Paul A. Raber
Heberling Associates,
Inc.
Like the rest of us, archaeologists get set in their ways. They
become used to looking at the same types of archaeological sites and doing so
in the same ways. Sometimes it takes an outside force to pull them away from
their pet subjects and ingrained habits. Cultural resource management (CRM)
studies required by federal and state historic preservation laws and regulation
have served this purpose in North American archaeology over the past half
century. Archaeological field studies directed by the dictates of project
design have come to dominate the practice of archaeology in the United States,
with highway improvements and public works projects defining areas of required
archaeological testing and study. Archaeologists may grumble about the limitations
imposed on their interests by project boundaries and scopes—the really great
site that we know is just outside the
project area—but CRM studies have benefited the discipline of archaeology by
directing the attention of archaeologists to settings and sites that we might
otherwise have ignored.
Our understanding of this period and the ties of local
peoples to the Adena and Hopewell complexes, however, has been heavily
influenced by the traditional focus on the sometimes spectacular remains found
at mound sites like McKees
Rock Mound and dozens of other burial mounds in southwestern Pennsylvania
and adjacent regions of the upper Ohio Valley, or those uncovered at
semi-permanent hamlet or village sites like those at the Fairchance Mound and
Village site in nearby West Virginia. Available archaeological information is
heavily biased towards those site types.
The work at 36WH1729 joins several other recent studies in
drawing attention to the distinctive set of activities and the use of local
resources that occurred at small, briefly occupied campsites in the Ohio Valley
and elsewhere in Pennsylvania (see Nass and Henshaw 2017; Raber 2017a, 2017b).
Such studies have contributed detailed information on what happened at these
small sites and how the sites were related to seasonal occupations at larger
base camps and other specialized sites through large-scale exposures and
intensive post-excavation studies of artifacts and features.
The excavations at 36WH1729 exposed roughly 26% of the core
site area, recovering more than 6400 stone artifacts and pottery fragments and
178 kg of fire-cracked rock. The exposure of 93 m2 revealed twelve
confirmed or likely pre-Contact cultural features, all of which seem to have
been hearth or hearth remnants, as would be expected at small, briefly occupied
camps, where the family or task group present would have gathered around a
hearth to cook, socialize and conduct most of the varied activities documented
in the excavated remains. We defined the dates of occupation with 15
radiocarbon dates on charcoal taken from features and other contexts.
The results of excavation and post-excavation analyses provide
a detailed picture of life at a small
upland camp used repeatedly during the Early and Middle Woodland periods. Studies
of microscopic wear on stone tools allowed us to characterize some of the
activities that occurred at successive camps at 36WH1729, while analyses of pollen
and residues on both stone tools and pottery expanded our knowledge of the
local environment, activities, and the materials obtained and used at the site.
Small groups—probably nuclear families—camped here for short periods during the
fall, hunted white-tailed deer and other game, and collected nuts and other
wild plants available in the cleared areas around the site. Much of the
activity seems to have focused on the collection and processing of black
walnuts, the butchering of deer carcasses for meat, and the working of hides,
bone, and antler. Most of the meat, hides, and nuts were processed and
preserved to be later used or consumed at seasonal camps.
These tasks were accomplished using flaked stone tools of
local Uniontown chert that was obtained within a short distance of the site. Some
97% of the toolstone used at 36WH1729 was Uniontown chert obtained from nearby—but
currently undefined—sources. The site was occupied for perhaps a few days or a
week during the fall, when the nut crop and game could be harvested in the vicinity
of the camps. The inhabitants returned to base camps or hamlets along the
larger streams’ drainage for the winter season. They must also have used nearby
Early and Middle Woodland period burial mounds, but there is no evidence to
indicate that they visited the mounds while camped at the site.
The studies at 36WH1729 provided a new perspective on life during
the Early and Middle Woodland periods in the upper Ohio Valley, one very
different from that derived from the traditional focus on burial mounds and
villages. The daily lives of families and small bands, and their intimate
knowledge of the changing local environment evident in the use of resources
like Uniontown chert, deer and wild plants, are all delineated in the material
remains from small sites like 36WH1729. As the body of our knowledge of small
sites accumulates, we can ask new and more detailed and relevant questions
about how the past inhabitants of the region lived and adapted to changing
conditions.
Our ability to ask such questions, however, depends on
paying attention to the small sites that were critical parts of past settlement
systems. Giving such small sites their due reflects the major impact CRM
archaeology has had on the study of the past.
References:
Nass, John P, Jr. and Marc Henshaw
2017 The Value of Small Sites for the Study of
Late Woodland Subsistence: An Example from Southwestern Pennsylvania. Journal
of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 33:27-48.
Raber, Paul A.
2017a The Significance of Small Sites in the Upper
Ohio River Drainage: Investigations at 36WH1619. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 87(1):1-28.
2017b Eight
Thousand Years on the Banks of Aughwick Creek: archaeological Studies at 36HU224, The Pogue Bridge North
Site. Byways to the Past Series. The Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation and Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.
2018 The Early and Middle Woodland Periods at
Small Site in the Upper Ohio Valley: The Evidence from 36WH1729. Pennsylvania
Archaeologist 87(1):1-28.
For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .
No comments:
Post a Comment