the gehring site: an analysis of a middle woodland lithic assemblage in the american bottom
Post on 02-Jan-2016
25 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
The Gehring Site: An Analysis of a Middle
Woodland Lithic Assemblage in the American Bottom
Katie Leslie
Hypotheses
• Trade or migration
• Determine regions of interaction
• Phase
• Purpose of site
Middle Woodland• Time frame
– 150 BC to AD 350
• “People of colors and glitter” • (Fortier 2008)
– Variety of colors– Variety of chert types
Fortier 2008
Movement Patterns
• Trade, migration, direct procurement
• Equifinality
• Literature unclear
Surface Collection-85 acres-30,000 piece lithic assemblage
Test units-Six 2x2 meter units- Plowzone- Screening- Features
FeaturesFeature 102, Feature 104
Excavation methods-First half in one level-Second half in cultural episodes-Screening-Floatation samples
Methods
-Comparative collection-Heat- treatment-Tool versus debitage-Counts-Weights-Unidentified
Feature Results
Local chert types-Burlington-Chouteau-Salem-Glacial till
Non-local chert types– Grimes Hill– Cobden/Dongola– Kaolin– Ste. Genevieve– Mill Creek
• Debitage– Core reduction
• 33 flakes– 64% Burlington
– Bifacial reduction• 51 flakes
– 53% Burlington
– Shatter• 51 flakes
– 69% Burlington
Blades-58% of tool assemblage-Characteristics
-Parallel sides-Ridges
-Technology
Flake Tools-15% of tool assemblage-Expedient -Re-sharpening
Results
• Hoe Flake– 15% of tool assemblage– Sharpening hoes– Polish
Scrapers-4% of tool assemblage-Retouching-Burlington
-Norton reworked into scraper-Glacial Till
-Exhausted humpback scraper-Ste. Genevieve
-Side scraper
Results
• Spear Points– 5% of tool assemblage– Norton
• Ste. Genevieve– Unidentified
• Burlington– Etley
• Burlington
• Cores• -3% of tool assemblage• Bipolar reduction
– Heat-treated Burlington• Multidirectional
– Burlington
Middle Woodland Diagnostics of Plowzone and Surface
• Plowzone– 49 blades
• Surface– 121 blades– Waubesa point– Dickson point
Conclusion• Holding Phase
• Farming– Hoe flakes
• Tool production site?
• Trade versus migration
• Regions of interaction– Southern Illinois, Illinois river valley, southwestern Illinois
• Trade versus migration?
Acknowledgments
• I want to thank Dr. Holt for all of the wisdom that she shared, without her guidance this research would not have been possible
• Larry Kinsella for making my comparative collection without which the unidentified category would be much larger.
• Miranda Yancey and Ken Farnsworth for looking over my first attempts at lithic analysis and for guiding me in the right direction.
top related