Schiffer (1986) first identified the old wood problem for wood charcoal-based dates from archaeological contexts in the American Southwest. The potential for dates to be skewed toward excessively old calendar ages in this region has recently generated reticence in part of the archaeological community towards including wood charcoal dates in general. Some scholars have even begun to cleanse the radiocarbon databases of regions throughout North America, partly with this presumed limitation in mind. However, the issues that contribute to the old wood problem have not been closely examined outside the arid climate of the American Southwest, resulting in some studies excluding hundreds of radiocarbon dates. The present study fills that void by examining the radiocarbon record from four well-dated Fort Ancient sites in southwestern Ohio and southeastern Indiana. Specifically, we test whether or not there are significant differences between wood charcoal and non-wood charcoal assays. Our findings suggest that wood charcoal dates should not be excluded. We explore reasons for this difference in the Eastern Woodlands and propose an ideal dating regime.

Using several methods to distinguish dart and arrow points, archaeologists have suggested that the bow and arrow appeared in various parts of the world between ˜65,000 and 1,000 years ago. Hildebrandt and King (2012) proposed a dart-arrow index (DAI) to help differentiate dart and arrow points, rejecting claims that the bow and arrow was introduced to western North America prior to the Late Holocene. We used the DAI and other methods to evaluate ˜11,700-year-old projectile points from Santa Rosa Island, obtaining mean values below the threshold for darts, comparable to several North American arrow point types. We have no direct evidence that these small points were used on darts, arrows, or hand-thrown spears, but faunal associations suggest that they may have served as harpoon tips used on atlatl darts to capture birds, fish, and marine mammals. The DAI and other methods for discriminating between dart and arrow points are based almost exclusively on ethnographic and archaeological specimens from interior regions. Our analysis suggests that such methods should not be applied universally, especially in coastal or other aquatic settings, and that archaeologists should continue to critically assess the antiquity of the bow and arrow and the function of projectile points worldwide.

Many archaeological sites along coastlines and rivers contain large quantities of marine and riverine bivalve shell. Often shell is the only datable organic material available to determine radiocarbon age estimates of features and to build regional chronologies. Shell is difficult to date accurately because of reservoir effects, and archaeologists have avoided it despite its abundance. If reservoir effects are understood, shell can provide accurate radiocarbon age estimates. This report provides an example using regression relations computed from radiocarbon assays of paired shelll charcoal samples from archaeological sites along the middle and lower Snake River, Northwestern North America.

Smith et al. (2013) provided important new information concerning the ages of a variety of projectile point types found in the Great Basin. Two of their interpretations, however, deserve further discussion. Smith et al. (2013) concluded that the Nicholarsen (or Nicolarsen) Cache contains both dart and arrow points. However, our application of methods developed by Hildebrandt and King (2012) to distinguish dart and arrow points, indicates that the Nicholarsen Cache contains arrow points exclusively. In addition, we suggest that the two ca. 6,800-year-old “Elko-Eared” points identified by Smith et al. (2013) are Large Side-notched points.

The geographic and chronological distribution of eyed bone needles in North American Paleoindian sites led Osborn (2014) to propose that these distinctive artifacts date primarily to the Terminal Pleistocene Younger Dryas Cold Event and were essential to making close-fitting clothes needed to survive frigid winter conditions. Our study of a museum collection from Tule Lake Rock Shelter (CA-SIS-218A) in the high Klamath Basin area supports Osborn’s argument. We present nine high-precision accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon assays from a 2.5 m deep cultural sequence, demonstrating that Paleoindians occupied the site primarily during the Younger Dryas. Although only about .5 m3 of the Paleoindian deposits at CA-SIS-218A were excavated, fragments of four small bone needles were recovered, three of which contain whole or partial eyes. Two fragments of large mammal cortical bone from the same levels contain remnants of “groove and snap” fractures that may be related to the production of needle blanks. The bone needles from Tule Lake Rock Shelter extend the geographic range of these distinctive Paleoindian artifacts into the high desert region of Northern California.

Hockett et al. 's (2014) comment argues two points: (1) the Nicholarsen Cache does not contain both dart and arrow points;, and (2) the “early“ Elko points in our sample are Large Side-notched points. We appreciate their reanalysis of the Nicholarsen Cache points using a different approach, which leads them to the same conclusion made in our original article. Whereas we concede that one of the Elko points is difficult to classify and could be viewed as a Large Side-notched point, we find no evidence that the other specimen is anything but an Elko point directly dated to the middle Holocene.

The Grenfell bone rod resembles other instances of Clovis-era organic or osseous technology and has on a number of occasions been considered with other Clovis bone, antler, and ivory rods or beveled artifacts. It had been suspected of being constructed from proboscidean long bone. As an early discovery (made in 1883), the Grenfell artifact had somewhat obscure provenience details and a lengthy curatorial history. We describe accelerator mass spectrometry and zooarchaeology by mass spectrometry methods that allow rapid, minimally destructive determinations of both the age and the raw material composition of osseous artifacts. Our analysis reveals that the Grenfell artifact is actually a terminal Paleoindian-era manifestation made of bison bone. Similar methods could be more widely applied in North America in order to build more refined data sets for osseous technologies. These results also reveal the ease with which archaeologists can secure additional information from existing collections, highlighting our ethical obligations to do so.

Fauvelle (2013) used experimental approaches to evaluate whether acorns were an important commodity traded from mainland groups to the Island Chumash. Consistent with a dearth of acorn remains found in island sites, he concluded that acorns were not a major export. We agree with this conclusion, but Fauvelle never adequately explains why acorns were not a major trade item and proposes that trade for high-quality asphaltum, supposedly unavailable on the islands, drove an intensification of Chumash social complexity. We believe the Island Chumash had abundant local plant foods, asphaltum, and other resources.

Exciting new discoveries have forced us to reevaluate longstanding assumptions regarding the origins of social complexity in the area of the Santa Barbara Channel. Whereas previous models for the development of Chumash chiefdoms assumed that islands were terrestrially marginal environments, current data suggest islanders enjoyed a diversity of subsistence resources. Given these developments, it is time for us to reexamine the economic basis for exchange across the Santa Barbara Channel.