UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE INVESTIGATING MOUND ACTIVITIES AT MISSISSIPPIAN SITES IN THE SOUTHEAST: iv A SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF LITHIC DEBITAGE AT THE PEVEY SITE (22LW510) IN MISSISSIPPI A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By SARAH LUTHMAN Norman, Oklahoma 2017 INVESTIGATING MOUND ACTIVITIES AT MISSISSIPPIAN MOUND SITES IN THE SOUTHEAST: A SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF LITHIC DEBITAGE AT THE PEVEY SITE (22LW510) IN MISSISSIPPI A THESIS APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY v BY _________________________________ Dr. Patrick Livingood, Chair _________________________________ Dr. Asa Randall _________________________________ Dr. Amanda Regnier vi © Copyright by SARAH LUTHMAN 2017 All Rights Reserved. Acknowledgements I would be entirely remiss if I did not start by thanking my committee, whose ideas, constructive criticism, and support made this thesis possible. Drs. Patrick Livingood, Asa Randall, and Amanda Regnier have provided fantastic examples of positivity, and were available and responsive for whatever I needed. Dr. Randall’s classes on archaeological theory and southeastern archaeology greatly contributed to some of the ideas in this paper, especially the second chapter. Dr. Regnier helped most iv with my writing style, but also provided a smart reorganization of the first chapter. Dr. Livingood has led me through every step of the writing process, allowing me to work on the materials collected from his dissertation site, helping me formulate research questions, and providing comments on every page of this document. Without him, there would be no thesis. I would also like to thank the Department of Anthropology at the University of Oklahoma, and all of the faculty who have showed me what opportunities are available in archaeology, and how history affects the lives of people today. They have worked together to create an environment that fosters friendly intellectual conversation, which has allowed me to take risks and ask questions. I would especially like to acknowledge Dr. Bonnie Pitblado, who introduced me to lithic analysis, and whose coding sheets helped me to organize what it was I wanted to know about the stone artifacts at the Pevey site. I also need to thank Dr. Paul Sandberg, who helped me to understand the basic statistics generated by this analysis, and who showed me how to discuss them. I would also be remiss if I did not recognize the contributions of other archaeology graduate students to this paper. As an audience to their posters and papers, iv I have seen examples of how rigorous analysis can provide information about the past that really matters to other archaeologists. My cohort especially has been a lifeline of support and sanity during these trying times that we call graduate school. Finally, I would like to thank Piers, who knew very little about the study of archaeology, but who listened attentively anyways when I talked of mounds and flakes. He has always been overly positive, and is very good at telling you you’re almost done (even when you’re not). His support during the last year is greatly appreciated, and his v patience and understanding with my long absences while writing is admirable. v Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. viii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. ix Abstract…………. ....................................................................................................................... xi Ch. 1: The Pevey Site ................................................................................................................... 1 Previous Research at Pevey ................................................................................................ 4 Mound Research along the Lower Mississippi and Black Warrior Rivers ....................... 12 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 15 Ch. 2: Mound Arrangements ...................................................................................................... 17 Social Space Theory ......................................................................................................... 19 vi Archaic Mounds ................................................................................................................ 25 Look to the East: Mississippian Culture ........................................................................... 29 Moundville: a Mississippian Mound Site ......................................................................... 33 Plaquemine Cultures ......................................................................................................... 41 Look to the West: Plaquemine and Coles Creek Mound Sites of the Lower Mississippi and Big Black Rivers ........................................................................................................ 44 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 53 Ch. 3: Lithics Theory and Methods ............................................................................................ 56 Centralization, Stratification, and Craft Production.......................................................... 58 Choosing Proveniences for Analysis ................................................................................ 66 Citronelle Gravels ............................................................................................................. 70 Reduction Stages ............................................................................................................... 73 Analysis of Unmodified Flakes ........................................................................................ 75 Types of Flakes ................................................................................................................. 82 Typological Concepts for Tools........................................................................................ 87 Modified Lithics ............................................................................................................... 90 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 92 Ch. 4: Results .............................................................................................................................. 94 Assemblage Summary ...................................................................................................... 97 Hypothesis 1 ..................................................................................................................... 99 Multivariate Analysis .................................................................................................. 112 Hypothesis 2 ................................................................................................................... 118 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 128 vi Chapter 5: Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 132 References ................................................................................................................................ 138 Appendix 1: Coding Flake Attributes ....................................................................................... 149 Appendix 2: Coding Tool Attributes ........................................................................................ 151 Appendix 3: Coding Hammerstone and Core Attributes .......................................................... 154 Appendix 4: Lithic Debitage Analysis ..................................................................................... 153 Appendix 5: Lithic Tools Analysis ........................................................................................... 228 Appendix 6: Hammerstones and Cores Analysis ..................................................................... 235 vii vii List of Tables Table 3.1: Analytical units from each unit, showing excavated lithics………….....68-69 Table 3.2: Description of width/thickness ratios for each biface stage………………..75 Table 4.1: Debitage and tools at each unit……………………………………………101 Table 4.2: Types of tools at Pevey……………………………………………………104 Table 4.3: Stone debitage, stone tool, and ceramic densities for each unit…………..105 Table 4.4: Eigenvectors for Principle Components 1, 2, and 3………………………112 viii viii List of Figures Figure 1.1: Map of Pevey on the Pearl River…………………………………………4 Figure 1.2: Present heights of the mounds at Pevey………………………………….5 Figure 1.3: Map of Pevey’s mounds………………………………………………….6 Figure 1.4: Culture chronology chart for the Lower Mississippi River Valley………9 Figure 1.5: Map of contemporaneous sites in and near Mississippi………………...14 Figure 2.1: Idealized locations and sizes of mounds that may convey status……….23 Figure 2.2: Picture of St. Catherine’s Island shell rings…………………………….28 Figure 2.3: Model of MIIS influence………………………………………………..30 ix Figure