The Quarry - Society for American Archaeology

The Quarry The e-Newsletter of the SAA’s Prehistoric Quarries & Early Mines Interest Group #10 October 2013

A view into part of the Neolithic variscite mines at Gavà, near Barcelona. These workings, based upon tunnel and chamber mining, produced a distinctive sea-green raw material which was ground into various forms of beads used in jewellery which was later deposited in high status burials as part of an extensive trade network in the western Mediterranean. For more information visit www.parcarqueologic.cat. Photo © Pete Topping

EDITORIAL Welcome to issue #10 of The Quarry. This themed issue presents papers given at the PQEMIG-sponsored symposium organized by Juliet Morrow and Peter Mills at the 2013 SAA Annual Meeting in Hawai’i (see Research Reports below), alongside news items which will be of interest to many members. Do remember that The Quarry is here to be used to promote your forthcoming events or engage with fellow researchers to explore your current queries or

The Quarry #10 (October 13)

1

for assistance with hypothesis building. I would like to thank Anne Dowd for organising and editing the Hawai’i contributions and the authors for all of their hard work. Enjoy. Notes for contributors Contributions can be any length but ideally not more than 2,000 words in Word format. Plans and photographs must be supplied as low resolution jpegs; try to keep these to five or fewer to make the Editor’s job as simple as possible and prevent the file size from growing too large (although this guidance is open to negotiation!). Such restrictions will also help authors focus their efforts and use only the truly critical images. If you do use photographs please ensure that you can also supply written permission from the photographer for their use, and if anyone is featured in a photo, as a scale for example, that they also give their written permission for their image to be used in both the e-newsletter and on the SAA website where it will be placed in the archive of Quarry back numbers. These copyright procedures are essential to protect the interests of all concerned and must be in place before web dissemination can take place. So what are you waiting for, get something in to the Editor at: [email protected].

NEWS & COMING EVENTS Here is notice of a session focussing upon early quarry sites being organised by Barbara Purdy and Blaine Ensor at the Paleoamerican Odyssey Conference to be held at the Santa Fe Convention Center, New Mexico, from the 17-19th October 2013. Their session is scheduled during the evening of 18th October. This is billed as a once in a decade event: Searching for the earliest Americans at ancient chert quarry / workshop sites Chert sources have long been known for the quality and quantity of stone available to produce tools and weapons. Few archaeologists, however, have in-depth knowledge of lithic technology, and quarry/workshop sites usually contain a confusing array of debitage and broken discards. Consequently, the research potential of these sites has been neglected. Nevertheless, since the nineteenth century, there have been occasional reports of artifacts or stone working techniques observed at quarry/workshops that do not resemble those of Clovis or more recent age, but they do resemble those produced in the Old World thousands of years before Clovis. The purpose of this discussion is to address difficulties associated with investigations at quarry/workshop sites and how to overcome them. Usual problems include (1) a lack of stratigraphy, (2) an absence of organic materials suitable for RC dating, (3) unrecognizable artifacts, and (4) the fact that many old techniques continued into modern times and cannot be time related without care. Topics will include (1) a summary of previous observations, (2) presence or absence of intentional heat treatment, (3) types of platform preparation, (4) weathering, (5) possible dating methods, and (6) quarry behavior; i.e. why was the quarry utilized? Various individuals will be asked to contribute their expertise to the discussions. Posters, and specimens from previously reported sites will be available for examination. Investigations at chert quarry/workshop sites might add a presently uncharted way to discover the earliest humans in the Western Hemisphere. Gunflints – Beyond the British and French Empires: Invitation to take part in an active working group Torben Bjarke Ballin LITHIC RESEARCH, Stirlingshire Honorary Research Fellow, University of Bradford, UK [email protected] BACKGROUND Since I became interested in gunflints as a source of information on the post-medieval era, I have searched the Internet for papers relating to the subject. In the beginning, I searched for information relating to the British and French gunflint industries, as most analysts seemed to agree that these industries had almost total control of the production of, and trade in, this commodity. This has proven to be a somewhat inaccurate assumption.


2

We do not need to go into any great detail as to why this assumption was incorrect – suffice to say that other empires, which for strategic reasons did not wish to be entirely reliant on British and French supplies of gunflints, had to build up and organise their own gunflint industries, including at one end of these structures a raw material procurement system (mines and workshops), and at the other a distribution network. As a result of my Internet searches, I came across papers on gunflints from parts of Europe which did not form part of the British and French empires, and it was obvious that gunflints of deviating (i.e., non-British and non-French) types were produced in these areas. Danish gunflints, for example, are quite distinct, as are some east European, Ottoman and western Mediterranean types. I would like to invite like-minded researchers throughout Europe and the Americas – that is, analysts with an interest in non-British and non-French gunflint industries – to take part in an informal network (a working group), the purpose of which is to exchange information on this topic.

Fig. 1. Ventral and dorsal faces of typical Danish flake-based gunflint – the Danes never developed from flake-based to blade-based production. (photo: B. Ballin-Smith) AIMS AND OBJECTIVES As stated above, the general objective of this working group should be to exchange information on the topic of European gunflints produced outside the British and French spheres of interest, and the industries responsible for their production and distribution. To allow gunflints to be used as a tool in terms of the interpretation of specific historical situations, it is necessary to start with basics, and 1) attempt to construct local typologies and typo-technologically based chronologies, and 2) define specific methodologies which will allow us to use these typologies and chronologies as interpretational tools. It should be attempted to publish the findings of the group, either on the Internet or as hard copies. At a later stage, it should be possible for the group to move up ‘the Ladder of Inference’ and engage in the discussion of specific historical cases, by the use of the typologies, chronologies, etc. produced by the working group. ORGANIZATION At the present time, I suggest that we start in an informal manner, and that everyone who is interested in taking part contacts me, providing name, institution/company, and email address, as well as lists of local gunflint literature. I will then organize this information, and – at a later stage – circulate a list of names, contact details, literature, etc. to members of the group. I suggest that individuals or groups of individuals in the relevant parts of Europe and the Americas then attempt to produce the much-needed local typologies and chronologies, and


3

that we – at a later stage – attempt to get these published, or even organize a conference on the topic. Who is invited to join this informal working group? Based on at the information on European gunflints stored on my computer, I have been able to produce a preliminary (and at the present early stage probably somewhat incorrect) number of possible local industries, each of which may have aimed at the production of specific types of gunflints (some of which would be regionally diagnostic). Those areas are:        

British Empire French Empire Scandinavia (mainly Denmark) Germany/Prussia Alpine region (Switzerland, Austria, N Italy) Western Mediterranean (Portugal, Spain, Italy) Eastern Europe (incl. Poland, most of Austro-Hungarian Empire, Russia) Ottoman Empire (incl. Balkans, Levant, N Africa)

Fig. 2. So-called Albanian gunflint (from Evans 1897: Ancient Stone Implements of Great Britain) – recent finds from the Balkans and the Levant suggest that this type may have been produced and traded throughout the Ottoman empire. Most of these areas need to be researched further, and colleagues from these parts of Europe are invited to take part. Although we do know quite a bit about gunflints produced in the British and French empires, there is variation to be investigated within these empires, and it is necessary to find out for example how gunflints from the Netherlands look – as the country formed part of the French empire during the Napoleonic era, the Dutch gunflints may typologically correspond to typical French pieces, but in terms of raw material they may be more similar to British pieces, having been based at least partly on Maastrichtian flint (and what about potential Austrian and Spanish typo-technological influence on Dutch gunflint production?). Analysts from the USA may be able to contribute to this work in terms of information on the Spanish gunflint industry (California, New Mexico, Texas), which may have produced types particularly suited for the Spanish Miquelet flintlock type, as well as information on the Russian gunflint industry (Alaska), which is presently a somewhat enigmatic entity. HERE AND NOW? At present, it is difficult to predict how the proposed working group will function and which specific results it may produce. At the moment, I find it most important to simply start this process and then – as the saying goes – ‘play it by ear’. The work will for example be


4

influenced by how many researchers choose to join the group, how well the areas defined above are going to be covered, etc., etc. But let’s take the first steps and see how things go!

RESEARCH REPORTS THEMED ISSUE: QUARRY LANDSCAPES Contents Quarries and Early Mines: Settlement Context and Transportation Network Relationships by Anne S. Dowd……………………………………………………………………..… 5 Linking Quarry and Settlement on the Swabian Alb, Southern Germany by Lynn E. Fisher, Susan K. Harris, Jehanne Affolter, Corina Knipper, and Rainer Schreg…………………………………………….…….. 8 Sourcing Burlington Formation Chert: Implications for Long Distance Procurement and Exchange by Sarah D. Stuckey, and Juliet E. Morrow…………………………………….......

20

Multiscalar Analysis of Quarries by Mary Beth D. Trubitt, Anne S. Dowd, and Meeks Etchieson………………..…

30

Quarries' Place in Settlement and Transportation Networks by Adrian L. Burke……………………………………………………………………..

43

Quarries and Early Mines: Settlement Context and Transportation Network Relationships Anne S. Dowd, ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC [email protected] Abstract This Prehistoric Quarries and Early Mines Interest Group-sponsored symposium treated the settlement context and transportation network of quarries and early mines. To date, there has been considerable research on quarries and their relationships with workshop or production areas. In addition, pathway and trails associated with quarries, linking specialized sites, may reveal the organization of quarrying activities and the raw material transport, as well as community settlement characteristics. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping provides new techniques for regional analysis at varying scales and ways to document the different site types related to quarries. Sites around quarries have the potential to specifically show how different cultural groups, both large and small, used quarries. Associated linear features such as trails or pathways may provide evidence for direction of transport or relationships with habitation or production sites. Stone characterization studies, which may establish links among distant places, also contribute to this theme. Introductory Comments This brief introduction is simply to call attention to a few of the reasons why you should read the articles that follow. Much of this research is presented for the very first time, and while lengthier, more detailed, articles are forthcoming from each author, "you heard it here first!" We are fortunate to have a publication like The Quarry where we can get our results out quickly and reach a broad audience. I would like to thank Juliet E. Morrow and Peter R. Mills for organizing this symposium, which brought together researchers from Europe, Canada, and the United


5

States. One of the most enjoyable parts of my role as Chair of the Prehistoric Quarries and Early Mines Interest Group has been the chance to meet and talk with scholars from many other countries who are interested in the topic. Hopefully, publishing this "Quarry Landscapes" issue of The Quarry will attract more people to the meetings where we can discuss our mutual interests face-to-face and will create some momentum for future themed issues on quarry and mine-related subjects. In the first research report, Fisher and colleagues offer an intriguing glimpse into the peoples who, before the transition from the Early to the Middle Neolithic periods in southern Germany, were ranging more widely for purposes of procuring raw materials. These explorers' paths can be reconstructed and compared with later time periods by the painstaking work Fisher and colleagues have undertaken to study petrology in a large geographic area, longhouse settlements (e.g., the sites of Schlaghau and Grund), and individual quarry features from the Asch-Borgerhau Quarry Complex (charcoal from pit fill can be directly dated using absolute radiocarbon methods). This paper is impressive in its scope, and as one researcher who has long espoused reconstructing procurement systems, this is a terrific example of what you can learn about past lifeways when you take the time to provide a more comprehensive landscape view of a broad area. In the second research report, Stuckey and Morrow extend a research trajectory that was pioneered by Barbara E. Luedtke and J. T. Meyers in 1984, showing us how new technologies can help solve decades-old archaeological problems. In this case, Generic Burlington variety cherts from the Burlington Limestone Formation and High Ridge variety cherts from the Lafayette Formation, e.g., the Crescent Quarry in Missouri, are examined using Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) to see if there are elemental differences that can be detected. These authors provide information on a new sample processing technique in this study, which is the use of Nujol oil and pulverized chert placed onto a salt (KCI) plate. Sloan points, described as hypertrophic (size XXXL) and possibly used as chief's badges or insignia, were widely traded. Rocks were used as a medium of exchange and for this reason, Stuckey and Morrow would like to know more about material source variability. In the third research report, Trubitt and colleagues provide information on one of the largest and one of the smallest quarries in the country (these are Spanish Diggings Quarry Complex in Arkansas, and Starks Quarry in Wyoming, respectively), reminding us among other things that horizontal separation of components may exist for quarry extraction activities and related stone tool reduction or use areas, as with any other site type. Since we are used to heading for the largest site on the landscape, it is sometimes helpful to look at places where activities are easier to separate chronologically, and then return to the areas with more complicated palimpsests. In both locations, examining the surrounding settlements, resource processing areas, and transportation corridors, gives archaeologists a much better idea of how the quarry or quarry complex in question fits into the procurement system: looking downstream where products were delivered to consumers, or looking upstream where headwater catchments were reconnoitered for resources. In this sense then, river and stream drainages are like paths, trails, and other transportation networks connecting people with their destinations. Adrian Burke elaborates on his discussant comments in a concluding essay. Burke emphasizes to quarry researchers how important isolating datable contexts are for our work, and also, that quarries are not just a random set of attacks on rock to get it out of the ground, but the result of ancient peoples' often very sophisticated understanding of bedrock geology and extraction technology. Burke mentions exposure dating, as a possible direction for quarry researchers to take. Edward B. Evenson and colleagues' work dating erratics on glacial moraines near Fremont Lake in Pinedale, Wyoming, although currently used for much older features than are found in North American archaeological contexts, might be an example in this regard (Evenson, personal communication, 2013; Gosse et al. 1995a, 1995b; Zimmerman et al. 1994). Another example is using relative growth curves for lichen on exposed rock (Benedict 1967, 2009:157). Burke urges us not to take quarries for granted, but to patiently tease out the specialized information they contain about chaînes opératoires, in these frequently highly variable archaeological sites.


6

Lastly, I would like to call attention to some companion publications. A short article appeared in the May issue of The SAA Archaeological Record on Prehistoric Quarries and Early Mines Interest Group activities (Dowd 2013a), and a forthcoming themed North American Archaeologist "The George H. Odell Memorial Issue" is in press, with publication slated for December of this year (Dowd 2013b). An interdisciplinary volume that is worth looking out for is a planned special issue of Quaternary International, which will include articles on chemical characterization methods, quarrying, and characterizing stone materials (Dowd n.d.). Both of these forthcoming publications are the result of past SAA symposia, and are potentially of interest to Prehistoric Quarry and Early Mines Interest Group members. References Cited Benedict, James B. 1967 Recent Glacial History of an Alpine Area in the Colorado Front Range, U.S.A. Establishing a Lichen-Growth Curve. Journal of Glaciology 6(48):817-832. 2009 A Review of Lichenometric Dating and Its Applications to Archaeology. Antiquity 74(1):143-172.

I.

American

Dowd, Anne S. 2013a From Source to Center: Raw Material Acquisition and Toolstone Distributions. The SAA Archaeological Record 13(3):14-17. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C. Electronic document http://onlinedigeditions.com/publication/?i=160407, accessed August 8, 2013. Dowd, Anne S., guest editor 2013b The George H. Odell Memorial Issue. North American Archaeologist 34(4), in press. Dowd, Anne S., n.d. Archaeology of Technology: Quaternary International, in prep.

Power, Agency, and Stone Tools.

Gosse, J. C., E. B. Evenson, J. Klein, B. Lawn, and R. Middleton 1995a Precise Cosmogenic 10Be Measurements in Western North America: Support for a Global Younger Dryas Cooling Event. Geology 23:877-880. Gosse, J. C., J. Klein, E. B. Evenson, B. Lawn, and R. Middleton 1995b Beryllium-10 dating of the Duration and Retreat of the Last Pinedale Glacial Sequence. Science 268:1329-1333. Luedtke, Barbara E., and J. T. Meyers 1984 Trace Element Variation in Burlington Chert: A Case Study. In Prehistoric Chert Exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent, edited by Brian M. Butler, and Ernest E. May, pp. 287-298. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper No. 2. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Zimmerman, Susan G., Edward B. Evenson, John C. Gosse, and Charles P. Erskine 1994 Extensive Boulder Erosion Resulting from a Range Fire on the Type-Pinedale Moraines, Fremont Lake, Wyoming. Quaternary Research 42(3):255-265.

Copyright © Dowd 2013, All rights reserved.


7

Linking Quarry and Settlement on the Swabian Alb, Southern Germany Lynn E. Fisher, University of Illinois Springfield [email protected] Susan K. Harris, Centre for Baltic and Scandinavian Archaeology, Schleswig, Germany [email protected] Jehanne Affolter, AR-GEO-LAB, Neuchâtel, Switzerland, and Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMR) 6298 ArteHiS, Dijon, France [email protected] Corina Knipper, University of Mainz, Germany [email protected] Rainer Schreg, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum (RGZM), Mainz, Germany [email protected] Abstract Beginning in the Early Neolithic Period (or LBK) and increasingly in the Middle and Later Neolithic periods (a transition spanning about 5,000-2,300 B.C.) in Europe, considerable energy was invested in quarrying and mining chert and flint for tool production. Acquisition of stone combined local sources with regional transport. Chipped stone was used in everyday activities and for objects that likely played a special role in exchange networks. Linkages between quarries and surrounding landscapes thus can shed light on patterns of travel, work, and trade at local and regional scales. Archaeologists are rarely able to link quarries and settlements in a detailed analysis. This paper reports on a long-term regional project investigating chert acquisition and tool production in quarry and settlement contexts in a chert-rich upland in southern Germany. We combine collections analysis, archaeological and geophysical survey, and targeted test excavations to document stone sources and site locations. We compare assemblages from a large open-pit quarry complex (Asch-Borgerhau) and from settlements at varying distances using a uniform coding system. Systematic, nondestructive petrographic characterization of chert enables us to trace material from the quarry or other sources to settlements. The resulting database offers rich potential for exploring chronological and spatial variation in stone acquisition, tool production, and activities on a Neolithic landscape. Introduction This contribution presents a brief overview of the methods, initial results, and potential of on-going archaeological investigations that place analysis of a Neolithic open-pit quarry landscape in the context of a regional settlement project. Our geographic focus is on the southeastern part of the Swabian Alb limestone plateau on the upper Danube River near the modern city of Ulm, Germany. The Swabian Alb is a karst upland extending across southwestern Germany, reaching elevations up to 1,000 m asl in the west and sloping gently down to the east (Figure 1). Nodular chert is widely available on the plateau in Upper Jurassic limestones and overlying weathering clays (Burkert 1999). Jurassic chert from this region was an important resource throughout the Neolithic as both local and surrounding areas are comparatively poor in stone suitable for tool making (Scharl 2010; Strien 2000). In spite of its regional importance for understanding stone raw material acquisition and circulation during the Neolithic, however, there has been little investigation of Neolithic activities on the Swabian plateau itself. As a result, little is known about which source areas were exploited in Neolithic times, how raw material was extracted, and how extraction sites were integrated into local and regional settlement and economic systems. Project Goals and Methods There is a long history of intensive investigation of Neolithic settlement in lowland areas of southwestern Germany (e.g., Hafner and Schlichtherle 2008; Heide 2001; Lindig 2002; Schlichtherle 1990; Strien 2000), but the Swabian Alb plateau has generally been assumed to play little role in regional settlement until late in the Neolithic (Biel 1974; Rieth 1938). A long-term collaborative project was initiated in 2002 to investigate Neolithic activities


8

on the plateau (Fisher and Knipper 2003; Knipper et al. 2005). The initial aim was to test the hypothesis that stone raw materials and other resources drew early farming communities at least seasonally into this upland region. Impetus for this project came from the work of dedicated avocational archaeologists who had documented many prehistoric sites on the southeastern Swabian Alb between the modern towns of Ulm and Blaubeuren (Bollow 2012; Fisher and Knipper 2003; Knipper et al. 2005; Kreutle 1994; Schreg 2007; Schreg and Knipper 2005). Building on this long history of work by area avocational archaeologists, we combined analysis of private collections with systematic archaeological survey to explore Neolithic settlement and activities in a study area about 12 by 25 km just north of the modern city of Ulm (Fisher and Knipper 2003; Knipper et al. 2005). A second phase of fieldwork, begun in 2006, combined geomagnetic survey, soil coring, and test excavations to locate and investigate buried archaeological deposits. The result is a large regional database including information on over 100 reported Neolithic site locations, detailed analysis of lithic and ceramic inventories from selected localities, and remote sensing and test excavations at three Neolithic sites. These methods were successful in locating both settlement and chert acquisition features (Fisher et al. 2008a, 2008b; Harris et al. 2009; Knipper et al. 2007).

Figure 1. Map Showing the Location of the Project Study Area on the Southeastern Swabian Alb in Context of Major Geological Units of Southwestern Germany. Chert from the Jurassic Limestones of the Swabian Alb was an important source of stone for toolmaking in loess basins to the Northwest and in the Pre-Alpine Lowlands to the South. (Map: C. Knipper based on Landesamt für Geologie, Rohstoffe und Bergbau Baden-Württemberg 1998).


9

Borgerhau Chert Quarry The centerpiece of these investigations to date is the large open-pit quarry landscape of Borgerhau. The site is characterized by over 200 pits and depressions still visible on the modern surface and associated with dense artifact scatters (Fisher et al. 2008a, 2008b). Surface features extend over more than five hectares in a small wooded area surrounded by farmland, and vary from small circular or oval depressions one to a few meters in diameter to large irregular depressions surrounded by heaps of debris (Figure 2). Excavation of six oneby two-meter test trenches demonstrated that surface features in the central area of the site result from pits dug in some cases over two meters deep into chert-bearing sediments, combined with secondary dumping of backdirt and flaking debris. Nodular cherts from the Borgerhau quarry are highly variable in color, grain, and quality, and occur in residual clays resulting from weathering of the underlying limestones. The Borgerhau area lies between the Upper Jurassic Liegende Bankkalk Formation of the middle and western Swabian Alb, which comprises bedded limestones and marls, and the contemporary Massenkalk Formation of the eastern Swabian Alb, which consists of massive limestones with algal-sponge reefs (Geologisches Landesamt Baden-Wüttemberg 1981, 1997). Most common are gray and white cherts, including a fine-grained light to medium gray or blue-toned material with partial concentric banding, and a medium-grained white to light gray variant. Cortex is typically very thin, and many nodules show fine- to medium-grained material in a band near the cortex with a very coarse center (Figure 3).

Figure 2. Distribution of Surface Features, Asch-Borgerhau Quarry Site. Borgerhau Quarry and Nearby Settlements Borgerhau is the first Neolithic quarry site documented on the Swabian Alb. As such it has substantial potential for helping to illuminate patterns of stone raw material exploitation in a regionally important source area. Of particular interest is the location of the quarry site in a settlement landscape that includes documented settlements dating to the Early and Middle Neolithic as well as later periods (Fisher and Knipper 2003; Harris et al. 2009; Knipper et al. 2005; Knipper et al. 2007). Borgerhau is located on the gently rolling karst landscape of the Blaubeuren Alb plateau, which ranges in elevation from 630 to 700 m asl and is characterized by deeply incised river valleys and a lack of running surface water. This portion of the study area contrasts with the higher and more rugged hilly Alb plateau (“Kuppenalb”) to the west, and with the lower-lying and more fertile slopes of the Ulm Alb plateau and Lone valley to the


10

east. On the Blaubeuren Alb plateau, Jurassic chert is abundant in residual clays. Archaeological survey documented many Early Neolithic (LBK) to later Neolithic surface scatters in this area, and geomagnetic survey and test excavations revealed Early and Middle Neolithic settlements within a few kilometers of the Borgerhau quarry. Systematic surveys and literature review have so far documented no Stone Age sites on the rugged hilly Alb in the northwest part of our study area, while both surface lithic scatters and Neolithic sites with subsurface features are relatively numerous in the lower-lying regions to the east. The Blaubeuren Alb plateau thus appears to represent a chert-rich location at the upland margin, an ecotone, of a varied Neolithic settlement landscape that extends to the east into lowerlying and warmer areas with relatively better agricultural soils (Knipper et al. 2005).

Figure 3. Chert Nodules from Residual Loams at Asch-Borgerhau. The location of the Borgerhau quarry within this broader settlement landscape invites consideration of its relationship to settlements both in the immediate vicinity and at varying distances from the quarry. To explore these relationships, and to shed light on Neolithic practices of stone-working and distribution, we focus on three major goals: 1) establishing the chronology of settlement and phases of work at the quarry; 2) characterizing chert from the quarry to determine to what extent this raw material was used on nearby settlements; and, 3) comparing artifact spectra between quarry and settlement to explore how chert from the Borgerhau quarry was used in different periods of the Neolithic. Below, we briefly outline initial results of a pilot study comparing Borgerhau raw material and artifact assemblages with materials from two Neolithic settlements in the immediate vicinity of the quarry (Figure 4).


11

Figure 4. Map Showing Distribution of Documented Neolithic Sites in the Immediate Vicinity of the Borgerhau Quarry Site. (Map based on: Ministerium für Umwelt und Verkehr BadenWürttemberg 2001; ASTER and Landsat Image Courtesy of NASA and METI.) The closest known settlement is the LBK site of Schlaghau, less than 1 km south of Borgerhau (Harris et al. 2009). At Schlaghau, geomagnetic survey identified postholes and pit features of about 19 LBK longhouses. Test trenches yielded LBK ceramics and numerous lithics. About 2.5 km southwest of Borgerhau is the Middle Neolithic settlement of Grund. Like the LBK settlement, this site is characterized by a dense surface lithic scatter as well as subsurface archaeological features documented through geomagnetic survey and excavation of small test trenches (Knipper et al. 2007). Excavations revealed a thick colluvial layer overlying a series of pits containing lithics and ceramics characteristic of the Middle Neolithic Stichbandkeramik (SBK, stroke ornamented) group. Linking Settlement and Quarry: Chronology A major goal of the long-term project is to determine the chronology of Neolithic settlement in the upland study area. Assemblage characteristics from surface sites in the region pointed to occupation dating back to the Early Neolithic LBK Period. On-going studies of settlement chronology on the Alb are based on ceramic analysis and on radiocarbon dates from test excavations at the nearby Schlaghau and Grund sites. Seriation of decorative elements on ceramics from excavated features at Schlaghau place the site in the earlier to middle LBK (Phases 4 and 5 of the Württemberg chronology). At Grund, vessel shapes and decoration are characteristic of the Middle Neolithic SBK ceramic complex. A lack of younger or youngest LBK as well as elements characteristic of early SBK material points to a chronological gap between the LBK settlement at Schlaghau and the Middle Neolithic settlement at Grund (Hans-Christoph Strien, personal communication, 2011). Settlement features at Grund date between approximately 5,000 and 4,700 cal. BC and coincide well with the earliest excavated features at Borgerhau. Nine 14C dates on charcoal confirm the LBK age of the excavated features at Schlaghau. A series of radiocarbon dates on charcoal from pit fill at the Borgerhau quarry range from approximately 5,000 to 2,500 B.C. and indicate at least three periods of chert exploitation from the


12

LBK/Middle Neolithic transition to the Final Neolithic (Figure 5, Fisher et al. n.d.). Although dates from Schlaghau and Borgerhau overlap, the LBK settlement tends to be older than the excavated features at the quarry. Based on currently available evidence, the earliest Neolithic settlement on the Blaubeuren Alb plateau slightly predates the excavated quarry pits at Borgerhau.

Figure 5. Earliest 14C Dates on Charcoal from Borgerhau Quarry Pit Fill (shaded in blue), Showing that the Oldest Quarry Pits so far Documented are Contemporaneous with Middle Neolithic Settlement Features at Grund (shaded in red), but tend to be later than Early Neolithic LBK Features at Schlaghau (green). Erl: samples processed at the AMS Radiocarbon Laboratory in Erlangen; MAMS: samples processed at the Klaus-TschiraLaboratory of Physical Dating of the Curt-Engelhorn-Center for Archaemetry in Mannheim; Hd: samples processed through the University of Heidelberg, Measured at the Zurich Accelerator Facility. Calibrated using Calib 6.0.1. A decade of fieldwork on the Swabian plateau has thus documented a varied Neolithic landscape including chert acquisition and settlement features dating to Early, Middle and Younger Neolithic periods. Initial comparisons of raw materials from Borgerhau and surrounding settlements convinced us that it would be valuable to investigate linkages between the Borgerhau quarry and settlements in this region. Our goal is to characterize Borgerhau chert in such a way that it can be traced from quarry to settlement. Initial questions include the importance of the Borgerhau quarry relative to other local and regional stone sources, the distances over which the material was transported, the ways in which it


13

was used at varying distances from the quarry, and how all of these factors may have changed over the course of the Neolithic. To investigate these questions on the Swabian Alb, we combine intersite comparison of assemblages with petrographic characterization of chert. Intersite Comparisons: Core Technology and Lithic Spectra Analysis of the artifact assemblages from the Borgerhau quarry and the Schlaghau and Grund settlements is on-going (Knipper et al. n.d.; Fisher et al. n.d.). More than 100,000 chert artifacts were recovered from test trenches at Borgerhau. Detailed analysis of selected features and artifact categories is in progress. Unmodified flakes, angular debris, blades, and cores dominate the assemblage, while modified pieces make up less than 1 % of the total and include few formal tools. Splintered pieces and hammerstones are the most common modified artifacts. Artifacts typical of Neolithic settlements, such as laterally or end-retouched pieces, are rare. Like the large flakes and debris typical of the Borgerhau assemblage, cores reflect early stages of a technological sequence that was completed elsewhere. Most common are tested nodules, simple capped nodules (nodules with a large flake removed to serve as a striking platform), and core fragments. Large nodules show massive percussion cones associated with splintering, suggesting they were split into manageable blocks using an anvil technique. Large flakes were removed to shape these large, blocky cores. Overall, the Borgerhau assemblage is dominated by early stages of lithic production, including large flakes, early-stage cores, and nodules and raw material blocks. Low percentages of blades and tools suggest that cores and blanks were transported elsewhere for use and further modification. Taken together, all indications point to a narrow range of activities focused on chert extraction and early-stage processing (see Fisher et al. n.d.). The lithic inventories from the two nearby excavated settlements contrast sharply with Borgerhau. At both settlements, proportions of blades and formal tools, such as borers, scrapers, and lateral- and end-retouched pieces, are much higher and the mean sizes and weights of cores and blanks are much smaller. An assemblage of about 2,750 lithic artifacts including cores, flakes and blades as well as modified tools, was recovered from features and overlying plow zone at the Schlaghau Early Neolithic site. Though an initial expectation had been that this upland LBK site might have played a special role in processing and distributing local stone raw material, chert processing and tool production do not seem to have been the major activity of any household. Instead, the location of the settlement on loess-loam soil and the presence of sickle blades indicate an economic focus on agriculture, despite the relatively high elevation, 670 m asl, and the distance from surface water, which is unusual for LBK sites. Macroscopic identification of chert revealed light gray raw materials similar to chert from the Borgerhau quarry, but also suggested substantial use of other local chert varieties. At the Middle Neolithic Grund Site, on the other hand, not only absolute chronological contemporaneity with Borgerhau, but also the macroscopic characteristics of the chert raw material, suggests that Borgerhau chert was processed at this settlement. Test excavation yielded about 7,300 stone artifacts, mostly from a single large pit complex (detailed analysis pending, Dr. Petra Kieselbach). The artifacts consist almost exclusively of white to light gray, sometimes banded chert closely resembling Borgerhau raw material. This suggests that there may be a close economic linkage between this Middle Neolithic settlement and the nearby quarry, while residents of the Early Neolithic settlement at Schlaghau, on the other hand, made use of diverse local resources. Linking Settlement and Quarry: Petrographic Characterization of Chert To test this working hypothesis and explore linkages between the quarry and surrounding settlements, we use a non-destructive petrographic method developed by one of the co-authors (Affolter 2002). Affolter uses a binocular stereomicroscope with magnifications up to 80 to record information about texture, macro- and microfossils, other inclusions, and sedimentary features, and to draw conclusions about the material’s geological age and the specific sedimentary environment in which it formed, for example, in an intertidal zone,


14

shallow water, or on or near a reef of the Jurassic sea. Using this method, it is often possible to distinguish between nodular cherts from different source locations within the internally varied bedded and massive limestone formations of the Swabian Alb. Archaeological materials can be matched to geological sources identified in the field, as sedimentary facies vary during each geological period from one geographic location to another. Importantly, this method permits comparison of geological and archaeological samples using the same nondestructive technique.

(a) Borgerhau Geological Sample

(b) Sonderbuch Geological Sample

(c) Wittlingen Geological Sample Figure 6. Selected Microphotos of Borgerhau and Other Jurassic Cherts Showing Some of the Contrasts Mentioned in the Text: (a) Borgerhau Geological Sample, (b) Sonderbuch Geological Sample; and, (c) Wittlingen Geological Sample.

In previous work, Affolter has established a large comparative database of raw material from Switzerland, southern Germany, and neighboring areas. This method has been successful in tracing the local and regional distribution of products from several regional quarry sites on surrounding settlements (Affolter 2002; Altorfer and Affolter 2011).


15

In a pilot study carried out in the summer of 2012, we applied this method to a sample of several hundred artifacts from the Borgerhau quarry and comparative samples from Schlaghau LBK and Grund Middle Neolithic materials. Affolter collected and examined geological samples from several other local sources to determine whether or not chert from the Borgerhau quarry could be distinguished from nearby sources. This research builds on extensive prior work identifying and characterizing raw material sources on the Swabian Alb in the context of Paleolithic land use studies (Burkert 1999; Burkert and Floss 2005; Çep et al. 2011; Floss and Kieselbach 2006). Results of the petrographic pilot study were very promising. First, Borgerhau chert has characteristics that distinguish it from several other local and regional varieties of Upper Jurassic chert. For example, an opaque matrix commonly characterizes heterogeneous Borgerhau chert with scattered dark to translucent components that are irregular in shape, with few identifiable fossils (Figure 6a). A contrasting local variant, present but less common at Borgerhau, is a white or light gray to beige chert with a chalcedony-like matrix and numerous elongated components including sponge spicules (Figure 6b). This "Sonderbuch" variety can also be found at a natural chert source at the village of Sonderbuch, about 2 km from Borgerhau. At a regional level, numerous fragments of sponge spicules and mollusks distinguish Upper Jurassic cherts from an important Neolithic raw material source at Wittlingen on the northern edge of the Swabian Alb (Figure 6c, see also Strien 2000:10). These differences point to variations in the local environments in which the cherts formed, whether in shallow, muddy water (the common Borgerhau variant described above), a quiet lagoon (Sonderbuch), or in an intertidal environment (Wittlingen). Further work is needed to identify and describe additional natural raw material sources in the study area. Our goal is to identify characteristics that can help us to differentiate chert outcrops within the Liegende Bankkalk and Massenkalk Formations. Second, comparisons between materials from Borgerhau and the neighboring excavated settlements seem so far to confirm our initial impression that the Early Neolithic and Middle Neolithic settlements differ significantly in their use of Borgerhau chert. The inventory from the Schlaghau LBK settlement includes chert raw material typical of the Borgerhau Quarry Complex, but the high-quality "Sonderbuch" variety appears much more frequently in the settlement assemblage than it does at the quarry. This may indicate either that the LBK residents at Schlaghau selectively chose high-quality variants from the Borgerhau Quarry Complex, likely in the southern part of the quarry, where the "Sonderbuch" variant may naturally outcrop in contact with the more typical Borgerhau material, or alternatively, that they made use of both Borgerhau and Sonderbuch source areas. The Middle Neolithic assemblage at Grund, on the other hand, consists almost exclusively of chert varieties common at Borgerhau, suggesting that the lithic-rich pit features at Grund may indeed provide one glimpse of the further processing of Borgerhau chert after initial steps carried out at the quarry. Conclusions and Directions for On-Going Work A third phase of work is planned. In addition to completing the technological comparison of excavated settlement and quarry assemblages, we will return to the field to locate and sample additional raw material sources in the study area. We plan to expand the petrographic study to characterize additional geological sources and to explore the distribution of Borgerhau chert across the study area in Early, Middle and Younger Neolithic contexts. Future work will also build on a successful pilot study in geochemical characterization of chert from Borgerhau and surrounding sites (Bertsch 2013). The promising results from the pilot study described above suggest that it should be possible to identify chert likely to derive from Borgerhau on settlements at varying distances from the quarry. More particularly, contrasts between the Early and Middle Neolithic settlements examined so far suggest that further investigation of the ways in which Neolithic people used local chert varieties have substantial potential for helping to resolve questions about Neolithic economies in this region. For example, the transition from the Early to the Middle Neolithic in southern Germany seems to have been marked by significant changes in the circulation of stone raw materials (Scharl 2010; Strien 2000). To understand these


16

changes, we need detailed studies of chert acquisition and transport as it is reflected on both quarries and settlements. Dense lithic scatters have been documented at several other locations close to the Borgerhau quarry, including Wippingen, 1.5 km northeast of Borgerhau, and Asch, 2 km north. Based on characteristics of the assemblages, these probably include predominantly Early and Middle Neolithic sites as well as younger Neolithic components. Chert macroscopically similar to Borgerhau chert is found at these locations. Farther afield, other Neolithic settlements have been identified on loess slopes to the east, largely through surface collections. In addition, recent excavations associated with construction of a high-speed rail line substantially enrich evidence of Neolithic settlement on the Swabian Alb (Scheschkewitz and Thoma 2011). Highlights include LBK and Middle Neolithic houses at Ulm-Lehr, a site known from earlier surface collections among which, again, Early and Middle Neolithic materials predominate. Our investigation of chert inventories collected from different areas of this large surface artifact scatter pointed to some spatial separation of Early and Middle Neolithic components, which should offer potential for further analysis of changing use of local raw materials from the Early to the Middle Neolithic. Borgerhau, the first documented Neolithic chert extraction site on the Swabian Alb plateau, is thus situated within a rich Neolithic settlement landscape on the southeastern Swabian Alb. Preliminary results suggest that the non-destructive petrographic method applied here, combined with technological comparisons of quarry and settlement assemblages from different phases of the Neolithic, have strong potential for investigating the processing and distribution of Borgerhau chert at local and regional scales over the course of the Neolithic. Based on the pilot study, we anticipate that these comparisons will also provide a foundation for further studies of the changing uses of Swabian Alb Jurassic cherts over the course of the Neolithic, including their extraction, processing, and local and regional distribution. Acknowledgements The authors thank Dr. Wolfgang Burkert and Dr. Berrin Çep for assistance in locating raw material sources in the field. The National Science Foundation (Award BCS-0316125) supported the research described here. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Additional support came from a Fulbright Foundation Fellowship (Fisher), a Fulbright Alumni Initiatives Award (Fisher and Conard), a NSF Fellowship Award to Harris (#0901893), and private donations. This project owes much to Mr. Helmut Mollenkopf (Treffensbuch) who supported our work for a number of years before his death in 2009. We gratefully acknowledge the support and cooperation of Professor Nicholas J. Conard of the University of Tübingen, Dr. Stefanie Kölbl of the Blaubeuren Museum of Prehistory, Dr. Frieder Klein of the Regierungspräsidium Tübingen, who provided lab and storage facilities, and the many students from the University of Tübingen and the University of Illinois Springfield who contributed to field and laboratory work. References Cited Affolter, J. 2002 Provenance des silex préhistoriques du Jura et des regions limitrophes. Neuchâtel, Service et Musée cantonal d’archéologie. Archéologie neuchâteloise 28. Service et Musée cantonal d'archéologie, Neuchâtel. Altorfer, K., and J. Affolter 2011 Schaffhauser Silex-Vorkommen und Nutzung. Beiträge zur Schaffhauser Archäologie 5. Kantonsarchäologie, Schaffhausen. Bertsch, A. M. 2013 Untersuchungen zur Trennung von Jurahornsteinen verschiedener Fundorte – archäologisch und chemisch. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, submitted to MathematischNaturwissenschaftliche Fakultät, University of Tübingen.


17

Biel, J. 1974 Zur neolithischen Besiedlung der Schwäbischen Alb. Württemberg 1:53–64.

Fundberichte aus Baden-

Bollow, R. 2012 Ausdehnungen einer zunächst kleinen Fundstelle. Electronic document http://lesefunde.blogspot.de/2012/10/432-ausdehnungen-einer-zunachst-kleinen.html, accessed October 24, 2012. Burkert, W. 1999 Lithische Rohmaterialversorgung im Jungpaläolithikum des südöstlichen BadenWürttemberg. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, submitted to Geowissenschaftlichen Fakultät, University of Tübingen. Burkert, W., and H. Floss 2005 Lithic Exploitation Areas in the Upper Paleolithic of West and Southwest Germany – A Comparative Study. In Stone Age – Mining Age, edited by G. Körlin, and G. Weisgerber, pp. 35–49. Proceedings of the VIIIth International Flint Symposium Bochum 1999. Der Anschnitt, Beiheft 19, Bochum. Çep, B., W. Burkert, and H. Floss 2011 Zur mittelpaläolithischen Rohmaterialversorgung im Bockstein (Schwäbische Alb). Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte 20:33–46. Fisher, L. E., and C. Knipper 2003 Zur Untersuchung steinzeitlicher Landschaften: Die Besiedlung und Nutzung der Blaubeurer und Ulmer Alb im Paläolithikum, Mesolithikum und Neolithikum. Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte 12:113–139. Fisher, L. E., C. Knipper, S. K. Harris, and R. Schreg 2008a Jungsteinzeitliche Hornsteingewinnung in Blaubeuren-Asch „Borgerhau” im Kontext der neolithischen Siedlungslandschaft auf der Blaubeurer Alb, Alb-Donau-Kreis. Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden-Württemberg 2007:36–41. Fisher, L. E., S. K. Harris, C. Knipper, and R. Schreg 2008b Neolithic Chert Exploitation on the Swabian Alb (Germany): 2007 Excavations at Asch-'Borgerhau.' The Quarry 2:11–17. Fisher, L. E., S. K. Harris, C. Knipper, and R. Schreg n.d. Neolithic Chert Extraction and Processing on the Southeastern Swabian Alb (AschBorgerhau). In Prehistoric Flint Mines in Europe, edited by J. Lech, and A. Saville. UISPP Commission on Flint Mining in Pre- and Protohistoric Times, and Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, in press. Floss, H., and P. Kieselbach 2006 The Danube Corridor after 29,000 BP – New Results on Raw Material Procurement Patterns in the Gravettian of Southwestern Germany. Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte 13:61–78. Geologisches Landesamt Baden-Württemberg, editor 1981 Blatt 7524 Blaubeuren. Geologische Karte von Baden-Württemberg [1:25,000]. 1997 Blatt 7525 Ulm-Nordwest. Geologische Karte von Baden-Württemberg [1:25,000], 2nd edition. Hafner, A., and H. Schlichtherle 2008 Neolithic and Bronze Age Lakeside Settlements in the Alpine Region. Threatened Archaeological Heritage Under Water and Possible Protection Measures – Examples from Switzerland and Southern Germany. ICOMOS International Heritage at Risk Report 2006-07, pp.175–180.


18

Harris, S. K., L. E. Fisher, C. Knipper, and R. Schreg 2009 Fortsetzung der Untersuchungen zur neolithischen Besiedlung und Hornsteinnutzung auf der BlaubeurerAlb, Alb-Donau-Kreis. Archäologische Ausgrabungen in BadenWürttemberg 2008:34–37. Heide, B 2001 Das ältere Neolithikum im westlichen Kraichgau. Internationale Archäologie 53. Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden, Westfalen. Knipper, C., S. K. Harris, L. E. Fisher, R. Schreg, J. Giesler, and E. Nocerino 2005 The Neolithic Settlement Landscape of the Southeastern Swabian Alb (Germany). Electronic document, http://www.jungsteinsite.de/, accessed August 8, 2013. Knipper, C., L. E. Fisher, S. K. Harris, and R. Schreg 2007 Sondagegrabungen zur neolithischen Hornsteinnutzung in Blaubeuren-Sonderbuch. Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden-Württemberg 2006:33–37. n.d. Die linearbandkeramische Siedlung von Sonderbuch „Schlaghau“ auf der Blaubeurer Alb, in prep. Kreutle, R. 1994 Berghülen – Asch – Sonderbuch. Zur Entstehung einer archäologischen Fundlandschaft auf der Blaubeurer Alb. Blaubeurer Geographische Hefte 2. Denkhaus, Blaubeuren. Landesamt für Geologie, Rohstoffe und Bergbau Baden-Württemberg, editor 1998 Geologishe Schulkarte von Baden-Württemberg [1:1,000,000], 12th edition. Lindig, S. 2002 Das Früh- und Mittelneolithikum im Neckarmündungsgebiet. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 65. Habelt, Bonn. Ministerium für Umwelt und Verkehr Baden-Württemberg, editor 2001 Wasser- und Bodenatlas Baden-Württemberg [1:200,000, 1:350,000], 1st edition. Rieth, A. 1938 Vorgeschichte der Schwäbischen Alb. Mannus-Bücherei 61. Curt Kabitzsch, Leipzig. Scharl, S. 2010 Versorgungsstrategien und Tauschnetzwerke im Alt- und Mittelneolithikum - Die Silexversorgung im westlichen Franken. Marie Leidorf, Rahden and Westf. Scheschkewitz, J., and M. Thoma 2011 Eine Trasse quer über die Schwäbische Alb. Beginn der Grabungen an der ICENeubaustrecke Wendlingen-Ulm und der A-8-Ausbaustrecke Hohenstadt-Ulm (West). Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden-Württemberg 2010:28-33. Schlichtherle, H. 1990 Aspekte der siedlungsarchäologischen Erforschung von Neolithikum und Bronzezeit im südwestdeutschen Alpenvorland. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 71:208– 244. Schreg, R. 2007 Albert Kley – der Archäologe. In Viele Wege und ein Ziel: Albert Kley zum 100. Geburtstage, edited by G. Currle, and H. Gruber, pp. 84–124. Geislingen. Schreg, R., and C. Knipper 2005 Nachlass aus Jahrtausenden. Die Aufarbeitung der archäologischen Sammlung von Albert Kley. Hohenstaufen & Helfenstein 15:199–204.


19

Strien, H.-C. 2000 Untersuchungen zur Bandkeramik in Württemberg. Prähistorischen Archäologie 69. Habelt, Rahden and Westf.

Universitätsstudien zur

Sourcing Burlington Formation Chert: Implications for Long Distance Procurement and Exchange Sarah D. Stuckey, Arkansas State University [email protected] Juliet E. Morrow, Arkansas Archeological Survey [email protected] Abstract Lithic material is ubiquitous in the archaeological record and it is often the only material recovered from archaeological sites dating to over 2,500 years ago in the midcontinent. The sources from which lithic materials were procured are an important key to addressing many questions, including those related to ancient mobility and exchange patterns. This paper outlines the methods that will be applied to sourcing Burlington chert from a wide range of locations in order to characterize the intersource and intrasource variability of the chert. Introduction This is a revised version of a paper presented in the symposium titled “Quarries and Early Mines: Settlement Context and Transportation Network Relationships” sponsored by the Prehistoric Quarries and Early Mines Interest Group for the 78th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology (SAA), Honolulu, Hawai'i, April 5, 2013. At the SAA meeting, we presented some preliminary results from a pilot study that explores the potential for sourcing Burlington type chert to the specific locations from which it was quarried. We began by assuming that there is potential variation in the chemical constituents of Burlington chert from widely scattered geographic areas. Burlington chert is highly variable in many attributes, including color, translucency, luster, knappability (knapping quality), mottling and fossil inclusions, to name a few. It is generally considered to be one of the higher-quality lithic raw materials in the Central Mississippi River Valley, an area we define as from the American Bottom and Greater St. Louis area to the confluence of the Arkansas and Mississippi rivers. The Central Mississippi Valley includes portions of the states of Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi. Background and History Previous studies of Burlington-type chert include David Ives (1975, 1984) study of the Crescent Hills quarrying area and Barbara Luedtke’s Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA) of 101 samples of Burlington chert reported in Meyers (1970) from a localized outcrop in the Lower Illinois River Valley, about 65 km northwest of St. Louis. Luedtke and Meyers' (1984:297) results implied that Burlington chert “…from varying outcrop areas should be rather easily distinguished…” and that this would facilitate studies of Native American procurement patterns. Luedtke and Meyers (1984) added that much more work on the geochemistry of cherts was needed in order to understand the underlying causes of the variation. Burlington-Keokuk Formation Burlington chert occurs in the Burlington-Keokuk Formation of the Mississippian System. The difficulty in distinguishing Burlington chert from Keokuk chert (which derives from the Keokuk Section) has led most researchers to refer to chert from both the Burlington and Keokuk sections as Burlington-type chert (Ray 2007:192). Jack Ray (2007:193) recognizes five varieties of Burlington chert: 1) Generic, 2) Keokok, 3) High Ridge, 4)


20

Mozarkite; and, 5) Graydon. Only the Generic and High Ridge varieties of Burlington chert as classified by Ray are considered in this study.

Figure 1. Map of Burlington and Lafayette Formations, Numbered, Red Dots indicate Sample Locations, the Corresponding Key is below in Table 1.

Generic variety Generic Burlington chert is highly variable, but it is generally fossiliferous, medium to fine-grained in texture, and exhibits a dull luster. Fracture planes, fossil voids, and quartzlined vugs are common. Generic Burlington chert occurs along the western and northern Ozarks (Ray 2007), in west-central Illinois (Meyers 1970), and in southeast Iowa (T. Morrow 1994).


21

In 1998 Walthall and Koldehoff reported that much of the chert from the Crescent Quarries is Generic, but that some patterns and color shades are unique to the Crescent source. One particular pattern they refer to as “wood grain”, and another as “High Ridge.” Koldehoff’s visual examination of the Sloan Dalton assemblage led him to conclude that the points were made of “wood-grain” and “High Ridge” Crescent chert (Walthall and Koldehoff 1998:263). Table 1. Corresponding Key to Figure 1 with Name, Number of Samples Taken, County and State, and Code Prefix for each Sample Location.

Key

Location Name

Total # of samples taken

1

Three Sisters Subdivision

4

St. Louis, MO

23SL-

2

High Ridge Wal-Mart

3

Jefferson, MO

23JE-

3

Near Van Meter Quarry

2

Saline, MO

23SA-

4

Hominy Creek Quarry

3

Polk, MO

23PO-

5

Golden Grove Quarry

4

Bates, MO

23BA-

6

Spring Honey Quarry

2

Lawrence, MO

23LA-

7

Scatter Creek W.M.A.

3

Green, AR

SCWMA-

8

Hedges Quarry

4

Craighead, AR

3CG-

9

Crowley’s Ridge Nature Center

3

Craighead, AR

CRNC-

County, State

Code prefix

High Ridge variety High Ridge Burlington chert can be very colorful, exhibiting a dull to medium luster and often occurring in large masses and nodules. It comes from the Crescent Quarry area of St. Louis and Jefferson counties, Missouri. High Ridge Burlington chert from the Crescent Quarry area was so highly sought after that it was mined prehistorically (see Holmes 1919). Parish (2009) describes the Crescent Quarry area as a series of narrow ridgelines covered with prehistoric quarry pits or trenches and debitage extending over 11 km to the southeast (Holmes 1919). The chert exploited at the site occurs in lenses and irregular beds within the Burlington-Keokuk Formation limestones. Along the ridgeline weathering has exposed the uppermost portions of the chert stratum. Prehistoric mining activity was concentrated the base of the slope where higher-grade materials could be extracted (Meyers 1970). In some places, large nodules of Burlington chert can be pried from the soil matrix or the underlying limestone formation. Jack Ray (2007:195) describes High Ridge Burlington chert from the Crescent Quarry area as generally less fossiliferous than Generic Burlington chert.


22

The Crescent Quarry area is situated approximately 482 km (300 miles) from the Sloan Dalton Site (3GE94) cemetery in Arkansas (Morse 1997). The nearest bedrock sources of Burlington chert to the Sloan Dalton Site are in St. Genevieve County, Missouri, located 220 km to the northeast, and Boone County, Arkansas, located 220 km to the west (J. Morrow 2010). Highly refined, hypertrophic bifaces known as Sloan points dating to ca., 12,000 B.P. and found throughout the Mississippi Valley from Arkansas to Illinois were made of white Burlington chert thought to be from Crescent Quarry (Walthall and Koldehoff 1998). Layfayette Formation The Tertiary-age Lafayette Formation (Berry 1911, McCutcheon and Dunnell 1998, Potter 1955) contains redeposited cobbles of Burlington chert as well as cherts from other formations and was locally available to Dalton and later cultures (see Ray 2007:205). Cobbles of Burlington chert macroscopically similar to the high quality Burlington chert that occurs in the Crescent Quarry area were potentially procured from the Lafayette Formation on Crowley’s Ridge (Ray 2007:206). Ray (2007:205) describes Burlington chert from the area around Springfield, Missouri, that occurs in thick beds and as large nodules as “…high-quality Burlington chert equal to that in the Crescent Quarry area.” This area of southwest Missouri is no farther from the Sloan site than southwest St. Louis County, Missouri, where the High Ridge variety of Burlington type chert occurs. From this area, Dalton groups would have travelled the James and White rivers rather than the Mississippi River (Ray 2007:205).

(a) Visual Comparison 1

(b) Visual Comparison 2

(c) Visual Comparison 3

(d) Visual Comparison 4

Figure 2. These Photographs show the Visual Similarities between Cherts from the Burlington and Lafayette Formations: (a) Visual Comparison 1, (b) Visual Comparison 2, (c) Visual Comparison 3; and, (d) Visual Comparison 4. Problem Statement Much ado has been made about Burlington chert being found hundreds of kilometers from its source area, especially one variety of chert from the Burlington Formation known as


23

Crescent chert (Crescent Quarry or High Ridge variety chert) that derives from an area 40 km southwest of St. Louis, Missouri (Ives 1975, 1984). A number of Clovis tools, ca., 13,000 B.P., from the Martens Site (23SL222) in St. Louis have been identified as Crescent Quarry chert (Ahler 1999). Stuart Streuver (1973) believed he could identify Middle Woodland sites in the Illinois River Valley by the mere presence of a heat-treated variety of Burlington chert from the greater St. Louis area (or Crescent Quarry). Dan and Phyllis Morse (1980:2) identify Crescent Quarry chert, mined from the greater St. Louis area, as the northernmost recognizable chert used in Northeast Arkansas. Nearly 90% of the recovered elements of the early Mississippi Period microlithic industry at the Zebree site in Mississippi County Arkansas were identified as being manufactured from Crescent Quarry chert (Morse and Morse 1980). Problem Orientation The question of whether or not Burlington type chert can be traced to specific outcrops or regions must be addressed using more than macroscopic methods. Now that we know that there are nodules of high quality Burlington chert in the Lafayette Formation (one source of which is Crowley’s Ridge in northeast Arkansas and southeast Missouri) and from outcrops and native quarries in southwest Missouri that look similar to high quality Burlington chert from the Crescent Quarry area southwest of St. Louis, we can test for interquarry and intraquarry chemical variation. While a nondestructive method would allow for the testing of actual artifacts, we hope to first determine whether or not there are any elemental differences among varieties of Burlington chert, i.e., from the Crescent Quarry and other areas in greater St. Louis; Burlington chert cobbles from the Lafayette Formation in northeast Arkansas and southeast Missouri, and Burlington chert from other areas of Missouri to the west and north. Methods There are a number of geochemical techniques that have been applied to sourcing chert, including Neutron Activation Analysis, (NAA), X-Ray Florescence (XRF), and Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) analysis (see Andrefsky 2005; Church 1994; Luedtke 1992; Odell 2003 for individual studies). These techniques quantify the elemental composition within a particular chert sample or artifact. These techniques focus on detection of trace elements and Rare Earth Elements (REE), which require a highly sensitive detection capability (Parish 2009). Another geochemical technique known as Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) is also being used to source chert (Pollard et al. 2007:80). This technique uses a beam of infrared light, which passes through the sample, and collects the amount of light that is transmitted. Based on the composition of the molecular bonds found within a piece of chert, peaks will appear at specific wavelengths. Both destructive and nondestructive versions of FTIR are available. Because it is unknown whether or not there is variation between outcrops, direct testing on artifacts is not necessary at this time and so a non-destructive method was not pursued for this study. FTIR was selected as the technique for this study. To quantify the variability in Burlington chert, twenty-eight samples were collected from nine locations in Missouri and Arkansas. The location and number of samples taken from each location are in Table 1. The locations are shown in Figure 1. Jack Ray collected samples from most of the areas outside of St. Louis in Missouri. Larry Kinsella and the second author collected samples from St. Louis and Jefferson counties in Missouri. Jeff Gatewood and the authors collected the samples from Crowley's Ridge. Each sample was given a coded label, a three-part code similar to the Smithsonian Trinomial system used for assigning numbers to archaeological sites. The first number, “3” is for Arkansas, the second part of the code is a set of two letters that represent the abbreviated county from which the sample was taken, the last part of the code is a numerical value, which is given to identify the number of the sample taken from a given location in sequence. Two of the three locations in Arkansas were not actual prehistoric quarry areas, and were given a two-part label. The first part being a series of letters that correspond to the first letters of the area’s name and the second part is the number of the sample taken from a specific location. The samples collected were larger than necessary for testing. Each sample was radially fractured using a quartzite hammerstone, a limestone hammerstone, and a moose antler baton in order to obtain a smaller portion of the larger sample. The smaller portion was labelled and placed aside for further examination. The larger portions were labelled,


24

corresponding to the portion taken, and are curated at the Jonesboro Station of the Arkansas Archaeological Survey. All specimens have been preserved except for 23PO-1. There was only enough of the sample to use for this experiment, so there was none available for archiving. Radial fracturing was then used on the smaller samples to remove the remaining cortex. A cordless Dremel tool, with an 84922-silica carbide grinding stone, was then used to remove any remaining cortex and weathering. Each sample was then placed in an ultrasonic cleaner to remove any impurities remaining on the sample. The instrument was set to 40°C at 60 sonics a minute and allowed to run for five minutes. The samples were then removed and rinsed with distilled water, and then acetone, and placed on a lint-free Kimwipe to dry for several days. Once clean and dry, the samples were crushed to microscopic particles using the STLX Pulverizer by TM Engineering Ltd. for 100 seconds and placed in a plastic vial, each labelled with the appropriate code, and stored for later use. Of the twenty-eight samples, four samples from each of the Burlington Formation and Lafayette Formation were found to be macroscopically similar. Table 2 lists the sample codes of these “look-a-likes” or visual comparisons and Figure 2 is a photograph of the visual comparisons. The results of these eight samples are the focus of this report. Table 2. Visual Comparisons and their Corresponding Sample Codes. Burlington Formation (Missouri)

Crowley’s Ridge (Arkansas)

Visual Comparison 1

23SL-1

3CG-1

Visual Comparison 2

23JE-3

3CG-4

Visual Comparison 3

23PO-2

3CG-2

Visual Comparison 4

23SL-2

CRNC-3

A small amount of ground chert was measured and mulled with Nujol (mineral oil) and placed onto a salt (KCl) plate. Testing chert sample to Nujol ratios, revealed that only 55 mg of chert and one drop of Nujol gives an optimal spectrum for analysis. Based on this, a scale accurate to four decimal places was used to weigh out between 0.0550-0.0552 g of the eight samples. Then the samples were placed in a small mortar and one drop of Nujol was added. Using the pestle, the components were mixed until the chert was completely saturated. Then the sample was collected with a metal scoopula and placed on an International Crystal Laboratories Real Crystal IR Card with a KCl salt plate. A cover slip was then placed over the sample and slight pressure was added to spread the mull evenly under the cover slip. Thermo Scientific analyzed each sample using FTIR with the Nicolet iS10. Results Nujol has absorbance peaks in three regions: 1) 1,370-1,380 cm-1, 2) 1,440-1,470 -1 cm ; and, 3) 2,800-3,000 cm-1. To account for this, the background spectrum was taken with a KCl card containing one drop of Nujol. These regions gave inaccurate peaks and will be ignored. The instrument ran 32 scans with a resolution of 1 cm-1, collecting 7,467 measurements spanning from 400 cm-1 to 4,000 cm-1. All samples showed similarities from 1,500 cm-1 to 4,000 cm-1 as seen in Figure 3. These regions were therefore ignored during analysis. Figures 1a through 1d show the spectral representation of each of the visual comparisons. Of the four macroscopically similar sets, three showed distinct elemental differences between the chert from the Burlington Formation and the chert from the Lafayette Formation. Visual Comparisons 1, 2, and 3 showed in two wave number ranges, 400-550 cm-1 and 9001,350 cm-1. Visual Comparisons 1 and 2 showed differences in the 1,380-1,440 cm-1 range.


25

And, Visual Comparison 1 showed differences in the 775-850 cm-1 range. The fourth visual comparison did not show any differences and was interpreted as an exact match. These data show that no correlation exists between visual characteristics and geological location. The chert found at archaeological sites here in Arkansas may be from the Burlington Formation or may be from the Lafayette Formation. Continued testing of additional outcrops and prehistoric quarry areas within the Burlington Formation is necessary to quantify other potential elemental distinctions.

Figure 3. Region of Spectral Output Ignored due to Similarities. Future research is planned to determine to what element or mineral the peaks correspond. The other twenty samples are being analyzed to identify any distinctions within and between quarries. Continuation of this study will add to the geological knowledge base of the Burlington and Lafayette Formations, as well as aiding the interpretations of Native American mobility and exchange patterns and accurate identification of stone tools and debitage found at prehistoric sites.

(a) Visual Comparison 1


26

(b) Visual Comparison 2

(c) Visual Comparison 3

(d) Visual Comparison 4 Figure 4. Photographs of Macroscopically Similar Chert Samples: (a) Visual Comparison 1, (b) Visual Comparison 2, (c) Visual Comparison 3; and, ( d) Visual Comparison 4.


27

If Crescent Quarry chert is found to be similar to Burlington chert from other locations, such as the Lafayette Formation, then statements claiming to identify Native American stone tools as having been made of Crescent Quarry chert cannot be validated using this method, but may be validated using another sourcing method. Sourcing Burlington chert is a prerequisite for studies involving settlement context and transportation network relationships in the Central Mississippi Valley and adjacent regions, and this pilot study is a small step toward that goal. Acknowledgments For support and assistance with various aspects of this project we thank the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Dr. Ross Carroll of the Department of Chemistry and Physics at Arkansas State University, the Engineering Department at Arkansas State University, Jack Ray at the Center for the Archaeological Research, and archeologist and prehistoric technologist Larry Kinsella of Fairview Heights, Illinois. None of them should be held responsible for any errors or omissions herein. References Cited Ahler, Stanley A. 1999 Use-Wear and Functional Analysis of Selected Artifacts from the Martens Site (23SL222), St. Louis County, Missouri. Manuscript on file, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Jonesboro, Arkansas. Andrefsky, William, Jr. 2005 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Lithic Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Berry, Edward W. 1911 The Age and Type of Exposures of the Lafayette Formation. The Journal of Geology 19(3):249-256. Church, Tim 1994 Lithic Resource Studies: A Sourcebook for Archaeologists. Lithic Technology Special Publication 3, Department of Anthropology, University of Tulsa. Holmes, William Henry 1919 Handbook of Aboriginal American Antiquities, Part 1, Introductory, The Lithic Industries. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 60. Ives, David J. 1975 The Crescent Hills Prehistoric Quarrying Area. Missouri, Columbia.

Museum Brief #22. University of

1984 The Crescent Hill Prehistoric Quarrying Area: More than Just Rocks. Prehistoric Chert Exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent, edited by Brian M. Butler, and Ernest E. May, pp. 187-195. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper No. 2. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Luedtke, Barbara E. 1992 An Archaeologist’s Guide to Chert and Flint. Archaeological Research Tools 7. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Luedtke, Barbara E., and J. T. Meyers 1984 Trace Element Variation in Burlington Chert: A Case Study. In Prehistoric Chert Exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent, edited by Brian M. Butler and Ernest E. May, pp. 287-298. Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper No. 2. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. McCutcheon, Patrick T., and Robert C. Dunnell


28

1998 Variability in Crowley’s Ridge Gravel. In Contributions to the Archaeology of the Central Mississippi River Valley, edited by Michael J. O’Brien, and Robert C. Dunnell, pp. 387-280. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Meyers, J. T. 1970 Chert Resources of the Lower Illinois Valley. Investigations, 18.

Illinois State Museum Reports of

Morrow, Juliet E. 2010 The Sloan Dalton Site (3GE94) Assemblage Revisited: Chipped-Stone Raw Material Procurement and Use in the Cache Basin. Missouri Archaeologist 71:5-40. Morrow, Toby A. 1994 A Key to the Identification of Chipped-Stone Raw Materials found on Archaeological Sites in Iowa. Journal of the Iowa Archaeological Society 41:108-129. Morse, Dan F. 1997 Sloan: A Paleoindian Dalton Cemetery in Northeast Arkansas. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Morse, Dan F., and Phyllis A. Morse 1980 Excavation, Data Interpretation, and Report On the Zebree Homestead Site, Mississippi County, Arkansas. Submitted to the Memphis District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Contract No. DACW-66-76-C-0006. Copies available from USACOE. Odell, George H. 2003 Lithic Analysis. Springer, New York. Parish, Ryan 2009 A Chert Sourcing Study using Visable\Near-Infared Reflectance Spectroscopy at the Dover Quarry Sites, Tennessee. Unpublished Master's thesis, Murray State University Department of Geosciences, Kentucky. Pollard, Mark, Catherine Batt, Ben Stern, and Suzanne M. Young 2007 Analytical Chemistry in Archaeology. Manuals in Archaeology, Cambridge. Potter, Paul E. 1955 The Petrology and Origin of the Lafayette Gravel Part 2. Geomorphic History. The Journal of Geology 63(2):115-132. Ray, Jack H. 2007 Ozarks Chipped-Stone Resources: A Guide to the Identification, Distribution, and Prehistoric Use of Cherts and Other Siliceous Raw Materials. Missouri Archaeological Society Special Publications, No. 8. Missouri Archaeological Society. Streuver, Stuart 1973 Chert Utilization in Lower Illinois Valley Prehistory. In Variations in Prehistory, edited by D. W. Lathrap and J. Douglas, pp. 61-73. Illinois Archaeological Survey, Urbana. Walthall, John A., and Brad Koldehoff 1998 Hunter-Gatherer Interaction and Alliance Formation: Dalton and the Cult of the Long Blade. Plains Anthropologist 43(165):257-273.


29

Multiscalar Analysis of Quarries Mary Beth D. Trubitt, Arkansas Archeological Survey [email protected], Anne S. Dowd, ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC [email protected], Meeks Etchieson, U.S.D.A. Forest Service [email protected], Abstract Quarries come in all sizes, as did the groups who used them. In this paper, we evaluate two case studies: the Spanish Diggings Novaculite quarry complex in Arkansas and the Starks Pleistocene cobble quarry in Wyoming. Large and small quarries provide interesting contrasts in extraction scales, raw material uses, seasonality, work group sizes, and site distributions, as well as transport distances and directions. Both examples were predominantly used during the Middle Archaic periods in their respective regions (ca. 8,0006,250 B.P. in Arkansas and 5,500-2,500 B.P. in Wyoming). Multiscalar analyses of the settlement context of these quarries show variation in resource extraction intensity and differing regional or local material distributions. These case studies provide an intriguing perspective on how group sizes and settlement scales shed light on prehistoric stone quarrying technology, and may ultimately inform us on emerging inequalities or their absence among hunter-fisher-gatherer societies. Introduction This paper examines the internal structure, settlement context, and transportation network of quarries and early mines. To date, there has been considerable research on quarries and their relationships with workshop or production areas. Dowd (1998a, 1998b, 1998c) has shown how we can trace toolstone from quarry to workshop to campsite to reconstruct lithic procurement and production systems, and investigate emerging social complexity among Archaic hunter-fisher-gatherers. Associated linear features like trails, roads, or waterways provide evidence for direction of transport or relationships with habitation or production sites.

Figure 1. Locations of Starks Quarry in Wyoming and Spanish Diggings in Arkansas (base map: Color Coterminous United States Shaded Relief – 200-meter Resolution, December 2005, National Atlas of the United States, http://nationalatlas.gov).


30

To discuss resource extraction intensity and direction of transport, looking at quarries of differing sizes has value for understanding variable work group sizes and technology organization. In this paper, the authors look carefully at two locations: an expansive quarry complex in Arkansas, and a small quarry in Wyoming with reduction and processing areas close by (Figure 1). In the first example, groups in a large region encompassing a drainage system of up to six stream orders used Spanish Diggings. In the second, Starks Quarry was used in a relatively circumscribed area near first and second order streams. The large quarry was presumably accessible year round; while the small one could only be accessed when snow was off the ground in its upland locale. Groups using the quarries could have varied in size from as few as 5 to as many as 50 people or more. Transportation may not have been as an important consideration for the smaller quarry, whereas for the larger example, the quarry itself may have been a key node in an interregional network of trails, drainages, habitations, tool producing locales, processing zones, and trading areas. Spanish Diggings Quarry, Arkansas Arkansas Novaculite chert is a fine-grained siliceous rock that outcrops in the Ouachita Mountains of west-central Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma. It was quarried by Indians for toolstone for thousands of years, and is still mined commercially today for whetstones. Geologically, the Arkansas Novaculite Formation in the Novaculite Uplift of the Ouachita Mountains is a Devonian to Mississippian age deposit (Haley 1993). It is thought to have formed through precipitation of silica from volcanic sediments in a marine setting, followed by metamorphosis during mountain building (Holbrook and Stone 1979; Keller et al. 1985; Scarr 2008; Steuart et al. 1982). Novaculite-type chert is a distinctive toolstone that occurs in bedrock form in a range of colors and textures, but is typically translucent on thin edges (Figures 2, 3).

Figure 2. Arkansas Novaculite chert samples from Spanish Diggings Quarry Complex (photography by T. Stumpf, Copyright © 2012 Arkansas Archeological Survey, all rights reserved). Chert was quarried from bedrock outcrops on mountain ridges in the Novaculite Uplift. Over 120 Novaculite-type chert quarries have been recorded as archaeological sites in Arkansas (Trubitt et al. 2004). An extensive complex of aboriginal quarry features and workshop debris extends for nearly 5 km of ridgeline at Spanish Diggings (3GA48/3HS158/3HS433). The site covers about 960,000 m sq. (Baker 1974; Etchieson 1997; Etchieson and Trubitt 2012; Holmes 1919; Jenney 1891). The name comes from the mistaken 19th century notion that the quarry pits originated from 16 th century Spanish mining, and there are other “Spanish Diggings” sites in Wyoming and Oklahoma that share this erroneous name. Limited test excavations by Charles Michael Baker (1974, 1982) in the 1970s uncovered dense Novaculite chipping debris as well as hammerstone fragments and a few chipped stone tools. The few diagnostic dart points indicate the main use of the quarries during the Middle to Late Archaic Periods, ca. 6,500-3,000 B.P., extending into the Woodland Period, ca. 4,000-1,300 B.P.


31

Figure 3. Boulder outcrop at Spanish Diggings Quarry Complex (photography by M. Etchieson, Copyright © 2008 Meeks Etchieson, all rights reserved). Recent research by Meeks Etchieson (1997; Etchieson and Trubitt 2013) has produced detailed topographic mapping of five major groups of quarry features on the eastern end of Spanish Diggings (Figure 4). Quarry features identified include primary pits, secondary pits, bedrock outcrops with evidence of quarry activity, surface stripping, and debris fields (Figure 5). At Spanish Diggings, the Novaculite chert-bearing strata have a vertical dip (Griswold 1892), and aboriginal miners worked outcrops of high quality material along the southern edge of the ridge crest. The result is the accumulation of two to six meters of quarry debris over a wide area and three large adjacent depressions covering up to 900 m sq. each (each with a volume of approximately 3,200 cubic meters). A debris field of 3.2 hectares encompasses the largest set of features. Three additional quarry debris fields occur further to the west (including the area mapped by W. H. Holmes (1919; Jenney 1891)). Smaller oval quarry pits (5-15 m long x 10-12 m wide x 0.5-1.0 m deep with quarry debris


32

inside and on the downslope side) are located along both sides of the ridge crest, but are more numerous along the south edge.

Figure 4. Topographic map of a portion of Spanish Diggings showing quarry pits (cartography by M. Etchieson, Copyright © 2012 Meeks Etchieson, all rights reserved). At the time of his late 19th century visit to Spanish Diggings, Jenney (1891:316) estimated that some 100,000 cubic yards (76,455 cubic meters) of Novaculite had been quarried and carried away from the ridge. If the quarries were used over a 3,500 year period, this would be the equivalent of 22 cubic meters of Novaculite removed per year; if used over a 5,000 year period, this would be the equivalent of 15 cubic meters removed per year, or roughly 2 tandem axle dump truck loads per year. Even using rough estimates, the volume of rock quarried from Spanish Diggings suggests large groups of people obtaining toolstone, either directly or through trade. Spanish Diggings was quarried extensively not only because of the quality of the Novaculite cherts available for toolstone, but also because the ridge spans the divide between the Saline River and the Ouachita River drainages (Baker 1974; Dowd 2013:15-16; Etchieson and Trubitt 2013). From the ridge-top Novaculite quarry, Indians could transport quarried stone down first, second, and third order streams to the Ouachita River (sixth order) to the southwest, or to the east via first, second, and third order streams to the Saline River (fourthfifth order stream). The Spanish Diggings Quarry Complex lies about 8 to 10 km from the Ouachita and Saline rivers. Following Anne Dowd (1998a), we can trace Novaculite from quarry to workshop to campsite to reconstruct lithic procurement and production systems, and investigate social inequalities among Archaic hunter-fisher-gatherers. No campsites have been identified at the Spanish Diggings Quarry Complex, but there are several sites (3HS432, 591-594) with Novaculite workshop debris (biface fragments and chipping debris) along the first, second, and third order streams at the base of the mountain ridge below Spanish Diggings. At least one is known to have Early, Middle, and Late Archaic Period (ca. 9,000-3,000 B.P.) use indicating some contemporaneity with the quarrying activity at Spanish Diggings. We may expect prehistoric trails from the mountain ridge to the stream valleys below, although none have been documented here yet. Portions of trails to or from ridge-top Novaculite quarries have been identified on several mountains in the Ouachita National Forest further west, and documenting quarry features and workshop debris at their endpoints can strengthen their interpretation as routes of Novaculite transport (versus animal trails or modern alterations). Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping


33

and modeling may assist in identifying potential trail locations (e.g., Dore and McElroy 2011). From the base of the mountain, transport along or on waterways by boat may have been preferred (for a related discussion see Blair 2010).

Figure 5. Quarry pit at Spanish Diggings Quarry Complex (photography by M. Etchieson, Copyright © 2009 Meeks Etchieson, all rights reserved). Further from Spanish Diggings and at the confluence of a third order stream with the Ouachita River, a large habitation site (3HS28) has midden deposits heavy with Novaculite chert chipping debris and Archaic Period diagnostics. Mary Beth Trubitt’s (2009a, 2009b, 2011; Trubitt and Hanvey 2011; Trubitt et al. 2011) excavations showed major use during the Middle Archaic Period (7,100-5,400 B.P., conventional radiocarbon age, based on two accelerator mass spectrometry dates). Flintknapping was a major activity here, as seen from the copious Novaculite debris, biface fragments, finished tools, and hammerstones. Biface and debitage analyses show that Novaculite came into the site as Stage 2 thick bifaces or cores, which were then heat-treated and further knapped into dart points and other tools (Figure 6). Novaculite was probably brought in from Spanish Diggings, but there were other Novaculite quarries nearby that were likely used too. Other activities – hunting, plant gathering, fishing, and food preparation – took place there, based on the notched pebble net weights (likely used on fishing nets), sandstone grinding stone fragments, “nutting stones,” clusters of fire-cracked rock interpreted as spoil from cooking facilities, charred hickory nutshell, and dart points with impact fractures and fragments of calcined animal bone found at the site.


34

Figure 6. Reduction sequence based on analysis of Arkansas Novaculite-type chert artifacts from Site 3HS28 (photography by V. Hanvey, Copyright © 2011 Arkansas Archeological Survey, all rights reserved). From the 3HS28 habitation or base camp, Novaculite bifaces or finished tools could have been transported south via the Ouachita River to other Middle Archaic Period groups. A site (3OU22) located about 125 km downriver that shows similar styles of Novaculite dart points may have been home to people who obtained Spanish Diggings chert through trade. Starks Quarry, Wyoming The Starks Quarry (48FR6994) location is, by comparison to Spanish Diggings, very small (26,740 m sq.). The quarry itself is on top of a small rise at 7,893' asl, which contains Pleistocene gravels. A small path (game trail) leads up to the top. On the south side of the


35

hill, a lag deposit has been exposed by people who dug into sands to loosen buried cobbles in a zone about 25 m long x 20 m wide x 2 m deep (roughly 1,000 cubic meters). A possible quarry pick made of quartzite could have aided this task (Figure 7). Below the hillside are two first order headwater streams that meet to form a second order stream about 35 m from the disturbed slope. Reduction debris covers the flatter zones on benches where bifaces were made near the stream confluence. Middle Archaic bison bone was found in an activity area at the base of the quarried hillside, and a Late Prehistoric resource processing site with evidence of fishing exists just downstream. All available evidence points to quarrying, tool making, and tool use in close proximity to one another.

Figure 7. Site 48FR6994 Quartzite (green) bifacial quarry pick, ventral view (photograph by A. Dowd, Copyright © 2012 ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, all rights reserved). The Wind River Formation in Northwest Wyoming consists of variegated red and white claystone and siltstone, which is largely nontuffacaeous except near the top, contains a lenticular coal unit in middle, and resembles the Indian Meadows Formation at the base (geological map code=Twdr) (Keefer 1957). Site 48FR6994 has five different types of lithic materials (chert, chalcedony, obsidian, quartzite, and basalt). Among the artifact categories identified on the surface are lithic debitage, cobble cores, a scraper, bifaces, and a projectile point. The survey and testing effort indicated that this concentration included decortication (primary (19%)), percussion (secondary (25%)) and pressure (tertiary (56%)) flakes. The presence of decortication flakes indicates that this was an area where initial stone manufacture occurred, with untyped chert cobbles being the most popular raw material (Table 1; Dowd and Ladd 2012:26). With the possible exception of a single obsidian flake, the variety of chipped stone raw materials (n=174) matches the selection of secondarily deposited lag cobbles available south of the knoll on the site’s western edge (see also Dowd and Vlcek 2013 for information about the regions' raw materials). Fire-cracked rock (n=49) and bone (n=15) were also recovered. Table 1. 48FR6994 Chipped Stone Artifacts by Material Type. Chipped Stone Obsidian Basalt Chert Quartzite

Chalcedony

Subtotals

PPKs Bifaces Scrapers Cores Primary Flakes Secondary Flakes Tertiary Flakes Shatter Totals

0 4 1 1 10 11 21 1 49

2 8 1 4 28 35 81 15 174

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1


0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2

2 3 0 0 9 12 35 9 70

0 1 0 3 9 9 25 5 52

36

Initially dated using a Hanna projectile point of the McKean Complex (ca., 4,9003,000 B.P.), it may be a Middle Archaic Period (5,500-2,500 B.P.) site (Figure 8; Dowd and Ladd 2012:25, 27). Fourteen systematically positioned shovel test pits (STPs) on a 10 m grid and two judgmentally placed excavation units (EUs) probed the extent and depth of buried deposits and artifact concentrations (Dowd and Ladd 2012:Appendix B). Eight of the fourteen STPs were positive for prehistoric materials (Nos. 7, 8, 10-12, 15, 17, 18), as were both excavation units.

Figure 8. Site 48FR6994 Chert (white/brown) Hanna projectile point, ventral view (photograph by A. Dowd, Copyright © 2012 ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, all rights reserved). A green quartzite biface, a possible quarry pick (with its tip broken from an impact fracture), was found (Dowd and Ladd 2012:27; Dowd 2012:13-14). A tan chert broken (from a lateral snap) projectile point/knife (PPK) or Stage 4/5 biface was found in EU No. 2, Level 2 (Dowd and Ladd 2012:25-28). Faunal bone, the right distal end of a Bison bison radius, was found in EU No. 2, Level 3 (Figure 9, Dowd and Ladd 2012:28). An AMS date on tiny fragments excavated around this bone is 2,500 + 30 B.P. conventional age (or 2,730-2,470 B.P. at the 95% probability level) (Beta Analytic No. 316474). This date provides a terminus post quem, or date after which the artifacts from Level 2 in EU No. 2 were deposited. The date is consistent with the end of the Middle Archaic Period, but could also signal the transition into the Late Archaic Period (2,500-1,500 B.P.). Two second order creeks merge below the study area and together they become a third order creek, which flows into the Wind River (fourth order), the major drainage in the area. Stratum I soils are brown 7.5YR 4/2 silt with clay between 0-15 cmbs. Most of the artifacts came from this layer; however, additional materials were found in Stratum II, a dark brown 7.5 YR 4/3 silt clay. Soil types are the Rockinchair-Rock outcrop-Sinkson complex, hilly (193), and Sinkson-Almy-Themoplis association, rolling (208). Another nearby site with materials that appear to have come from the quarry site exists. The Stewart Site (48FR6995) is a small Eastern Shoshone processing camp where people may have fished and processed food resources using surface hearths. The site dates to the Firehole Phase (1,000-300 B.P.) of the Late Prehistoric Period (1,500-300 B.P.). It is located south and east of the creek crossing.


37

Figure 9. Lower example is Site 48FR6994 faunal bone, right distal end of a Bison bison radius (photograph by A. Dowd, upper example is a comparative bone sample, Specimen No. UCM-OS-1484, courtesy of the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History collection, Copyright © 2012 ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC and University of Colorado Museum of Natural History, all rights reserved). A red chert tri-notched projectile point base (n=1), an oval uniface tan quartzite scraper (n=1), and two utilized secondary flakes (one of green quartzite and one of red quartzite (n=2)) were evident on the site surface (Figures 10, 11; Dowd and Ladd 2012:2931). A few pieces of debitage (chert (n=8), chalcedony (n=3), quartzite (n=9)) were present, but the low quantities indicated that very limited tool maintenance or production took place at the site. Expedient rather than formal tools were made here. Primary (21%), secondary (37%), and tertiary (42%) debitage categories were represented.

Figure 10. Site 48FR6995 chert (red) tri-notched projectile point base, dorsal view (photograph by A. Dowd, Copyright © 2012 ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, all rights reserved).


38

Fire-cracked rock (FCR) was present in at least four locations in and around the perimeter of the artifact concentration (FCR Concentration 1 (n=18), 2 (n=7), 3 (n=6), and 4 (n=8)). Cracked and fire-reddened quartzite cobbles and fragments made up most of the surface FCR. These were probably hearth locations whose rock components have been scattered over time. Six shovel test pits were placed across the site in two transects with 10 m intervals. Four were positive for prehistoric artifacts (STP Nos. 1-4). Low artifact density (n=21) suggests that many of the site's artifacts are on or close to the ground surface. Sterile soils were encountered at 10-13 cmbs.

Figure 11. Site 48FR6995 quartzite (tan) uniface scraper, ventral view (photograph by A. Dowd, Copyright © 2012 ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, all rights reserved). The site is located on a low flat bench that overlooks a creek to the south and is protected from winds by a low hill to the north. Extremely level and close to water, its area is approximately 1,741 m sq. The silty loam soils are dusty and dry on the surface but retain moisture below the surface due to their slight clay content. The Munsell color and soil description for the cultural layer is brown 7.5YR 4/4 silt with clay in Stratum I and light brown 7.5YR 6/3 very compact silt clay in a sterile Stratum II. The soil type is the Sinkson-AlmyThemoplis association, rolling (208). Vegetation consists of sparse grasses, forbs, and low sagebrush. The site probably represents a single component, short-term camping and/or resource-processing episode during the Late Prehistoric Period, occupied by a small group of people, possibly affiliated with the Eastern Shoshone. The stone scraper and utilized flakes may have had roles in butchering or food preparation. This was likely a special purpose camp that may have been occupied for a day or two some distance from a base camp. Protein residue analysis of materials on the red chert tri-notched point base showed evidence of trout antiserum, which is consistent with the arrow having been used to harvest fish of the Salmonidae family (e.g., salmon (Oncorhynchus), trout (Salmo), lake trout (Salvelinas namaycush), lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis), mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), and arctic/mountain grayling (Thymallus arcticus)). Fishing may have been a springtime occupation when bison stores had run out (Shimkin 1947; Yost 2012:3, 6-7). Lowie (1924:200) specifically mentions that among the Ute, fish "were shot with barbed arrows," and that "dried fish were stored in caches and eaten in the fall." Data Analysis Spanish Diggings was a large quarry complex with features extending nearly 5 km along a mountain ridge. Initial reduction took place in and near the quarry pits, resulting in extensive debris fields. Further reduction was done at nearby workshops, located about 11.25 km away, at the base of the mountain and adjacent to small streams. Toolstone from this and other quarries was brought to base camps on the Ouachita and Saline rivers, where


39

it was heat treated and flaked into dart points and other tools. Site 3HS28, about 8.5 km from Spanish Diggings on a terrace adjacent to the Ouachita River, was used for both flintknapping and food preparation activities. Fall-winter season use is suggested by the use of hickory nuts, and larger groups of people may have gathered there to fish with nets, perhaps taking advantage of fish congregating and spawning in the nearby river in late spring-early summer. Ongoing analysis of the 3HS28 site assemblage is geared towards estimating tool production and evaluating whether preforms or bifaces were exchanged with other groups further down the Ouachita River. The Starks Quarry has only one quarry pit that has been identified to date (although others in the vicinity but outside of the surveyed area are possible). A small group of about five people may have been responsible for the raw material extraction at the site over several visits. Nearby lithic reduction activities produced formal bifaces, informal unifaces and bifaces, and expedient flake tools, so initial manufacture and late stage biface or expedient tool production took place in a relatively circumscribed area. Like in Arkansas, waterways and valleys as corridors for travel were important in Wyoming. While evidence of trails or paths is somewhat elusive, drainages apparently structured access, use and transport of raw materials in both regions. Besides creeks and streambeds, long ridges enclose the valley where the quarry is found. Along these ridges are drivelines and overlook locations where people travelled while hunting herd animals. Conclusions A small quarry with diverse raw materials was used by hunters armed with McKean Complex Hanna dart points to kill large animals, like bison, and other tools like quarry picks, to loosen cobbles from their sand matrix along a steep sided hill and overlook. These quarry users may have occupied the bench next to the quarry pit to fashion replacement bifaces and to create butchering and quarrying tools. On another bench below the stream confluence, later Shoshone people caught fish using small tri-notched arrow points and fabricated expedient cobble flake tools using materials from the quarry. During at least two time periods, at ca. 2,500 B.P. and 300 B.P., hunting parties may have used the quarry in a somewhat opportunistic fashion, likely in the late spring, summer or early fall, when the upland location was snow free and walking into the valley following the creek traversing its length was easy to do. The small quarry example provides examples of specific quarry use, material transport close by for tool production, and tool use for food processing as part of seasonal movements to procure food. Material transport into and out of the valley may have been part of a range of spring-summer-fall movements, and limited to unstandardized formal bifaces, with scrapers or other informal tools left at the processing and reduction sites. Chert was preferred for biface production, but quartzite was preferred for larger informal tools. A historic road (early twentieth century) has been identified that parallels the creek into and out of a long valley flanked by ridges, and prehistoric movements likely followed a similar route along waterways or along high ridges bordering the valley. Aerial photography may be used to identify drivelines or other linear stone features along the ridges. Our large quarry is one of several that are left from aboriginal mining activities in the Novaculite Uplift of the eastern Ouachita Mountains. Novaculite quarried from Spanish Diggings and other mountain ridges was reduced into bifaces and preforms and finished tools at nearby workshops and base camps located on larger streams and rivers, by task groups who likely went to the quarry for the express purpose of collecting raw materials. Novaculite artifacts are found in Archaic Period contexts on sites farther down the Ouachita River in southern Arkansas as well as several hundreds of kilometers away at sites in Louisiana and Mississippi (Arkansas Archeological Survey 2013), and while more work needs to be done to document this extensive chert tool production and exchange system, river transport by dugout canoe likely played an important role. Sourcing studies and identification of potential transportation routes through least cost path analysis are future steps. Acknowledgements This paper was prepared for an April 5, 2013 symposium organized and chaired by Juliet E. Morrow and Peter R. Mills for the 78 th Society for American Archaeology Annual


40

Meeting in Honolulu, Hawai'i, titled: "Quarries and Early Mines: Settlement Context and Transportation Network Relationships." A. Dowd would like to thank Mr. and Mrs. Starks, as well as the ArchæoLOGIC USA field and laboratory team members. Thanks also to Ms. Hazen-McCreary who reviewed the project. References Cited Arkansas Archeological Survey (written by Mary Beth D. Trubitt, Tyler Stumpf, and Vanessa Hanvey, created by John Samuelsen) 2013 Arkansas Novaculite: A Virtual Comparative Collection. Electronic document, http://arkarcheology.uark.edu/novaculite/index.html, accessed February 15, 2013. Baker, Charles Michael 1974 A Study of Aboriginal Novaculite Exploitation in the Ouachita Mountains of SouthCentral Arkansas. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. 1982 A Brief Study of the Arkansas Novaculite Quarries. In Fancy Hill: Archeological Studies in the Southern Ouachita Mountains, edited by Ann M. Early and W. Frederick Limp, pp. 307-334. Research Series, No. 16. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville. Blair, Susan E. 2010 Missing the Boat in Lithic Procurement: Watercraft and the Bulk Procurement of Toolstone on the Maritime Peninsula. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 29(1):33-46. Dore, Christopher D., and Stephen A. McElroy 2011 Automated Trail Identification and Mapping: An Experiment in Archaeological SpectralImage Analysis Using Commercial High-Resolution Satellite Remote-Sensing Data. Advances in Archaeological Practice, http://www.saa.org/AbouttheSociety/Publications/AdvancesinArchaeologicalPractice/SampleA rticles/tabid/1492/Default.aspx, accessed August 8, 2013. Dowd, Anne S. 1998a Lithic Procurement and Social Complexity in New York's Hudson River Valley. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Brown University, Providence. University Microfilms/ProQuest, Ann Arbor. 1998b Operationalizing an Anthropology of Technology: Lithic Procurement and Tool Production among North American Hunter-Gatherers, Lithic Technology: From Raw Material Procurement to Tool Production, Proceedings of the Workshop No. 12 of the XIII International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, edited by S. Milliken and M. Peresani, pp. 109-113. M.A.C., Forli, Italy. 1998c Biface Standardization Accompanying Organized Chert Quarrying Efforts: An Argument for Intensifying Lithic Production. In Craft Specialization: Operational Sequences and Beyond, Papers from the European Association of Archaeologists Third Annual Meeting at Ravenna 1997, Volume IV, edited by S. Milliken and M. Vidale, pp. 69-75. BAR International Series 720. 2012 Field Note: A Bifacial Stone Quarry Pick. The Quarry 7:13-14. Electronic document http://www.saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/ABOUTSAA/interestgroups/prehistquarry/The%20Quarry% 207.pdf, accessed August 8, 2013. 2013 From Source to Center: Raw Material Acquisition and Toolstone Distributions. The SAA Archaeological Record 13(3):14-17. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C. Electronic document http://onlinedigeditions.com/publication/?i=160407, accessed August 8, 2013. Dowd, Anne S., and Brian Ladd 2012 Archaeological Site Evaluation for the Henthorne Access Road, Fremont County,


41

Wyoming. ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, Pinedale, Wyoming. Submitted to BLM, Permit No. 631-WY-LTC12. Copies available from ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, Pinedale, Wyoming. Dowd, Anne S., and David Vlcek 2013 Lithic Sources in Wyoming's Upper Green River Basin. North American Archaeologist 34(4), in press. Etchieson, Meeks 1997 Prehistoric Novaculite Quarries in the Ouachita Mountains. Paper presented at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Nashville. Etchieson, Meeks, and Mary Beth Trubitt 2013 Taking it to the River: Arkansas Novaculite Quarrying and Archaic Period Tool Production. North American Archaeologist 34(4), in press. Griswold, Leon S. 1892 Whetstones and the Novaculites of Arkansas. In Annual Report of the Geological Survey of Arkansas for 1890, Vol. III. Press Printing Company, Little Rock. Haley, Boyd R., assisted by Ernest E. Glick, William V. Bush, Benjamin F. Clardy, Charles G. Stone, Mac B. Woodward, and Doy L. Zachry 1993 Geologic Map of Arkansas. Arkansas Geological Commission and United States Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado. Holbrook, Drew F., and Charles G. Stone 1979 Arkansas Novaculite – A Silica Resource. Arkansas Geological Commission, Little Rock. Holmes, William Henry 1919 Novaculite Quarries, Ark. In Handbook of Aboriginal American Antiquities, Part I, Introductory, The Lithic Industries, edited by William Henry Holmes, pp. 196-200. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 60. Jenney, W. P. 1891 Ancient Novaculite Mines near Magnet Cove, Hot Springs County, Arkansas. American Anthropologist IV: 316-318. Keefer, W. R. 1957 Geology of the Du Noir area, Fremont County, Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 294-E, pl. 26, scale 1:48,000. Keller, Walter D., Charles G. Stone, and Alice L. Hoersch 1985 Textures of Paleozoic Chert and Novaculite in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma and Their Geological Significance. Geological Society of America Bulletin 96:1353-1363. Lowie, Robert H. 1924 Notes on Shoshonean Ethnography. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 20(3):185-324. American Museum Press, New York. Scarr, Kristin D. 2008 Trace Element Studies of the Arkansas Novaculite. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Shimkin, Demitri B. 1947 Wind River Shoshone Ethno-Geography. Anthropological Records 5(4):245-288. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Steuart, Charles T., Drew F. Holbrook, and Charles G. Stone 1982 Arkansas Novaculite: Indians, Whetstones, Plastics and Beyond. Arkansas Geological


42

Commission Miscellaneous Publication 18:119-134. Trubitt, Mary Beth D. 2009a Investigating Middle Archaic at the Jones Mill Site. (Bulletin of the Arkansas Archeological Society) 48:71-84.

The Arkansas Archeologist

2009b Putting an Age on the Archaic at Jones Mill. Field Notes (Newsletter of the Arkansas Archeological Society) 349:3-7. 2011 Another Archaic Period Date from Jones Mill. Field Notes (Newsletter of the Arkansas Archeological Society) 358:5-6. Trubitt, Mary Beth D., and Vanessa N. Hanvey 2011 Reconstructing the Novaculite Reduction Sequence at Jones Mill, Arkansas. Poster presented at the 68th Annual Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Jacksonville, Florida. Electronic document http://www.hsu.edu/pictures.aspx?id=16361, accessed August 8, 2013. Trubitt, Mary Beth D., Thomas Green, and Ann Early 2004 A Research Design for Investigating Novaculite Quarry Sites in the Ouachita Mountains. The Arkansas Archeologist (Bulletin of the Arkansas Archeological Society) 43:17-62. Trubitt, Mary Beth D., Kathryn Parker, and Lucretia Kelly 2011 Reconstructing Ancient Foodways at the Jones Mill Site (3HS28), Hot Spring County, Arkansas. Caddo Archeology Journal 21:43-70. Yost, Chad, assisted by Peter Kováĉik 2012 Protein Residue Analysis of Two Flaked Tools from the Stewart Site (48FR6995), Fremont County, Wyoming. PaleoResearch Institute, Golden, Colorado. Submitted to ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC. Copies available from ArchæoLOGIC USA, LLC, Pinedale, Wyoming, or PaleoResearch Institute, Golden, Colorado. Copyright © Trubitt, Dowd, & Etchieson 2013, All rights reserved.

Quarries' Place in Settlement and Transportation Networks Adrian L. Burke, Université de Montréal [email protected] Abstract This essay forms the discussant commentary for the "Quarries and Early Mines: Settlement Context and Transportation Network Relationships" Society for American Archaeology (SAA) Symposium sponsored by the Prehistoric Quarry and Early Mines Interest Group on April 5, 2013, Honolulu, Hawai'i. Discussant Comments Quarries are highly variable. This is perhaps obvious to those of you who have spent time at quarries. We know that they are generally extensive or large sites and they are often products of repeated use or exploitation over many generations. This long duration of use makes them rather special. Quarries are also organized, by that I mean quarries are not haphazard locations where you go and just find some material and extract it. Quarry exploitation is organized, often very well organized, and of course you will see examples today from the Neolithic in Germany, in the Western United States, and the Midwest, and elsewhere in the world. All around the world, people who study quarries for extended periods of time have come to the realization that the degree of organization at quarries is surprising at times and of course this requires people and planning, and in some cases even specialists. By specialists, I mean people who either have specialized geological knowledge, or flintknappers, and in some cases, craft specialists repeatedly producing the same forms. So quarries can also be interesting for those interested in craft specialization.


43

The other thing that has interested me for years is the geological knowledge behind quarries and quarrying. I think that when you spend time at quarries you start to have an enormous respect for the knowledge of geology that people had in the past. Researchers like Philip LaPorta (1996:73) have referred to this as “folk geology.” The intimate knowledge of the geology that people had is rather striking and is not always obvious in the way archaeologists treat quarries, because these are often seen as a place where raw material is found and that is the end of the story. There is, however, a real back-story to quarries, which includes geological knowledge passed down through generations. In my own fieldwork for example, I am repeatedly surprised and amazed that every time I find a secondary source of raw material and I know that perhaps I am getting close to the bedrock source, I inevitably discover that people in the past had also found these secondary cobble sources and then taken the time to find the original bedrock source. Furthermore, they often targeted specific beds within a formation. People don’t just go up to an outcrop and start hammering away, they actually target specific beds and this reflects their knowledge of the geology and is also directly related to lithic technology. One of our Achilles’ heels in quarry studies is dating. I do not mean dating the sites where we find the quarry products, I mean dating the actual quarries and workshops, which is notoriously difficult but you can see in the case of the Neolithic in Germany, you can sometimes get lucky and find backfilled pits with datable material. I was particularly impressed to see that, in some cases, archaeologists can date specific events of extraction and exploitation at different periods. For me, that would be a dream where I work in the Northeast, but I know that some of you have managed to do that in the regions where you work. It would be great if we can work more on this aspect in quarry studies. I know that there are some possibilities in exposure age dating, for example, in some quarries where you have talus slopes that have covered previous episodes of extraction, but isotope dating for recent periods is usually plus or minus several hundred years. It is fine for dating moraines, but maybe eventually it could work for quarries? Obviously, we can learn a lot about quarries and workshops themselves, especially about production and lithic technology. The aspects of quantification in terms of production as well as the characterization of technological production are, in my opinion, understudied here in North America. I will use the term chaîne opératoire because I work mostly in French. It is a term that is increasingly used in North America. If you actually look at what our colleagues are doing elsewhere in the world, you will notice that there has been a lot of work done where we now have a better sense of not just the quantification of production, but also the entire sequence of lithic production at quarries and workshops. Quarries and related workshops are truly the best place to get a sense of the initial extraction and production and transformation of this material. There is no better place to study the chaîne opératoire. The French colleagues, who pioneered the chaîne opératoire approach, will often start their research at the quarry related workshop sites. If you look at the total number of published works of this type of analysis in France for example, there are not many, so fortunately we are not too far behind. But we need to focus a lot more on quarries themselves also in terms of technological production and get a real sense of how that technological production is being organized to then follow what happens later over the landscape as that material travels. I think that in the long run, a lot of us are looking for a more complete picture. This involves placing the quarry into a past social landscape. Obviously, that also allows us to place the quarries into the larger settlement system. That was the purpose of the session today. This involves sourcing and looking at the regional distribution of raw materials. I think that we are finally getting to this level of integration. For many of us this is the ultimate goal, to place quarries into that larger context, socially, and economically, of course. Quarries still deserve more attention from the archaeological community. They are too often taken for granted. Lithic raw materials start their lives at quarries and workshops, and the life of a tool continues onto the sites where it is used, and eventually to where it is deposited, whether in a ritualized setting, in refuse, or simply abandoned. If we try to spend a little more time on quarries, we can get a better understanding of the total life cycle of tools in their total cultural and social context.


44

References Cited LaPorta, Philip C. 1996 Lithostratigraphy as a Predictive Tool for Prehistoric Quarry Investigations: Examples from the Dutchess Quarry Site, Orange County, New York. In A Golden Chronograph for Robert E. Funk, edited by C. Lindner and E.V. Curtin, pp. 73-83. Occasional Publications in Northeastern Anthropology, No. 15. Archaeological Services, Bethlehem, Connecticut.


45