VISUALIZING PALEOINDIAN AND ARCHAIC MOBILITY IN THE OHIO REGION OF EASTERN NORTH AMERICA A dissertation submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Amanda N. Colucci May 2017 ©Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials Dissertation written by Amanda N. Colucci B.A., Western State Colorado University, 2007 M.A., Kent State University, 2009 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2017 Approved by Dr. Mandy Munro-Stasiuk, Ph.D., Co-Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dr. Mark Seeman, Ph.D., Co-Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dr. Eric Shook, Ph.D., Members, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dr. James Tyner, Ph.D. Dr. Richard Meindl, Ph.D. Dr. Alison Smith, Ph.D. Accepted by Dr. Scott Sheridan, Ph.D., Chair, Department of Geography Dr. James Blank, Ph.D., Dean, College of Arts and Sciences TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………………………………..……...……. III LIST OF FIGURES ….………………………………………......………………………………..…….…..………iv LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………….……………..……………………x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..………………………….……………………………..…………….………..………xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 STUDY AREA AND TIMEFRAME ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1.1 Paleoindian Period ................................................................................................................................ 6 1.1.2 Archaic Period ....................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 GENERAL THEORETICAL CONTEXT ................................................................................................................ 19 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................ 24 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 44 3.1 POINT COLLECTION AND IDENTIFICATION...................................................................................................... 44 3.1.1 Clovis/Gainey (11,500-10,900 B.P.) .................................................................................................... 47 3.1.2 Thebes (10,000-9,000 B.P.) ................................................................................................................. 50 3.1.3 MacCorkle (9,000-8,500 B.P.) ............................................................................................................. 52 3.1.4 LeCroy (8,500-7,800 B.P.) ................................................................................................................... 54 3.1.5 Brewerton Corner Notched (5,000 – 4,000 B.P.) ................................................................................ 55 3.1.6 Data Organization ............................................................................................................................... 56 3.2 ACCURACY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................................... 64 3.2.1 Interpolation Methods.......................................................................................................................... 65 3.2.2 Dataset description .............................................................................................................................. 68 3.2.3 Execution of interpolation assessment, building a new accuracy dataset ........................................... 69 iii 3.2.4 More Detailed Evaluation of the Interpolation Assessment................................................................. 71 3.3 TRADITIONAL AND “IMPRESSIONISTIC” METHODS ......................................................................................... 75 3.3.1 Graphical display of non-directional distance data ............................................................................ 75 3.3.2 Mapped display of non-directional distance data ................................................................................ 76 3.4 GEOSPATIAL METHODS .................................................................................................................................. 79 3.4.1 Non-Local Raw Materials Maps .......................................................................................................... 79 3.4.2 Interpolation ........................................................................................................................................ 80 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 83 4.1 GENERAL RAW MATERIAL COMPOSITION ...................................................................................................... 83 4.2 FALL-OFF CURVES AND CONCENTRIC CIRCLE MAPS ..................................................................................... 87 4.3 INTERPOLATION SURFACES ............................................................................................................................ 94 4.3.1 Early Paleoindian Interpolation Results.............................................................................................. 94 4.3.2 Thebes Interpolation Results.............................................................................................................. 100 4.3.3 MacCorkle Interpolation Results ....................................................................................................... 105 4.3.4 LeCroy Interpolation Results ............................................................................................................. 110 4.3.5 Brewerton Interpolation Results ........................................................................................................ 115 4.4 COMPARISON OF FALL-OFF RESULTS AND INVERSE DISTANCE WEIGHTED (DIFFERENCE MAPS) RESULTS. 120 4.4.1 Clovis/Gainey Difference Map Results .............................................................................................. 120 4.4.2 Thebes Difference Map Results ......................................................................................................... 122 4.4.3 MacCorkle Difference Map Results ................................................................................................... 124 4.4.4 LeCroy Difference Map Results ......................................................................................................... 126 4.4.5 Brewerton Difference Map Results .................................................................................................... 128 4.5 NON-LOCAL RAW MATERIAL MAPS ............................................................................................................ 130 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION............................................................................................. 137 5.1 METHODOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTIONS ........................................................................................................... 138 5.2 CONTRIBUTIONS TO MOBILITY STUDIES ...................................................................................................... 140 5.2.1 Clovis and Gainey: Early Paleoindian (11,050 – 10,800 BP) ........................................................... 140 iv 5.2.2 Thebes: Earliest Early Archaic (10,000-8,000 BP) ........................................................................... 142 5.2.3 MacCorkle: Later Early Archaic (9,500-8,000 BP) .......................................................................... 144 5.2.4 LeCroy: Latest Early Archaic (8,500-7,800BP) ................................................................................ 146 5.2.5 Brewerton: Early Late Archaic (5,000-4,000 BP) ............................................................................. 147 5.3 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK ............................................................................................................. 149 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................ 153 v LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1.1 STUDY AREA. ............................................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 1.2 TERRAIN MAP OF OHIO .............................................................................................................................. 12 FIGURE 1.3 PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS OF OHIO ............................................................................................................ 13 FIGURE 1.4 OHIO FLINT OUTCROPS FROM MULLETT 2009. .......................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 1.5 DISTRIBUTION OF THE UPPER MERCER LIMESTONE FORMATION FROM CARLSON 1994. ........................... 16 FIGURE 1.6 EXAMPLES OF UPPER MERCER CHERT. .....................................................................................................