Exchange, Embedded Procurement, and Hunter-Gatherer Mobility: a Case Study from the North American Great Basin by Khori S. Newla
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Exchange, Embedded Procurement, and Hunter-Gatherer Mobility: A Case Study from the North American Great Basin by Khori S. Newlander A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Anthropology) in The University of Michigan 2012 Doctoral Committee: Professor John D. Speth, Chair Professor Robert E. Whallon Jr. Professor Henry T. Wright Professor Youxue Zhang Professor George T. Jones, Hamilton College To J and our furry family ii Acknowledgments This project could not have been completed without the hard work, support, and guidance of many people. I would especially like to thank my committee: John Speth, Bob Whallon, Henry Wright, Tom Jones, and Youxue Zhang. I am truly grateful for the guidance you have provided along the way. This work is certainly stronger for it. In particular, I owe my dissertation chair, John Speth, special thanks for the long hours he spent talking with me about all facets of this project. Next stop, rock-hounding in Blakeslee Corners! I will forever be indebted to Tom Jones and Charlotte Beck as well. Tom and Charlotte introduced me to archaeology as an undergraduate student at Hamilton College, where our adventures included a field school in Nevada during a “Mormon” cricket invasion. When I turned my gaze back toward the Great Basin in search of a dissertation topic, Tom and Charlotte provided students to work with me in the field, access to all of their collections, and continual support and guidance, even as I pursued ideas with which they may disagree. It is hard for me to imagine a better example of what a student-teacher relationship can be than the one I have enjoyed with Tom and Charlotte. Thank you! My thanks also go to Ceci Laseter, Caroline Miller, Lisa Fontes, William Swearson, and Howard Tsai, who all spent time in the field with me scrambling up and down mountain sides looking for chert. I am grateful to Howard, in particular, for patiently looking after me after I attempted to roll my truck all the way across Long Valley. Based on this experience, I can now conclude with absolute certainty that Paleoindians did not transport toolstone in this way! Additionally, I wish to acknowledge the support of the Bureau of Land Management staff in Ely, Nevada while I was in the field. Once the geological samples were collected, Ted Huston, of the Keck Elemental Geochemistry Laboratory in the Department of Geological Sciences at the University of iii Michigan, helped me carry out the LA-ICP-MS analysis. At Hamilton College, David Bailey (Department of Geosciences) provided access to the rock room for sample preparation and Nathan Goodale (Department of Anthropology) provided access to his PXRF equipment. Thank you all! I also wish to thank my fellow students, especially my cohort mates (Cameron Gokee, Amy Nicodemus, and Uthara Suvrathan), for their friendship and support over the years. Funding for this research was provided by the National Science Foundation (DDIG# 0911983), supplemented by grants from the University of Michigan Department of Anthropology, Museum of Anthropology, and Rackham Graduate School, for which I am grateful. Last, but certainly not least, I wish to thank my parents and my wife, Jess, for their love and support over the years. I couldn’t have done it without you! iv Table of Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgements iii List of Figures viii List of Tables xvii Chapter 1: Introduction 1 An Early Word on Some Terminology 1 The Case Study: Toolstone Procurement and Early Hunter-Gatherer Mobility in the Great Basin 3 Chapter 2: Framing the Questions: The Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Environmental and Archaeological Records 13 Physical Setting 14 Modern Environments 17 Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Environments 19 Climate and Hydrology 19 Flora 23 Fauna 25 Summary and Anthropological Significance 27 Cultural Record 29 Paleoarchaic Antiquity and Antique Fauna 30 Paleoarchaic Subsistence 33 Lithic Technology 36 Obsidian Conveyance Zones and Paleoarchaic Ranges 43 Perishable Technology 48 Summary 50 Chapter 3: The Cultural Geography of Paleoarchaic Hunter-Gatherers: v Mobility, Exchange Networks, and Scale 52 Ethnographic Models of Mobility 55 Paleoarchaic Subsistence-Settlement Patterns in Ethnographic Perspective 60 Wobst to the Rescue? Or, Putting the People Back on the Land 69 Risk and Information Viewed from the Perspective of Behavioral Ecology 72 Paleoindians and the “Risk” of Relying on Exchange for Critical Resources 76 Some Examples of Hunter-Gatherer Non-Utilitarian Mobility and Exchange 83 Patterns and Implications 88 Chapter 4: Using Lithic Technological Organization to Build a Multi-tiered Model of Paleoarchaic Mobility and Inter-group Interaction in the Eastern Nevada Study Area 94 Lithic Technological Organization as an Analytical Framework 95 The Eastern Nevada Study Area 100 Previous Lithic Analyses of the Eastern Nevada Study Area, Augmented and Reinterpreted 108 Minimum Analytical Nodule Analysis 129 Minimum Analytical Nodules 132 Minimum Analytical Nodules and Chert Procurement 151 A Brief Word on Occupation Span and Mobility 158 Conclusion 165 Chapter 5: The Lithic Landscape of the Eastern Nevada Study Area 167 Geological Setting 168 Sample Design and Methodology 171 Description of Geological Sample Localities 176 Butte Valley 178 Jakes Valley 191 Long Valley 205 Railroad Valley 215 Coal Valley 221 Supplemental Localities 232 Initial Impressions of the Chert Outcrops in East-Central Nevada 237 Compositional Analysis 240 vi X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) Spectrometry 241 Laser Ablation Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass-Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) 256 Portable X-ray Fluorescence (PXRF) Spectrometry 294 Conclusion 308 Chapter 6: Conclusion 311 Analytical Implications 317 Theoretical Implications… 318 …for later Great Basin Prehistory 318 …for Paleoindians 320 The Last Word 322 Works Cited 323 vii List of Figures Figure: 2.1 The limits of the hydrographic Great Basin (adapted from King 1986). 14 2.2 Geographic subdivisions of the Great Basin (adapted from Beck and Jones 1997:Figure 1). 15 2.3 Great Basin pluvial lakes at their Pleistocene maximums, ca. 14,000 14C yr BP (adapted from Grayson 1993, 2011:Figure 5-5; Madsen et al. 2002:Figure 6; Mifflin and Wheat 1979; Williams and Bedinger 1984). 21 2.4 Schematic of three types of hunter-gatherer subsistence-settlement strategies (adapted from Madsen 1982a:Figure 2). 28 2.5 Location of significant Paleoarchaic sites. 32 2.6 Paleoarchaic projectile points and associated artifacts. 40 2.7 Paleoarchaic obsidian conveyance zones (adapted from Jones et al. 2003: Figure 13). 44 2.8 Madsen’s model of Paleoarchaic mobility organization. 45 3.1 Binford’s (1983b) model of hunter-gatherer mobility (adapted from MacDonald and Hewlett 1999:Figure 1). 58 3.2 MacDonald and Hewlett’s model of hunter-gatherer mobility (adapted from MacDonald and Hewlett 1999:Figure 10). 59 3.3 Histogram and box-plot comparing OCZs with modern hunter-gatherer data from Kelly (2007:Table 4-1). 61 3.4 Distances of hunting forays (adapted from Madsen 2007:Figure 1.12). 63 3.5 Paleoarchaic mobility centered on the Sunshine Locality, as modeled after Nunamiut lifetime land use (Binford 1983a:115). 68 4.1 Map showing localities considered here. 101 4.2 Nonparametric bivariate density model defined by the abundance of lithic artifacts at LPL1. 106 4.3 Nonparametric bivariate density model defined by the abundance of chert artifacts at LPL1. 107 viii 4.4 Normal quantile plot of biface and core weights by toolstone type for Butte Valley localities (top) and LPL1 in Jakes Valley (bottom). 110 4.5 Normal quantile plot of BRF weights by toolstone type for Butte Valley localities (top) and LPL1 in Jakes Valley (middle), pared down by excluding weights greater than 20 g. 111 4.6 Obsidian sources represented in the Eastern Nevada Study Area lithic assemblages. 113 4.7 Hypothesized territory of Paleoarchaic hunter-gatherers defined by obsidian provenance analyses from the Eastern Nevada Study Area (adapted from Jones et al. 2003:Figure 8). 114 4.8 Map indicating the location of FGV sources and Paleoarchaic localities in the Eastern Nevada Study Area. 115 4.9 Abundance of toolstone types within the aggregated Butte Valley localities (top, n = 11,591) and LPL1 in Jakes Valley (bottom, n = 6797). 117 4.10 Distribution of bifaces and projectile points across the toolstone types in the aggregated Butte Valley localities (top, n = 526) and LPL1 in Jakes Valley (bottom, n = 463). 121 4.11 Distribution of unifaces across the toolstone types in the aggregated Butte Valley localities (top, n = 171) and LPL1 in Jakes Valley (bottom, n = 148). 122 4.12 Normal quantile plot of CRF weights (g) by toolstone type for the aggregated Butte Valley localities (top) and LPL1 in Jakes Valley (bottom). 125 4.13 MAN A. 133 4.14 MAN B. 134 4.15 MAN C. 134 4.16 MAN D. 135 4.17 MAN E. 135 4.18 MAN F. 136 4.19 MAN G. 136 4.20 MAN H. 137 4.21 MAN I. 137 4.22 MAN J. 138 4.23 MAN K. 138 4.24 MAN L. 139 4.25 MAN M. 139 4.26 MAN O. 140 ix 4.27 MAN P. 140 4.28 MAN Q. 141 4.29 MAN R. 141 4.30 MAN S. 142 4.31 MAN T. 142 4.32 MAN U. 143 4.33 MAN V. 143 4.34 MAN X. 144 4.35 MAN Y. 144 4.36 MAN Z. 145 4.37 MAN AA. 145 4.38 MAN BB. 146 4.39 MAN CC. 146 4.40 MAN DD. 147 4.41 MAN EE. 147 4.42 MAN FF. 148 4.43 MAN GG. 148 4.44 MAN HH. 149 4.45 MAN II. 149 4.46 MAN JJ. 150 4.47 MAN LL. 150 4.48 MAN MM.