UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones 5-1-2015 Chipped Stone Analysis of the Yamashita Sites in Moapa Valley, Nevada: A Technological Organization Approach Tatianna Menocal University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Repository Citation Menocal, Tatianna, "Chipped Stone Analysis of the Yamashita Sites in Moapa Valley, Nevada: A Technological Organization Approach" (2015). UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. 2388. http://dx.doi.org/10.34917/7645969 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHIPPED STONE ANALYSIS OF THE YAMASHITA SITES IN MOAPA VALLEY, NEVADA: A TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION APPROACH By Tatianna Menocal Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology University of Nevada, Las Vegas 2010 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts – Anthropology Department of Anthropology College of Liberal Arts The Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas May 2015 We recommend the thesis prepared under our supervision by Tatianna Menocal entitled Chipped Stone Analysis of the Yamashita Sites in Moapa Valley, Nevada: A Technological Organization Approach is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts - Anthropology Department of Anthropology Barbara Roth, Ph.D., Committee Chair Karen Harry, Ph.D., Committee Member Margaret Lyneis, Ph.D., Committee Member Stephen M. Rowland, Ph.D., Graduate College Representative Kathryn Hausbeck Korgan, Ph.D., Interim Dean of the Graduate College May 2015 ii ABSTRACT Archaeological research on the lowland branch of the Virgin Branch Puebloan (VBP) has been conducted steadily throughout the 20th century. Much of this research occurred in the early half of the century with initial research conducted by Mark R. Harrington and later archaeology designed as salvage work due to public works projects, including the construction of Hoover Dam and the development of Lake Mead (Ahlstrom and Roberts 2012). The initial archaeology in the area was focused on classifying and characterizing the Puebloan occupation in the region, as the discovery of habitation sites in the area represented the farthest western extension of the Puebloan cultural identity (Harrington 1927; Shutler 1961; Lyneis 1995). Later researchers expanded their research interests to include the study of ceramics, trade patterns, and community organization (Lyneis 1992; Allison 2000; Harry and Watson 2010). Few intensive lithic analyses have been conducted on site assemblages of the Virgin Branch, particularly in the Moapa Valley area of southern Nevada. This thesis uses lithic assemblage data collected from the Yamashita sites, four VBP sites located in the Moapa Valley in southern Nevada dating between the early Pueblo II (PII) period (AD 1000-1020) and the early Pueblo III (PIII) period (AD 1200-1300). The goals of the project are to examine what the tools and debitage at the sites reveal about tool design and how raw material and occupation duration affected these assemblages. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Department of Anthropology at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas and my thesis committee members. Thank you to Dr. Barbara Roth for mentoring me throughout my graduate career and Dr. Margaret Lyneis for giving me the opportunity to work on these assemblages. I would also like to thank my other committee members Dr. Karen Harry and Dr. Stephen Rowland for their input during the project. I would like to thank my coworkers at the Desert Research Institute: Justin DeMaio, Lauren Falvey, Barbara Holz, and Maureen King for their input, assistance, and good natures. A special thanks is necessary to Dr. Colleen Beck for her constant support throughout the thesis writing process and offering me numerous opportunities to learn and gain archaeological experience. Last, I would like to thank my family and close friends. Your love, humor, and encouragement provided the necessary fuels for me to succeed. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................ iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................ 1 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................... 5 Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 8 Significance ................................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2 BACKGROUND: THE VIRGIN BRANCH PUEBLOAN ................. 17 Chronology and Material Culture ................................................................................. 18 Subsistence and Settlement ........................................................................................... 26 Yamashita Sites ............................................................................................................. 28 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 36 Analysis Methods .......................................................................................................... 36 Raw Material ................................................................................................................. 48 Summary ....................................................................................................................... 51 CHAPTER 4 YAMASHITA SITES: RESULTS ......................................................... 52 Yamashita-2 (26CK6445) ............................................................................................. 52 Yamashita-3 (26CK6446) ............................................................................................. 72 Yamashita-5N (26CK2041) .......................................................................................... 88 Yamashita-5S (26CK2042) ........................................................................................... 93 CHAPTER 5 YAMASHITA SITES: COMPARISON AND DISCUSSION .......... 101 Tool Design ................................................................................................................. 101 Raw Material Use ........................................................................................................ 133 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 153 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... 156 Research Questions ..................................................................................................... 156 v Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 161 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 164 CURRICULUM VITAE............................................................................................... 173 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 The Yamashita sites, their associated structures, and dating methods* ............. 4 Table 2.1 Virgin Branch Puebloan chronology and characteristics (modified from Ahlstrom and Roberts 2012: 126). .................................................................................... 19 Table 3.1 Total number of artifacts analyzed. .................................................................. 37 Table 3.2 List of tool attributes and the research questions addressed. ............................ 39 Table 3.3 Debitage attributes, their definitions, and research question addressed. .......... 47 Table 4.1 Chipped stone tool assemblage from Yamashita-2........................................... 52 Table 4.2 Yamashita-2 biface stages by provenience. ...................................................... 61 Table 4.3 Yamashita-2 debitage dataclass. ....................................................................... 68 Table 4.4 Yamashita-2 platform type (of complete and proximal flakes). ....................... 69 Table 4.5 Yamashita-2 size class of complete flakes. .....................................................