An Evaluation of the Antiquity of Great Basin Carved Abstract Rock Art in the Northern Great Basin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nevada, Reno Paleoindian Rock Art: An Evaluation of the Antiquity of Great Basin Carved Abstract Rock Art in the Northern Great Basin A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology By Emily S. Middleton Dr. Geoffrey M. Smith/Thesis Advisor May, 2013 © Emily S. Middleton 2013 All Rights Reserved THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by EMILY S. MIDDLETON entitled Paleoindian Rock Art: An Evaluation of the Antiquity of Great Basin Carved Abstract Rock Art in the Northern Great Basin be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Geoffrey M. Smith, Advisor James P. Barker, Committee Member Peter J. Goin, Graduate School Representative Marsha H. Read, Ph. D., Dean, Graduate School May, 2013 i ABSTRACT One of the principle ways that researchers assign sites to particular time periods is using temporally diagnostic projectile points as index fossils; however, this practice has not been widely employed to date rock art sites. I use this approach to add an additional line of evidence supporting other researchers’ suggestions that a unique style of rock art found in the northern Great Basin is older than the majority of rock art found in the region. This style, termed Great Basin Carved Abstract (GBCA), has been found buried beneath a sealed deposit of Mazama tephra (~6,850 14C BP), which suggests that the style dates to at least the Early Holocene. I present frequencies of temporally diagnostic projectile points found at 55 GBCA sites in the northern Great Basin to argue that this style dates to the Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene (TP/EH) transition (~12,500- 7,500 14C BP). Furthermore, I examine the relationship between GBCA rock art and several environmental variables to test traditional models of TP/EH land use. I propose a new model of land use for the earliest period of prehistory in the northern Great Basin that better incorporates all available data from the TP/EH; a dataset that now includes rock art. ii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my mother, Kelly. Both personally and professionally, you have always been my role model. You never failed to encourage me, believe in me, and have always been my biggest fan. For your countless years of sacrifice, I dedicate the final product of my own two years of work to you – it will never compare with everything you have done for me, but I offer it nonetheless. Thank You, Mom. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My most sincere thanks are given to those who have provided their assistance throughout my graduate career. First, the Great Basin Paleoindian Research Unit (GBPRU) provided funding, employment, and ultimately peace of mind for the entirety of my time at UNR, allowing me to focus on classes, research, and writing rather than a 9-5 job. To the faculty of the Anthropology Department, thank you for the spectacular graduate program you have crafted and continue to improve each year; the support that the entire department provides to each of its graduate students on an individual and personal basis creates a working environment that allows us each to flourish in our own ways while still molding us to be better students, professionals, and people. In particular, my advisor, Dr. Geoffrey Smith, has perfected this technique. Your guidance over the past two years has often been subtle and always in the most polite ways, but the knowledge you have imparted is unmistakable. You have encouraged my professional development and I consider myself an immeasurably better writer, public speaker, and archaeologist. Those of us who get to call you Advisor are a lucky bunch. To my other committee members, Pat Barker and Peter Goin, your advice has been equally important. Thank you both for your brainstorming efforts at the outset and help in developing a research topic. Pat, your knowledge of and familiarity with all things Great Basin rock art has been an invaluable resource. My research is stronger thanks to your keen observation that my rock art thesis was a bit lacking in – of all things – rock art! To Peter, your perspective has prompted me to evaluate some of my assumptions and look critically at my work. iv I also must thank Bill Cannon, Archaeologist for Oregon’s Lakeview District BLM; you were instrumental in facilitating this research. Not only did you take time out of your undoubtedly busy schedule to take me to see these spectacular rock art sites firsthand, but you allowed me access to the data that you painstakingly compiled over the years. I hope I have done it justice. Back at UNR, my fellow graduate cohort has done their share of facilitating as well. Your company, support, mutual commiseration, and above all, your humor have made the difficulties somehow enjoyable. The beer didn’t hurt either… Finally, I acknowledge my family: Mom, Nana, and Tyler. Though it was never often enough, the times I did come back home served to recharge my batteries and remind me of who I am – that the overstressed and under-slept graduate student I had become was only temporary. Robin (and Vaughn) had to deal with that person all too often. I thank you Robin for your encouragement, your love, and your patience – I am in your debt. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... i DEDICATION .................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................x CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1 Research Background ..............................................................................................4 Environment and Climate ............................................................................4 The Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Transition, 12,500-7,500 14C BP ....................................................................................5 The Middle Holocene, 7,500-5,000 14C BP .................................................6 The Late Holocene, 5,00014C BP-Present ....................................................7 The Human Colonization of the Great Basin ...........................................................7 Prehistoric Lifeways ................................................................................................9 Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Lifeways ..........................................9 Middle Holocene Lifeways ........................................................................12 Late Holocene Lifeways ............................................................................14 Situating Great Basin Rock Art within a Broader Context ....................................14 GBCA Rock Art .........................................................................................18 Research Goals.......................................................................................................29 CHAPTER 2: MATERIALS .............................................................................................30 Documentation and Recordation of GBCA Rock Art Sites...................................32 vi Establishing Temporal Associations: Diagnostic Artifacts Associated with GBCA Rock Art ...........................................................33 The Paleoindian Period: 11,000-7,500 14C BP ..........................................34 Great Basin Fluted Projectile Points ..............................................34 Great Basin Concave Base Projectile Points .................................35 Great Basin Stemmed Series Projectile Points ..............................35 Windust Stemmed Projectile Points...............................................36 Cascade Projectile Points ...............................................................36 Crescents ........................................................................................37 The Early Archaic Period: 7,500-5,000 14C BP .........................................37 Northern Side-Notched Projectile Points .......................................37 The Middle Archaic Period: 5,000-1,500 14C BP ......................................40 Humboldt Concave-Base Projectile Points ....................................40 Gatecliff Contracting Stem Projectile Points .................................40 Gatecliff Split Stem Projectile Points ............................................40 Elko Corner-Notched Projectile Points ..........................................40 Elko Eared Projectile Points ..........................................................41 The Late Archaic Period: 1,500-70014C BP ..............................................41 Rosegate Corner-Notched Projectile Points ...................................41 The Proto-Historic Period: 700 14C BP-Contact ........................................41 Desert Side-Notched Projectile Points ...........................................41 Cottonwood Triangular Projectile Point ........................................41 Data from GBCA Rock Art Sites...........................................................................42