University of Nevada, Reno Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Cave
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nevada, Reno Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Cave Use in Oregon’s Fort Rock Basin: An Examination of Western Stemmed Tradition Projectile Point Assemblages from Fort Rock Cave, Cougar Mountain Cave, and the Connley Caves A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology by Sophia A. Jamaldin Dr. Geoffrey M. Smith/Thesis Advisor May, 2018 by Sophia A. Jamaldin 2018 All Rights Reserved THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by SOPHIA A. JAMALDIN Entitled Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Cave Use in Oregon's Fort Rock Basin: An Examination of Western Stemmed Tradition Projectile Point Assemblages from Fort Rock Cave, Cougar Mountain Cave, and the Connley Caves be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Geoffrey M. Smith, Ph.D., Advisor Christopher S. Jazwa, Ph.D., Committee Member Kenneth D. Adams, Ph.D., Graduate School Representative David W. Zeh, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate School May, 2018 i ABSTRACT Luther Cressman‟s pioneering investigations of northwestern Great Basin caves in the late 1930‟s established that humans were in the region during the terminal Pleistocene/early Holocene (TP/EH) (~16,000-8300 cal BP). The Paleoindian assemblages recovered from Fort Rock Cave, Cougar Mountain Cave, and the Connley Caves suggest that these sites served as longer-term residential bases, although most other caves and rockshelters in the region saw shorter stays. In this thesis, I test the hypothesis that those three caves served as longer-term (weeks or months) residential bases. My results reveal that: (1) local-to-nonlocal projectile point toolstone proportions suggest that shorter-term occupations occurred at each site; (2) local-to-nonlocal debitage proportions suggest that longer-term occupations occurred at Fort Rock Cave and the Connley Caves; and (3) Fort Rock Cave projectile points manufactured on nonlocal toolstone are significantly more curated than those manufactured on local toolstone. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are numerous individuals, organizations, and institutions who helped me to complete this thesis. My advisor Dr. Geoffrey Smith guided me during my graduate studies at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR). He welcomed me to the Great Basin the summer before I began graduate school and provided me with invaluable experience in field and classroom settings. His efforts toward developing my abilities as a student, writer, and researcher were immense and I am eternally grateful. Drs. Christopher Jazwa and Kenneth Adams provided valuable feedback throughout the thesis writing process and helped me formulate my research design. UNR‟s Anthropology faculty broadened my writing and critical thinking skills, and my graduate cohorts and companions helped me in countless ways during my two years at UNR. The Great Basin Paleoindian Research Unit, Desert Research Institute, Jonathan O. Davis Scholarship, Nevada Archaeological Association, UNR Graduate Student Association, UNR Anthropology Department, Herbert E. Splatt Scholarship, and AM- ARCS of Nevada provided financial support for my research endeavors. The Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History (UOMNCH) allowed me to analyze materials from the Fort Rock Cave and Connley Caves collections. Dr. Pam Endzweig and Elizabeth Kallenbach assisted me during my time at the UOMNCH and I am thankful for their kindness and patience. Drs. Pam Endzweig, Dennis Jenkins, and Thomas Connolly (UOMNCH) shared important insight with me throughout my research that helped me to understand the complex history of work at my study sites and provided me with unpublished data that benefitted this study. Pat McMillan welcomed me to the iii Favell Museum and facilitated my visits there to analyze the Cougar Mountain Cave collection. District Archaeologist Jennifer Gantt and District Ranger Kevin Larken of the Deschutes National Forest granted me permission to collect geologic obsidian samples within the Newberry National Volcanic Monument. They took time out of their busy schedules to support my request and helped me to broaden UNR‟s comparative collection and perform my analyses. Lastly, a thousand thank-you‟s to my parents, my siblings, and Derek for their continuous encouragement and daily efforts toward putting a smile on my face. Completing this thesis would have seemed impossible without their endless support. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. ix LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... xiii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1 Research Background ..............................................................................................4 Fort Rock Basin Regional Setting and TP/EH Environment .......................4 The Western Stemmed Tradition Technological Complex .........................8 Models of Paleoindian Land Use .................................................................9 Hunter-Gatherer Cave and Rockshelter Use ..............................................12 Lithic Technological Organization ........................................................................14 Factors that Influenced LTO ......................................................................14 Central Place Foraging Theory and LTO...................................................17 Lithic Tool Curation ..................................................................................17 Factors that Influenced Curation ................................................................18 LTO Studies in the Intermountain West: Scales of Analysis ................................19 Individual Tools and Site Assemblages .....................................................21 Regional Assemblages ...............................................................................22 Summary ....................................................................................................25 CHAPTER 2: MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................27 Materials ................................................................................................................27 Fort Rock Basin Caves...............................................................................27 Fort Rock Cave (35LK1) ...........................................................................29 v Fort Rock Cave Stratigraphy .....................................................................40 The Fort Rock Cave Paleoindian Lithic Assemblage ................................44 Cougar Mountain Cave (35LK55) .............................................................46 The Cougar Mountain Cave Paleoindian Lithic Assemblage ....................49 The Connley Caves (35LK50) ...................................................................51 The Connley Caves Stratigraphy ...............................................................54 The Connley Caves Lithic Assemblage .....................................................58 Methods..................................................................................................................59 Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis .....................................................59 Exponential Regression Analysis ..............................................................64 Projectile Point Classification and Curation Analyses ..............................65 Debitage Analysis and Classification ........................................................68 Expectations and Hypotheses ................................................................................71 Hypothesis 1...............................................................................................74 Hypothesis 2...............................................................................................74 CHAPTER 3: RESULTS ...................................................................................................76 Source Provenance Analysis ..................................................................................76 Fort Rock Cave ..........................................................................................76 Projectile Point Sample Composition ............................................76 Debitage Sample Composition ......................................................79 Bedwell‟s Early Assemblage .........................................................83 Cougar Mountain Cave ..............................................................................84 Projectile Point Sample Composition ............................................84 Bifacial Preform/Knife Sample Composition ................................86 The Connley Caves ....................................................................................86 Projectile Point Sample Composition ............................................86 Debitage Sample Composition ......................................................88 Regression Analysis ...............................................................................................90