Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T20:40:16.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Points in Time: Direct Radiocarbon Dates on Great Basin Projectile Points

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Geoffrey M. Smith ,
Pat Barker ,
Eugene M. Hattori ,
Anan Raymond  and
Ted Goebel
Geoffrey M. Smith
Affiliation:
Great Basin Paleoindian Research Unit, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Reno, 1664 North Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557 ([email protected])
Pat Barker
Affiliation:
Nevada State Museum, 600 North Carson Street, Carson City, NV 89701 ([email protected]; [email protected])
Eugene M. Hattori
Affiliation:
Nevada State Museum, 600 North Carson Street, Carson City, NV 89701 ([email protected]; [email protected])
Anan Raymond
Affiliation:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 20555 Gerda Lane, Sherwood, OR 97140 ([email protected])
Ted Goebel
Affiliation:
Center for the First Americans, MS4352, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Typological cross-dating is the primary means by which archaeological sites are placed into chronological frameworks. This approach relies on the assumption that artifacts at undated sites—usually projectile points—are coeval with similar artifacts found at Other, dated sites. While typological cross-dating is necessary in regions dominated by open-air lithic scatters, the approach can be problematic when undated and dated sites are separated by significant distances. Here, we present radiocarbon dates on projectile points with organic hafting material still attached or found within organic storage bags. Our results provide unequivocal ages for various morphological projectile point types at several Great Basin locales and should be useful to researchers seeking local age estimates for those point types, which often involves relying on chronological data from more distant sites. The results also highlight potential issues with uncritically applying typological cross-dating using typologies based on metric attributes, and in two cases, suggest the need to revise the age ranges for certain point styles in the western Great Basin.

Resumen

Resumen

Fechado por comparación tipológica es el medio primario a través del cual sitios arqueológicos son ubicados en marcos eronológicos. Esta aproximación asume que los artefactos de un sitio no fechado—generalmente puntas de proyectil—son contemporáneas con artefactos similares encontrados en otros sitios ya fechados. Aunque esta metodología es necesaria es regiones dominadas por dispersiones líticas al aire libre, esta aproximación puede resultar problemática cuando aquellos sitios que han sido fechados y aquellos que no se encuentran a grandes distancias. Aquí presentamos fechados radiocarbónicos en puntas de proyectil con residuos de enmangamiento orgánico o las bolsas en las que se hallaron. Nuestros resultados proveen fechas inequívocas para varios tipos morfológicos de puntas de proyectil en varias localidades de la Gran Cuenca y deberían ser útiles para los investigadores que buscan edades estimadas para dichos tipos, lo cual a veces involucra depender en datos cronológicos de sitios más lejanos. Los resultados también resaltan potenciales problemas con la aplicación acritica del fechado por comparación usando tipologías basadas en atributos métricos y, en dos casos, sugiere la necesidad de revisas los rangos de fechas para ciertos estilos de puntas en el oeste de la Gran Cuenca.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 78 , Issue 3 , July 2013 , pp. 580 - 594
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by the Society for American Archaeology.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Aikens, C. Melvin 1970 Hogup Cave. Anthropological Papers No. 93. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Aikens, C. Melvin, Cole, David L., and Stuckenrath, Robert 1977 Excavations at Dirty Shame Rockshelter, Southeastern Oregon. Miscellaneous Papers No. 4. Idaho State Museum of Natural History, Boise.Google Scholar
Arkush, Brooke S. 1998 Archaeological Investigations at Mosquito Willie Rockshelter and Lower Lead Mine Hills Cave, Great Salt Lake Desert, Utah. Archives of Great Basin Prehistory No. 2. Coyote Press, Salinas, California.Google Scholar
Barker, Pat, Pinto-Ellis, Cynthia, and Valentine, David 2011 Looting at Elephant Mountain Cave. Nevada Archaeologist 24:1–10.Google Scholar
Barnes, Robin B. 2000 Prehistoric Caches in an Intermittent Wetlands Environment: An Analysis of the Nicholarsen Cave Collection, Washoe County, Nevada. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Beck, Charlotte 1995 Functional Attributes and the Differential Persistence of Great Basin Dart Forms. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 17:222–243.Google Scholar
Delacorte, Michael G. 1997 Culture Change along the Eastern Sierra Nevada/Cascade Front. Volume I: History of Investigations and Summary of Findings. Report prepared for Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company, Reno.Google Scholar
Goebel, Ted 2007 Pre-Archaic and Early Archaic Technological Activities at Bonneville Estates Rockshelter: A First Look at the Lithic Record. In Paleoindian or Paleoarchaic?: Great Basin Human Ecology at the Pleistocene-Holocene Transition, edited by Kelly E. Graf and Dave N. Schmitt, pp. 156–184. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Grayson, Donald K. 1988 Danger Cave, Last Supper Cave, and Hanging Rock Shelter: The Faunas. Anthropological Papers Vol. 66, Part 1. American Museum of Natural History, New York.Google Scholar
Grayson, Donald K. 2011 The Great Basin: A Natural Prehistory. University of California Press, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hattori, Eugene M. 1982 The Archaeology of Falcon Hill, Winnemucca Lake, Washoe County, Nevada. Anthropological Papers No. 18. Nevada State Museum, Carson City.Google Scholar
Heizer Robert, R., and Hester, Thomas R. 1978 Great Basin Projectile Points: Forms and Chronology. Publications in Archaeology, Ethnology, and History No. 10. Ballena Press, Socorro, New Mexico.Google Scholar
Hester, Thomas R. 1974 Archaeological Materials from Site NV-Wa-197, Western Nevada: Atlatl and Animal Skin Pouches. University of California Archaeological Research Facility Contributions 21:1–36.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, William R., and King, Jerome H. 2002 Projectile Point Variability along the Northern California-Great Basin Interface: Results from the Tuscarora-Alturas Projects. In Boundary Lands: Archaeological Investigations along the California-Great Basin Interface, edited by Kelly R. McGuire, pp. 5–28. Anthropological Papers No. 24. Nevada State Museum, Carson City.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, William R., and King, Jerome H. 2012 Distinguishing Between Darts and Arrows in the Archaeological Record: Implications for Technological Change in the American West. American Antiquity 77:789–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Bryan S., and Murphy, Timothy W. 2009 Antiquity of Communal Pronghorn Hunting in the North-Central Great Basin. American Antiquity 74:708–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmer, Richard N. 1986 Common Projectile Points of the Intermountain West. In Anthropology of the Desert West: Essays in Honor of Jesse D. Jennings, edited by Carol J. Condie and Don D. Fowler,pp. 89–115. Anthropological Papers No. 110. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Jennings, Jesse D. 1986 Prehistory: An Introduction. In Great Basin, edited by Warren L. D’Azevedo, pp. 113–119. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Layton, Thomas N., and Davis, Jonathan O. 1978 Last Supper Cave: Early Post-Pleistocene Culture History and Paleoecoiogy in the High Rock Country of the Northwestern Great Basin. Manuscript on file in the Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Reno.Google Scholar
Milliken, Randall T., and Hildebrandt, William R. 1997 Culture Change along the Eastern Sierra Nevada/Cascade Front. Volume V: Honey Lake Basin. Report prepared for Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company, Reno, Nevada.Google Scholar
O'Connell, James R. 1975 The Prehistory of Surprise Valley. Anthropological Papers No. 4. Ballena Press, Ramona, California.Google Scholar
O'Connell, James R., and Innoway, Cari M. 1994 Surprise Valley Projectile Points and Their Chronological Implications. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 16:162–198.Google Scholar
Oetting, Albert C. 1994 Chronology and Time Markers in the Northwestern Great Basin: The Chewaucan Basin Cultural Chronology. In Archaeological Researches in the Northern Great Basin: Fort Rock Archaeology since Cressman, edited by C. Melvin Aikens and Dennis L. Jenkins, pp. 41–62. Anthropological Papers No. 50. University of Oregon, Eugene.Google Scholar
Raymond, Anan 1989 Eastgate Points and Blanks from the Nicholarsen Cache. Manuscript on file at the Nevada State Museum, Carson City.Google Scholar
Raymond, Anan 2008 Technological Organization of the Eastgate Points and Preforms in the Nicholarsen Cache, Winnemucca Lake, Nevada. Paper presented at the 31st Biennial Great Basin Anthropological Conference, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
Ross, Jeffrey 2000 Archaeological Damage Assessment for 26EK6892, AKA “Bob's Cave.” Report on file at the Nevada State Museum, Carson City.Google Scholar
Schiffer, Michael B. 1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Dave N., and Madsen, David B. 2005 Camels Back Cave. Anthropological Papers No. 125. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Shott, Michael J. 1997 Stones and Shafts Redux: The Metric Discrimination of Chipped Stone Dart and Arrow Points. American Antiquity 62:86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, David H. 1976 A Diegueno Shaman's Wand: An Object Lesson Illustrating the ‘’Heirloom Hypothesis.” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3:128–132.Google Scholar
Thomas, David H. 1981 How to Classify the Projectile Points from Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1):7–43.Google Scholar
Wilde, James D. 1985 Prehistoric Settlement in the Northern Great Basin: Excavations and Collections Analysis in the Steens Mountain Area, Southeastern Oregon. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene.Google Scholar