic features discussed in the Paleoindian chapter, the site is

60 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

in Area 3 (pers. comm., P. Miller, KCI (46Hk34)—were upland ridgetop sites Technologies, Inc.). overlooking the Ohio River, while the Half- Moon Site (46Br29) was a large site with Steubenville points along the Ohio River bottomland south of Weirton. McKees Rocks mound (36Al16), overlooking the mouth of Chartiers Creek and the Ohio River, also yielded grooved adzes and Steubenville points. This distribution of sites as presented in Mayer- Oakes (1955) indicates a preference for Panhandle Archaic sites in upland settings, at least along the Ohio River. Nevertheless, one site—46Br29—was in an alluvial setting, confirming the data presented in Lothrop (2001) that indicate a wider use of landforms, including Photograph 10. Aerial Photograph of the Leetsdale Site. bottomlands, upper terraces, and ridgetops. View Northeast (www.lrp.usace.army.mil/.htm). Photograph courtesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This cluster of Steubenville sites confirms PASS file data which indicate a wide range of site The site yielded one of the few assemblages of locations during the Steubenville or Panhandle steatite artifacts in western Pennsylvania, and Archaic portion of the Late Archaic period. several projectile points more commonly found Recent excavations at the East Steubenville Site at sites in the lower Ohio River Valley and the (46Br31), excerpted below from Lothrop’s Wabash River Valley of Illinois (Frye and (2001a) management summary, reinforce this Weiser 2003: 4-5). The presence of these interpretation and indicate a wide diet breadth artifacts in the Late Archaic/Transitional for Late Archaic Native Americans. Archaic component indicates widespread regional interaction networks within eastern 46Br31—East Steubenville—Excerpted from North America during the terminal portion of Lothrop (2001a) the Late Archaic period, approximately 4,000- The East Steubenville Site (46Br31) is the type 3,000 years ago. site for the Panhandle Archaic, as described above. The site is located on a south-trending West Virginia Panhandle Sites ridgespur overlooking the Ohio River near Lothrop (2001) reports that at least eight Weirton, West Virginia (Photograph 11). Ohio Panhandle Archaic sites, some with associated River pool elevation at this location is 644 feet shell middens, have been recorded a few miles (196 meters), while Site 46Br31 occupies the west of the current study area in the panhandle south end of the ridgespur at an elevation of 900 of West Virginia. Settings are variable, feet (274 meters) amsl. Mahan Run, a low-order including three sites situated on first terraces stream, empties into the Ohio River immediately above the Ohio River, one site located on a high south of the ridgespur. The site is located only T2/T3 Pleistocene terrace, and four sites five miles west of the Pennsylvania state line situated on intermediate or higher Pleistocene and the current study area. terrace straths above the valley bottom. As first reported by Mayer-Oakes (1955), Mayer-Oakes (1955:132) reports on four of avocational archaeologists discovered the East these Steubenville sites in the West Virginia Steubenville Site in 1938, and intermittently panhandle along the Upper Ohio River. Three of conducted informal excavations thereafter; the sites—East Steubenville (46Br31), New Mayer-Oakes’ report (1955) was based on their Cumberland Heights (46Hk1), and Globe Hill field notes and artifact collections. These

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 61

excavations identified a shell midden used by During Phase III work, GAI excavated 86 STPs, Late Archaic Native Americans. The site also excavated 316 1x1-m test units, and stripped the yielded other food refuse, including bones of entire ridgetop landform to identify features. deer and other mammal, turkey, fish, birds and These excavations resulted in the identification turtle. Excavations in the shell midden produced of 74 cultural features, including 5 human tools of perishable materials rarely preserved on burials and 50 pit features. Of particular note other prehistoric sites in the region, including among the 50 pit features found at Site 46Br31 bone awls and harpoons of antler and bone. are three features tentatively interpreted as pits for steaming freshwater mussel.

Other cultural feature types include 10 FCR 46Br31 clusters, one postmold, two lenses of preserved shell midden along the west flank of the ridge, Ohio River six miscellaneous features (including a tabular anvil stone), and the five human burials. The 10 FCR clusters consist of rock concentrations in which many of the rocks appear to been reddened or cracked by heat; in some cases, these FCR clusters also contained concentrations of charcoal. These features are tentatively interpreted as small hearth platforms. Four feature dates place site occupation between 3,400 to 3,840 years ago (see dates above).

GAI archaeologists excavated the five human burials at Site 46Br31 between November 6 and Photograph 11. Aerial Photograph of the East November 17, 2000. Disarticulated human Steubenville Site. View North. Courtesy of West Virginia Division of Highways. remains were also recovered from feature 92, a disturbed deposit discovered during stripping on Stone tools from the site included Steubenville the west flank of Site 46Br31 (see below). spearpoints and other flaked stone tools of These burials include four pit interments located Onondaga and Flint Ridge chert, as well as on the eastern flank of the ridge (Features 1, 37, groundstone tools consisting of grooved adzes 46, and 62), and a single pit burial, Feature 5, and axes, and bannerstone spear-thrower positioned along the southwestern margin of the weights. A human burial and two dog burials ridge. In addition, all five burials are located were reportedly found at the site. Based on these along or within a few meters of where slopes on discoveries at Site 46Br31 and similar finds at the ridge margins increase from approximately three other nearby sites, Mayer-Oakes defined 20 to 35 percent. As one final observation on the Panhandle Archaic Complex as a distinctive trends in burial location, Features 5, 37, 46 and riverine adaptation of prehistoric Native 62 are all situated within the approximate Americans in the Upper Ohio Valley, dating former boundary of shell midden at the site; sometime between 5000 and 3000 years ago. only Feature 1 lay outside the original Three years after Mayer-Oakes’ report on the distribution of shell discarded the site, situated East Steubenville Site, Crane and Griffin (1958) further to the north on the eastern flank. reported a radiocarbon date of 2270 BC (4220 BP) on shell from the site. Based on field counts, data recovery excavations at Site 46Br31 produced 52,419 lithic artifacts, In 1999-2000, GAI conducted data recovery 14,698 shell, and 3464 faunal remains (see excavations at Site 46Br31 (East Steubenville) Table 2). These artifact totals include large for the West Virginia Division of Highways. numbers of stone tools (383 bifaces, 37

62 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

unifaces) and approximately 241 cobble and harvested from large river, shallow water groundstone tools. The biface assemblage settings (likely from shoals in the Ohio River) includes more than 200 projectile points; of 300 feet below the ridgetop setting of the East these, most were Steubenville projectile points, Steubenville site. Shellfish were probably while perhaps one-quarter represent Brewerton harvested during the summer, when the river notched points. The recovery of several was at its lowest ebb. Brewerton points in pit features containing shell at Site 46Br31 suggest that shellfish Faunal analysis by Marie-Lorraine Pipes and procurement may have begun during the Steven Thomas reveals a diverse food base at presumed earlier Brewerton component. East Steubenville, including 16 species of mammal (dominated by deer), 8 species of fish, According to Jon Lothrop of GAI (pers. comm.. 5 species of bird, 5 of reptile and 2 of amphibia. 2003), artifact analysis (Dr. Kenneth Mohney, Deer were likely taken in fall and early winter. Renee Sobota, and Lisa Dugas) has revealed a Among fish remains, channel catfish were most diverse technology consisting of flaked stone, common, caught during middle and late spring. ground stone, cobble, bone and shell Fish comprise 38 percent of the faunal implements. As noted, hunting implements assemblage, emphasizing, along with shellfish, include Steubenville stemmed and lanceolate, the importance of riverine resources in the and Brewerton projectile points. The Panhandle Archaic diet. Studies of botanical nondiagnostic, flaked stone, assemblage is remains by Justine McKnight revealed that mast dominated by bifaces, including "unfinished" (including hickory, black walnut, and acorn) bifaces, drills, and an unusual biface tool was commonly collected during the fall for tentatively termed square-bit bifaces. consumption. Seeds of fleshy fruits and small grains are rare. Notably, there is no evidence of Preliminary microwear analysis of this last tool cultigens at the East Steubenville site, a striking class by Dr. Melody Pope indicates scraper use contrast to sites of the contemporaneous Shell on animal hides and other materials. Bifaces Mound Archaic in Kentucky; this absence of classified as unfinished early-, middle-, and late- cultigens may be a diagnostic trait of plant use stage bifaces, at first assumed to represent point in the Panhandle Archaic. manufacturing rejects, also bear microwear traces of use as processing tools. Early-stage Osteological studies of human remains at the bifaces were employed for plant processing or site by Dr. Paul Sciulli recognized six woodworking, while middle- and late-stage individuals, including one from a looted burial. bifaces show evidence of hide working. The All were adult, and analysis identified two inventory of ground stone tools includes three- males and two females, with ages at death quarter-grooved adzes and celts, suggesting both ranging from 20-30 to 45-55. Common heavy and light woodworking tasks. Cobble pathologies included severe tooth wear, tools, consisting of hammerstones, pitted stones, presumably from a gritty diet, and degenerative manos and metates suggest plant and lithic joint disease, reflecting the rigors of the processing activities. Bone and shell tools are Panhandle Archaic lifeway. also represented--these appear to be used for scraping activities and other tasks; their Situated on a ridgetop, the East Steubenville site presence as an alternative technology may is of moderate size, occupying 6400 sq. meters. explain the scarcity of unifacial and expedient Across this landform, shell midden and most stone tools in this unusual assemblage. features were distributed along the east and west flanks, areas for food resource processing; lithic Studies of freshwater mussel shell (Dr. Harold artifacts and debris on the ridgecrest likely Rollins, Lisa Dugas) show that Panhandle define general habitation and stone working Archaic Americans collected 26 species. areas. The site appears to represent a composite Habitat analysis shows that most species were of many reoccupations by groups of modest

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 63

size. Seasonality data suggests Native American chert/flint artifacts. Flint Ridge and Onondaga encampments during the spring, summer and cherts were used at three and two sites fall/early winter; however, moderate artifact respectively, while chalcedony and sandstone densities and lack of evidence for structures at were also recovered at one Late Archaic site East Steubenville suggests these occupations each. None of the single-component Late may have been typically intermittent rather than Archaic sites in PASS files identified Upper continuous in any given year. This scenario Mercer chert or steatite, the latter of which is a may signal increased redundancy of site use at hallmark of the terminal portion of the Late resource-rich locations along the Ohio River Archaic (Transitional Archaic). While these during the latter portion of the Late Archaic. data are limited, they suggest the use of chert, Evidence suggests that Native Americans at this several varieties of which were locally available time also occupied short-term, seasonal in and near Watershed D. Onondaga chert was encampments outside the Ohio Valley proper as also available in secondary cobble form part of their settlement round. throughout regional drainages and should be considered a local lithic raw material. D. LATE ARCHAIC SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE Late Archaic lithic raw material use data are PASS files and research reports provide data on also available in research reports from lithic raw material use during the Late Archaic Meadowcroft, Mungai Farm, Dravo, St. Joe #1, in Watershed D of Subbasin 20. Twenty sites in and Crivallero in Watershed D, as well as the PASS files are single-component Late Archaic East Steubenville Site within a few miles of the sites, 17 of which provide data regarding lithic watershed. All types of Late Archaic projectile raw material use. In addition, several research points are lumped together for the Cross Creek reports provide more specific information useful studies, thus there is no means to distinguish in reconstructing Late Archaic lithic raw differences in lithic raw material use and material use. Data from PASS files indicate that settlement patterns between Brewerton and 13 of the 17 single-component Late Archaic Steubenville site occupations. sites (with lithic raw material data) yielded

Table 26. Cross-Tabulation of Site by Lithic Raw Material (Presence or Absence) at Single Component Late Archaic Sites (PASS Files; X=present; --=absent).

Onondaga SITENO Chert/Flint Flint Ridge Chert Chalcedony Sandstone Not Identified 36Bv0035 X ------36Bv0171 X ------36Wh0170 ------X 36Wh0183 ------X 36Wh0348 X ------X -- 36Wh0355 X ------36Wh0357 X ------36Wh0398 ------X 36Wh0422 X -- -- X -- X 36Wh0549 X ------36Wh0566 X ------36Wh1192 X ------36Wh1193 -- -- X ------36Wh1194 X X ------36Wh1195 X X X ------36Wh1200 X X ------36Wh1202 X ------Total Sites 13 3 2 1 1 4

64 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Table 27. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material Type for Late Archaic Artifacts (Vento and Donohue 1982:124-127).

LOCATION ONON- KANA- FLINT UPPER M. BRUSH C. 10 UNION- GLACIAL OTHER TOTAL DAGA WHA RIDGE MILE TOWN PEBBLE PTS Meadowcroft (%) 6.1 29.0 12.6 18.4 15.1 7.7 1.2 2.4 7.6 245 Mungai Farm (%) 15.9 7.2 11.1 15.9 15.9 15.9 12.6 2.4 2.5 207 Cross Cr Sites (%) 19.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 13.0 32.2 3.2 6.5 6.5 31 Total Points (n) 54 88 56 80 74 62 30 13 26 483 Total % 11.2 18.2 11.6 16.6 15.3 12.8 6.2 2.7 5.4 100

Nevertheless, the Cross Creek studies, as shown chert and one Uniontown chert flake, suggesting above in Table 27, indicate the use of a variety use of locally collected lithic raw materials. of cherts, including (in order of preference) Kanawha, Upper Mercer, Brush Creek, 10 Mile, Berger (1988) conducted Phase I and II Flint Ridge, Onondaga, Uniontown, and glacial excavations at the Crivallero Site (36Bv122) pebble. Local cherts and exotic cherts were near the confluence of Little Traverse Creek and used, indicating curation and replacement of Raccoon Creek. This site yielded 242 lithic broken exotic chert points with points produced artifacts, including 10 projectile points. from local stones. The high incidence of Flint Diagnostic artifacts were restricted to four Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts indicates travel probable Brewerton points and one Early and trade to east-central Ohio, while use of Woodland Adena stemmed point. While several Kanawha chert indicates travel to north-central chert types, including Flint Ridge, Onondaga, West Virginia. Recent studies of Kanawha chert Uniontown, Upper Mercer, Shriver, and jasper artifacts by Brian Fritz (pers. comm. 2003; were identified in the assemblage, no tables Mohney and Lothrop 2003) have indicated presenting the counts and percentages of each possibly local sources of Kanawha-like chert in type were presented in the report. southwestern Pennsylvania; given the high incidence of the material at the Cross Creek Isolated Onondaga chert Brewerton projectile sites, a local source for the material is likely. points were recovered during two Phase I surveys in Watershed D. One of the points was Excavations at the Dravo site (36Bv240) recovered on an upland near the mouth of revealed more than 14,000 lithic artifacts from Raccoon Creek and the Ohio River (Baker an upper terrace of the Ohio River near 1996), while the other was recovered during Georgetown (Davis 1988, n.d.; Davis and Lantz STP excavation along a small creek in Raccoon 1987). Phase I/II excavations at the site yielded Creek state park (Eddins 1982:52). five Steubenville points and three Brewerton points (Davis and Lantz 1987), while Phase III Excavations in the Late Archaic components of studies yielded 27 Laurentian points (Brewerton the East Steubenville Site, a few miles west of and Otter Creek), but no Steubenville points. Watershed D, indicated differential use of lithic Fourteen of the Laurentian points were raw materials during the Brewerton and produced from local Onondaga cobble chert, Steubenville occupations (Mohney 2002; with the remainder produced from Delaware, Mohney and Lothrop 2003). A total of 119 Upper Mercer/Coshocton, Flint Ridge and Steubenville and 82 Brewerton points were untyped gray chert (Davis 1988:65). recovered at the East Steubenville site. For the Brewerton assemblage, Onondaga chert (55%) At the St. Joe #1 Site (36Bv230) on Raccoon and other local cobble cherts (20%) comprise 75 Creek near Monaca, Cosgrove and Michael percent of the total projectile point assemblage, (1986) identified a small lithic scatter with a while Upper Mercer chert from east-central Brewerton side-notched point. Lithic raw Ohio was also popular. In order of importance, materials included 7 flakes of Onondaga pebble Brewerton points were produced from

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 65

Onondaga, Gull River, Upper Mercer, and yielding abundant faunal and botanical remains, untyped black and gray cherts. and wide varieties of tools and features (including human and dog burials). This appears In comparison, a wider variety of cherts were to be true both in the Upper Ohio Valley at sites used to produce the Steubenville points at the like East Steubenville and within the Raccoon site, including a predominance of bedrock Creek Valley, at sites like 36Bv17 and 36Bv52, cherts, such as Ten Mile chert. In order of discussed above. While these latter two sites did importance, Steubenville points were produced not yield shell middens or burials, they were from Ten Mile, untyped black, Upper Mercer, comparatively more dense and diverse in terms Brush Creek, and Uniontown cherts. Both of artifacts than Brewerton point sites (Mayer- Brewerton and Steubenville points were Oakes 1955:141,144). Sites with Steubenville frequently produced from Flint Ridge and Upper points were either occupied: 1) on multiple Mercer cherts from east-central Ohio. The occasions during a restricted timeframe, as predominance of bedrock cherts for Steubenville suggested by Lothrop (pers. comm., 2003); or 2) points contrasts with the heavier use of local were occupied once by numerous individuals. If cobble cherts for Brewerton points. the former is true, then the sites suggest multiple reoccupations of the same landform for shell Mohney and Lothrop (2003) argue that the processing, an intensive subsistence strategy not reliance on primary source cherts for commonly seen at Brewerton point sites. If the Steubenville points was likely due to its higher latter is true, then these Steubenville point sites quality and larger raw size. Steubenville points could be interpreted as incipient villages. In are larger than Brewerton points and it would contrast to these sites with Steubenville points, have been difficult to produce Steubenville Brewerton sites in Subbasin 20 and the Upper points using small chert cobbles. Thus, the Ohio Valley are more numerous, but generally morphology of the collected raw material was consist of low-density lithic reduction stations important in determining which raw materials and/or small campsites with limited artifact were used during the Late Archaic period. The diversity. sources of lithic raw materials also suggest more widespread travel patterns for individuals using These differences in settlement patterns, site Steubenville points, compared to those that used types, and chert use may reflect fundamental Brewerton points (Mohney and Lothrop 2003). differences in land-use and lithic technologies of the respective Late Archaic sub-periods. E. LATE ARCHAIC: CONCLUSION AND Brewerton point sites are reminiscent of Early RESEARCH QUESTIONS and Middle Archaic sites in Watershed D of Subbasin 20. However, by the end of the Late Late Archaic Overview Archaic, during what some have called the Data provided in PASS files and research “Panhandle Archaic” (Mayer-Oakes 1955; reports provide a means to compare sites with Mohney 2002), Steubenville point sites mostly Brewerton and Steubenville points within resemble Transitional Archaic sites in other Watershed D of Subbasin 20. Generally, PASS parts of Pennsylvania (compare with the data indicate that Panhandle Archaic/ Transitional Period of the Upper Juniata Steubenville settlement was less dense (fewer Subbasin; MacDonald 2003a). Sites with sites), but encompassed a wider range of Steubenville points, thus, appear to mark the landforms and drainages than Brewerton sites. beginning of the transition from the mobile Sites with Steubenville points are within both forager lifestyle of the Archaic to the more uplands and lowlands and within the Raccoon sedentary, horticultural lifestyle of the Creek and Cross Creek drainages, while subsequent Woodland. Brewerton sites tend to be more in lowlands of Raccoon Creek. Most importantly, Steubenville While agricultural remains, steatite, pottery, and point sites are generally richer in artifacts, broadspears are not recovered at Steubenville

66 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

/Panhandle Archaic sites, many other site traits 7. If so, is it best to include Panhandle are similar to Transitional Archaic sites, Archaic/Steubenville sites within the including similar timeframes, subsistence Transitional/Terminal Archaic period? patterns, site sizes, and intensity of site 8. How can we explain the lack of Steubenville occupations. As such, researchers in the Upper points at the Leetsdale site, given its Ohio Valley may want to consider the proximity and similar age to Steubenville “Panhandle Archaic/Steubenville” sites as sites in the Upper Ohio and Raccoon Creek representative of a distinct regional sub-culture Valleys? within the “Transitional/Terminal Archaic 9. Why don’t these Transitional-era sites in the Period” in the Upper Ohio Valley. Upper Ohio Valley yield early evidence of agriculture, as do sites in central and eastern Pennsylvania? Late Archaic Research Questions 10. Why wasn’t any steatite recovered at This summary of Late Archaic archaeological Steubenville, which dates to approximately data in and near Watershed D of Subbasin 20 the same time period as the Transitional has generated several research issues which Period occupations of Leetsdale? should be considered when conducting archaeological work in the area. Twelve Late 11. Does Leetsdale represent the western-most extent of steatite use in Pennsylvania? Archaic research questions are listed below; this list is by no means comprehensive and should be 12. Are the birdpoints at Leetsdale the eastern- used only as a starting point for generating most expression of that point type? additional research issues. Archaeological sites which can provide information pertaining to these and other research questions will likely meet National Register Criterion D; thus, unless they lack integrity, sites which address these research questions will be eligible for listing in the National Register for Historic Places:

1. Does the Brewerton portion of the Late Archaic represent a continuation of the Middle and Early Archaic?

2. Does the increase in recorded Brewerton sites imply an increase in populations

compared to the Early and Middle Archaic?

3. Why are there more Brewerton sites than Steubenville Sites? 4. What accounts for the differences in lithic raw material use between Brewerton and Steubenville populations? 5. Does the transition between Brewerton and Steubenville represent a population replacement or an in-situ evolution of Late Archaic cultures? 6. Does the increasing site size and density of Steubenville sites suggest that Native Americans were transitioning into a Woodland-type culture?

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 67

(This page intentionally blank)

68 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

CHAPTER VIII EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD 3000 to 2100 BP

A. EARLY WOODLAND OVERVIEW Atlantic (Custer 1996:242) and Meadowood The Early Woodland period witnessed the cultures in New York (Ritchie 1980:180-200; continuation of trends that emerged during the Snow 1980:267). Additional descriptions of end of the Late Archaic period at chronology, material culture, and site types are Steubenville/Panhandle Archaic sites. The described below for Adena sites in the Upper emergence of pottery, mound building, and Ohio Valley and Watershed D. agriculture are hallmarks of the Early Woodland period. Although the subsistence base continued B. EARLY WOODLAND MATERIAL to be based on hunted and gathered resources, CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY horticulture gradually assumed greater Early Woodland Material Culture importance during the Early Woodland (Clay 1991). The emergence of the Adena cultural As introduced above, the prominent settlement complex in the central Ohio Valley directly pattern for Early Woodland cultures in the involved populations in Watershed D. Site Upper Ohio Valley consisted of mortuary/ritual densities are low for the Early Woodland in the sites on alluvial terraces of major streams and study area, with only 22 Early Woodland sites rivers and resource extraction camps in uplands compared to 68 during the preceding Late and along smaller streams. As such, material Archaic. Whether this reduction in site counts is culture between the two site types varies, with due to population decrease/dispersement or the ceremonial sites containing typical Adena nucleation of populations into fewer sites is an burial goods, while the resource extraction important issue. camps contain a limited range of food production and processing artifacts, typical of Beginning in the latter portion of the Early Archaic forager camps. One change from the Woodland, Native Americans of the Adena Archaic camps is the presence of pottery and culture built burial mounds and other occasional domesticates at Early Woodland ceremonial facilities along the Ohio River, as campsites. Material culture for Early Woodland well as along the mid-Atlantic coast (Adena) sites is discussed below. Figure 14 shows the and in New York (Meadowood). Important locations of important Early Woodland sites mounds near the study area include Grave Creek mentioned in the text. Mound (Hemmings 1977), Cresap Mound (Dragoo 1963), and McKees Rocks Mound McMichael (1971:89) and Mayer-Oakes (McMichael 1956), all of which are on the (1955:153), based on data from the McKees Upper Ohio River. The structure and size of Rocks Mound near Pittsburgh, and several other Adena ceremonial complexes was highly mounds along the Upper Ohio Valley, indicate variable, ranging from small incipient Adena that Upper Ohio Valley Adena burial mound ceremonial sites to large mound complexes. sites typically contain one or more of the following diagnostic characteristics: In uplands above major drainages, Adena peoples occupied small camps and engaged in · Adena/Cresap Stemmed (Figure 13-1A) and short-term extractive activities, such as lithic Robbins (Figure 13-1C) points and food processing (Schweikart 1998:17). This · Adena Plain and Half-Moon grit-tempered site distribution pattern of mounds in larger cordmarked and plain pottery river valleys and camps in uplands resembles · Groundstone (gorgets, tubular pipes, celts that used by Adena cultures in the Middle and tablets) and bone tools (awls, needles)

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 69

· Rolled copper beads and bracelets and cut mica. · Copper gorgets (Figure 13-3A; McMichael 1956:142) · conical mounds with prepared soil base or floor upon high-order alluvial terrace · underlying primary mound built of a midden · sacred circle earthwork with interior ditches underlying mound · central sub-floor pit · clay cap for primary mound · cremations · log-tomb burials · body extended in flesh · red ochre deposits · double-posted circular houses

Some of the traits listed above, including mound type and location, burial practices, and ceremonial items are also common at Middle Woodland Hopewell mounds; thus, diagnostic artifacts and features with radiocarbon dates aid in distinguishing Early and Middle Woodland sites. Several mound locations in the Upper Figure 13. Early Woodland/Adena Artifacts (from Ohio Valley were used repeatedly and, thus, Dragoo 1963:179). may contain evidence of stratified pre-mound component Adena, and Hopewell occupations, as at McKees Rocks Mound near Pittsburgh Pottery, comprised mainly of grit-tempered (McMichael 1956:144-145). plain wares, such as Half-Moon Plain and Cordmarked and Adena Plain, was introduced The pottery and point types mentioned above during the Early Woodland. Grit-tempered are also common at non-mound Early Woodland Adena Plain was recovered at McKees Rocks sites, including food processing camps and Mound near Pittsburgh (McMichael 1956: 139) lithic-reduction stations. The diagnostic Early and is the most common pottery type at Adena Woodland projectile points (see Figure 13) in sites in the lower and middle Ohio Valley western Pennsylvania include Cresap stemmed (Lothrop 2001b). (2950 to 2400 BP), Adena stemmed/ovate (2750-2250 BP), Meadowood points (2500-2790 Mayer-Oakes (1955:214) states that Half-Moon BP; Ritchie 1980:181), and Robbins stemmed Cordmarked ware is “definitely associated with points (2400 BP to 1750 BP) (Dragoo 1963; Adena mounds and is the earliest unit in our Justice 1987:191-196). Early Woodland points pottery sequence.” Vessels have lugs and flat are also commonly produced from Flint Ridge bases, similar to earlier steatite and groundstone chert, indicative of the widespread Adena ties to vessels, another indication that it represents an Ohio (George 1975). early, transitional pottery type. Half-Moon Cordmarked was produced using coils malleated

70 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

with a cordwrapped paddle (Mayer-Oakes 1955:184-185). Temper was crushed grit, predominantly granite, but occasionally chert or · 125±125 BC (1950-2200 BP; SI- limestone. Interior surfaces of the vessels were 2362); charcoal from firepits/upper smoothed, while the cordmarking on the exterior 1/3 of Stratum V (F-14). is vertical near the rim, but in multiple · 205±65 BC (2090-2220 BP; SI- directions on the vessel body. Vessel thickness 2487); charcoal from firepits/upper ranges from 10-20mm, with a mean of 14mm 1/3 of Stratum V (F-14; associated (Lothrop 2001b). with 10-, 12-, and 14-row corn fragments). Mayer-Oakes (1955:189) states that · 340±90 BC (2200-2380 BP; SI- 2051); charcoal from firepits/upper “evidence from the Georgetown site [in 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16; associated with 16-row corn fragments). Watershed D on the Ohio River] places this · 375±75 BC (1950-2200 BP; SI- type at the bottom of the pottery sequence 1674); charcoal from firepits/upper and it may well be the earliest pottery in 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16; associated with 16-row corn fragments). the area.” · 535±350 BC (2135-2835 BP; SI- 2359); charcoal from firepits/upper Confirmation of the early age of Half-moon 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16). cordmarked ware was found at Meadowcroft · 705±120 BC (2535-2775 BP; SI- Rockshelter, which yielded two vessels dated to 3031); charcoal from firepits/upper 2815 BP and 3065 BP, respectively (Johnson 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16). 1982:142), the earliest occurrence of this pottery · 865±80 BC (2735-2895 BP; SI- type in the Upper Ohio Valley (see radiocarbon 1665); charcoal from dates below). McKees Rocks Mound also firefloor/middle 1/3 of Stratum IV yielded significant quantities (79 sherds) of (F-16; Feature 60B; Half-Moon chert-tempered Half-Moon plain pottery. All of Cordmarked vessel; associated with the sherds are likely “from one vessel, which squash remains). was plain-surfaced, thick, crude, and flat- · 870±75 BC (2745-2895 BP; SI- bottomed” (McMichael 1956:139). McMichael 1665); charcoal from firepit/middle further comments that Half-Moonware at 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16; associated McKees Rocks generally resembles Fayette with squash remains). Thick, the most common type at Adena sites · 910±80 BC (2780-2940 BP; SI- further downstream on the Ohio River to the 1660); charcoal from south and west (Figure 14). firepits/firefloors/lower 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16). Early Woodland Chronology · 1100±85 BC (2965-3135 BP; SI- Early Woodland Radiocarbon Dates in 2049); charcoal from Watershed D firepits/firefloors/lower 1/3 of Stratum IV (F-16). Within the study area, Early Woodland sites with radiocarbon dates are infrequent, including · 1115±80 BC (2985-3145 BP; SI- only Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the 1664); charcoal from firepits/upper Georgetown Site. At Meadowcroft, nine features 1/3 of Stratum III (F-18; Feature yielded Early Woodland radiocarbon dates, 60; associated with Half-Moon suggesting frequent use of the site at that time Cordmarked vessel and squash (Stuckenrath et al. 1982:80): remains).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 71

Ohioview Georgetown Figure 14. Location of Early Woodland Sites Discussed in Text.

Leetsdale D Ohio River A14

- McKees C

-- Early Woodland/Adena Rocks Beaver County Mound 10 - Sites in and Near Pittsburgh Allegheny County

441 Ohio River - Watershed D Washington County F Harmon Cr. Map Key Raccoon Creek Sites outside of Watershed D Peters MayviewBend/ Creek

DWG. NO 20 02 Sites in Watershed D Meadowcroft Mayview Depot Cross Creek Mound Watershed Boundary Mungai Farm River/Stream in Watershed D Avella Mound 10/03 Crall River/Stream not in Watershed D Buffalo Creek Mound County Line DATE 7/

Chartiers Creek jcl

PENNSYLVANIA E

Monongahela River

Ohio River WEST VIRGINIA

Wheeling Creek DRAWN DHM APPROVED Grave Creek Mound To Ohio River Scale Cresap Mound 0 5 10 miles

Ohio River C0NSULTANTS, INC. Subbasin 20

gai Pennsylvania

Figure 14 Map of Early Woodland Sites

72 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

These dates suggest multiple occupations of the 974), 2190±200 BP (M-975), 2240±150 BP (M- rockshelter between ca. 3,100 and 2,000 years 976), and 2506±175 BP (Gulf) have also been ago, squarely within the Early Woodland. An recorded at Cresap Mound, a few miles south of Early Woodland Adena Ovate-based point was Grave Creek Mound (McConaughy 1990:3). recovered in Stratum V, while the Early Cotiga Mound in the middle Ohio River Valley Woodland Feature 60 yielded the earliest Half- of County, West Virginia, yielded 20 Moon cordmarked pottery in the Upper Ohio Early Woodland radiocarbon dates between ca. Valley. Corn and squash remains were also 3000 BP and 2000 BP, with moundbuilding recovered in well-dated features (see above) in focused between 205 BC and 75 AD the Early Woodland levels of Meadowcroft. (Frankenburg and Henning 1994:179).

At the Georgetown Site on a first terrace overlooking the Ohio River (near the Ohio state C. EARLY WOODLAND, SUBSISTENCE, line), Mayer-Oakes (Davis n.d.) obtained a date SITE TYPES, AND LOCATION TRENDS of ca. 2300 BP (173±80 BC) from a hearth feature with fragments of Half-Moonware Early Woodland Subsistence ceramics. With the date of ca. 1100 BC from Across Eastern North America, the Early Meadowcroft, the two dates represent the Woodland subsistence base continued to be earliest and latest occurrences of this pottery based on hunted and gathered resources, with type in Watershed D. horticulture gradually assuming greater importance during the Early Woodland, Early Woodland Radiocarbon Dates in including the domestication of squash, Peripheral Areas chenopod, maygrass, sumpweed, and sunflower While only Meadowcroft and Georgetown have (Hart 1995b; Smith 1987). Ethnobotanical yielded Early Woodland radiocarbon dates remains from various Early Woodland sites within the study area, several sites further south suggest that, while domesticates were on the Upper Ohio River have yielded dated introduced, they were dominated by the use of Early Woodland components. The Leetsdale widely available wild plant foods (Adovasio and Site (Fenicle 2003) has yielded two terminal Johnson 1981; Ballweber 1989; Ritchie 1980). Late Archaic/Early Woodland dates from charcoal in hearth features: 3370±40 BP (BC Meadowcroft Rockshelter yielded the oldest Beta-177514; Feature 1, Block 1) and 2940±40 radiocarbon dates for squash (Cucurbita sp.) in BP (Beta-177992; Feature 3). With the Half- the Upper Ohio Valley, including 1115±80, Moon ceramics, Leetsdale contains a substantial 870±75, and 865±80 BC (Cushman 1982: 207; terminal Late Archaic/Early Woodland Adovasio and Johnson 1981; Lothrop 2001b). component. The Crawford-Grist #2 Site Meadowcroft documents the first (36FA262), an Early Woodland hamlet on the cultigens in the Ohio Valley as well, having Monongahela River, yielded two features with yielded specimens of 16-row corn associated radiocarbon dates of 2370±150 BP (DIC- with dates of 375 and 340 BC, and 10-, 12-, and 3061A; Feature 46) and 2430±55 BP (DIC- 14-row corn dated to 205 BC (Adovasio and 3105; Feature 53) (Grantz 1986:18). Johnson 1981: 67, 72, Table 2). While acceptable as the earliest dates for maize in the A radiocarbon date from a pooled charcoal Ohio Valley, the lack of similar evidence on any sample obtained during coring at Grave Creek other sites in the region suggests that corn Mound, in Moundsville, West Virginia (only 25 horticulture represented only a minor miles southwest of the study area) yielded a date constituent of subsistence adaptations at this of 2150 BP (200±225 BC; Uga1324; Fowler et time. al. 1976:119; Hemmings 1984; McConaughy 1990:3). Additional dates of 2020±150 BP (M- Meadowcroft has also produced evidence for limited use of seed-bearing plants and fruits

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 73

during the Early Woodland. Seeds of amaranth, construction episode capping one burial goosefoot and knotweed are associated with a event; in many cases, these mounds were date of 980±75 BC (although apparently none accretional and grew in size over time as show evidence of domestication); fleshy fruits, including remains of raspberry/blackberry, additional burials and mound-capping cherry and grape have been dated to 980 and episodes were added. Evidence for mortuary 865 BC (Cushman 1982: table 4). Evidence of ritual associated with mound burials is nut exploitation during the Archaic at highly variable in terms of post-mortem Meadowcroft is also reflected for Early treatment of the body, choice of crypt or Woodland components by small amounts of walnut, hickory, and acorn associated with ninth grave pit construction for interment of the and tenth-century BC radiocarbon dates. By 340 body, types of grave goods included in the BC, greater quantities of preserved nutshell, interment, and positioning of the burial especially walnut, may indicate increasing use within the overall mound structure, to name of this resource (Cushman 1982: Table 3; a few. Lothrop 2001b).

Evidence of wild resource exploitation was also Evidence of Circular Post Structures has identified at the Leetsdale Site. Phase II been identified at many Adena mound sites excavations identified a Half-Moon Cordmarked in the lower and middle Ohio River Valley, pottery fragment that tested positive for rabbit most often below the mound itself (Clay during immunological analysis, while a stone bowl/mortar tested positive for mustard 1998: 6-9; Clay and Niquette 1992). None (Fennicle 2003). Finally, botanical remains from of these site types has been identified in the Early Woodland occupations at Crawford-Grist Upper Ohio River Valley. This evidence #2 in Fayette County, Pennsylvania, included consists of distinctive paired-postmold freshwater mussel shellfish remains, hickory patterns arranged in symmetric circles up to and acorn nut, black/raspberry, and starchy seed plants (Grantz 1986: 16-17). 30m in diameter that represent the remains of former freestanding wooden post Adena Site Types in the Ohio River Valley structures; the structures were originally Along with resource procurement camps of the Early Woodland (such as Meadowcroft interpreted as residential in function, Rockshelter), researchers currently recognize perhaps representing the dwelling of a high four basic Adena mortuary ritual site types in status individual that was later buried within the Ohio River Valley: burial mounds, circular the mound (Webb 1941b). These paired- post structures, ceremonial circles, and large postmold circles are now viewed as ditched villages (Clay 1998; Lothrop and Munford 2001). Only burial mounds and evidence of sometimes-roofless structures ceremonial circles are known to occur in the that predated burial mound construction and Upper Ohio River Valley. The site types and represent the locations of "mortuary camps" their respective roles in mortuary ritual activities (Seeman 1977, 1986). Activities likely are reviewed below in an excerpt from Lothrop involved preparation of the deceased for and Munford (2001: 170-175). burial, with the paired-post structure serving Burial Mounds represent the most obtrusive as a permeable screen arena for these and most heavily investigated Adena mortuary rituals before burial elsewhere mortuary ritual site type (Clay 1998). Adena (Clay 1998:6-8). mounds minimally represent a single

74 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Ceremonial Circles represent a relatively ditch and stockade construction (Clay rare Adena mortuary ritual facility (GAI 1988). Originally viewed as evidence of 2002). In their simplest form, these small Adena "villages" within defensive earthworks consist of a symmetric circular constructions (Webb and Snow 1945), these ditch with the excavated spoil placed on the sites are now interpreted as having been outside of the ditch to form an exterior used by the Adena for ritual purposes and/or berm; in all cases, the ditch-and-berm for processing and distribution of exotic construction is broken by one or more ritual goods such as barite artifacts (Clay entryways (Clay 1998: 9-10; Otto 1979). In 1988). This site type is not known in the part, variability in ceremonial circles Upper Ohio River Valley. reflects decisions by corporate groups at one or more times to modify the site, For the Upper Ohio Valley region, archeologists thereby altering the ritual use of locations have recorded two of the four Adena mortuary site types defined above, including accretional marked by these ceremonial circles (Clay burial mounds and ceremonial circle 1998). At Mt. Horeb, a post circle was built earthworks. Ditched village sites have not been within the ditch and berm construction identified with certainty, and paired-post circles (Webb 1941a). At other ceremonial circles, are conspicuously absent (pers. comm., burial mounds were built within the limits J.Lothrop, 2003; Lothrop 2001b).

of the interior ditch (e.g., the Biggs Circle- Hardesty 1964) or on top of the entire Key Adena/Early Woodland Sites near Watershed D ceremonial Circle (Gay Mound; Clay 1998: Mayer-Oakes (1955:142-153) reports on several 10). In other cases, ceremonial circles Adena mound sites in the Upper Ohio River encompassed both mound and paired-post Valley near Watershed D, which McMichael constructions (e.g., Dominion Land (1971:89) groups into three “mound clusters,” Company site) (Otto 1979). At Grave Creek, two of which are pertinent to the current study a ditch surrounding the 240-foot diameter area. The Grave Creek mound group is centered on the Upper Ohio Valley in the northern mound was built either prior to, or during panhandle of West Virginia, while the Forks of one of the stages of, mound construction the Ohio group is centered near the confluence (Hemmings 1978). Unlike other ceremonial of the three rivers in Pittsburgh. Several Early circles, the circular ditch at Grave Creek Woodland habitation sites are also present near lacked an adjoining exterior berm, a Watershed D, including Leetsdale, Mayview Bend, and Crawford Grist #2. Figure 14, above, characteristic interpreted by Hemmings shows the locations of these and other important (1978: 24) as evidence that the Adena Adena sites in and near the study area. The two excavators of the ditch contributed the mound clusters discussed here effectively resulting spoil to mound construction surround Watershed D of Subbasin 20 and (Hemmings 1978). indicates a significant Adena presence in the study area.

Large Ditched Villages, the fourth Adena Grave Creek Mound Group ritual site type, consist of very large, Grave Creek Mound (Moundsville, West irregular subcircular enclosures—the best Virginia; Hemmings 1977; McMichael 1971) is example, Peter Village, involved a massive ca. 25 miles southwest of Watershed D on the Ohio River and is the largest earthwork in

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 75

McMichael’s Grave Creek Mound Group. Dragoo (1963:141) reports that more than 2,000 Measuring 19 meters (62 feet) high and 73 disk shell beads, hundreds of marginella shell meters (240 feet) in diameter, Grave Creek beads, as well as numerous gorgets, copper dwarfs all other recorded mounds in the Upper bracelets, mica, and an engraved stone tablet Ohio Valley and dates to ca. 2100 BP were recovered in burials at Grave Creek (Hemmings 1984:3; McConaughy 1990:3). Mound. Tombs at Grave Creek consisted of a Grave Creek mound's dimensions indicate that heavy crib-like log structure, rather than simple 1.2 million cubic feet of soil was required for pits with overlying logs as at Cresap Mound construction, work that was probably carried out further downstream. The increased complexity in several stages involving soil borrowing from of the Grave Creek burials may indicate a later locations on Grave Creek Flats and, in occupation (Dragoo 1963; McConaughy 1990). conjunction with associated mortuary rituals and grave construction, basket-by-basket placement Cresap Mound (Dragoo 1963; McConaughy of spoil at this location (Hemmings 1977, 1984). 1990; McMichael 1971) is also within the Grave Fowler et al.’s (1976:112) report on the 1975- Creek Mound group of sites on the Upper Ohio 1976 investigations at Grave Creek Mound River. Dating to ca. 2000-2500 BP (see dates indicated that the ditch underlying the mound above), Cresap Mound ( is located 6.5 miles was ca. 40 ft. wide, 4-5 ft. deep, and south of Moundsville (ca. 30 miles south of the symmetrical with an opening to the south. Cores current study area). Excavated by the Carnegie drilled within the mound itself indicated Museum in 1958 under the direction of Don heterogeneous bands of fill likely denoting Dragoo, this stratified Adena mound was basket loads, a pattern observed at Cotiga underlain by a prepared clay floor, a series of Mound in Mingo County, West Virginia as well burials and other features, and an encircling (Frankenberg and Henning 1994). Underneath backfilled trench. Dragoo's (1963: 33-35) the mound was a surrounding moat—a possible sequence of feature and mound construction at example of a ceremonial circle, described the Cresap Mound documents changes over time above. in mortuary ritual at the site and provides a basis for evaluating the function and origin of Adena mounds.

Figure 15. Profiles of Cresap Mound (from Dragoo 1963:21).

76 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

As summarized by Lothrop and Munford subsequent capping episodes covering the three (2001:176), a condensed synopsis of these small initial mounds. Clay and Niquette (1992) events at Cresap Mound includes: have suggested that the submound prepared-clay surface at the Kirk Mound was periodically 1. Removal of topsoil from an area swept clean following ritual activities that approximating the subsequent mound preceded mound construction. At Cresap, if the footprint; same kinds of site maintenance were conducted 2. Creation of central fire pit; on the prepared clay floor (the "stage" for premound mortuary rituals [e.g., ritual food 3. Spreading of circular, prepared clay floor preparation, feasting, kindling of cremation measuring 12.2 meters (40 feet) across; fires]), the Feature 14 trench could have served 4. Creation of a circular trench (Feature 14) as a fortuitous trap or intentional receptacle for around the clay floor perimeter; debris from ritual activities that was later swept 5. Activity in the southwest quadrant of Feature off the prepared surface. 14 interior space: interment of Burials 11 and 28 and features 10 and 19 burial pits, Forks of the Ohio Mound Group subsequently covered by construction of Among the Forks of the Ohio Group of mounds small burial mound ("West Primary (McMichael 1971), the most pertinent to this Mound") containing additional burials; study is McKees Rocks Mound near Pittsburgh 6. Activity in southern sector of Feature 14 (McMichael 1956). Peters Creek Mound and interior space: additional burials and Crall Mound, further south on the Monongahela cremation basins (including burial 21 pit River, are the eastern-most Adena mounds in superimposed on feature 14), covered by southwestern Pennsylvania. construction of second small mound;

7. Activity in eastern sector of Feature 14 McKees Rocks Mound was originally excavated interior space: Feature 28 burial, with an in the late 1890s by the Carnegie Museum, with associated "clay bench" superimposed on the subsequent mound interpretations by inner edge of the Feature 14 trench, covered by construction of third small mound McMichael (1956) and Mayer-Oakes (1955; containing additional burials; Photograph 12). Based on these studies (Figure 16), the mound appears to have been built in 8. Feature 15, cremation pit placed in three phases, including a prepared clay floor depression between southern and eastern mounds, followed by construction of single with a central burial of an Adena female. This conical mound cap covering all three small burial was subsequently covered with a layer of mounds—subsequent intermediate stages of charcoal and ash interpreted as the remains of a mound capping further expanded the mound burned burial structure. Atop this layer of ash footprint, covering all of Feature 14. were placed two additional episodes of fill, effectively forming the shape of the conical The placement of premound and initial small mound. The mound contained mostly extended mound features within and on the margins of burials, with lesser amounts of bundle burials Cresap Mound Feature 14 provides the obvious and cremations. The primary mound contained interpretation suggested by Clay (1998:18) for only the single burial, while the two later Adena ceremonial earthwork circles: that the mounds contained five and 29, respectively, Feature 14 trench served to define premound suggesting that the final occupation was the ritual space at the site and structure the most intensive. Artifacts recovered from the performance of initial mortuary rites. burials include numerous columnella and Stratigraphic information indicates that the marginella shell beads, antler and bone tools, a Feature 14 trench was filled prior to reel-shaped gorget, and a piece of plain twined construction of the Feature 28 burial and the fabric enclosing a copper sheath (Dragoo overlying small eastern mound, as well as 1963:151-159).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 77

Peters Creek Mound on the Monongahela is the eastern-most Adena mound in the Upper Ohio Valley (see Figure 14). In 1890, the mound measured 80 ft. in diameter and was ca. six ft. tall, diminished by multiple plowings. The mound contained a central burial area with human bone and other features, but the early excavations were not controlled, so records are scant (Dragoo 1963:159). Artifacts from Peters Creek include celts, a grooved axe, shell beads, columnella beads, two copper gorgets, three trips of folded copper, two copper sheaths (one with a bear tooth), and abundant red ocher (Dragoo 1963:159-160). Photograph 12. View of McKees Rocks Mound Prior to the 1896 Excavations (from Dragoo 1963:153) Crall Mound in Monongahela City, Washington County, Pennsylvania, is also within the Forks of the Ohio Group, measuring some 60 ft. wide and nine ft. tall. Several smaller mounds indicated the likely presence of mound complex within the current city limits, most of which have been destroyed by modern development. As with the other Adena mounds in the region, the base of the mound was comprised of a clay floor with a central burial area with skeletal remains of at least five individuals buried with numerous ceremonial items (including a copper gorget, tubular pipe, and a copper strip) and covered with wood or bark. The primary mound was then enclosed by another mound layer including ash possibly related to a burial structure burn event.

Early Woodland Non-Mound Sites outside the Study Area In addition to Meadowcroft (discussed above), a handful of Early Woodland habitation sites have been excavated in the Upper Ohio Valley, including Crawford-Grist #2, Leetsdale, and Mayview Depot/Mayview Bend (Lothrop 2001b). The Crawford-Grist site #2 (Grantz 1986) is located in Fayette County, Pennsylvania, occupying an upland bench and saddle, 125 meters above the adjacent Monongahela River. Although no Adena points were recovered, flat-bottomed Adena Plain Figure 16. Profile and Planview of McKees Rocks pottery, a fireclay tubular pipe fragment, and Mound (from McMichael 1956:148). accepted radiocarbon dates of 480 and 420 BC, collectively indicate contemporaneity with some

78 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

of the earlier Adena mortuary ritual sites in the At Mayview Bend (Robertson et al. 1998), the region (although Half-Moon Cordmarked large number features radiocarbon dated to pottery suggests Early Woodland occupation as 1040-570 BC indicated that site occupation was well). Plowzone stripping revealed a moderate heaviest during this Initial Early Woodland density of small cultural features, including timeframe. Investigators interpret Mayview hearth basins; U-shaped, conical and flat- Bend as a location for limited or specialized bottomed pits; and several postmolds, some of activities during both Initial Early Woodland which may represent temporary structures or and later Woodland occupations and believe the windbreaks (Grantz 1986: 3-8). As noted earlier, site was contemporaneous with the nearby feature flotation produced a small sample of Mayview Depot habitation site (Lothrop 2001b). subsistence remains, including freshwater mussel shell, fish scales and calcined bone, and The pre-500 BC Woodland occupations at carbonized remains of hickory and acorn, Mayview Depot and Mayview Bend may be blackberry/raspberry, and possible carbonized viewed as "clusters of interrelated activities." starchy seed plants (Grantz 1986: 16-17). Further, the observations of low artifact density at the Mayview Depot and Mayview Bend sites, These data, in combination with a simple and the near absence of stone tools that the latter artifact assemblage of pottery and stone tools site, together suggest that the paucity of (biface fragments, expedient unifacial recorded Early Woodland (1100-5/400 BC) sites implements, hammerstones and anvils, and a in the Upper Ohio Valley may reflect the low rounded-end celt) suggests a suite of campsite archaeological visibility of many of these sites activities consisting of tool manufacture, and raises questions about the criteria used for woodworking, expedient tool use, and food site definition. processing and consumption. Grantz (1986: 18) interprets the site as a short-term encampment Finally, another habitation site occupied during by "one or more extended families" during the the Early Woodland is the Leetsdale Site late summer through late autumn or early (46AL480) on the north bank of the Ohio River, winter. The presence of mostly local lithic raw less than a mile from Watershed D. As noted materials in the stone tool assemblage, and above (see radiocarbon dates), one of the most minor amounts of Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer substantial components of the site was deposited cherts (Grantz 1986: 8-9), suggests either ca. 3000 BP Seventeen Half-Moon Cordmarked seasonal travels to eastern Ohio lithic sources or sherds were recovered (Fenicle 2003) along interaction with groups living in those areas. with 380 lithics and a stone bowl/mortar (Photograph 13). Located along the middle reach of Chartiers Creek in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, the Mayview Depot and Mayview Bend sites (36AL124 and 36AL125) are important for their glimpses into Early Woodland settlement in valley bottom settings of the Upper Ohio Valley (Kellogg et al. 1998; Lothrop 2001b). Mayview Depot straddles a dissected T-2 terrace, while the nearby Mayview Bend site occupies a T-1 terrace. Excavations at Mayview Depot Photograph 13. Excavator holding Stone Bowl/Mortar encountered 75 hearth and refuse pit features from Leetsdale Site (www.lrp.usace.army.mil/.htm; within a total site area of 3300 sq. meters; Photo Courtesy of the U.S. Corps of Engineers. however, most of the features probably reflect post 5/400 BC occupation (Kellogg et al. 1998).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 79

Flaking debris from Phase I-II excavations was Rockshelter), a pattern reflected in PASS files produced largely from local pebble cherts. data (Table 28). Features associated with the Early Woodland Alternatively, the lack of mounds may actually occupation include several postmolds, a refuse reflect a prehistoric behavior pattern. Clay pit, and several hearths (Schuldenrein et al. (1991) suggests that locations of mound clusters 2003). No domesticates were recovered from the were also locations of intersecting social group site, but several nut hull fragments were territories. As such, mounds/mound clusters recovered in the Early Woodland component, were locations for ceremonial congregation. If indicating nut processing and/or consumption at this is true, then perhaps Watershed D of the site. Subbasin 20 lacks mounds because of an absence of social territory intersection. Early Woodland Sites in Watershed D,

Subbasin 20 While no Early Woodland villages are reported PASS file data indicate a reduction in site in site files in Watershed D, the Ohioview Site counts compared to the preceding Late Archaic, (36Bv9) is an example of the type of Early with 22 sites compared to 69, respectively. Woodland site one would expect to find in the When duration of period is taken into account, study area (see Figure 14). This site on the north the Early Woodland yields a site density per bank of the Ohio River is less than one mile decade of 0.18, compared to 0.38 for the Late west of its confluence with Raccoon Creek Archaic. However, Early Woodland site density (Alam 1961; Faingnaert and Doyle 1977). Its is similar to that of the Panhandle Archaic/ location on the north bank places it within Steubenville phase (0.16 sites per decade). Watershed B of Subbasin 20. While much of the Rather than a population reduction, thus, site was destroyed by development (Alam perhaps the reduced site counts are due to 1961), thousands of artifacts were collected over nucleation of populations into villages, which the years by the landowner, many of which began during the latter portion of the Late indicate a substantial Adena component. Archaic at these Steubenville sites (see previous Artifacts include a bird stone, gorgets, celts, an chapter for discussion). Alternatively, a mobile Adena stone tablet, and a cache of bifaces. No forager lifestyle was dominant during the Early mound is known to have existed at this location, Woodland, and site visibility is low. but the upper 18 inches of the site were stripped for topsoil in the 1950s. As Alam (1961:61) Based on the locations of the mounds and the states: reduced site counts, one might infer the presence of mounds/villages within Watershed “about three-quarters of a miles upstream D of Subbasin 20. While such mounds might be present, no Early Woodland Adena mound sites from [the Ohioview Site, near the mouth have been excavated or previously identified in of Raccoon Creek] a number of rock Watershed D of Subbasin 20. As discussed above, the lack of documented mound sites mounds have been destroyed by the along the main stem of the Ohio River in the continual erosion of the river bank…A study area may be due to their destruction or lack of recognition to date. The valley of number of Hopewell and Adena type Raccoon Creek near its confluence with the artifacts have been recovered….” Ohio River likely also contained Early Woodland mounds, although areas further upstream and along the smaller streams, including Cross Creek, were most likely used as hunting and gathering areas, with site types restricted to small camps (e.g., Meadowcroft

80 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Table 28. Early Woodland Sites, Watershed D, Subbasin 20 (PASS Files)

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT TYPE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY 36Bv0029 Georgetown Half-Moon pott. Beaver Green Twp. 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Adena (Stemmed) Beaver -- 36Bv0078 Parish Farm Adena (Stemmed) Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0210 Lower Circle on Rock Adena (Stemmed) Beaver Raccoon Township 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Adena (Stemmed) Washington Smith Township 36Wh0124 Paul Adena (Stemmed) Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh0181 Reservoir Adena (Stemmed) Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0344 -- Early Woodland Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0365 Yee Farm Early Woodland Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0368 MS #59 Early Woodland Washington Independence Township 36Wh0374 Rex Smith Farm Early Woodland Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0389 Carter Farm Early Woodland Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh0421 FB #2 Adena (Stemmed) Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0475 Berrinski Camp Adena (Stemmed) Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0757 Capuzzi #2 Early Woodland Washington Robinson Township 36Wh1115 Murgel Site Adena (Stemmed) Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1161 Gregorski Adena (Stemmed) Washington Jefferson Township 36Wh1191 Lowry #12 Adena (Stemmed) Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1286 Vanzin #4 Adena (Stemmed) Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1317 Herbst #2 Early Woodland Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1318 Cherry Run Terrace Early Woodland Washington Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Half-Moon pottery Washington Jefferson Township

Table 29. Early Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D, Subbasin 20 (PASS Files).

SITE SITE NAME SITE TYPE SETTING TOPO ELEV (FT.) NEAREST WATER 36Bv0029 Georgetown Open T0/T1 Alluvial 680 Ohio River 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 920 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0078 Parish Farm Village T0/T1 Alluvial 780 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0210 Lower Circle on Rock Open T0/T1 Alluvial 960 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Open Slopes Slopes 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0124 Paul Open Upland Upland 1280 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0181 Reservoir Open Upland Upland 1110 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0344 -- Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1000 Mid Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0365 Yee Farm Open Upland Upland 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0368 MS #59 Open Upland Upland 1200 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0374 Rex Smith Farm Lithic Red. Upland Upland 1180 S Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0389 Carter Farm Open Upland Upland 1260 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0421 FB #2 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1100 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0475 Berrinski Camp Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1080 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0757 Capuzzi #2 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 940 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1115 Murgel Site Open Saddle Saddle 1300 Chartiers Creek 36Wh1161 Gregorski Open Saddle Saddle 1160 Trib Scott Run 36Wh1191 Lowry #12 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1100 -- 36Wh1286 Vanzin #4 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1240 -- 36Wh1317 Herbst #2 Open Saddle Saddle 1250 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Wh1318 Cherry Run Alluvial Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1260 Cherry Run 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Rockshelter T0/T1 Alluvial 1000 Cross Creek

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 81

Table 30. Early Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files).

DIST. TO WATER ORDER OF DIST. TO DIRECTION OF ORDER OF SITE NEAREST WATER (M) DIREC. OF WATER WATER CONF. CONF. CONF. 36Bv0029 Ohio River 50 Northwest 9 380 No Conf. 9 36Bv0036 Raccoon Creek 80 Southeast 1 1000 North 4 36Bv0078 Raccoon Creek 100 West 4 260 Southwest 4 36Bv0210 Raccoon Creek 100 West 2 140 Northwest 2 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork 50 North 1 710 East 2 36Wh0124 Raccoon Creek 300 South 1 540 Southeast 2 36Wh0181 Raccoon Creek 100 Southwest 3 175 South 3 36Wh0344 Mid Fk Cross Creek 0 On-site 1 10 South 3 36Wh0365 Trib Burgetts Fork 330 Southeast 1 860 Northeast 2 36Wh0368 Trib Cross Creek 150 Southeast 1 1550 East 2 36Wh0374 S Fk Cross Creek 5 North -- 490 West 3 36Wh0389 Raccoon Creek 0 East 1 750 Northwest 3 36Wh0421 Raccoon Creek 0 Southeast 2 420 Southwest 3 36Wh0475 Raccoon Creek 70 West 3 120 Southeast 3 36Wh0757 Raccoon Creek 120 South 5 255 Southwest 5 36Wh1115 Chartiers Creek 160 South 1 1140 Southwest 3 36Wh1161 Trib Scott Run 800 West 1 1980 North 4 36Wh1191 -- 10 North 1 180 Southwest 2 36Wh1286 -- -- Southeast -- -- No Conf. 0 36Wh1317 Trib Raccoon Crk 150 ------No Conf. -- 36Wh1318 Cherry Run 100 ------No Conf. -- 36Wh0297 Cross Creek 60 South 5 400 Southwest 5

Twenty-one of the 22 sites in Watershed D with the artifact inventories. This restricted range of Early Woodland artifacts are open sites artifacts at Early Woodland sites in Watershed classified on the site form as either “camps” or D may indicate use of the area as a resource “villages” (Table 29). Sites are also distributed procurement zone, rather than a ceremonial fairly evenly between uplands/ saddles/slopes space for the Early Woodland Adena. The (n=10) and alluvial (n=12) settings, although separation of ritual and residential sites is a access to water remained a key to site placement hallmark of the Adena settlement pattern along (Table 30). Mean distance to water for Early the middle and lower Ohio River Valley (Clay Woodland sites—130 meters—is similar to 1998). other time periods, as is mean distance to the nearest stream confluence (597m).

Mean elevation of Early Woodland sites is 1,101 ft. amsl, compared to 1128 ft. for Late Archaic sites, indicating a slight preference for locating sites in alluvial settings.

As during the Archaic, artifacts from Early Woodland habitation sites are largely restricted to lithics, with only Meadowcroft Rockshelter and Georgetown (36Bv29; Mayer-Oakes 1955:153) yielding Half-Moon ceramics (Photograph 14).PASS forms for Early Photograph 14. View Northwest toward the Georgetown Site (36Bv29) and the Ohio River. Woodland sites do not list ceremonial objects in

82 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Given the locations of most mounds upon large- Lithic raw material use patterns support the order rivers, the lack of mounds in Watershed D contention that Native Americans continued to is not altogether surprising, as nearly the entire incorporate much of the landscape into their watershed is comprised of low-order stream travel patterns during the Early Woodland. At valleys and uplands. The only known Early Meadowcroft Rockshelter in the Cross Creek Woodland village site in Watershed D is the watershed, dominant Early Woodland toolstones Georgetown Site, which lacks a mound (Davis are Kanawha chert, Upper Mercer chert, Flint and Lantz 1987; Mayer-Oakes 1955:153). The Ridge chert, and Onondaga chert, in percentages high density of artifacts, the presence of post- that largely mirror the Late Archaic occupation molds, and the site’s location on an upper (Figure 18); also compare Table 27 and Table terrace of a major river suggest a village 31). Meadowcroft likely functioned as a short- function, although excavations were limited term resource procurement and processing camp (Davis and Lantz 1987). As noted above, a for populations living along the Upper Ohio radiocarbon date from the site places its Valley in nearby West Virginia. occupation at 173±200 BC. Along with the Ohioview Site on the north side of the Ohio Local lithic raw material use pattern was also River (discussed above), these two sites indicate emphasized at the Leetsdale Site on the Ohio the possible presence of incipient Early River near Watershed D. Phase I-II occupations Woodland villages within and immediately yielded 95% local cobble chert artifacts, as well adjacent to Watershed D. as a variety of other lithic materials (Fenicle 2003:61). D. EARLY WOODLAND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE Late Archaic 300 Overall, compared with the Late Archaic Early Woodland occupations of the same sites, occupation 245 intensity was reduced during the Early 250 Woodland, as suggested by significantly fewer 207 lithic artifacts at Meadowcroft, Mungai Farm, 200 and the other Cross Creek sites (Figure 17). On one hand, this pattern is not expected, given the 150 hypothesis that populations merged into fewer (but larger) village sites during the Early

Artifact Counts 94 Woodland. Given this hypothesis, Early 100 Woodland sites should be more artifact-rich, not c less than Late Archaic sites. On the other hand, 50 31 31 this reduced intensity of site use may reflect the nature of the recorded Early Woodland sites in 5 the study area. As noted, most sites are small 0 Meadowcroft Mungai Farm Cross Creek hunting and gathering camps. Thus, the lower Sites density of artifacts at sites in Cross Creek likely indicates less intensive use of sites in more remote uplands and smaller stream drainages—a Figure 17. Comparison of Late Archaic and Early Woodland Artifact Counts, Sites in Cross Creek pattern seen elsewhere during the Early Drainage (Vento and Donohue 125-127). Woodland (Clay 1991: 3). These data support Clay’s (1991) assertion that a mobile, forager lifestyle was dominant in the Early Woodland.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 83

Table 31. Cross-Tabulation of Cross Creek Site by Lithic Raw Material for Early Woodland Artifacts.

LOCATION ONONDAGA KANAWHA FLINT UPPER M. BRUSH C. 10 UNIONTOWN GLACIAL OTHER TOTAL RIDGE MILE PEBBLE PTS Meadowcroft (%) 8.5 26.6 16.0 21.3 8.5 6.4 1.1 2.1 8.7 94 Mungai Farm (%) -- 3.2 45.2 35.5 9.7 ------6.4 31 Cr. Crk. Sites (%) -- 20.0 40.0 40.0 ------5 Avella Mnd (%) -- -- 25.0 50.0 25.0 ------4 Total pts (n) 8 27 32 35 12 6 1 2 11 134 Total % 6.0 20.2 23.9 26.1 9.0 4.5 0.8 1.5 8.2 100

In contrast to Meadowcroft and Leetsdale, Early Wallace (1971) does not identify any Native Woodland component sites in Cross Creek American paths near Mungai Farm, the site is on reflect the increased role of Adena a ridge divide between Cross Creek and ceremonialism. At Mungai Farm (see Figure Burgetts Fork, a viable route between the Upper 18), exotic cherts dominate the assemblages, Ohio Valley in the West Virginia panhandle and with Flint Ridge (45.2%) and Upper Mercer the forks of the Ohio near Pittsburgh. (35.5%) accounting for 80 percent of the artifact assemblage. At Avella Mound (36Wh415) in the E. EARLY WOODLAND: CONCLUSION Cross Creek drainage, the Early Woodland AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS occupation was brief, represented by only four projectile points, three of which were produced Early Woodland Overview from exotic chert (Flint Ridge and Upper The Early Woodland represents one of the most Mercer). At other Cross Creek sites, four of five dynamic periods within the entire prehistory of Early Woodland points were produced from the Upper Ohio Valley. During the Early Upper Mercer and Flint Ridge cherts (Vento and Woodland, Native American foragers continued Donohue 1982:126-127). to diversify their resource base, including the first use of domesticated plants. A hallmark of Flint Ridge chert, likely due to its high quality many of communities was the presence of burial and aesthetic appeal, was popular in ceremonial mounds at sites like McKees Rocks, Cresap, blade and point production at Early and Middle Grave Creek, Peters Creek, and Crall along the Woodland ceremonial sites (Dragoo 1963; Upper Ohio Valley and vicinity. While no Mayer-Oakes 1955:154). Mound sites typically mounds are known within Watershed D, the area reveal high percentages of Flint Ridge chert; is bordered to the east and west by two major thus, the prevalence of the chert at a site like mound groups—the Grave Creek Mound Group Mungai Farm, a short-term occupation within near Moundsville and the Forks of the Ohio uplands, is conspicuous. This is especially true Group near Pittsburgh. The lack of mounds in when compared to the Early Woodland the current study area is, thus, fairly occupation at nearby Meadowcroft Rockshelter, conspicuous, and is likely due to one of two which displays an “Archaic” pattern of lithic reasons: 1) a lack of social group intersections raw material use (Figure 18). While the Early at which mounds were often built (Clay 1991) Woodland occupation at Avella Mound was or 2) their destruction or lack of identification. minimal (Applegarth and Cowin 1982), the While mounds might be expected along the presence of exotic lithics may indicate incipient main stem of the Ohio in Watershed D, the ceremonialism that fluoresced during the remainder of the study area is comprised of low- subsequent, more intensive Middle Woodland order tributary streams and uplands, areas occupation. At Mungai Farm, the presence of typically used as hunting and gathering areas exotic cherts may indicate that Early Woodland during the Early Woodland period. As such, Native Americans camped at the site while most Early Woodland sites in Watershed D traveling to or from a ceremonial site. While

84 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

appear to be camps used for resource heavily populated sites, or settlement trends procurement. resulting in reduced site visibility?

3. Does the reduction in occupation intensity of Early Woodland lithic raw material use patterns Early Woodland campsites reflect shorter varied from the preceeding Late Archaic in the stays and/or less frequent visits? If so, what use of Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts for accounts for this changing pattern of site ceremonial tool production. While some use? campsites like Meadowcroft continue patterns of lithic raw material use of the preceding Late 4. What was the influence of the Adena culture Archaic, other sites like Mungai Farm and in Watershed D? Avella Mound contained high percentages of 5. Did Adena individuals build mounds in Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer chert artifacts, Watershed D? If so, where are they? reflecting the Adena ceremonial influence. These site file and research report data support 6. Is it possible that Watershed D, given tbe Clay’s (1991) assertion that the Early Woodland widespread prevalence of small streams and was marked by hunting and gathering by uplands, simply did not experience dispersed populations, with mounds located at widespread Adena ceremonialism; thus, the lack of recorded mounds? the intersections of social territories. The presence of exotic cherts at some sites in the 7. How extensive was horticulture during the study area reflects the participation of Early Early Woodland in Watershed D? Woodland cultures at Watershed D within the Adena Inaction Sphere. 8. Was there an increase or decrease in the use of semi-sedentary base camps/villages during the Early Woodland? Early Woodland Research Questions 9. Was hunting and gathering the predominant This summary of Early Woodland subsistence method? archaeological data has generated several research issues which should be considered 10. What is the cause for the reduced site counts when conducting archaeological work in the compared to the Late Archaic? Were area. Thirteen Early Woodland research populations nucleating within fewer sites or questions are listed below; this list is by no did populations actually decrease for some means comprehensive, and should be used only reason? as a starting point for generating additional 11. How can we explain the origins of the Adena research issues. Archaeological sites which can culture along the Upper Ohio River Valley? provide information pertaining to these and other research questions will likely meet the 12. How extensive was trade/travel between National Register Criterion D; thus, unless they Adena in the Upper Ohio Valley and other lack integrity, sites which address these research parts of the east (Middle Atlantic) and questions will be eligible for listing in the Midwest (lower and middle Ohio Valley)? National Register for Historic Places: 13. What accounts for the increased use of Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts at the Early 1. What relationship, if any, was there between Woodland occupations in Cross Creek? terminal Late Archaic Steubenville populations and their Adena descendents/replacements in the Upper Ohio Valley?

2. Does the reduction in site numbers reflect decreasing Early Woodland populations, population nucleation into fewer, more

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 85

35 Late Archaic 29 Meadowcroft 30 26.6 Early Woodland 25 21.3 20 18.4 16 15.1 15 12.6

% Arti facts 8.5 8.5 7.7 7.6 8.7 10 6.1 6.4 5 2.4 1.21.1 2.1 0

Other 10 Mile Kanawha Onondaga Flint Ridge Uniontown Brush Creek Upper Mercer Glacial Pebble

50 45.2 Mungai Farm 45 40 35.5 35 Late Archaic 30 Early Woodland 25 20 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 12.6

% Arti factsl 15 11.1 9.7 10 7.2 6.4 3.2 2.4 5 0 0 0 0 2.5 0

Other 10 Mile Kanawha Onondaga Flint Ridge Uniontown Brush Creek Upper Mercer Glacial Pebble

Figure 18. Comparison of Late Archaic and Early Woodland Lithic Raw Material Use at Meadowcroft Rockshelter (top) and Mungai Farm (bottom) (after Vento and Donahue (1982:124-125).

86 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

CHAPTER IX MIDDLE WOODLAND PERIOD 2100 to 1100 BP (150 BC to A.D. 850)

A. MIDDLE WOODLAND OVERVIEW Woodland habitation sites along the Raccoon In western Pennsylvania, the Middle Woodland Creek Valley. The Middle Woodland appears to period is characterized by a continuation of represent a period of continuity from the trends initiated during the Early Woodland, preceding Early Woodland. Agriculture likely including burial ceremonialism, interregional increased in importance during the Middle exchange, and the increased importance of Woodland, although only a few regional sites indigenous cultigens and maize. In this report, have yielded ethnobotanical evidence of we follow the chronological model of Raber domestication at this time. (1985); however, many researchers in the Upper Ohio Valley follow a model established by B. MIDDLE WOODLAND MATERIAL Mayer-Oakes (1955) which defines the Middle CULTURE AND CHRONOLOGY Woodland as occurring between In the lower and middle Ohio River Valley, the Hopewell Middle Woodland Material Culture Culture was dominant and it influenced Native Middle Woodland technology represents a Americans in the Upper Ohio Valley; however, continuation of styles utilized during the Early while the current study area was within the Woodland period. Ceramics of the Middle Hopewell Interaction Sphere, it was on its Woodland increase in diversity, decorations eastern periphery and sites with Hopewell become more common, and vessel thickness influence are rare in the study area. As during generally decreases with increasing the Early Woodland, most habitation sites are technological sophistication (McConaughy small lithic scatters, with few recorded villages 2000). Projectile point types include and ceremonial sites. Avella Mound on Cross Hopewellian artifacts, such as Snyder’s and Creek is the only known Middle Woodland Raccoon corner-notched points (Figure 19). mortuary ritual site recorded in the study area. Groundstone tools, including manos, metates, This mound, and others in the surrounding pitted cobbles, adzes, and tool sharpeners are region, confirm that mortuary ritual remains an recovered at sites as well (Mayer-Oakes 1955; organized focus of Native American life, but Lantz 1989). with noteworthy changes (J. Lothrop, pers. comm. 2003). Lantz’s (1989) study of Raccoon Creek points indicates a concentration of Middle

Figure 19. Raccoon Notched Points (from Lantz 1989:9, 11).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 87

The most prevalent Middle Woodland point Several archaeologists have commented on type in the study area is the Raccoon Notched variation in cordage twist direction on Watson type (see Figure 19), as exemplified by the Cordmarked sherds for Middle Woodland numerous points of this type from the Outdoor components in the Upper Ohio Valley (Lothrop Theater Site (36Bv24) along Raccoon Creek 2001b). More northerly sites, including Watson near Aliquippa. and Meadowcroft (Johnson 1982; Maslowski 1973, 1980; McConaughy 2000), have yielded Raccoon Notched points are small, and thin, sherds with predominantly Z-twist cordage with excurvate blades. Side-notched and corner- impressions, while.further south, Watsonware notched varieties are noted by Lantz (1989:10- displays mostly S-twist cordmarking 12). Point locations are most common along (Hemmings 1984). These differences may tributary valleys, rather than the main stem of signify distinct populations occupying northern the Ohio. The Raccoon Creek Valley is and southern portions of the Upper Ohio Valley identified as a “Regional Center” of these points drainage during the Middle Woodland (Johnson (Lantz 1989:5). 1982; Lothrop 2001b; Maslowski 1973).

Middle Woodland Chronology Other Middle Woodland projectile point types identified in southwestern Pennsylvania include Radiocarbon dates are available from only two Backstrum Side-notched (a regional variant of Middle Woodland sites in the Raccoon Creek the Chesser point) (George 1992), Kiski Watershed, Meadowcroft and Avella Mound. Notched (George 1982), and Murphys Stemmed Dates from these sites are listed below: (George 1982: 208-209). Meadowcroft Rockshelter (36Wh297) · A.D. 70±65 (SI-3022); Stratum V, charcoal from As described by Lothrop (2001b) and Johnson firepits/upper 1/3 of unit. (2003), limestone tempered Watson · A.D. 160±60 (SI-3027); Stratum V, charcoal Cordmarked ware (Watsonware) is the major from firepits/upper 1/3 of unit. Middle Woodland pottery type in the Upper · A.D. 285±65 (SI-3024); Stratum V, charcoal Ohio Valley (Dragoo 1956; Hemmings 1984; from firepits/upper 1/3 of unit. Maslowski 1973; Mayer-Oakes 1955; · A.D. 660±60 (SI-3026); Stratum VII, charcoal McConaughy 2000). Watson Cordmarked and from firepits/middle 1/3 of unit. Associated with Watson Plain pottery are typically tempered maize remains. with crushed limestones. Vertical cordmarking is common, with smoothing on interior surfaces. Avella Mound (36Wh415) Vessels are globular, with decorations produced · A.D. 850±90 (SI-3498); on fill within Burial 7 by using a cord-wrapped paddle to make edge · A.D. 530±65 (SI-3499); Burial 7; date from impressions on the rim (Dragoo 1956: 64; charcoal fused to skulls Hemmings 1984: 29). Body sherds for · A.D. 790±110 (SI-2943); Burial 4/Cremation; Watsonware average 6 to 7mm thick. Flint Ridge Bennington corner-notched point with scraper/flakes Watsonware was largely a utilitarian pottery

(Mayer-Oakes 1955: 216) and displays a broad Additional radiocarbon dates are available from distribution through the Upper Ohio Valley. sites within the nearby Upper Ohio Valley, Watson pottery has been found at the Outdoor many of which are associated with diagnostic Theater Site in association with Raccoon points, pottery, or maize. Maslowski (1983:53- Notched points (Lantz 1989). Radiocarbon 55) provides several radiocarbon dates dates for Watsonware pottery span the entire associated with Watson pottery, including dates Middle Woodland period at sites in the Upper of A.D. 890±45 (Dic-1499) and A.D. 930±55 Ohio Valley (Maslowski 1983:53). (Dic-1500) from the Watson type site on the

Upper Ohio Valley just west of Watershed D.

88 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Additional dates for Watson pottery place its nuts (hickory, butternut and walnut) (Knepper use well into A.D. 1200 (Maslowski 1983:53). and Petraglia 1996: 38). Mayview Bend on McConaughy (2000: 7) suggests that these dates Chartiers Creek revealed a decline in nut use are too recent and were likely contaminated during the Middle Woodland (Lothrop 2001b). during processing; he provides several additional dates for Watsonware spanning the C. MIDDLE WOODLAND SITE TYPES, entire Middle Woodland (McConaughy 2000: LOCATIONS, AND SETTLEMENT 8). PASS Files Data: Middle Woodland Sites in Middle Woodland Subsistence Watershed D At Meadowcroft Rockshelter, 10-and 12-row Twenty-three Middle Woodland sites are maize fragments were recovered in Stratum VII, recorded in PASS files for Watershed D, indicating continued cultivation of this crop Subbasin 20 (Table 32). When the length of the circa A.D. 660 (Adovasio and Johnson 1981:67- periods is taken into account, Watershed D 72). Various nut, fruit, and seed remains were contains 0.23 Middle Woodland sites per also found in these levels, suggesting that a decade, compared to 0.18 sites during the Early mixed subsistence pattern persisted in the study Woodland. Most sites in the subbasin were area during the Middle Woodland (Cushman identified based on the presence of Raccoon 1982: Tables 3 and 4). In Watershed C of Notched points, with two sites—Meadowcroft Subbasin 20, excavations of Early-Middle and Outdoor Theater—also yielding Watson Woodland features (dating to A.D. 500-1000) at Farm pottery. the Connoquenessing Site recovered carbonized seeds (goosefoot, persimmon and grape) and

Table 32. Middle Woodland Sites, Watershed D (PASS Files).

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT TYPE AGE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY 36Bv0021 Biscan Farm MW MW Beaver Independence Twp. 36Bv0024 Outdoor Theatre Raccoon N. MW Beaver Hopewell Township 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Raccoon N. MW Beaver -- 36Bv0040 Crevallero MW MW Beaver -- 36Bv0114 Jarecek MW MW Beaver Independence Twp. 36Bv0179 Biscan Farm #2 MW MW Beaver Independence Twp. 36Bv0240 Dravo Raccoon N. MW Beaver Greene Township 36Bv0248 Crucible Steel Raccoon N. MW Beaver Greene Township 36Bv0253 South Side High School Snyders MW Beaver Greene Township 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Raccoon N. MW Washington Smith Township 36Wh0133 J Alrutz Farm #1 MW MW Washington Mt. Pleasant Twp. 36Wh0349 MS #39 Raccoon N. MW Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0393 MS #87 MW MW Washington Mount Pleasant Twp. 36Wh0409 MS #104 MW MW Washington Smith Township 36Wh0410 MS #105 MW MW Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0415 Avella Mound C-14 MW Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh0654 Huffman Hilltop MW MW Washington Mt. Pleasant Twp. 36Wh0984 Lutz #3 MW MW Washington Mt. Pleasant Twp. 36Wh1032 C V Cowden MW MW Washington Cross Creek Township 36Wh1147 Brezinski #4 MW MW Washington Hopewell Township 36Wh1158 Lutz #9 MW MW Washington Mt. Pleasant Twp. 36Wh1318 Cherry Run Terrace MW MW Washington Mt. Pleasant Twp. 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Watson CM MW Washington Jefferson Township

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 89

The majority of Middle Woodland sites in the ft. amsl, slightly less than during the Early study area (n=14 of 23; Table 33) are within the Woodland (1,101 ft.), continuing a trend toward Raccoon Creek watershed, with an additional lower elevations begun during the Late Archaic five sites in the Cross Creek watershed and two (1,128 ft.). sites on the Ohio River. Most sites are open habitations (n=20 of 23) near the larger rivers, Research Reports: Sites in Watershed D including Raccoon Creek, Cross Creek or the Ohio River, with comparatively little use of low- Only a handful of research reports discuss order drainages (n=5), slopes (n=4), and uplands Middle Woodland occupations in the Raccoon (n=6 sites). Of the 23 sites, 12 are in alluvial Creek watershed. Lantz’ (1989) study of settings, while 11 are on uplands, saddles, or Raccoon Notched projectile point distributions sideslopes. is the most comprehensive overview of the Middle Woodland in the area. The Cross Creek Access to water was a key to site placement study (Applegarth and Cowin 1982) also (Table 34), with sites averaging 122m from provides data regarding Middle Woodland nearest water, similar to the preceding Early occupations at Avella Mound and Meadowcroft Woodland (130m). As with other time periods, (Adovasio et al. 1977). Mayer-Oakes (1955) proximity to stream confluences was apparently also includes information regarding Middle not important to site placement, with sites Woodland ceramic types at sites in the study averaging 720 meters from confluences. Mean area (Johnson 2003). elevation for Middle Woodland sites was 1,073

Table 33. Middle Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files).

SITE SITE NAME SITE TYPE SETTING TOPO ELEV (FT) NEAREST WATER 36Bv0021 Biscan Farm Open T0/T1 Alluvial 830 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0024 Outdoor Theatre Open T0/T1 Alluvial 760 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 920 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0040 Crevallero Open Upland Upland 920 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Bv0114 Jarecek Open T0/T1 Alluvial 820 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0179 Biscan Farm #2 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 830 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0240 Dravo Open T0/T1 Alluvial 760 Ohio River 36Bv0248 Crucible Steel Open T0/T1 Alluvial 700 Ohio River 36Bv0253 South Side H.S. Open Upland Hilltop 1320 Little Traverse Creek 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Open Slopes Slopes 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0133 J Alrutz Farm #1 Open Slopes Slopes 1200 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Rockshelter T0/T1 Alluvial 1000 Cross Creek 36Wh0349 MS #39 Open Slopes Slopes 1120 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0393 MS #87 Open Upland Ridgetop 1320 S Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0409 MS #104 Open Slopes Slopes 1230 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0410 MS #105 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1230 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0415 Avella Mound Burial Mound Upland Hilltop 960 Cross Creek 36Wh0654 Huffman Hilltop Rockshelter Upland Ridgetop 1420 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh0984 Lutz #3 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1180 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1032 C V Cowden Open Upland Ridgetop 1380 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1147 Brezinski #4 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1120 -- 36Wh1158 Lutz #9 Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1180 -- 36Wh1318 Cherry Run Open T0/T1 Alluvial 1260 Cherry Run

90 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Table 34. Middle Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D (PASS Files).

DIST. TO WATER DIRECTION OF ORDER OF DIST. TO CONF SITE NEAREST WATER (M) WATER WATER (M) DIR. OF CONF. 36Bv0021 Raccoon Creek 130 East 6 340 North 36Bv0024 Raccoon Creek 140 East 4 380 -- 36Bv0036 Raccoon Creek 80 SE 1 1000 North 36Bv0040 Trib Raccoon Crk 120 NE 2 180 -- 36Bv0114 Raccoon Creek 80 South 6 380 Southwest 36Bv0179 Raccoon Creek 100 North 3 200 Northeast 36Bv0240 Ohio River 140 NW 9 520 North 36Bv0248 Ohio River 0 On-Site 1 1940 South 36Bv0253 Little Traverse Creek 220 SE 1 1380 Northeast 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork 50 North 1 710 East 36Wh0133 Trib Cross Creek 260 SE 2 560 Southwest 36Wh0297 Cross Creek 60 South 5 400 Southwest 36Wh0349 Raccoon Creek 80 NW 1 720 South 36Wh0393 S Fk Cross Creek 180 West 1 760 South 36Wh0409 Raccoon Creek 50 East 1 870 East 36Wh0410 Raccoon Creek 10 West 1 1150 South 36Wh0415 Cross Creek 90 SE 5 200 Southwest 36Wh0654 Trib Cross Creek 440 NE 1 1240 Northeast 36Wh0984 Raccoon Creek 60 Northeast 1 320 Southwest 36Wh1032 Raccoon Creek 200 SW 1 1500 Northeast 36Wh1147 -- 160 South 1 460 Northwest 36Wh1158 -- 60 West 1 620 Southeast 36Wh1318 Cherry Run 100 ------

Mayer-Oakes (1955) triangular points, pendants, celts and Middle and Mayer-Oakes (1955) and Alam (1961) discuss Late Woodland pottery, including Watsonware the presence of Watson cordmarked and (Lantz 1989:27). Mahoning cordmarked ceramics at the Ohioview (36Bv9; Alam 1961), Georgetown (36Bv29), Avella Mound (36Wh415) and Industry (36Bv128) sites. As reviewed by Lothrop (2001b), Avella Mound on Cross Creek is the only investigated Middle Raccoon Notched Study (Lantz 1989) Woodland burial mound in Watershed D of In his 1989 study of the regional distribution of Subbasin 20 (Photograph 15; Applegarth and Raccoon Notched projectile points, Lantz Cowin 1982:249-255). Located on a low knoll reviews a “Regional Center” of the point type overlooking Cross Creek, this mound measured within the Raccoon Creek Valley. As shown in approximately 1 meter high and 18 meters wide. Table 32, several sites with Raccoon Notched Mortuary activity involved construction of four points are present in the study area. Lantz stone burial structures, after which a prepared (1989:45) identified 14 sites along Raccoon floor of white clay was laid down. Subsequent Creek and 33 in Beaver County. The Raccoon burials included a large stone cyst and several Notched point type was first recognized by Emil stone heaps. Burials included extended and in- Alam at the Outdoor Theater Site (36Bv24) near place and redeposited cremations. Chronological Aliquippa on the first terrace of Raccoon Creek. markers include a Manker point from a cache, a The 20,000 sq. meter site was completely Bennington point from a burial radiocarbon destroyed by industrial development west of dated A.D. 790, and dates of A.D. 530 and 850 Aliquippa along Raccoon Creek. Along with from another burial, indicating site occupation numerous Raccoon Notched points, the Outdoor between 500 and 800 A.D. Grave goods are Theater site yielded Flint Ridge cache blades rare, being limited to a single cache containing a (Mayer-Oakes 1955:154-155), drills, a scraper, Manker point, flakes and cores, and a beaver

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 91

incisor. Lithic raw material use at the site is represent accretional stone and earth structures discussed in detail below, but, in general, in which most burial placement appears to have indicates use of local cherts in addition to Flint been haphazard (Lothrop 2001b). In contrast to Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts. Adena mounds, which were separate from habitation sites, Hopewell mounds were directly associated with them, suggesting a changing role for ceremonial mounds.

At Watson Farm, mound matrix consisted of earth, quarried flagstone and river cobbles, with eight burials, including four extended (Dragoo 1956; Lothrop 2001b). Submound refuse pits likely represent pre- mound habitation features associated with the village.

Fairchance Mound revealed a prepared floor sand lens, laid down prior to construction of the 15x20-m mound (Hemmings 1984:10). As defined by Photograph 15. View of Hill in the Former Location of Lothrop (2001b), the main burial (Burial 17) Avella Mound. Excavations at the site removed most of was a sub-floor rectangular slab-lined pit roofed the mound, which was on top of the hill. View with logs, stone slabs and clay (Hemmings Northwest. 1984: 21) containing the remains of a young adult male and large numbers of grave goods, Meadowcroft Rockshelter (36Wh297) including over 600 marine shell disc beads, In contrast to Avella Mound, Middle Woodland greenstone celts, gorgets, hematite and mica occupations at the nearby Meadowcroft (Hemmings 1984: 21-24). Excavations of Rockshelter indicate no ceremonial activity and moundfill uncovered 49 burials, most of them abundant food processing tasks. Limestone- extended, with several displaying stone slab tempered Watsonware pottery dominates the grave pit construction. Based on these findings, ceramic assemblage, with 354 sherds in 36 Hemmings (1984: 20) concluded that the vessel clusters (Adovasio et al. 1977:61). As "Fairchance community was evidently organized described below, a variety of lithic raw on non-egalitarian lines" cited in Lothrop materials were used at the site, whereas at 2001b. ceremonial sites (such as Avella Mound), most lithics were from non-local sources (Flint Ridge The Billy #1 Mound (Westmoreland County) is and Upper Mercer). located on the lower reaches of the Monongahela River (George 1992:17-21). Although badly disturbed, excavations at this Relevant Middle Woodland Sites Outside of mound in 1984 revealed remnants of a probable Watershed stone crypt constructed of flagstones and river The largest post-Adena Middle Woodland cobbles (Lothrop 2001b). George (1992) states mounds, such as Watson Farm and Fairchance, that mounds are found in the downstream are found on the Ohio River in the northern portions of the Monongahela drainage in panhandle of West Virginia (e.g., Dragoo 1959; Pennsylvania (Lothrop 2001b). Hemmings 1984). Watson Farm and Fairchance mounds exhibited dimensions similar to the larger mounds in the upper Allegheny Valley (Dragoo 1956; Hemmings 1984 a). Both

92 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

D. MIDDLE WOODLAND LITHIC RAW In addition to these research report data, PASS MATERIAL USE files provide limited lithic raw material data for Data for Middle Woodland sites in the study eight single-component Middle Woodland sites area suggest continued use of a wide range of in Watershed D. Chert/flint was the lithic raw materials in stone tool production, predominant lithic raw material at the sites, with an emphasis on local lithics at campsites although Site 36Bv114 in Raccoon Creek and exotic lithics at sites with possible links to yielded jasper, with its most proximate sources the Hopewell Interaction Sphere. Lithic raw in central Pennsylvania. Flint Ridge and Upper material data are available from the Outdoor Mercer were not identified in PASS files for Theater Site, Avella Mound, Meadowcroft, and Middle Woodland sites. Mungai Farm, as well as from sites in the Cross Creek watershed (Table 35). George (1982) provides lithic data from the Middle Woodland Blawnox Site (36AL19) on At the Outdoor Theater Site (36Bv24; Lantz the lower Allegheny River as well; namely, 1989:45) on Raccoon Creek near Aliquippa, evidence from this site indicates the decline of several lithic raw materials were utilized in the the Hopewell influence circa 500-800 AD. production of Raccoon Notched points (see Most lithics were produced from local Table 35), including Onondaga chert (38%), Onondaga chert, with only minor amounts of Upper Mercer chert (38%), Flint Ridge chert Flint Ridge, Upper Mercer, and eastern 21%), and Plum Run chert from Ohio (2%). Pennsylvania Jasper. Mayer-Oakes (1955:154) reports cache blades of Flint Ridge chert at the site as well. These E. MIDDLE WOODLAND: OVERVIEW AND data compare favorably with sites in the Cross RESEARCH ISSUES Creek drainage, including Meadowcroft, The Middle Woodland in the Raccoon Creek Mungai Farm, and Avella Mound (Vento and watershed is best characterized as a peripheral Donohue 1982:124-127). Cherts from east- zone to the Hopewell Interaction Sphere of the central Ohio dominate the assemblages, with lower and middle Ohio River Valley. Sites like Flint Ridge comprising 23.2% of artifacts at the Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Outdoor sites and Upper Mercer comprising 30.3 Theater Site indicate use of the study area percent. The presence of high percentages of largely for hunting and gathering, rather than these cherts implies a link to the Hopewell ceremonial purposes. The prevalence of Interaction Sphere, even at sites without Raccoon Notched points at several Middle ceremonial functions, such as Meadowcroft, Woodland open sites confirms the importance of Mungai Farm, and Outdoor Theater. Only hunting and gathering in the Raccoon Creek Avella Mound was a mortuary site, and it Valley and vicinity. The lone exception to this yielded the least number of Flint Ridge and pattern in the study area is Avella Mound in Upper Mercer chert artifacts of the group (see Cross Creek which contained evidence of Table 35). ceremonialism and several human burials dated to ca. 500-800 A.D.

Table 35. Cross-Tabulation of Middle Woodland Site by Lithic Raw Material (Percent), Watershed D.

ONON- KANAWHA FLINT UPPER M. BRUSH C. 10 MILE UNION- GLACIAL OTHER TOTAL SITE* (%) DAGA RIDGE TOWN PEBBLE POINTS Meadowcroft 0 21.9 9.4 37.5 6.2 9.4 3.1 0 12.4 32 Mungai Farm 3.7 1.9 39.6 30.2 9.4 9.4 1.9 0.9 2.8 106 Cr. Cr Sites 13.3 6.6 33.3 26.6 6.6 13.3 0 0 0 15 Avella Mnd 19.4 3.2 12.9 19.4 12.9 3.2 0 19.4 9.7 31 Outdoor Theater 38.0 0 21.0 38.0 0 0 0 0 3 53 Mean Percent 14.9 6.7 23.2 30.3 7.0 9.1 1.0 4.1 5.6 -- *Data from Lantz (1989:45) for Outdoor Theater and Vento and Donohue (1982:124-127) for Cross Creek Sites.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 93

Despite the low density of Hopewell ceremonial Middle Woodland Research Questions sites/mounds in the study area, cherts from east- This summary of Middle Woodland central Ohio dominate some lithic assemblages, archaeological data in and near Watershed D of suggesting ample travel and trade within the Subbasin 20 (Raccoon Creek) has generated Hopewell Interaction Sphere. Cultural several research issues which should be stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates suggest that considered when conducting archaeological these connections were chronologically work in the area. Nine Middle Woodland staggered, extending from approximately the research questions are listed below; this list is first through 5th or 6th centuries A.D. in the by no means comprehensive and should be used Upper Ohio Valley, relative to the 200 BC-A.D. only as a starting point for generating additional 400 duration for the Hopewell Interaction research issues. Archaeological sites which can Sphere. (pers. comm., J.Lothrop, 2003; 2001b). provide information pertaining to these and other research questions will likely meet The proximity of burial mounds and habitation National Register Criterion D; thus, unless they sites at some locations represents the most lack integrity, sites which address these research striking settlement shift during the post-Adena questions will be eligible for listing in the Middle Woodland in the Upper Ohio Valley National Register for Historic Places: proper (Clay 1998; Lothrop 2001b). The separation noted between Adena ceremonial 1. How does the Middle Woodland differ from sites and habitations is not present at Middle the preceding Early Woodland and subsequent Woodland sites. Subsistence remains at post- Late Woodland? Adena sites, exemplified by Meadowcroft, 2. Do the similar site counts for the Early and indicate reliance on a broad spectrum of upland Middle Woodland indicate demographic and riverine hunted and gathered foods with continuity in the first millennium A.D.? little evidence of cultigens. The diversity of diagnostic and nondiagnostic artifact classes at 3. What was the influence of the Hopewell Interaction Sphere in Watershed D of Subbasin sites like Outdoor Theater suggests the possible 20? presence of Middle Woodland villages in the Raccoon Creek Valley. At sites like 4. What is the significance of the high Meadowcroft, the more restricted subsistence percentages of Upper Mercer and Flint Ridge remains may reflect preservation differences or cherts at Middle Woodland sites? Does this imply links to the Hopewell Interaction shorter-term occupations (Lothrop 2001b). Sphere?

The Raccoon Creek and Cross Creek drainages, 5. What is the significance of the increased use of thus, were likely peripheral areas to the Raccoon Notched points in the study area? Is Hopewell heartland with continuity in site types this a Hopewell-associated phenomenon? and settlement patterns between the Early and 6. Did populations become nucleated during the Middle Woodland. Hunting and gathering Middle Woodland? If so, where are the base remained the most important subsistence camp/village sites? pattern, with agricultural foods forming only a 7. What role did agriculture play during the minor portion of the diet. Despite this apparent Middle Woodland period? separation from the Hopewell Interaction 8. How did settlement patterns change, as Sphere, the presence of high percentages of reflected in lithic raw material use at Middle Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts indicates Woodland sites? some ties to east-central Ohio, while sites like Outdoor Theater and Avella Mound yielded 9. Was there an increase in ceremonial/ritual activity in the study area during the Middle ceremonial items, such as cache blades and Woodland? burials, respectively, which also indicate the influence of Hopewellian ceremonialism in Watershed D.

94 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

CHAPTER X LATE WOODLAND PERIOD 1100 to 400 BP (AD 800-1550)

A. INTRODUCTION Figure 5 in Chapter III shows the locations of During the Late Woodland, Native American sites discussed in this chapter. populations increased, as did conflict associated with competition for resources. In the Upper Compared to other areas in southwestern Ohio Valley, many researchers label this period Pennsylvania, Watershed D is characterized by a the “Late Prehistoric,” following Mayer-Oakes low density of villages and a comparatively high (1955; Johnson 2003; Sciulli et al. 2003). For all frequency of open habitations/camps. Thus, intent and purposes, the “Late Prehistoric” and along with the Mahoning River to the north Late Woodland discussed here refer to the same (MacDonald and Cremeens 2002), Raccoon cultural events. Numerous researchers have Creek may represent a peripheral area during the provided regional syntheses or excavated Late Late Woodland with only marginal affiliations Woodland/Late Prehistoric sites in western to the Monongahela. Pennsylvania, including the valleys of the Upper Ohio River (Davis 1988; Mayer-Oakes 1953, B. LATE WOODLAND MATERIAL CULTURE, 1955; Rue 1990), the Upper Allegheny River CHRONOLOGY, AND KEY REGIONAL SITES (Burkett 1999; George 1978, 1998; Lantz 1982, Hallmarks of the Late Woodland period are 1989; Lounsberry 1997; Johnson et al. 1979), shell-tempered pottery and triangular projectile the Monongahela River (George 1974; Johnson points. Mayer-Oakes (1955:158) indicates that and Athens 1988), among other lesser order plain pipes, bird-bone beads, and cannel coal streams and rivers (Herbstritt 1981a; Knepper pendants are also diagnostic of Late Woodland and Petraglia 1996; MacDonald and Cremeens occupations in the Upper Ohio Valley. The 2002; Skirboll and Hanson 1996). These studies following section describes ceramic and provide an outstanding view of Late Woodland projectile point types common to regional Late culture within western Pennsylvania in general, Woodland sites. but lack specific data regarding the Raccoon Watson Plain and Watson Cordmarked Pottery Creek drainage in particular. Watson Plain and Cordmarked wares continued to be used during the Late Woodland period. The Monongahela culture was dominant during Watsonwares were coiled and subsequently the Late Woodland, focusing their settlement on malleated with a paddle and anvil. Temper is the Monongahela, Youghiogheny, and Upper coarse limestone, with both interior and Ohio River Valleys of southwestern exteriors smoothed on the Plain variety and Pennsylvania and northern West Virginia. In the exteriors cordmarked on the other variety. Lips Raccoon Creek drainage, the Monongahela are square to rounded, with straight to slightly influence is uncertain, although several sites outflaring rims (Mayer-Oakes 1955:194-196). have yielded Monongahela ceramics. PASS files Maslowski (1983:53) reports the presence of include data regarding 30 Late Woodland sites Watson pottery at Meadowcroft Rockshelter in Watershed D. Raccoon Creek and vicinity is associated with a radiocarbon date of A.D. home to some important Late Woodland sites, 1025±65 (SI-2047), confirming its use into the including Georgetown and Shippingport, but Late Woodland. most well-studied Late Woodland sites are Mahoning Plain and Cordmarked Pottery located on the periphery of the current study Mayer-Oakes’ (1955:192-195) type description area. Late Woodland village sites, such as of Mahoning Ware remains the standard and McKees Rocks, Watson Farm, and hundreds of includes three main types that date to the others, are all located outside of Watershed D. Middle-Late Woodland: Mahoning cordmarked,

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 95

Mahoning plain, and Mahoning incised Beaver Rivers near New Castle that yielded (MacDonald 2000b). Mahoning cordmarked and Mahoning ware pottery and triangle points. plain types are regionally concentrated in the Phase III excavations in the mid-1990s at the Beaver River drainage and vicinity and are Chambers Site by Algonkian Archaeological considered typologically related to the shell- Consultants, Inc. recovered a nearly complete tempered Monongahela cordmarked, while Mahoning Cordmarked pot within a feature Mahoning incised is rarer and is most common dated to between A.D. 779 and 1250 in the Ohio Valley proper. Each variation was (MacDonald 2001). A small number of corn and produced via the coil method, using crushed gourd fragments were also recovered from a igneous rock (e.g., granite) or quartz temper. Late Woodland feature at Chambers. Monongahela Cordmarked, Plain, and Incised Mahoning cordmarked vessel decoration is Monongahela shell-tempered wares are by far largely confined to the lip area, which may also the most diagnostic ceramic type for Late be notched or impressed. Coils were malleated Woodland sites in southwestern Pennsylvania. with a cordwrapped paddle and cords were As defined by Mayer-Oakes (1955:196-198), oriented vertically near the rim, but in varying Monongahela Cordmarked and Plain wares were directions on the remainder of the vessel. A typically tempered with crushed shell and minor number of sherds show evidence of fabric produced using the coiling technique with impressions. Decoration is confined to the rim, malleation by paddle and anvil. Cordmarkings which was slightly flared and occasionally were produced using a cord-wrapped paddle. folded. Vessel necks were slightly constricted Exteriors are plain or cordmarked with some and vessel bodies were likely globular, although smoothing, while interiors are smoothed. no known complete vessels have been Decorations are restricted to the lip and adjacent identified. Sherd thickness is 3-10mm, with a lower rim, with some lips showing cordmarking mean of 7mm.Temper fragments comprise or punctation. Monongahela Incised wares were approximately 30-60 percent of the paste. produced similarly, with the addition of incised Texture of sherds is regular and compact, with parallel or rectilinear lines. regular breaks along the coil line (Mayer-Oakes 1955:191-192). Late Woodland Lithic Technology Generally, Late Woodland lithic technology in Mahoning plain sherds typically possess a western Pennsylvania is characterized by the smoothed interior and exterior, while the rarer production of expedient tools for daily tasks Mahoning is typically incised with parallel using locally available cherts (Hart 1995a:522; straight lines on a smoothed exterior surface. Hatch 1980; MacDonald 2000, 2001; Stewart Mahoning plain vessel rims are also slightly 1990). Late Woodland sites yield a variety of flared, with necks slightly constricted. Vessel lip small triangle points, including Levanna (Figure is flattened and often L-shaped with interior and 20) and Madison varieties. Typically produced exterior overhang. Thickness of Mahoning plain from locally available cobble cherts, these small sherds varies from 4-10mm, with a mean of triangle points were used as arrow tips. Chesser 7mm (Mayer-Oakes 1955:192-193). notched, Jack's Reef Corner Notched (Justice 1987) and Backstrum Side- Mahoning ware “seems to occur on sites which notched (George 1992) also are Middle Woodland or Hopewellian” (Mayer- occur at Late Woodland sites Oakes 1955:193), but Mahoning River Valley in western Pennsylvania. sites clearly indicate a Late Woodland period of use. The Coverts Crossing Site (36Lr75) yielded Figure 20. Late Woodland numerous Mahoning ware fragments with early Levanna Triangle Point (from Late Woodland dates (MacDonald 2000b:167). Michels and Smith 1967:669). In addition, the Chambers Site (36Lr11) is one Actual Size. of six Late Woodland sites on the Mahoning and

96 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Late Woodland Radiocarbon Dates 1400, with increasing use of maize over the The radiocarbon date inventory for the Late course of the various occupations (Church Woodland in Watershed D is comprised of three 1995:69). As noted above, the extensive dates from Meadowcroft Rockshelter: research at Late Woodland village sites in southwestern Pennsylvania has resulted in · A.D. 1025±65 (SI-2047); Stratum VII, Floor hundreds of radiocarbon dates (Nass and Hart 13; charcoal from firepits/mid 1/3 of unit; 2000), only a handful of which are from associated with Watson pottery (Maslowski Watershed D of Subbasin 20. 1983:53). Pertinent Late Woodland Sites near · A.D. 1320±100 (SI-3023); Stratum VIII, Watershed D Floor 12; charcoal from firepit Numerous publications have provided details of · A.D. 1265±90 (SI-2363); Stratum IX, Floor Late Woodland cultures in southwest 9; charcoal from firepit/upper 1/3 of unit Pennsylvania, with several references provided at the beginning of this chapter. Given previous in-depth study and the low occurrence of Numerous radiocarbon dates are available from Monongahela sites in the current study area, this Upper Ohio Valley Late Woodland sites, report only touches on some of the key including several near Watershed D. Nass and attributes of Monongahela settlements, as a Hart (2000:132-133) provide a list of 72 basis for comparing them to sites in Raccoon radiocarbon dates for Late Woodland sites Creek and vicinity. dating to between A.D. 1000-1600 in the Upper Ohio Valley. The quantity of dates increases As of 1989, 332 Late Woodland Monongahela over the course of the Late Woodland period, as sites were recorded in western Pennsylvania, shown in Figure 21, suggestive of increasing site with a core of settlement centered near the counts and populations over time. Monongahela and Youghiogheny rivers (Johnson et. al. 1989). Several of the sites discussed in this section are shown on Figure 5 35 29 in Chapter I. Mass spectrometer analyses of 30 25 human bone from Monongahela sites in West 25 Virginia indicate that maize contributed up to 70 20 18 percent of the diet (Farrow 1986). Site types 15 include villages in river bottomlands and along 10 trail networks in uplands. Smaller camps are

No. of Radiocarbon Dates 5 generally restricted to uplands and terraces of 0 1000-1200 1200-1400 1400-1600 smaller streams and rivers. Years A.D. The Monongahela constructed large, Figure 21. Quantity of Late Woodland Radiocarbon multiseasonal, palisaded villages of one to five Dates Over Time in the Upper Ohio Valley (data from acres in size and probably contained from 100 to Nass and Hart 2000:132-133). 150 inhabitants. These villages were generally Near Watershed D, George (1995:28) reports on circular and were often fortified with a round or four sites in the Chartiers Creek Valley with oval stockade. Circular houses around a central radiocarbon dates: the Kelso Site, A.D. 1350; circular plaza were abutted by large circular Morganza Village, A.D. 1300; Wylie, A.D. storage pits (Bennett and Porter 1986:17; Hart 1310 and 1350; and McKees Rocks Village, and Nass 1995; Nass and Hart 2000). A A.D. 1330. Church (1995) also reports on a distinctive Monongahela storage feature was well-dated Monongahela village in the northern post-lined and pear-shaped and was often West Virginia panhandle, the Saddle Site attached to a circular house (Mayer-Oakes (46Mr95) with dates ranging from A.D. 1100- 1955:161).

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 97

As described in more detail below, villages of indicate a preference for late-Late Woodland this composition are not known in Watershed D, village locations to be in upland settings that although three villages in Washington County were easily defendable (George 1995). are in uplands. The lack of excavations at these sites precludes further comparison. George Finally, GAI (1986) identified a Late Woodland (1995) describes four upland village sites a few site (Site 36Wh924; see Figure 5) with likely miles south and east of Watershed D along Monongahela affiliations buried under a meter Chartiers Creek in Watershed F. These four sites of alluvium in the floodplain of Chartiers Creek are the most proximate Late Woodland villages near Canonsburg. Only one flake was identified to the current study area and are shown on during initial shovel testing, but subsequent Figure 5 in Chapter III. deep testing recovered 90 shell-tempered Monongahela pottery fragments and numerous Located on a hilltop overlooking the confluence flakes between 150 and 200cm below the of Chartiers Creek and the Ohio River, the ground surface. The location of this site has McKees Rocks Site (36AL16) contains an obvious implications for archaeological survey Adena Mound (described above) and a late-Late within similar settings in Watershed D. Woodland to Protohistoric village site (Buker 1968). Located in Watershed G of Subbasin 20, C. LATE WOODLAND SITES IN the site was excavated first in 1896 and later by WATERSHED D the Allegheny Chapter of the Society for Compared to the Early Woodland (n=22 sites; Pennsylvania Archaeology in the early 1960s. 0.18 sites/decade per period) and Middle The village site contained a stockade with Woodland (n=23 sites; 0.24 sites), the Late multiple burials and numerous storage features; Woodland (n=30 sites; 0.43) experienced a however, Buker (1968:45) notes the marked significant population increase in Watershed D absence of “dwelling shapes or placement with (Figure 22). This increase is similar to other the village confines.” He suggests that a plaza regions of the state, such as the Upper Juniata was present within the stockade and that houses River basin of south-central Pennsylvania were outside the stockade’s walls. Pottery and (MacDonald 2003a). In Watershed D of burial types (typically extended or semi-flexed) Subbasin 20, site counts appear to have from the site indicate affinities with increased gradually from the low of 0.16 sites Monongahela are also common at Monongahela per decade of the terminal Late Archaic sites. The lack of distinct circular houses within /Steubenville sites to the high of 0.43 per decade the confines of the stockade led Buker (1968) to during the Late Woodland (see Figure 22). suggest possible Fort Ancient contacts, a suggestion not contradicted by George (1995:37). Subsistence at the site involved a mixed farming and foraging pattern, including 0.5 0.43 maize agriculture, shellfish collection, and deer 0.4 hunting. 0.3 0.23 0.16 0.18 0.2 George (1995) comments on three additional 0.1 sites in the Chartiers Creek Valley between 0 Pittsburgh and Washington, Pennsylvania, EW MW LW within 20 miles of Watershed D. Radiocarbon

dates for these sites all suggest fourteenth Site Count/Decades per Period Steubenville century A.D. occupations. The Kelso Site (36Wh23) and Morganza Village (36Wh48) are Figure 22. Site Densities per Period from the End of the Late Archaic to the Late Woodland, Watershed D. located on hilltops, while Wylie #3 (36Wh283) is located on a sideslope/bench near Kelso. These four sites (including McKees Rocks)

98 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Within Raccoon Creek and vicinity, PASS files The high density of small, Late Woodland also indicate the continued prevalence of small camps in Raccoon Creek resembles the pattern open sites (n=22 of 30) during the Late observed in the Mahoning River drainage to the Woodland, but with an increase in village (n=7) north in Beaver and Lawrence Counties sites as well (Table 36). (Watersheds A and B, Subbasin 20). At the Coverts Crossing and Coverts Bridge Sites, on At Meadowcroft Rockshelter (Adovasio et al. either side of the Mahoning River (ca. 50 miles 1977:61), the Late Woodland component north of the Ohio River), multiple Late yielded Jack’s Reef and triangle projectile Woodland camp occupations were recorded points, Mahoning and Monongahela ceramics, with evidence of extensive nut processing, but and wild food remains, but only a small number comparatively little maize agriculture of maize fragments. Contrast these data with (MacDonald 2000b, 2001; MacDonald and those from village sites in the Upper Ohio Cremeens 2002). As suggested by Church Valley which indicate a greater than 70 percent (1995:69-70), while maize agriculture certainly reliance on maize for some Monongahela increased over time during the Late Woodland, populations (Farrow 1986). hunting and gathering continued to be important, especially in areas peripheral to the Monongahela heartland.

Table 36. Late Woodland Sites, Raccoon Creek Watershed (PASS Files).

SITE NO. SITE NAME ARTIFACT TYPE MUNICIPALITY 36Bv0003 Old Indian Fort Triangles Shippingport Borough 36Bv0004 Lower Field/Shippingport Triangles/pottery Shippingport Borough 36Bv0029 Georgetown Watson CM Greene Township 36Bv0036 Wassler #2 Triangles -- 36Bv0040 Crevallero Triangles -- 36Bv0045 Poorhouse Run Late Woodland Potter Township 36Bv0076 Mack No. 2 Triangles Hanover Township 36Bv0078 Parish Farm Triangles Hopewell Township 36Bv0086 Route 30 Triangles -- 36Bv0169 Whriner No. 2 Triangles Hopewell Township 36Bv0180 Belich Farm Triangles -- 36Bv0202 Williams Farm Triangles -- 36Bv0213 Wildflower Reserve #3 Triangles -- 36Bv0248 Crucible Steel Triangles Greene Township 36Bv0250 Thomas Pate Triangles -- 36Wh0001 Moore Farm Late Woodland Smith Township 36Wh0022 Scarem & Foder Farm Triangles Hanover Township 36Wh0106 Mungai Farm Triangles/Jacks Reef Smith Township 36Wh0123 Shaffer Inc Monongahela CM Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh0297 Meadowcroft Triangles Jefferson Township 36Wh0338 MS #28 Triangles Independence Township 36Wh0404 Talkovich Farm Triangles Cross Creek Township 36Wh0409 MS #104 Triangles Smith Township 36Wh0410 MS #105 Triangles Cross Creek Township 36Wh0550 McNinch Site No. 2 Triangles Hanover Township 36Wh0758 Capuzzi #3 Late Woodland Robinson Township 36Wh1007 Carter #3 Triangles Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1104 Cross Creek Log House Triangles Cross Creek Township 36Wh1118 Lowry #9 Triangles Mount Pleasant Township 36Wh1161 Gregorski Late Woodland Jefferson Township

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 99

As noted above, while PASS files indicate that The mean elevation of Late Woodland sites is most Late Woodland sites in Watershed D are 961 ft. amsl, a decrease of more than 100 ft. open camps, seven sites in the study area are from the Middle Woodland (1,073 ft.) and a recorded as villages (Table 37). decrease of 140 ft. from the Early Woodland. This decrease over time indicates an ever- Johnson (2003) notes three main Late Woodland increasing preference for sites to be placed at Monongahela villages along Raccoon Creek, lower elevations, likely due to the increased role including Murdocksville (36Bv88), Scarem of agriculture and sedentism in lowland settings (36Wh22), and Moore-Olah (36Bv38). These during the course of the Woodland. Mean village sites are all in lowland terrace settings, a distance to water for Late Woodland sites contrast to the upland Monongahela village (98.3m) also decreased compared to the Middle pattern in the Mononghela drainage to the east. Woodland (122m), as did mean distance to Johnson (2003) also notes the presence of three nearest stream confluence (522m versus 720m). additional Monongahela village sites on the Nineteen of the 30 Late Woodland sites are Ohio River in or adjacent to the current study located in alluvial settings, a higher percentage area: Shippingport (36Bv4), Ohioview (36Bv9; than the Middle Woodland (12 of 23 sites) as Alam 1961); and Rochester (36Bv80). well. These data support the elevation data in showing a Late Woodland preference for site The four village sites in Beaver County are in placement in lowland, alluvial settings in floodplain/terrace settings of the Ohio River or Watershed D. Raccoon Creek, while the three village sites in more southerly Washington County are within uplands, saddles, or slopes (see Table 37). As D. LATE WOODLAND LITHICS AND described above, this upland location trend is SETTLEMENT typical of Late Woodland villages in the nearby As during other periods, the Cross Creek study Chartiers Creek and Monongahela River valleys, provides some of the only data regarding Late especially during the terminal Late Woodland lithic raw material use in Watershed Woodland/Late Prehistoric (George 1995). The D (Table 38). In contrast to the Early and upland setting of villages likely facilitated Middle Woodland periods, Late Woodland sites defense due to increasing intercultural conflict generally contain a broader range of lithic raw in the Upper Ohio River Valley and vicinity materials, with an emphasis on locally collected (George 1995). The Lower Field/Shippingport cobble cherts. While Flint Ridge and Upper Site (36Bv4) on the Ohio River in Watershed D Mercer cherts were utilized extensively by yielded multiple burials (Mayer-Oakes 1955), regional Early and Middle Woodland groups, one of which contained a Ft. Ancient-type these exotic cherts were not as important during projectile point embedded in its skull (Davis the Late Woodland, suggesting the severing of 1988:34), supporting the hypothesis of increased close ties to east-central Ohio. Lithic raw conflict during the Late Woodland. material compositions of artifacts from the Dravo Site (36Bv240) are similar to This site, along with the three upland villages in Meadowcroft and Mungai Farm, with locally Washington County and sites discussed above collected cobble cherts dominating the by Johnson (2003), indicates cultural links to the assemblages (see Table 40). Monongahela for Late Woodland populations in Watershed D. At the Scarem Site (36Wh22), Johnson (2003) notes the presence of late Neutral influence in the Raccoon Creek Valley, based on the presence of ceramic traits.

100 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Table 37. Late Woodland Site Location Data, Watershed D, Subbasin 20.

SITE NO. SITE TYPE SETTING LANDFORM ELEVATION NEAREST WATER 36Bv0003 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 660 Ohio River 36Bv0004 Village T0/T1 Terrace 680 Ohio River 36Bv0029 Village? T0/T1 Floodplain 680 Ohio River 36Bv0036 Open T0/T1 Terrace 920 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0040 Open Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 920 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Bv0045 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 680 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0076 Open T0/T1 Terrace 1020 N Fk Kings Crk 36Bv0078 Village T0/T1 Floodplain 780 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0086 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 840 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0169 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 780 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0180 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 820 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0202 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 820 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0213 Village T0/T1 Terrace 860 Raccoon Creek 36Bv0248 Open T0/T1 Terrace 700 Ohio River 36Bv0250 Open T0/T1 Floodplain 800 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0001 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1020 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0022 Village Upland Hill Ridge/Toe 980 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0106 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1220 Trib Burgetts Fork 36Wh0123 Village Slopes Upper Slopes 1170 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0297 Rockshelter T0/T1 Terrace 1000 Cross Creek 36Wh0338 Isolated Find Slopes Middle Slopes 1160 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0404 Village Upland Ridgetop 1200 Mid Fk Cross Creek 36Wh0409 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1230 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0410 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 1230 Raccoon Creek 36Wh0550 Open T0/T1 Terrace 970 Aunt Clara's Branch 36Wh0758 Open T0/T1 Stream Bench 980 Raccoon Creek 36Wh1007 Open Saddle Saddle 1270 Trib Raccoon Crk 36Wh1104 Open Slopes Middle Slopes 1160 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1118 Lithic Red. T0/T1 Terrace 1120 Trib Cross Creek 36Wh1161 Open Saddle Saddle 1160 Trib Scott Run

Table 38. Late Woodland Site Location Data, PASS Files (Watershed D).

SITE NO. NEAREST WATER DIST. WATER (M) DIRECTION OF WATER ORDER WATER DIST. TO CONF (M) DIRECTION OF CON. 36Bv0003 Ohio River 120 Southwest 3 340 Northwest 36Bv0004 Ohio River 0 On-site 1 170 West 36Bv0029 Ohio River 50 Northwest 9 380 -- 36Bv0036 Raccoon Creek 80 Southeast 1 1000 North 36Bv0040 Trib Raccoon Crk 120 Northeast 2 180 -- 36Bv0045 Raccoon Creek 50 West 9 120 Southwest 36Bv0076 N Fk Kings Crk 40 South 1 320 North 36Bv0078 Raccoon Creek 100 West 4 260 Southwest 36Bv0086 Raccoon Creek 60 East 4 540 Northwest 36Bv0169 Raccoon Creek 60 West 4 220 South 36Bv0180 Raccoon Creek 40 East 4 600 North 36Bv0202 Raccoon Creek 40 North 1 180 West 36Bv0213 Raccoon Creek 60 Southeast 4 910 Southwest 36Bv0248 Ohio River 0 On-site 1 1940 South 36Bv0250 Raccoon Creek 20 Southeast 4 80 Southwest 36Wh0001 Raccoon Creek 150 West 1 170 Southwest 36Wh0022 Raccoon Creek 110 East 1 560 Northeast 36Wh0106 Trib Burgetts Fork 50 North 1 710 East 36Wh0123 Raccoon Creek 90 Southeast 1 300 Northwest 36Wh0297 Cross Creek 60 South 5 400 Southwest 36Wh0338 Raccoon Creek 30 North 1 180 East 36Wh0404 Mid Fk Cross Creek 190 East 2 300 Northeast

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 101

SITE NO. NEAREST WATER DIST. WATER (M) DIRECTION OF WATER ORDER WATER DIST. TO CONF (M) DIRECTION OF CON. 36Wh0409 Raccoon Creek 50 East 1 870 East 36Wh0410 Raccoon Creek 10 West 1 1150 South 36Wh0550 Aunt Clara's Branch 20 East 1 100 Southeast 36Wh0758 Raccoon Creek 100 South 5 350 Southeast 36Wh1007 Trib Raccoon Crk 180 South 1 675 West 36Wh1104 Trib Cross Creek 170 Southwest 1 480 South 36Wh1118 Trib Cross Creek 100 Southeast 2 180 Southwest 36Wh1161 Trib Scott Run 800 West 1 1980 North

Table 39. Cross-Tabulation of Late Woodland Site by Lithic Raw Material (Percent), Watershed D.

ONON- KANA- FLINT UPPER M. BRUSH C. 10 MILE UNION- GLACIAL OTHER TOTAL SITE DAGA WHA RIDGE TOWN PEBBLE POINTS Meadowcroft % 5.5 18.2 7.3 36.4 16.4 7.3 5.5 3.6 -- 55 Mungai Farm % 5.5 -- 11.1 27.7 44.4 -- 5.5 -- -- 18 Cross Cr Sites % ------50.0 ------50.0 2 Dravo % 42.9 -- -- 50.0 ------56.7 30 Total Pts (n) 10 10 6 32 18 4 4 2 19* 105 Total % 9.5 9.5 5.7 60.5 17.1 3.8 3.8 1.9 18.1 100 *includes 14 “Delaware” chert points (Davis 1988:73)

PASS files provide only limited additional data Subbasin 20 (MacDonald and Cremeens 2002), regarding lithic raw material use at Late approximately 50 miles north of the study area, Woodland sites in Watershed D. Six single- Raccoon and Cross Creeks may have been component Late Woodland sites are present in peripheral to the Monongahela heartland. the watershed, five of which list chert/flint as Nevertheless, PASS data indicate that Late the only lithic raw material types. One site Woodland sites are closer to water, lower in (36Bv169) also records the presence of elevation, and more often in alluvial settings Onondaga chert in the lithic assemblage. No than Early and Middle Woodland sites, sites record Flint Ridge or Upper Mercer cherts confirming that agriculture and sedentism on PASS forms. While limited, these data increased in river bottoms during the Late confirm the emphasis on local lithic raw Woodland. material use during the Late Woodland. During the last few hundred years of the Late E. LATE WOODLAND: SUMMARY AND Woodland, villages in the southern portion of RESEARCH QUESTIONS Watershed D and within nearby Chartiers Creek were placed on hilltops and sideslopes. Within Late Woodland Overview Chartiers Creek and the Monongahela River PASS files data indicate a preference for Late valleys, these villages contained fortified Woodland site locations in lowland settings, for defensive measures (George 1995). especially compared to previous periods. This One of the only Late Woodland villages in settlement tendency likely is related to the ever- Watershed D, the Lower Field/Shippingport Site increasing role of agriculture and village life, (36Bv4; see Figure 5) on the Ohio River, both of which occurred largely in river bottoms yielded a burial with a projectile point in eastern North America (Smith 1987). embedded in its skull, also suggestive of Nevertheless, the low density of true Late population conflict. The increasing populations Woodland village sites in Watershed D of of the Late Woodland, as reflected in the Subbasin 20 is conspicuous. A comprehensive increasing site counts in PASS files, likely map of Late Woodland sites in the Upper Ohio inspired competition for resources. Climate Valley by Hart and Nass (1995:25) does not changes approximately 800 years ago (ca. 1200 depict a single excavated site in Watershed D. A.D.) may have resulted in reduced resource As with the Mahoning River in Watershed A of availability as well (Nass and Hart 2000). This combination of factors—increasing populations

102 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

and reduced resources—may have spurred the area. Ten Late Woodland research questions are reliance on maize agriculture and the increased listed below; this list is by no means settlement in alluvial settings. comprehensive and should be used only as a starting point for generating additional research As noted above, analysis of human bone from issues. Archaeological sites which can provide Late Woodland sites in southwestern information pertaining to these and other Pennsylvania indicates that nearly 70 percent of research questions will likely meet National the Monongahela diet was composed of maize Register Criterion D; thus, unless they lack in southwestern Pennsylvania and northern West integrity, sites which address these research Virginia (Farrow 1986; Mayer-Oakes 1955). questions will be eligible for listing in the The limited nutritional intake of the maize-base National Register for Historic Places: diet apparently led to higher incidences of disease and skeletal deformities for 1. How did Late Woodland cultures (e.g., the Monongahela populations (Nass and Hart Monongahela) differ from their 2000:147). In support of this notion, Davis predecessors of the Middle and Early (1988) reports that one of the Late Woodland Woodland? burials studied by Mayer-Oakes at Shippingport 2. Was the Monongahela a continuation of in Watershed D contained a skeleton with Middle Woodland trends or a population vitamin deficiency and congenital abnormalities. replacement within Watershed D? 3. How can we explain the apparent The lack of excavated Late Woodland villages population explosion during the Late precludes our ability to clearly define the role of Woodland? the Monongahela in the study area. Given the 4. How prevalent was sedentism and proximity of the Monongahela heartland, its agriculture in Watershed D? influence is presumed to have been great. The presence of seven Late Woodland village sites 5. Why were Late Woodland sites placed at in Watershed D PASS files suggests an lower elevations and closer to streams and increasing role for sedentism and crop use. to stream confluences? PASS data also indicate that Late Woodland 6. Does the increased tendency for Late sites were mostly in lowland settings, possibly Woodland sites in alluvial settings reflect to facilitate agriculture. Given the alluvial increasing agriculture in valley bottoms? setting of many Late Woodland sites, burial of 7. What best explains the increase in conflict sites under late Holocene alluvium is likely during the Late Woodland? within many floodplain and terrace settings of 8. Did increasing populations deplete Raccoon Creek (see Geomorphology and Figure resources enough to cause dietary stress? 3 above), as occurred at Site 36Wh924 along Chartiers Creek (GAI 1986). As discussed 9. What was the influence of the above, the Late Woodland component of this Monongahela in Watershed D? site was buried under 1.5-2.0 meters of 10. Why haven’t any Monongahela villages alluvium, suggesting the possibility of deeply been identified in the watershed? buried Late Woodland sites within Watershed D as well.

Late Woodland Research Questions This summary of Late Woodland archaeological data in Watershed D has generated several research issues which should be considered when conducting archaeological work in the

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 103

CHAPTER XI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This final chapter provides an overview of the that the major demographic change occurred major chronological and demographic changes between the Early and Middle Archaic in other during the last 12,000 years in Watershed D, parts of Pennsylvania, the PASS data for Subbasin 20, including Raccoon Creek and Watershed D of Subbasin 20 indicate population Cross Creek. PASS data provide a means to continuity between these periods, with the most assess demographic change over time in this significant increases between the Paleoindian study area. Site counts, site locations, and site and Early Archaic and the Middle Archaic and types can be assessed for each prehistoric period Brewerton Late Archaic, as depicted in Figure and compared to evaluate changing patterns 23. during the last 14,000 years of Native American use of the area. This report hypothesizes that the reduced site counts between the Brewerton Late Archaic and A. DEMOGRAPHY AND SETTLEMENT the Steubenville Late Archaic may best be As shown in Figure 23, increases in site counts explained by the increased tendency for per decade are concluded to indicate a Native collective processing of foods, resulting in American population increase between the nucleation of populations into fewer sites. Thus, Paleoindian and Early Archaic, continuing in this scenario, Brewerton populations were through the Brewerton Late Archaic in foragers moving to and from resource Watershed D. A second population increase is procurement areas, establishing short-term also suggested by site counts between the camps in a variety of settings, and thereby Steubenville Late Archaic and the Late yielding Brewerton points from many small Woodland. This report suggests that the two sites. While still incorporating a wide use of the population changes are related to changing landscape, Steubenville populations began to subsistence and settlement patterns. congregate to exploit concentrated resources; thus, a few large sites yield Steubenville points. Based on the PASS data, the Early Archaic The large shell heaps at Steubenville sites in the appears to represent a distinct cultural West Virginia panhandle support this demographic break from the Paleoindian period, hypothesis, as does the ubiquity of Brewerton as reflected by: 1) increases in population; 2) points at small lithic scatters in the Upper Ohio movement of most sites into alluvial settings, as Valley (Mayer-Oakes 1955; Mohney 2002). As opposed to uplands; and 3) increased use of a such, the reduced Steubenville site counts likely wide variety of landforms. The two periods reflect population congregation at sites, rather share similar patterns of lithic raw material use, than population reduction. including wide-ranging travel patterns within southwestern Pennsylvania, northern West If increasing resource availability stimulated Virginia, and east-central Ohio, as reflected in population growth between the Paleoindian and the use of Kanawha chert, Flint Ridge chert, Brewerton Late Archaic (as reflected in Figure Upper Mercer chert, and Brush Creek chert. 23), we should expect the corresponding use of a wider variety of landscapes over the early and The increasing availability of riverine and other middle Holocene. Site location data from PASS resources between the Paleoindian and Late files appear to confirm this scenario (Figure 24), Archaic allowed the exploitation of a wider as Middle Archaic and Brewerton Late Archaic range of foods, with a culmination during the sites tend to be more in uplands (ca. 54%) than Brewerton Late Archaic. While Carr (1998a, lowlands (ca. 46%), compared to the Early 1998b) and MacDonald (2003a) have suggested Archaic in which most sites are in lowlands

104 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

(61%). This increasing use of uplands between These trends of increased use of uplands and use the Early and Late Archaic is mirrored in mean of a wider variety of settings between the Early elevation of sites, as the elevation increased by and Late Archaic were reversed between the 100 ft. between the Early Archaic (1,027 ft. Late Archaic and Late Woodland. Given the amsl) and Late Archaic (1,128 ft. amsl). Mean increasing role of sedentism, agriculture, and distance to water and mean distance to village life of the later Woodland, one might confluence also increased between the Early expect an increased tendency for sites in alluvial Archaic (102m and 588m) and Late Archaic settings over the course of the Woodland (see (126m and 691m), another indication that Figure 24). This prediction is confirmed by site populations were moving across the landscape location data in Figure 24, which indicate an and more frequently into uplands. increase in use of alluvial settings (63% of sites) during the Late Woodland. Accordingly, the mean elevation of sites also decreases to 961 ft. amsl during the Late Woodland, compared to 0.5 0.43 1,128 ft. amsl during the Late Archaic (Table 0.45 40). Mean distance to water and mean distance 0.4 0.34 0.35 to stream confluence is also lowest during the 0.3 0.23 Late Woodland, confirming the tendency to 0.25 0.18 0.2 0.16 move to valley bottoms conducive to 0.15 0.13 0.15 agriculture, a trend that occurred throughout the 0.1 0.03 0.05 0.02 Woodland in the eastern United States (Smith

Sites/Decades per Period 0 1987).

EA MA EW MW LW Paleo Table 40. Site Location Data, All Periods, Watershed D, Brewerton Early Paleo Steubenville Subbasin 20. Period PERIOD MEAN DIST TO MEAN DIST. TO MEAN ELEVATION WATER (M) CONF. (M) (FT. AMSL) Paleoindian 212 789 1208 E.Archaic 102 588 1027 Figure 23. Site Counts per Decade Per Period, M.Archaic 150 621 1052 Watershed D, Subbasin 20. L.Archaic 126 691 1128 E.Woodland 130 597 1101 M.Woodland 122 720 1073 L.Woodland 98.3 522 961 Upland/Saddle/Slope 80 Alluvial 70 60 Thus, while botanical evidence for agriculture is 50 minimal for Late Woodland sites in Watershed 40 D (see Chapter X), site location data indicate 30 Percent 20 that farming may have been an important 10 subsistence activity. Populations clearly moved 0 to river bottoms, most likely to grow crops. As noted in Chapter X, studies of Monongahela diet EA MA EW MW LW Paleo indicate a 70 percent reliance on maize Brewerton Steubenville Period agriculture. Additional excavations at Late Woodland sites along valley bottoms of Raccoon Creek are necessary to better understand the role of farming for Late Figure 24. Variation in Site Location, Watershed D, Woodland populations in Raccoon Creek and Subbasin 20. vicinity.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 105

B. LITHIC RAW MATERIAL USE AND The most obvious point to make about the data SETTLEMENT PATTERNS in Table 41 is its general uniformity over time. Lithic raw material data provide a means to On average, local cherts were used to produce evaluate travel and trade patterns and 38.4 percent of artifacts at the Cross Creek sites, technological choices over the last 14,000 years while non-local cherts were used to produce in Watershed D. Fortunately, the extensive 40.9% of artifacts. Variation from this pattern excavations at sites in Cross Creek yielded occurs during the Early Woodland, Middle excellent lithic raw material data, as described Woodland, Middle Archaic, and Late Archaic. in the previous chapters. This section During the Middle and Late Archaic, local synthesizes those data to compare land-use cherts dominate the assemblages of the sites, patterns over time. For each period, projectile with significant quantities of Kanawha chert as point data from the Meadowcroft, Mungai Farm, well. This use of a variety of locally available Cross Creek Village, and Avella Mound Sites stones likely reflects the ever-increasing use of a are combined with the general survey results variety of landforms, discussed in more detail presented in Vento and Donohue (1982:124- above and in Chapters VI and VII. Rather than 127). More detailed analyses of lithic raw traveling long distances therefore, Middle and materials are presented for each period in the Late Archaic Native Americans traveled chapters above. extensively within a well-defined local territory.

To better understand patterns of toolstone use, The Early and Middle Woodland reliance on the lithic raw materials were grouped into three non-local Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer cherts categories in Table 41: local, non-local, and represents another significant variation from the Kanawha chert. The local cherts include normal toolstone-use pattern (see Table 41). Onondaga, Brush Creek, Ten Mile, Uniontown, This peak in non-local chert use reflects and cobble chert, while non-local cherts include increased ceremonial ties to east-central Ohio Flint Ridge and Upper Mercer. Kanawha chert Adena and Hopewell populations. As discussed is separated due to the uncertain provenience of in more detail in Chapters IX and X, the Adena the material, with some suggesting that the most and Hopewell influences were not great in proximate sources are in central West Virginia Watershed D, but were apparent in the lithic raw (Vento and Donohue 1982) and others (Fritz, material assemblages at sites like Mungai Farm pers. comm., 2003; Mohney 2002) indicating and Avella Mound, both of which yielded very possible local sources for Kanawha-like chert in high proportions of Flint Ridge and Upper southwestern Pennsylvania; thus, its sources Mercer cherts. could be either local or non-local. Unknown cherts were present as well, accounting for the C. CONCLUSION: FUTURE AVENUES OF remainder in each period. RESEARCH IN WATERSHED D, SUBBASIN 20 One of the main results of this study is the realization that very few in-depth archaeological Table 41. Lithic Raw Material Use over Time, Watershed D, Subbasin 20. studies (beyond the Phase I survey level) have occurred within the Raccoon Creek Valley PERIOD LOCAL NON-LOCAL KANAWHA Paleoindian 34.6* 37.7 0.0 proper. No research reports at all are available Early Archaic 43.1 45.1 8.8 for several smaller streams in the northwestern Middle Archaic 42.4 30.3 21.2 portion of the study area, including Harmon Late Archaic 48.2 28.2 18.2 Early Woodland 21.8 50.0 20.2 Creek, King’s Creek, and the Aunta Clara’s Middle Woodland 36.1 53.5 6.7 Fork, all of which flow westerly into the Ohio Late Woodland 42.6 41.3 13.3 River. With the exception of the outstanding Total, Mean % 38.4 40.9 12.6 work conducted within Cross Creek at sites like *Data synthesized from Vento and Donohue (1982:124-127); only Meadowcroft data used for Paleoindian period. Meadowcroft Rockshelter by Adovasio and his colleagues, only one data recovery investigation

106 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

has taken place in Watershed D, the work at the ability to answer research questions discussed in Dravo Site by Davis (1988) on the south bank of this report. Even the smallest of sites may the Ohio River near the Ohio state line. While provide pieces of information regarding land- Mayer-Oakes (1955) conducted work at several use, technology, and subsistence that would sites in this area, most of it entailed analysis of contribute to a better understanding of existing collections. When excavations were prehistoric change within Raccoon Creek, Cross conducted by Mayer-Oakes, the lack of Creek, Traverse Creek, Little Traverse Creek, available technical data limited their ability to Service Creek, King’s Creek and the many other address specific research questions. Hundreds of drainages of Watershed D, Subbasin 20. sites are recorded in PASS files in the Raccoon Creek Valley, thus the minimal extent of archaeological work is astonishing, especially given the extensive studies that have taken place nearby in the Ohio River, Cross Creek, and Chartiers Creek. While the prehistory of these areas is very well known, especially for certain time periods, the prehistory of the Raccoon Creek Valley is a relative unknown and demands additional research.

While many upland sites are likely to reveal their presence by surface scatters of artifacts in plowed fields (e.g., Mungai Farm), sites in alluvial settings may be buried under more than a meter of late Holocene alluvium (see Geomorphology and Figure 3 above; MacDonald 2003b). For example, Site 36Wh924 along Chartiers Creek contained a Late Woodland Monongahela component with features and shell-tempered ceramics between 1.5 and 2.0 meters below ground surface (GAI 1986). As currently required by the BHP, deep testing is recommended in floodplain/terrace settings of larger streams and rivers within Watershed D.

More work clearly needs to be conducted to better evaluate the prehistory of Watershed D, especially within the Raccoon Creek Valley and its smaller tributaries. Within Cross Creek, the outstanding work by Adovasio and his colleagues provided a wealth of information that should be synthesized in a comprehensive technical report. While PASS data are also an excellent means to evaluate changing lifeways and demographics over time in Watershed D, more in-depth archaeological projects are required to address the research issues. Archaeological sites within the Raccoon Creek watershed should be evaluated to assess their

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 107

(This page intentionally blank.)

108 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

REFERENCES

Adovasio, J.M., R. Fryman, A.G. Quinn, D.C. Dirkmaat, and D.R. Pedler 1998 The Archaic West of the : A View from the Cross Creek Drainage, Washington County, Pennsylvania. In The Archaic Period in Pennsylvania, pp. 1-28, edited by P.A. Raber et al. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Adovasio, J.M., J. Gunn, J. Donahue, and R. Stuckenrath 1977 Meadowcroft Rockshelter: Retrospect 1976. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 47(2-3):1- 93.

1978 Meadowcroft Rockshelter, 1977; An Overview. American Antiquity 43 (4): 632-651.

1982 The Meadowcroft Rockshelter/Cross Creek Archaeological Project: Retrospect 1982. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 257-270, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

1983 The AENA Compilation of Fluted Points in Eastern North America: A Perspective from Meadowcroft Rockshelter. Archaeology of Eastern North America 11: 6-11.

1990 The Meadowcroft Rockshelter Radiocarbon Chronology 1975-1990. American Antiquity 55(2):348-354.

Adovasio, J.M., J. Gunn, J. Donahue, R. Stuckenrath, J.E. Guilday, and K.Volman 1980 Yes Virginia, It Really is that Old: A Reply to Haynes and Mead. American Antiquity 45(3): 588-596.

Adovasio, J.M. and W.C. Johnson 1981 The Appearance of Cultigens in the Upper Ohio Valley: A View from Meadowcroft Rockshelter. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 51(1-2):63-80.

Adovasio, J.M. and J. Page 2002 The First Americans. Random House, New York.

Adovasio, J.M. and D.R. Pedler 1997 Monte Verde and the Antiquity of Humankind in the Americas. Antiquity 71:573- 580. 2000 A Long View of Deep Time at Meadowcroft Rockshelter. Paper presented at the 65th Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Philadelphia.

Alam, E.A. 1961 A Preliminary Report on a Stratified Site at Ohioview. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 31(2):61-77.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 109

Applegarth, J.D. and V.L. Cowin 1982 Excavations at Cross Creek Village (36Wh293) and the Avella Mound (36Wh415), Washington County, Southwestern Pennsylvania. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 241-256, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN. Baker, P.H. 1996 Phase I Cultural Resource Survey of the Proposed 55±Acre Beaver Valley Retail Project, Center Township, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, ER 96-0753-007. Submitted to JDN Development Company, Inc. By Garrow and Associates, Inc., Latrobe, Pennsylvania.

Ballweber, H.L. 1989 A Study of Six Early/Middle Woodland Sites in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 59(2):46-99.

Bennett, R.N., and W.D. Porter 1986 Cultural Resources Survey of a Proposed 11.7 Mile Pipeline Corridor in Kanawha County, West Virginia. Prepared by WAPORA, Inc. For Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, Charleston, West Virginia.

Berg, Thomas M., John H. Barnes, W. D. Sevon, Viktoras W. Skema, I. Peter Wilshusen, and Dawna S. Yannacci 1989 Physiographic Provinces of Pennsylvania. Prepared for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Environmental Resources, Office of Resources Management, Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey.

Berger, Louis and Associates, Inc. (Berger) 1998 Phase II Archaeological Investigation, Site 36Bv122, Proposed Little Traverse Creek Bridge Replacement, SR 0030, Section B05, Independence Township, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, ER 92-3454-007. Prepared for PennDOT District 11-0 by Louis Berger and Associates, Inc., East Orange, NJ.

Bergman, C., J. Doershuk, R.Moeller, P.LaPorta, and J.Schuldenrein 1998 An Introduction to the Early and Middle Archaic Occupations at Sandts Eddy. In The Archaic Period in Pennsylvania: Hunter-Gatherers of the Early-Middle Holocene, pp. 45-76, edited by. P.Raber et al. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Beynon, D.E. 1981 The Geoarchaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh.

Binford, L. R. 1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35:255-273.

1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45(1):4-21.

110 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Boldurian, A.T. 1985 Variability in Flintworking Technology at the Krajacic Site: Possible Relationships to the Pre-Clovis Paleoindian Occupation of the Cross Creek Drainage in Southwestern Pennsylvania. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.

Bonnichsen, Robson, and Karen L. Turnmire, eds. 1991 Clovis: Origins and Adaptations. Center for the Study of the First Americans, Corvallis, Oregon.

Braun, E.L. 1950 Deciduous Forests of Eastern North America. The Blakiston Company, Philadelphia.

Bressler, J.P. 1989 Prehistoric Man on Canfield Island 36Ly37, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. North Central Chapter No. 8, Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology and the Lycoming County Historical Society.

Briggs, R.P. 1999 Appalachian Plateaus Province and the Eastern Lake Section of the Central Lowland Province. In The Geology of Pennsylvania, edited by C.H. Shultz, pp. 362-377. Pennsylvania Geological Society, Harrisburg, and Pittsburgh Geological Society.

Broyles, B.J. 1971 Second Preliminary Report: The St. Albans Site, Kanawha County, West Virginia, 1964-1968. West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey, Report of Archaeological Investigations 3, Morgantown.

Buker, W.E. 1968 The Archaeology of McKees Rocks Late Prehistoric Village Site. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 38(1-4): 3-49.

Burkett, Kenneth 1999 Prehistoric Occupations at Fishbasket. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 69(1):1-100.

Butts, C.F. 1945 Geologic Atlas of the United States, Hollidaysburg-Huntingdon Folio Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geologic Survey, Harrisburg. Callahan, E. 1979 The Basics of Biface Knapping in the Eastern Fluted Point Tradition: A Manual for Flintknappers and Lithic Analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America 7(1):1- 180.

Carlisle, R.C. and J.M. Adovasio 1982 Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage. Prepared for the 47th Annual Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 111

Carlisle, R.C., J.M. Adovasio, J. Donahue, P. Wiegman, and J.E. Guilday 1982 An Introduction to the Meadowcroft/Cross Creek Archaeological Project: 1973- 1982. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 1-30, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

Carr, K.W. 1989 The Shoop Site: Thirty-Five Years After. In New Approaches to the Past, edited by W.F. Kinsey and R.W. Moeller, pp. 5-28. Archaeological Services, Bethlehem, Ct.

1998a The Early Archaic Period in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 68(2):42-69.

1998b Archaeological Site Distribution and Patterns of Lithic Utilization during the Middle Archaic in Pennsylvania. In The Archaic Period in Pennsylvania: Hunter-Gatherers of the Early and Middle Holocene Period, edited by P.Raber, P.Miller, and S.Neusius, pp. 77-90. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Carr, K.W. and Adovasio, J.M. 2002a Paleoindians in Pennsylvania. In Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania, edited by K.W. Carr and J.M. Adovasio, pp. 1-50. Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology No. 2, Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

2002b Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania. Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology No. 2, Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Chatters, J.C. 2000 The Recovery and First Analysis of an Early Holocene Human Skeleton from Kennewick, Washington. American Antiquity 65(2):291-316.

Church, F. 1995 Monongahela Subsistence and Settlement in the Northern West Virginia Panhandle: the Saddle Site. Archaeology of Eastern North America 23:57-72.

Clarke, G. and C.M. Barton 2004 The Settlment of the American Continents. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. In Press.

Clay, R. B. 1980 The Cultural Historical Placement of Fayette Thick Ceramics in Central Kentucky, Tennessee Anthropologist V(2): 166-178. 1986 Adena Ritual Spaces. In Early Woodland Archeology, edited by Kenneth B. Farnsworth and Thomas E. Emerson, pp. 581-595. Center for American Archeology Press, Kampsville, Illinois.

1987 Circles and Ovals: Two Types of Adena Space. Southeastern Archaeology 6(1): 46- 56.

112 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

1991 Adena Ritual Development: An Organizational Type in a Temporal Perspective. In The Human Landscape in Kentucky’s Past: Site Structure and Settlement Patterns, edited by C. Stout and C.K. Hensley, pp. 30-39. Kentucky Heritage Council.

1998 The Essential Features of Adena Ritual and Their Implications. Southeastern Archaeology 17(1):1-21.

Clay, R. B. and C. M. Niquette 1992 Middle Woodland Mortuary Ritual in the Gallipolis Locks and Dam Vicinity, Mason County, West Virginia. West Virginia Archeologist 44(1&2):1-25.

Coe, J.L. 1964 The Formative Cultures of the Carolina Piedmont. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 54(5), Philadelphia, Pa.

Collins, M.B. 1999 Clovis Blade Technology. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Cosgrove, K.L. and R.L. Michael 1986 Phase II Archaeological Testing of Sites 2A, 3A, 3B, and 3C, St. Joe Resources Company, Fly-Ash Disposal Project, Potter Township, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, ER 86-0679-007. Submitted to Michael Baker , Jr., Inc. By NPW Consultants, Inc., Uniontown, Pennsylvania.

Cowin, Verna L. 1985 The Woodland Period. In A Comprehensive State Plan for the Conservation of Archaeological Resources, Volume II, edited by Paul A. Raber, pp. 185-193. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

1991 The Middle Archaic in the Upper Ohio Valley. In Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology. Vol. 7, pp.43-53.

Crowl, G.H. and W.D. Sevon 1999 Quaternary. In The Geology of Pennsylvania, edited by C.H. Shultz, pp. 225-231. Pennsylvania Geological Society, Harrisburg, and Pittsburgh Geological Society.

Cushman, K.A. 1982 Floral Remains from Meadowcroft Rockshelter, Washington County, Southwestern Pennsylvania. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 207-220, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

Custer, J.F. 1988 Late Archaic Cultural Dynamics in the Central Middle Atlantic Region. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 4: 39-60.

1996 Prehistoric Cultures of Eastern Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 113

2001 Classification Guide for Arrowheads and Spearpoints of Eastern Pennsylvania and the Central Mid-Atlantic. Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Custer, J.F., and E.B. Wallace 1982 Patterns of Resource Distribution and Archaeological Settlement Patterns in the Piedmont Uplands of the Middle Atlantic Region. North American Archaeologist 3(2): 139-172.

Custer, J.F., Scott C. Watson, and Daniel N. Bailey 1996 A Summary of Phase III Data Recovery Excavations at the West Water Street Site (36Cn175), Lock Haven, Clinton County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 66(1): 1-53.

Davis, C. E. n.d. Georgetown Site (36Bv29). National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. Submitted to the United States Dept. of the Interior, by Christine Davis.

1988 Phase III Data Recovery, the Dravo #1 Site, 36Bv240, ER 87-0879-007. Prepared for Dravo Corporation by the Carnegie, Section of Anthropology.

2001 Phase I Archaeological Survey and Limited Phase II Testing for the Leetsdale Concrete Casting Facility, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, ER 87-0469-042. Submitted to the PHMC-BHP by Christine Davis Consultants, Inc., Verona, Pennsylvania.

Davis, C.E. and S.W. Lantz 1987 Phase I/II Cultural Resource Survey of the Georgetown Project, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Report submitted by the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, to Dravo Corporation (ER No. 97-0879-007).

Davis, M.B. 1984 Holocene Vegetational History of the Eastern United States. In Late Quaternary Environments of the United States, edited by H.E. Wright, Jr., pp. 166-181. Longman Press, London.

Dent. R.J., Jr. and B.E. Kauffman 1985 Aboriginal Subsistence and Site Ecology as Interpreted from Microfloral and Faunal Remains. In Shawnee Minisink: A Stratified Paleoindian Site in the Upper Delaware Valley of Pennsylvania, pp. 55-79, edited by C.W. McNett. Academic Press, New York.

Dillehay, T.D. 1997 Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement in Chile: Paleoenvironment and Site Context. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Dincauze, D.F. 1976 The Neville Site: 8,000 Years at Amoskeag, Manchester, New Hampshire. Peabody Museum Monographs No. 4. Harvard University, Boston.

114 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Dragoo, D.W. 1956 Excavations at the Watson Site, 46Hk34, Hancock County, West Virginia. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 26(2):59-88.

1959 Archaic Hunters of the Upper Ohio Valley. Annals of Carnegie Museum 35: 139- 245.

1963 Mounds for the Dead: An Analysis of the Adena Culture. Annals of Carnegie Museum 37. Edmunds, W.E., Skema, V.W., and N.K. Flint 1999 Pennsylvanian. In Shultz, C.H. (ed.) The Geology of Pennsylvania, pp.148-170. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geological Survey and Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh Geological Society.

East, Thomas C. and K.A. Beckman 1992 Blair County S.R.6220 Wetland Replacement. Phase I and Phase II Cultural Resources Report Prepared for Pennsylvania Department of Transportation District 9-0 by Skelly and Loy, Inc. Engineers-Consultants, Monroeville and Harrisburg, PA.

East, T.C., R.B. Duncan, M.G. Sams, C.T. Espenshade, P.H. Baker, and A.T. Vish 1999 Phase I/II Archaeological Testing and Phase III Data Recovery, U.S. Route 220 Improvement Project, S.R. 0220, Section C10. Report submitted to PennDOT District 2-0 by Skelly and Loy, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

Eddins, J.T. 1982 Archaeological Site Survey of Defined Areas within Raccoon Creek State Park, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Submitted to the Dept. of Environmental Resources by the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh.

Eisert, Ronald W. 1974 Monongahela Flint and Associated Workshops in the Chartiers Valley, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 44(3):33-39.

Ellis, C. and J.H. Payne 1995 Estimating Failure Rates in Fluting Based on Archaeological Data: Examples from NE North America. Journal of Field Archaeology 22:459-474.

Ellyson, W.J., Kunkle, M., Ruffner, J.D., and J. Webb 1974 Soil Survey of Brooke, Hancock, and Ohio Counties, West Virginia. USDA- Soil Conservation Service, Washington D.C., Govt. Printing Office

Faingnaert, D. and W. Doyle 1977 A Report on the Skeletal Remains of the Ohioview Site, A Late Prehistoric Village. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 47(4):8-26.

Farrow, D.C. 1986 A Study of Monongahela Subsistence Patterns Based on Mass Spectrometric Analysis. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 11(2):153-180.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 115

Fenicle, D. 2003 Draft Report: Phase II Archaeological Testing: 36AL480, Leetsdale Industrial Park, Leetsdale, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, ER 87-0469-042. Submitted to USACOE Pittsburgh District by the ASC Group, Inc., Columbus, Ohio.

Fenneman, N.M. 1938 Physiography of Eastern United States. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

Fiedel, S.J. 2001 What Happened in the Early Woodland? Archaeology of Eastern North America 29: 101-142.

Fitzgibbons, P.T. 1982 Lithic Artifacts from Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 91-111, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

Fladmark, K.R. 1983 Times and Places: Environmental Correlations of Mid-to-Late Wisconsinan Human Population Expansion in North America. In Early Man in the New World, pp. 13-42, edited by R. Shutler. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Ca.

Fogelman, G.L. 1983 The Pennsylvania Artifact Series Lithics Book. Paulhamus Litho, Inc.

Fowler, D. B., E. T. Hemmings, and G. R. Wilkins 1976 Some Recent Additions to Adena Archaeology in West Virginia. Archaeology of Eastern North America 4:110-121.

Frankenberg, S. R. and G. E. Henning 1994 Phase III Data Recovery Excavations of the Cotiga Mound (46MO1), Mingo County, West Virginia. GAI Consultants, Inc. Project Number 90-509-12.

Fredlund, Glen G. 1989 Holocene Vegetational History of the Gallipolis Locks and Dam Project Area, Mason County, West Virginia. Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 89-01, Lexington, Kentucky.

Frison, G.C. 1991 Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Academic Press, New York.

Frye, L. and C. Weiser 2003 The Leetsdale Project. PAC Newsletter 24:3-6.

GAI Consultants, Inc. 1986 Phase II Archaeological Investigations of Seven Prehistoric Sites in Three Sewerage System Subdistricts, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Report submitted to North Strabane Township Municipal Authority by GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

116 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

1995 Archaeological Investigations at the Memorial Park Site (36Cn164), Clinton County, Pennsylvvania. Final Report Submitted to the U.S.A.C.O.E., Baltimore District by GAI, Monroeville, Pennsylvania.

Gajewski, K. 1988 Late Holocene Climate Changes in Eastern North America estimated from Pollen Data. Quaternary Research 29:255-262.

Gardner, W. M. 1987 Paleoindian and Archaic in West Virginia: An Overview for the State Historic Preservation Plan. West Virginia State Historic Preservation Office, Charleston.

2002 The Paleoindian Problem Revisited: Observations on Paleoindian in Pennsylvania (A Slightly Shorter Slant). In Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania, pp. 97-104, edited by K. Carr and J. Adovasio. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Gates, D.M. 1993 Climate Change and its Biological Consequences. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Gatus, T. W. 1985 Chert Resources and Patterns of Prehistoric Acquisition and Utilization in the Yatesville Reservoir Area of Extreme Northeastern Kentucky. In Prehistoric and Historic Sites Archeology in the Proposed Yatesville Reservoir, Lawrence County, Kentucky, edited by Charles M. Niquette and Theresa K. Donham, pp. 421-432. Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 85-13, Lexington, Kentucky.

Gaudreau, Denise C. 1988 The Distribution of Late Quaternary Forest Regions in the Northeast. In Holocene Human Ecology in Northeastern North America, edited by G.P. Nicholas, pp. 215- 256. Plenum Press, New York.

George, R.L. 1971 The Archaic of the Upper Ohio Valley: A View in 1970. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 41(1-2):9-15.

1974 Monongahela Settlement Patterns and the Ryan Site. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 44(1-2):1-22.

1975 Some Woodland Point Types in the Upper Ohio Valley. The West Virginia Archaeologist 24:22-31.

1978 The McJunkin Site, A Preliminary Report. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 48(4):33-47.

1985 The Archaic Period. In A Comprehensive State Plan for the Conservation of Archaeological Resources, edited by P.Raber, pp. 181-184. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 117

1992 Early Late Woodland in Western Pennsylvania; the Backstrum Side Notched Point Evidence. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 62(1):62-72.

1995 Getting High: Chartiers Valley Monongahela and the Troublesome 14th Century. Archaeology of Eastern North America 23:27-40.

1998 McFate Artifacts in a Monongahela Context: McJunkin, Johnston, and Squirrel Hill. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 67(1):35-44.

George, R.L. and C.E. Davis 1986 A Dated Brewerton Component in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 56(1-2):12-20.

Gleach, F.W. 1985 A Compilation of Radiocarbon Dates with Applicability to Central Virginia. Quarterly Bulletin of the Archeological Society of Virginia: 40(4):180-200.

Goldberg, P. and T.L. Arpin 1999 Micromorphological Analysis of Sediments from Meadowcroft Rockshelter, Pennsylvania: Implications for Radiocarbon Dating. Journal of Field Archaeology 26(3):325-342.

Grantz, D.L. 1986 Archaeological Investigations of the Crawford-Grist Site #2 (36FA262): An Early Woodland Hamlet. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 56(3-4):2-21.

Griffin, J.B. 1974 The Adena People. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

Guilday, J.E., P.S. Martin, and A.D. McCrady 1964 New Paris No. 4: A Pleistocene Cave Deposit in Bedford County, Pennsylvania. Bulletin of the National Speleological Society 26:121-194.

Guilday, J.E. and P.W. Parmalee 1982 Vertebrate Faunal Remains from Meadowcroft Rockshelter, Washington County, Pennsylvania: Summary and Interpretation. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 163-174, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

1965 Animal Remains from Sheep Rock Shelter (36Hu1), Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 35:34-49.

Hardesty, D. 1964 The Biggs Site: A Hopewellian Complex in Greenup County, Kentucky. Probes 14- 21.

118 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Hardlines Design Company 2001 Interim Report: Prehistoric Deposits at 36AL480, Leetsdale Industrial Park, Leetsdale, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Submitted to the USACOE Pittsburgh District by Hardlines Design Company, Columbus, Ohio.

Harper, J.A. 1997 Of ice and waters flowing: the formation of Pittsburgh’s three rivers. Pennsylvania Geology 28: 2-8. Hart, J.P. 1995a Summary and Conclusions. In Final Report, Archaeological Investigations at the Memorial Park Site (36CN164), Clinton County, Pennsylvania, pp. 507-548. Final Report Submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore. GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, PA.

1995b Storage and Monongahela Subsistence-Settlement Change. Archaeology of Eastern North America 23:41-56.

Hart, John P. and J.P. Nass, Jr. 1995 Modeling Monongahela Subsistence-Settlement Change: Introduction. Archaeology of Eastern North America 23:23-26.

Haynes, C.V. 1980 Paleoindian Charcoal from Meadowcroft Rockshelter: Is Contamination a Problem? American Antiquity 45(3):582-588.

Hemmings, E. T. 1977 Investigations at Grave Creek Mound 1975-76: A Sequence for Mound and Moat Construction. The West Virginia Archaeologist 36(2):59-68.

1978 Exploration of an Early Adena Mound at Willow Island, West Virginia. Report of Archaeological Investigation No. 7. West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey, Morgantown, West Virginia.

1984 Investigations at Grave Creek Mound 1975-1976: a Sequence for Mound and Moat Construction. West Virginia Archaeologist 38(2):3-49.

1985 West Virginia Radiocarbon Dates and Prehistory. West Virginia Archaeologist 37(2):35-44. Herbstritt, James T. 1981a Bonnie Brook: A Multicomponent Aboriginal Locus in West-Central Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 51(3):1-59.

1981b Final Report, Prehistoric Archaeological Site Survey in Pennsylvania Region II, Southwestern Pennsylvania 1980. Prepared for the PHMC by the Center for Prehistoric and Historic Site Archaeology, California, Pennsylvania.

Holland, John D. 1999 The Cherts of Northwestern Pennsylvania: Indigenous and Otherwise. Paper presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology, Brookville, PA.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 119

Housley, R.A., C.S. Gamble, M.Street, and P. Pettitt 1997 Radiocarbon Evidence for the Lateglacial Human Decolonization of Northern Europe. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 63:25-54.

Howard, C.D. 1991 The Clovis Point: Characteristics and Type Description. Plains Anthropologist 35(129): 255-262

Jacobson, R.B., Elston, D.P., and Heaton, J.W. 1988 Stratigraphy and magnetic polarity of the high terrace remnants in the Upper Ohio and Monongahela Rivers in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Quaternary Research 29: 216-232.

Johnson, W.C. 1977 Ceramics. In Meadowcroft Rockshelter: Retrospect 1976, edited by J.M. Adovasio et al. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 47(2-3):59-64.

1982 Ceramics from Meadowcroft Rockshelter: A Re-Evaluation and Interpretation. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 142-162, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

2001 Who were those Gals? Cordage Twist Direction and Ethnicity in the Potomac River Basin, Preliminary Evidence suggesting Population Continuity and Replacement during the Late Woodland Period. Paper presented at the Middle Atlantic Archaeological Conference, Ocean City, MD.

2003 Prehistoric Culture History of the Upper Ohio Valley. Unpublished Manuscript.

Johnson, W.C. and W.P. Athens 1988 Observations on Late Prehistoric Period Monongahela Culture Settlement Patterns within the Section of Fayette, Westmoreland, and Adjacent Allegheny, Armstrong, and Indiana Counties, Southwestern Pennsylvania. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Eastern States Archaeological Conference Federation, Toronto.

Johnson, W.C., W.P. Athens, M.T. Fuess, L.G. Jaramillo, K.R. Bastianini, and E. Ramos 1989 Late Prehistoric Period Monongahela Culture Site and Cultural Resource Inventory. Report prepared by the University of Pittsburgh Cultural Resource Management Program. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Jones, T.L., R.T. Fitzgerald, D.J. Kennett, C.H. Miksicek, J.L. Fagan, J. Sharp and J.M. Erlandson 2002 The Cross Creek Site (CA-SLO-1797) and its Implications for New World Colonization. American Antiquity 67(2):213-230.

120 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Joyce, Arthur A. 1988 Early/Middle Holocene Environments in the Middle Atlantic Region: A Revised Reconstruction. In Holocene Human Ecology in Northeastern North America, edited by George P. Nicholas, pp. 185-214. Plenum Press, New York.

Justice, N.D. 1987 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Kaktins, U. and Delano, H.L. 1999 Drainage basins. In Shultz, C.H. (ed.) The Geology of Pennsylvania, pp.378-390. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geological Survey and Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh Geological Society.

Kellogg, D.C., R. Kingsley, R. Varisco 1998 Archaeological Data Recovery at the Mayview and Mayview Bend Sites, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Report prepared for PennDOT District 11-0 by John Milner Associates, Inc.

Kinsey, W.F., III 1972 Archaeology in the Upper Delaware Valley. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Knepper, Dennis A. and Michael D. Petraglia 1996 Prehistoric Occupation at the Conoquenessing Site (36Bv292), An Upland Setting in the Upper Ohio River Valley. Archaeology of Eastern North America 24:29-58.

Kuhn, R.D. 1985 A Morphological Analysis of Bifurcated-Base projectile Points in the Northeastern United States. Man in the Northeast 29:55-69.

Lantz, S.W.

1982 A Cultural Resource Survey of L.R. 93 (T.R. 62) Irvine Bridge Located near the Town of Irvine, Warren County, Pennsylvania. Report prepared by Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh.

1984 Distribution of Paleo-Indian Projectile Points and Tools from Western Pennsylvania: Implications for Regional Differences. Archaeology of Eastern North America 12: 210-230.

1989 Age, Distribution and Cultural Affiliation of Raccoon Notched Point Varieties in Western Pennsylvania and Western New York. Bulletin of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History No. 28, Pittsburgh.

Larabee, P.A. 1986 Late Quaternary Vegetational and Geomorphic History of the Allegheny Plateau at Big Run Bog, Tucker County, West Virginia. Unpublished Masters of Science Thesis. The University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 121

Lepper, Bradley T. 1983 Fluted Point Distributional Patterns in the Eastern United States: A Contemporary Phenomenon. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 8(2):269-286.

Lepper, B.T., R.W. Yerkes, and W. H. Pickard 2001 Prehistoric Flint Procurement Strategies at Flint Ridge, Licking County, Ohio. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 26(1):53-78.

Leverette, F. 1934 Glacial deposits outside the Wisconsin terminal moraine in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania geological survey, 4th series, General geology Report 7, 123 p. Lothrop, Jon In Prep Panhandle Archaic Americans in the Upper Ohio Valley: Archaeological Investigations at the East Steubenville (46Br31) and Highland Hills (46Br60) Sites. WV Route 2 Follansbee-Weirton Road Upgrade Project, Brooke County, West Virginia. Report prepared for Whitney, Bailey, Cox & Magnani, LLP.

n.d. Panhandle Archaic in the Upper Ohio River Valley: Data Recovery at the East Steubenville (46BR31) and Highland Hills (46BR60) Sites. Report in Preparation for West Virginia Division of Highways by GAI Consultants, Monroeville, PA.

1989 The Organization of Paleoindian Lithic Technology at the Potts Site. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by C.Ellis and J.Lothrop, pp. 99-137. Westview Press, Boulder.

2001a Management Summary, Phase III Data Recovery at Prehistoric Sites 46Br31 and 46Br60, U.S. Route 2 Follansbee-Weirton Road Upgrade Project, Follansbee, Brooke County, West Virginia. Prepared by GAI Consultants, Inc. for Whitney, Bailey, Cox & Magnani, Bridgeport, West Virginia.

2001b Chapter 2. Study Unit 1: Upper Ohio Valley, Woodland Prehistoric Context for West Virginia. Unpublished Manuscript prepared for the West Virginia State Historic Preservation Office, Charleston, W.V.

Lothrop, J.C. and B. Munford 2001 Ritual or Special Purpose Use of Site 46Ni267. In Phase III Data Recovery Investigations of Site 46Ni267, Nicholas County, West Virginia, pp. 167-176, prepared by D.H. MacDonald, B.A. Munford, and J.C. Lothrop. Submitted to the West Virginia Division of Highways by GAI Consultants, Inc., Charleston, W.V.

Lounsburry, Kelly M. 1997 The Smith Site: The Chautauqua-McFate Culture in the Upper Allegheny River Valley in Southwestern New York. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 67(1):21-34.

Luedtke, Barbara E. 1992 An Archaeologist’s Guide to Chert and Flint. Archaeological Research Tools 7. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

122 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

MacDonald, D.H. 2000a Phase I Archaeological Survey, Royal Tartan Golf Course, Buffalo and Canton Townships, Washington County, Pennsylvania, ER 00-0010-125D. Report prepared for W.B. Stewart by GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

2000b Phase III Data Recovery Investigations at the Coverts Crossing Site (36Lr75), Lawrence County, Pennsylvania. Report Prepared for PennDOT District 11-0 and Taylor Engineers, Inc., New Castle, Pa. by GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

2001 Phase III Data Recovery Investigations at the Coverts Bridge Site (36Lr22812), Lawrence County, Pennsylvania. Report Prepared for PennDOT District 11-0 and Taylor Engineers, Inc., New Castle, Pa. by GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

2003a Pennsylvania Archaeological Data Synthesis: The Upper Juniata River Subbasin 11 (Watersheds A-D), Walter Industrial Park: Mitigation of Adverse Effects, USDCEDA, Greenfield Township, Blair County, PA. ER 00-2888-013. Prepared for Keller Engineers, Inc., by GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

2003b Phase I/II Archaeological Investigations, Bridge Replacement Project T-319, Beaver County Bridge No. 36 (Links Bridge), Independence Township, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Prepared for PennDOT District 11-0 by GAI Consultants, Inc., Monroeville, Pa.

2004 Paleoindians as Estate Settlers: Archaeological, Ethnographic, and Evolutionary Insights into the Peopling of the New World. In The Settlement of the American Continents, in press, edited by G.Clarke and M.Barton. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

MacDonald, D.H. and D.L. Cremeens 2002 Archaeology and Geomorphology of the Coverts Crossing (36Lr75) and Coverts Bridge (36Lr228) Sites, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 72(1):17-50.

Marine, J.T. 1997 Terrace deposits associated with ancient Lake Monongahela in the lower Allegheny drainage. Unpublished Master’s thesis. University of Pittsburgh.

Maslowski, R.F. 1973 An Analysis of Cordmarked Watsonware. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 43(2):1-12.

1983 The significance of Cordage Attributes in the Analysis of Woodland Pottery. Pennsylvania Archaeologist: 51-60.

Maxwell, Jean A. and Margaret Bryan Davis 1972 Pollen Evidence of Pleistocene and Holocene Vegetation on the Allegheny Plateau, Maryland. Quaternary Research 2:506-530.

Mayer-Oakes, W.J. 1953 An Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Shenango River Reservoir Area in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Anthropological Series, No.1. Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 123

1955 Prehistory of the Upper Ohio Valley: An Introductory Archaeological Study. Anthropological Series, No. 2. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh.

McAvoy, J.M. and L.D. McAvoy 1997 Archaeological Investigations at Site 44Sx202, Cactus Hill, Sussex County, Virginia. Research Report Series No. 8. Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Historic Resources, Richmond.

McConaughy, M.A. 1990 Early Woodland Mortuary Practices in Western Pennsylvania. West Virginia Archaeologist 42(2):1-10.

2000 The Watson Farm Site (46Hk34): a Possible Late Middle Woodland Village in the Panhandle of West Virginia. Paper Presented at the Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Philadelphia.

McMichael, E. V. 1956 An Analysis of McKees Rocks Mound, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 36:128-151.

1971 Adena-East, an Appraisal of the More Easterly Extensions of the Spread of the Adena Phenomenon. In Adena: The Seeking of an Identity, edited by B.K. Swartz, Jr., pp. 88-97. Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana.

Mead, J.I. 1980 Is it Really that Old? A Comment about the Meadowcroft Rockshelter “Overview.” American Antiquity 45(3):579-582.

Meltzer, D.J. 1988 Late Pleistocene Human Adaptation in Eastern North America. Journal of World Prehistory 2: 1-52.

1989 Why Don’t we Know When the First People Came to North America? American Antiquity 54:471-490.

1995 Clocking the First Americans. Annual Review of Anthropology 24:21-45.

2002 Thomas Wolfe and Eastern North American Paleoindians. In Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania, pp. 159-166, edited by K. Carr and J. Adovasio. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Mohney, K.W. 2002 Steubenville Projectile Points: Social and Technological Functions in the Panhandle Archaic of the Upper Ohio Valley. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.

124 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Mohney, K.W. and J.C. Lothrop 2003 Raw Material Availability and Use During the Late Archaic in the Upper Ohio Valley: A View from the East Steubenville Site. Paper presented at the Pennsylvania Archaeological Council Symposium, Recent Advances in Lithic Sourcing Studies, State College, Pennsylvania.

Mounier, R.A., J. Cresson, and J.W. Martin 1993 New Evidence of Paleoindian Biface Fluting from the Outer Coastal Plain of New Jersey at 28-OC-100. Archaeology of Eastern North America 21:1-23.

Nass, J.P., Jr. and J.P. Hart 2000 Subsistence-Settlement Change during the Late Prehistoric Period in the Upper Ohio River Valley: New Models and Old Constructs. In Cultures before Contact: the Late and Surrounding Regions, edited by R.A. Genheimer, pp. 124- 155. The Ohio Archaeological Council, Columbus.

Olafson, Sigfus 1964 West Virginia Flints Used in Ohio. Ohio Archaeologist 14(2):37-39.

Otto, M.P. 1979 Hopewell Antecedents in the Adena Heartland. In Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference, edited by D.S. Brose and N’omi Greber, pp. 9-14. The Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio.

Pennsylvania Bureau of Historic Preservation 1991 Cultural Resource Management in Pennsylvania: Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations. Bureau of Historic Preservation and Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 2002 Pennsylvania DEP Watershed Notebook. In http: www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/ deputate/watermgt/. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Home Internet Site.

Raber, P. A. 1985 A Comprehensive State Plan for the Conservation of Archaeological Resources. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylania.

1995 Prehistoric Settlement and Resource Use in the Aughwick Creek Valley and Adjoining Areas of Central Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 65(1):1-18.

1999 Late Woodland Settlement in the Uplands of Central Pennsylvania: the View from the Mykut Rockshelter, 36Hu143. Paper presented at the 65th SPA Meeting, Philadelphia, April 6, 2000.

Raber, P.A, P.E. Miller, and S.M. Neusius, eds. 1998 The Archaic Period in Pennsylvania: Hunter-Gatherers of the Early and Middle Holocene Period. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, PA.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 125

Reger, D. B. 1921 West Virginia Geologic Survey. Charleston, W.V.

Reppert, R. S. 1978 Kanawha chert: Its Occurrence and Extent in West Virginia. Open File Report 96. West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey, Charleston. Ritchie, W.A. 1965 The Archaeology of New York State. The Natural History Press, Garden City.

1969 The Archaeology of New York State (revised edition). The Natural History Press, Garden City.

1980 The Archaeology of New York State (revised edition). Harbor Hill Books, Harrison, New York.

Rue, David J. 1990 Cultural Resources Report for Proposed Construction of Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation’s 672-Foot Pipeline Replacement in Lawrence County, Pennsylvania. Project No. C7019, 3D/Environmental Services, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio.

Schiffer, M.B. 1983 Toward the Identification of Formation Processes. American Antiquity 48(4): 675- 706.

Schuldenrein, J., F. Vento, and S. Selby 2003 Draft Report: Interim Geomorphology Report for Archaeological Site 36AL480, Area 3 South, Leetsdale Industrial Park, Leetsdale, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Submitted to the USACOE Pittsburgh District by Geoarcheology Research Associates, Inc., Riverdale, New York.

Schweikart, J. F. 1998 An Upland Settlement in the Adena Heartland: Preliminary Evidence and Interpretations from Two Early Woodland Non-Mortuary Habitations in Perry County, Ohio. Unpublished Manuscript on File at ASC Group, Inc. Columbus, Ohio.

Sciulli, P.W., L.R. Lease, B.P. Brown, and N.E. Tatarek 2003 A Preliminary Investigation of Population Dynamics of the Upper Ohio Valley: AD 1200-1650. Archaeology of Eastern North America 31:1-14.

Seeman, M. F. 1977 The Hopewell Interaction Sphere: The Evidence for Interregional Trade and Structural Complexity. Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor.

1986 Adena “Houses” and Their Implications for Early Woodland Settlement Models in the Ohio Valley. In Early Woodland Archaeology, edited by Kenneth B. Farnsworth and Thomas E. Emerson, pp. 564-580. Center for American Archeology Press, Kampsville, Illinois.

126 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Shelford, V.E. 1963 The Ecology of North America. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Shott, M.J. 1990 Childers and Woods: Two Late Woodland Sites in the Upper Ohio Valley, Mason County, West Virginia. Program for Cultural Resource Assessment Archaeological Report 20. University of Kentucky, Lexington.

1993 The Leavitt Site: A Parkhill Phase Paleoindian Occupation in Central Michigan. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology No. 25. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Skinner, S.M. 1999 Phase I Literature Review and Archaeological Survey for a Proposed Sewer Pipeline in Robinson, Cecil, and Mount Pleasant Townships, Midway and McDonald Boroughs, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Report submitted to Gannett Fleming, Inc. By ASC Group, Inc., Columbus, Ohio.

Skirboll, Esther R. and Roger W. Hanson 1996 Preliminary Findings at the Wolf Creek Site (36BT82), Butler County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 66(1):54-67.

Smith, B.D. 1987 The Independent Domestication of Indigenous Seed-Bearing Plants in Eastern North America. In Emergent Horticultural Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by W.F. Keegan, pp. 3-48. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 7.

Smith, R.V. 1982 Soil Survey of Beaver and Lawrence Counties, Pennsylvania. USDA- Soil Conservation Service. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Snow, D.R. 1980 The Archaeology of New England. Academic Press, New York.

Steegmann, A. Theodore 1983 Boreal Forest Adaptations: The Northern Algonkians. Plenum Press, New York.

Stewart, M. and J.Cavallo 1991 Delaware Valley Middle Archaic. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 7:19-42.

Stewart, M. and J. Kratzer 1989 Prehistoric Site Locations on the Unglaciated Appalachian Plateau. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 59(1):19-36.

Stingelin, R.W. 1965 Late-Glacial and Post-Glacial Vegetational History in the North Central Appalachian Region. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Geology and Geophysics. Pennsylvania State University, State College.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 127

Straus, L.G. 2000 Solutrean Settlement of North America? A Review of Reality. American Antiquity 65(2):219-226.

Stuckenrath, R., J.M. Adovasio, J. Donahue, and R. C. Carlisle 1982 The Stratigraphy, Cultural Features and Chronology at Meadowcroft Rockshelter, Washington County, Southwestern Pennsylvania. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage, pp. 69-90, edited by R.Carlisle and J.Adovasio. Papers Prepared for 1982 Society for American Archaeology Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

Tankersley, Kenneth B. 1989 A Close Look at the Big Picture: Early Paleoindian Lithic Resource Procurement in the Midwestern United States. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by B. Lepper and J. Lothrop, pp. 259-292. Westview Press, Boulder.

Thornbury, W.D. 1965 Regional Geomorphology of the United States. John Wiley and Sons, London.

Trewartha, G.T. 1967 An Introduction to Climate. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Turnbaugh, W.H. 1977 Man, Land, and Time: The Cultural Prehistory and Demographic Patterns of North Central Pennsylvania. Lycoming County Historical Society, Williamsport, Pennsylvania.

Turner, C.G., II 2003 Three Ounces of Sea Shells and One Fish Bone Do Not a Coastal Migration Make. American Antiquity 68(2):391-396.

Vento, F.J. 2001 Geomorphology Study. In Phase I Summary/ Phase II Work Plan, Penndot district 11-0 Open End, Link’s Bridge #36, T-319, Independence Township, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Prepared by Christine Davis Consultants, Inc.

Vento, F.J., and J. Donahue 1982 Lithic Raw Material Utilization at Meadowcroft Rockshelter and in the Cross Creek Drainage. In Meadowcroft: Collected Papers on the Archaeology of Meadowcroft Rockshelter and the Cross Creek Drainage. Symposium at 47th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Vento, F.J., J. Schuldenrein, M.P. Purtill 2002 Final Report, Geomorphology of Archaeological Site 36AL480 at Leetsdale Industrial Park, Leetsdale, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, ER 87-0469-042. Prepared for USACOE Pittsburgh District.

128 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed

Vickery, K. D. 1996 The Flint Sources. In Recent Excavations at the Edwin Harness Mound, Liberty Works, Ross County, Ohio, edited by N’omi Greber, pp. 73-85. MCJA Special Paper No. 5. Kent State University Press.

Wagner, W.R., Heyman, L., and Gray, R.E. 1970 Geology of the Pittsburgh area. Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th Series, General Geology Report 59, 145 p.

Wall, Robert D., R. Michael Stewart, John Cavallo, Douglas McLearen, Robert Foss, Phillip Perazio, and John Dumont 1996 Prehistoric Archaeological Synthesis. Trenton Complex Archaeology: Report 15. The Cultural Resource Group, Louis Berger and Associates, Inc., East Orange, Jew Jersey. Prepared for the Federal Highway Administration and the New Jersey Department of Transportation, Bureau of Environmental Analysis, Trenton. Wallace, P.A.W. 1971 Indian Paths of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Walker, P.C. and Hartman, R.T. 1960 The Forest Sequence of the Hartstown Bog Area in Western Pennsylvania. Ecology 41 (3): 461-474.

Watts, W.A. 1979 Late Quaternary Vegetation of Central Appalachia and the New Jersey Coastal Plain. Ecological Monographs 49(4):427-469.

Webb, W.S. 1941a Mt. Horeb Earthworks, Site 1, and the Drake Mound, Site 11, Fayette County, Kentucky. Reports in Anthropology and Archaeology 5(2). University of Kentucky, Lexington.

1941b The Morgan Stone Mound, Site 15, Bath County, Kentucky. Reports in Anthropology and Archaeology 5(2). University of Kentucky, Lexington.

Whitehead, Donald R. 1973 Late-Wisconsin Vegetational Changes in Unglaciated Eastern North America. Quaternary Research 3:621-631.

PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed 129

130 PA Prehistoric Data Synthesis, Raccoon Creek Watershed