Andice Channel Flake Utility in the Gault Archeological Context

Transcription

1 Andice Channel Utility in the Gault Archeological Context A Gault Laboratory Internship Report by Sergio Ayala Introduction During the fall semester of 2011 I conducted an internship at the Gault School of Archeological Research. I had three main areas of work: the cleaning, sorting, and novice level processing of artifacts and debitage, the organizing of the abundant amounts of CaCO3 in the laboratory, and to develop an investigation in how Andice Channel s from Andice/Bell Points of the early archaic period, can help us empirically gauge the depositional integrity of the Gault excavation site. The first several weeks were about getting acquainted with the lab processes, thereby how the flow of artifacts find their way from the archeological site to its various levels of laboratory processing at the Texas State University Gault Lab facility. The next four weeks were concerned with organizing and clearing space in the laboratory for other important projects. This meant the constant lifting of the enormous amounts of CaCO3 sample bags. From the amount of this material alone, one cannot escape the fact that the Gault site was host to many generations of prehistoric people. It turns out that this material may likely lead to valuable insights for there is small evidence of organics and carbon inside this material. This would assist in the isotopic dating of various time intervals and also help us understand dietary components of various groups over time. History The Gault School of Archeological Research was established with the incredible developments of the Gault Site in Bell County. The site is between Georgetown and Ft. Hood in central Texas and has a long history of archeological investigation as well as uncontrolled artifact digging, commonly referred to as looting. Located in a small wooded valley with a spring-fed creek and an unlimited supply of prime flint, the site was occupied intensively during all major periods of the prehistoric era. Page 1 of 11

2 The first anthropologist at the University of Texas, J.E. Pearce, had a crew excavating at the site in 1929 and recovered 3,333 artifacts. Today, 3,257 of these still remain. The site was located on a farm owned by Henry Gault and his wife Jodie but over the years the land changed hands several times and was the focus of looting and private collecting. Archaeologists at the University of Texas at Austin and the Texas Historical Commission watched over the site but could not come to any agreement with the landowner regarding professional excavation. Visits in 1988 and a brief excavation in 1991 established that, although much of the site dating from 9,000 years ago to the present was irreparably damaged, intact Paleoindian strata remained deep below the site. The land changed ownership in 1998 and a group from the University of Texas at Austin led by paleontologist Dr. Ernie Lundelius and archaeologist Dr. Michael Collins were asked by the new owners to look at something they had exposed at the site. It turned out to be the lower jaw of a juvenile mammoth and some ancient horse bones surrounded by a large number of Clovis artifacts. A three year lease between the University and the landowners allowed the first extensive research excavations at Gault. Between 1999 and 2002 more than 1.2 million artifacts were recovered - about half of them of Clovis age. What has the research revealed about Clovis? The people that utilized Clovis technology knew a great deal about their environment, were not nearly as mobile as previously thought, and used nearly all of the available local resources to survive. This was not representative of a pioneering culture but rather one comfortable with and knowledgeable about their area. Consistently throughout the site there are possible traces of an earlier occupation at Gault in the deep test units. Often 50 cm below the Clovis occupation strata there is debitage from human manufacturing. In two test units in particular, one done in 2002 and one in 2007, the GSAR recovered a large number of debitage flakes that were IRSL dated to 500 to 1,000 years prior to Clovis. Included was a small fragment of a biface and many pieces of burnt Page 2 of 11

3 chert debitage. In addition, the lithic analysts said that the debitage did not appear to be the same as that we were used to seeing from Clovis manufacturing at the site. Currently, further finds have been excavated that quite interesting and hold great pre-clovis potential. We are now near the water table several meters below the surface and there are artifacts that are clearly not Clovis. The isotopic dating is 14,800 years B.P. in the earliest portions and the deeper elevations may go another 1000 years or more. The Andice Channel Project In order for archeologists to interpret past human behavior with empirical geoarcheological data, the importance of archeological context and contextual integrity is paramount. Without a stable surface that represents a particular time and space archeologists cannot interpret past life-ways in a scientific way. Physical evidence for close association between dated samples and the events for which dates are sought must be well defined and secured. In Texas from the Early to Late Archaic, and up from years ago, sites were often Sergio Ayala examining CaCO3 samples forming on stable surfaces. Though the establishing of the archeological chronology of Central Texas is under periodic refinement, what is important is that these stable surfaces across time are useful to researchers in many ways. In the following report I make use of a specific point manufacturing by-product of the Early Archaic to help affirm contextual integrity. Our work at the Gault School of Archeological Research is focused upon Clovis Culture and pre-clovis potential. This report covers an investigation of the Gault Laboratory s potential storage of Andice/Bell Point channel flakes of the Early Archaic to establish soil integrity, thus adding further validity to the Gault Site archeological context. Page 3 of 11

4 When Dr. Michael Collins handed me this project many questions and possible obstacles came to mind. Over the years many individual volunteers and universities have participated in excavations at the Gault site. In reviewing a little of history of the site, more than 4,000 volunteers worked on the Gault Project ranging from schoolchildren to graduate students to retirees. A number of universities cooperated in the excavation including Texas A& M University, Brigham Young University and University of Exeter. The Texas Archeological Society and its affiliates provided many eager volunteers as well as groups like the PaleoCultural Research Group from Arizona and the New Hampshire State Conservation and Rescue Archaeology Program (SCRAP). With so many individual and university groups involved, it is highly probable that many channel flakes were unnoticed and eventually found their way into the debitage bags also. There were two initial things I had to do. First, what would I find in the database and what was it identified as? Would it be labeled as an Andice Channel, or Channel Notching, or Notching? Going through the database Dr. Wernecke and I found two Andice Channel s labeled Notching Channel s. Going through the physical inventory they were directly identified. No others under any label were found. Thereby, I could not establish any scientific validity around two channel flakes for the lab. The question was whether I would find more, enough to create a relevant measure of soil integrity at the Gault Site. This project is similar to finding a needle in a hay stack, but requiring many needles from a great deal of hay stacks. Looking at the elevations where the channel flakes were found and reviewing where the Andice Points were uncovered, I quickly looked through our artifact storage and removed a nearby lot and poured a large bag of debitage out on the examining table. This bag held several flakes. Within ten minutes I was able to identify a clear Andice Channel. This was a very welcomed surprise to Dr. Collins and Dr. Wernecke. This began my five-week investigation into over sixty bags of debitage, many of which held over 6,000 flakes, one held over 16,000 flakes (a lab record). As can be imagined, archeological work is often tedious and requires particular concentration so as to not overlook the Page 4 of 11

5 smallest of details. Currently, there are many more identified bags that may hold promise but have not been examined. However, the investigation has already been very successful in two essential ways: 1) I have found 31 Andice Channel s from the debitage bags, and 2) Aside from one Andice Channel, all flakes are associated in a fairly narrow time context. This point was used as a diagnostic device in order to confirm a clear match between points and flakes a flake should fit neatly inside the channel if it is an Andice Channel. No other flake structure will fit properly in these channels. In the course of this investigation there was one type of sequent flake that closely resembled the channel flakes; however it was lacking a thick platform bulb on the bottom. Andice Channel Photo by Sergio Ayala David Olmstead found this Andice Point in Williamson County. It measures 2 ¾ inches long and is a classic example for this point type. Featured in Volume 2, Topical Studies, Archaic and Late Prehistoric Human Ecology in the Middle Onion Creek Valley, Hays County, Texas Page 5 of 11

6 GAULT41BL323 Andice/Bell Channel Physical Inventory Sheet Sheet No. 1 Date Performed By Sergio Ayala Department Inventory Name Excavator and Lot Number Easterly Northerly Count Texas State University Anthropology Gault Lab Internship Project 1. Andice Channel 2. Andice Channel 3. Andice Channel 4. Andice Channel 5. Andice Channel 6. Andice Channel S Howard, Lot Emiko, Lot 5104 Slump Removal/Storm Damage M Collins, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot S. Peck,R. Barns, Lot E1080 E1081 E1086 E946 E1082 N1160 N1163 N1168 N953 N Andice Channel 8. Andice Channel 9. Andice Channel 10. Andice Channel 11. Andice Channel 12. Andice Channel 13. Andice Channel 14. Andice Channel 15. Andice Channel 16. Andice Channel 17. Andice Channel MBC, Lot , GEM, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot 2738 L. 1 (surface find by scraping archaic layer off) Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot Sergio Ayala, Lot L. 4 E1081 E1080 E1124 E1078 E1080 E1080 E950 E1123 E1080 E1078 E1087 N1162 N1160 N1160 N1157 N1160 N1161 N960 N1159 N1163 N1159 N (4) 1 (2) 1 (5) 1 (21) 2 (3) 6 31 Andice Channel s Page 6 of 11

7 GAULT41BL323 Andice/Bell Projectile Physical Inventory Sheet Sheet No. 1 Date Performed By Sergio Ayala Department Texas State University Anthropology Gault Lab Internship Project Name Excavator, Lot, and Provenience Easterly Northerly Count 1. Andice Point UT Surface Surface 1 2. Andice Point UT Surface Surface 1 3. Andice Point UT Surface Surface 1 4. Andice Point Bcat Te #1 Bcat Te # Andice Point 3132 E1084 N1084 (surface) 1 6. Andice Point E N Andice Point E N Andice Point South Part of Bcat 1 9. Andice Point UT4100 Surface find, Black Midden-West edge-bcat Andice Point (level 3) W99 N Andice Point UT Surface Andice Point Bcat #1 Area Andice Point Back Dirt Bcat 1, General Surface 14. Andice Point E N Andice Channel s are very distinct. To understand the distinguishing characteristics it almost requires some tactile knowledge, one has to hold it and feel its special shape. These flakes have a deep conical platform and its concavity is more easily felt than seen since they are so small. I found that feeling the flakes often was the clarifying factor to help distinguish a channel flake from other types of flakes. There is one study however that has provided an exemplary introduction to Andice Point manufacturing. In 1994 Carey Weber and Dr. Michael Collins put together the report, A Replication of Page 7 of 11

8 Andice/Bell Technique. (Carey Weber, 1994) Carey Weber has distinguished himself in the replication of Andice/Bell Points. In this report, he was able to demonstrate the processes from material selection to applied techniques such as percussion, indirect percussion, leg-assisted pressure, pressure and by their place in the sequence of removal. Though this report is not focused on the experimental archeology and manufacturing technique of these points, the report does provide excellent drafts of how channel notching flakes are notched, how they are shaped by the technique applied to remove them, and in what sequence they are removed. This knowledge was very useful in the investigations of massive amounts of debitage. Some channel notching flakes are not whole specimens and can be easily missed in the backdrop of thousands of other flakes, but if one has reviewed this report, looked at different Andice Point specimens, then the mental image becomes clearer and the identification process easier. This was an enormous help in identifying several flakes that were fragments of their original shape. The left image is taken from the Onion Creek Valley study by Carey Weber and Dr. Michael B. Collins. The Right is an example from the Gault lab, found by author. a)arced concavity b)forward fracture advance c)zigzag stem closer to face opposite notching flake removal d)acute, S-shaped flake surface with maximum expansion e)less acute simple curved flake surface with minimal expansion Understanding aspects greatly helped in the identifying process. In this very well sketched image (left), the concavity, directional fracturing, and removal processes are evidenced. Page 8 of 11

9 From the Gault site in Bell County, including J. E. Pearce s 1929 excavations, there are 63 earlyarchaic points called Andice/Bell Points, many of which were surface finds. This label was coined by Pearce himself. The name comes from the town of Andice, a few miles from the Gault site. Their distinguishing marks are their long triangular stems, convex lateral edges, and thick Work area in the examination process prominent barbs. Their distribution is from East Central Texas, across the Texas Coastal Plains to Victoria through Corpus Christi. They occupy the early archaic from 4050 to 3050 B.C. Reviewing our samples, along with a cast of one from Williamson County, we could establish that in the manufacturing of the barbed portion of these points, between seven and eight specialized channel flake notches, per side (4 sides), are required to create their two deep channels, thus a combined total of channel notches per Andice Point. The bi-product of channel notches is channel flakes, distinctive unto their own in contour, size and shape. We could infer that we should find many such flakes in the physical inventory. From a geoarcheological standpoint, these tiny flakes are very important. Small objects can be moved within soil layers much more easily than larger ones. Thereby, these channel flakes, which we know should occupy a specific range in space ( ) and time (Early Archaic), will allow us a window into the soil movement at the site. If we had a large sample of channel flakes in our database, we could establish a clear measure of contextual integrity of the current excavation area. As mentioned in the opening of this report, clearly defined archeological context and contextual integrity are paramount. Without having to go into the detailed geological processes that make up the Gault archeological context, the early archaic Andice Channel flakes give us a measure of stability in the depositional events of the site. Essentially, all artifacts such bone, shell, and charcoal move by the laws of physics. Small items move easily while large mass objects move slowly, as they require larger sources Page 9 of 11

10 of energy to move them. Andice channel flakes are very small and extremely susceptible to movement within soil. Knowing that they occupy a specific time interval and elevation range creates a great opportunity to study depositional event stability of the site, hence the stability of the archeological context. Based upon the research provided by my work, the lab now has empirical data showing soil integrity and contextual integrity, thereby supporting other chronological and dating evidence. Looking over my time as an intern, the Gault Project has been extraordinary and will certainly lead to future academic and professional possibilities. Currently, Dr. Collins has approved my project for expansion and future publication in Lithics Journal, a peer-reviewed archeological journal. From learning to clean debitage, sort and catalogue artifacts, do basic curation, and initiating my own research work, I have developed a great deal of archeological experience in a single semester. I cannot be more pleased about the project and the incredible support from my internship advisor, Dr. R. Neill Hadder. Concerning my research project, it has been a great success and benefit to the Gault Project. The Andice Channel investigative project supports everything occurring at the Gault Site. The early archaic Andice Channel s give us a measure of stability in the depositional events of the site. Essentially, all artifacts lay or move within soil by the laws of physics. Andice channel flakes are very small and extremely susceptible to movement. Knowing that they occupy a specific time interval and elevation range created a great opportunity to study the depositional event integrity of the site, hence the stability of the archeological contexts over the prehistoric eras to modern times. Based upon my investigation, the Gault lab has empirical data showing soil integrity and contextual integrity, thereby supporting all other chronological and dating evidence. Page 10 of 11

11 Bibliography Alan P. Sullivan, I. K. (1985). Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation. American Antiquity, Carey Weber, M. B. (1994). A Replication of Andice/Bell Technique. In M. B. Robert A. Ricklis, Topical Studies (pp ). Austin: Texas Archeological Research Laboratory at the University of Texas. Eileen Johnson, V. T. (1986). Archaic Record in Lubbock Texas. The Plains Archeologist, Ferring, R. (1994). Principles of Geoarcheology: A North American Perspective by Michael R. Waters. American Anthropologist, Motet-White, A. (1974). SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIABILITY IN ARCHAIC POINT ASSEMBLAGES. The Plains Anthropologist, Richard W. Yerkes, P. N. (1993). Recent Developments in the Analysis of Lithic Artifacts. Journal of Archeological Research, Spalding, A. C. (1988). Archeology in Anthropology. American Anthropologist, Trigger, B. G. (1991). Constraint and Freedom - A New Synthesis forarcheological Explanation. American Anthropologist, Page 11 of 11