FINDING ANSWERS IN CHAOS: A LITHIC AND POST-DEPOSITIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE CLARK’S BAY SITE, ONTARIO A Thesis Submitted to the Committee of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Arts and Science Trent University Peterborough, Ontario, Canada © Copyright by Keri Lynn Sine 2013 Anthropology M.A. Graduate Program May 2013 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du 1+1 Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-93851-5 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-93851-5 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada Abstract Finding Answers in Chaos: A Lithic and Post-Depositional Analysis of the Clarks Bay Site, Ontario Keri Lynn Sine The objective of this thesis is to assess the degree of post-depositional disturbance and to document and analyze the lithic assemblage of 3,595 artifacts from the Clark’s Bay site (BdGn-8) near Burleigh Falls, Ontario. This research will contribute to the limited knowledge of stratigraphically compromised sites within the middle Trent Valley of southeastern Ontario. Post-depositional disturbance is assessed using size distribution data and re-fits to see if artifacts experienced sorting by weight and/or surface area. The results suggest that artifacts were sorted by surface area. From a technological perspective debitage is analyzed using a stage typology and the Sullivan and Rozen method. Raw material usage and comparison to established typologies from the Great Lakes area indicate that the assemblage dates to the late Middle Archaic (6,000-4,500 B.P.) through the Late Archaic/Transitional Woodland (4,500- 2,800 B.P.) periods. Formal shaped tools were predominately made from non-local tool stone, other tools from more local tool stone. Tool kits of all time periods were also replenished using local tool stone varieties. The stage typological analysis gave more concrete results than the Sullivan and Rozen method and is therefore recommended for future research involving large assemblages with a wide variety of tool stone types. Keywords:Ontario archaeology, Archaic, lithic debitage, raw material utilization, post-depositional disturbance, trade/exchange. Acknowledgements There are a several people I would like to acknowledge and thank for their support and guidance during the research and writing of this thesis. First is Dr. Susan Jamieson, my supervisor, who permitted me to excavate at the Clark’s Bay site and at the West Burleigh Bay site during three summer field school sessions from 2004 to 2006. The time spent in the field was an invaluable and memorable experience that allowed me to develop a true passion for archaeology. Without Dr. Susan Jamieson’s unfaltering support and understanding of my special needs as a single parent this thesis would not have been made possible. Her extensive knowledge and years of experience in archaeology and with First Nation peoples is truly inspiring. Furthermore, I would like to thank her as well as Chief Chris Nahrgang of the Kawartha Nishnawbe First Nation for granting me permission to analyze the lithic collection of the Clark’s Bay site. I would also like to thank my committee members Dr. Eugene Morin, Dr. Roger Lohman and Mr. William Fox for their guidance and support. Dr. Eugene Morin offered much needed guidance during the statistical analysis phase of my research while Dr. Roger Lohman always asked very pertinent questions about the interpretations of my research which helped me to stay focused on the cultural aspects of archaeological research. As external examiner, Mr. William Fox offered a number of searching comments and questions which further refined my thoughts about the Clark’s Bay assemblage and its place in Ontario’s past. I would also like to acknowledge Dr. James Conolly for allowing me to audit his spatial statistics course which was extremely useful during the analysis phase of my research and also for his guidance and patience while trying to ensure that I understood and applied the various statistics effectively. Also thanks are owing to Dr. Marit Munson for helping me with the development of the Access data base which I used to collect the detailed lithic data. I would also like acknowledge the generous financial support provided by Trent University in the form of bursaries including the Sara Graduate Bursary and others which were provided by anonymous donors. Finally, I would like to thank my family, firstly my mother and sister Julie for their encouragement and for being my editors throughout my University experience, secondly my father for his support and my son Taylor for his patience and at times much needed comic relief. IV Table of Contents Page Abstract ii Acknowledgements iii Table of Contents V List of Figures vii List of Tables ix Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Research Questions as They Pertain to Lithic Analysis 1 The Archaic in Ontario 3 Site Disturbance 6 Thesis Organization 7 Chapter 2: Middle and Late Archaic Social Organization in Ontario 9 Southwestern Ontario 12 Southeastern Ontario 20 Shield Archaic 26 Summary 29 Chapter 3: Approaches to Lithic Studies and Site Formation 30 Processes Tool Analysis 32 Debitage Analysis 36 Biface Analysis 37 Core Analysis 38 Site Formation Processes 40 Summary 42 Chapter 4: Research Methods 43 Excavation of the Clark’s Bay Site 43 Lithic Analysis 46 Detailed Debitage Flake Analysis 50 Dating the Clark’s Bay Site and Assessing Post-Depositional Disturbance 56 Summary 60 Chapter 5: Research Analysis and Results 61 Raw Material Usage and Lithic Analysis 61 Debitage Analysis Stage Typology 68 Cores 70 Debitage (Sullivan and Rozen Method) 72 Post-Depositional Disturbance 73 V Dating the Clark’s Bay site 75 Summary 76 Chapter 6: Discussion 78 Tool Analysis, Cultural Affiliation and Interaction 78 Debitage Analysis and Stage Typology 85 Debitage Analysis (Sullivan and Rozen) 90 Post Depositional Disturbance and Site Formation Processes 91 Summary 95 Chapter 7: Conclusions 97 Suggestions for Future Research 103 References Cited 105 Appendix A: Lithic Attributes 113 VI List of Figures Figure Description Page 1.1 The Location of the Clark’s Bay site within the Kawartha Lakes Region of Ontario 2 1.2 The Location of the Site in Relation to the Kawartha Lakes 2 2.1 Map of Ontario Showing Geographical Regions 12 3.1 Picture of the Site Showing Sloping Topography 44 5.1 Map of Southern Ontario Showing the Location of Exotic Cherts in Relation to the Clark’s Bay Site 63 5.2 Stage 1 Biface 65 5.3 Stage 2 Biface 66 5.4 Stage 3 Biface 67 5.5 Comparison of Flaked Artifact by Material 71 5.6 Results Sullivan and Rozen Debitage Analysis 72 5.7 Distribution of Concentration of Heavy Artifact at the Clark’s Bay site 74 6.1 Brewerton Projectile Point 82 6.2 Biface Tip Fragments 82 6.3 Crawford Knoll Projectile Point 84 6.4 Thumbnail Scraper 84 6.5 Ground Stone Artifacts Wood Working 85 6.6 Drawing of Biface Re-Sharpening Flake 86 6.7 Drawing of Scraper Re-Sharpening Flake 87 6.8 Drawing of Bipolar Core/Wedge 88 vii Drawing of Bipolar Core List of Tables Table Description Page 5.1 Clark’s Bay Lithic Artifact Counts and Percentages 61 5.2 Clark’s Bay Artifact Categories by Material Type 62 5.3 Frequency of Raw Material by Functional Tool Types 64 5.4 Summary of Biface Stages 67 5.5 Stage Typology by Raw Material Type 69 5.6 Summary of Core Types by Raw Material 70 IX 1 Chapter 1 Introduction Research Questions In many parts of the world, stone tools and their manufacturing debris can be the sole artifacts present in the archaeological record and thus, the sole evidence of past human activity (Kooyman 2000:1; Odell 1996:1). Therefore, the study of stone tools and their manufacturing debris is a vital part of archaeological research aiding in the interpretation of cultural phenomena such as past tool-making technologies and economic and socio-political relationships between peoples. With some notable exceptions, these assertions hold true for most sites dating to the Archaic period in Ontario, ca.