:.J THE EARLIEST ALASKANS AND THE EARLIEST AMERICANS THEME STUDY -, by Brian T. Wygal Final Edition A THESIS Presented to the Department of Anthropology and the College of Arts and Sciences University of Alaska Anchorage in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology December 2003
225
Embed
The earliest Alaskans and the earliest Americans theme study › docs › vol1 › I › 62751283.pdf · the Earliest Americans theme and their own perspectives on how their ancestors
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
:.J
THE EARLIEST ALASKANS AND THEEARLIEST AMERICANS THEME STUDY
-,
byBrian T. Wygal
Final Edition
A THESISPresented to the Department of Anthropology and the
College of Arts and SciencesUniversity of Alaska Anchorage
in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Anthropology
December 2003
EARLIEST AMERICANS THEME STUDY
~"
ARLISAlaskaReso~rcesLibrary & Information Service
Library Building, Suite 111 "/,.3211 Providence Drive
Anchora@:e, AK 99508-4614"
December 2003
by_
Brian T. Wygal
THESIS
THE EARLIEST ALASKANS AND THE
W~er4Jd~William Workman, PhD
1
ACCEPTE .
)
J
J
JJ
J
1
lI1
1
1
1
1
1
1
j
1
oLOf"-.of"-.f"-.
oooLOLOf"-.MM
Acknowledgments
My graduate committee at the University of Alaska, Anchorage has been
of special importance during the past two and a half years. Dr. William
Workman's suggestions, directions to publications, and knowledge of Arctic
archaeology provided indispensable insight to this research. Dr. Owen Mason
also provided me with hard-to-find publications, and the understanding that
geology, ecology, and site formation processes are fundamental when discussing
archaeology. I must also thank Robert Gal with the Western Arctic National
Parklands for providing his expertise on Paleoindian archaeology, lithic
technology, and analysis, as well as laboratory and field methods. His project,
the spatial and lithic analysis of the Last Day site, provided me with essential
introductions to the software and techniques used in archaeological analysis.
Dr. Becky Saleeby's efforts, from the beginning, have been most
supportive. She provided me with the support and motivation to study Early
Alaskans without restriction. Becky was responsible for taking on the Earliest
Americans Theme Study in Alaska and securing funding from the National
Council for Preservation Education and the National Park Service for my
internships under her supervision.
Becky was also responsible for introducing me to Dr. David Yesner, whose
work first inspired my desire to study Paleoindian archaeology during my
undergraduate years. David Yesner has been a true friend and mentor, studying
under his advisement has been an honor, and his example and influence shall
remain with me for my entire c..areer.
Finally, I must extend the utmost appreciation and gratitude to Kathryn
Krasinski, whose unlimited tenacity and work ethic provided much needed
inspiration in the final phases of this stage in the earliest Alaskan project. Her
countless revisions and constructive criticism contributed immensely to the final
drafts of this thesis.
Although many people, including my graduate committee, have provided
suggestions and knowledge, and directed me toward many publications and
ideas, the opinions and thoughts I have written in this thesis are entirely my own.
The positions included mayor may not reflect that of anyone of these
individuals.
ii
Abstract
A Theme Study considers the significance of cultlJral properties under a
common theme deemed nationally significant. The National Park Service has
been working to nominate archaeological properties to the National Register of
Historic Places based on the Earliest Americans Theme Study, as mandated by
the United States Senate in 1995. Alaska plays a vital role in developing this
theme since groups must have migrated throughout the state during the peopling
of the Western Hemisphere. As a contribution to this important Theme Study,
this thesis involves the development of methods used to assess the current body
of literature pertaining to Early Alaskan sites dated to between 8,000 and 12,000
radiocarbon years before present (rcybp). It reviews the current state of Alaskan
Paleoindian Cultural Resource documentation and provides information
necessary for the development of a multiple property nomination capable of
assessing the differing degrees of integrity and significance of these early sites.
iii
Table of Contents
Chapter
I. Introduction
II. The Earliest Americans Theme Study
Ill. The Earliest Alaskans
A. Geographic Focus
B. The State of Early Alaskan Cultural Resources
C. Alaskan Site Categories and Methods of Analyses
IV. Pleistocene/Early Holocene Environments and Archaeology in Alaska
A. Paleo-environment of the Pleistocene and Holocene
B. Early Alaskan Archaeological Classifications
C. Early Alaskan Component Frequencies
D. An Alternate Approach: Primary Mode of Lithic Production
E. Calibrated Radiocarbon Determinations for Early Alaskan Sites
V. Spatial Integrity of Ancient Surface Sites: A Case Study at Last Day
VI. Results and Conclusion
Notations
References Cited
Appendix
Page
1
6
10
16
20
22
29
29
36
47
48
52
56
66
70
71-88
89-216
iv
Tables and Figures Page
Table 3.1 Summary of Early Alaskan Sites 11-12
Table 3.2 Summary of Site Rankings 15
Figure 3.3 Early Alaskan Sites 16
Figure 3.4 Northem Distribution of Early Sites 18
Figure 3.5 Interior Distribution of Early Sites 19
Table 3.6 National Register Designation Codes 20
Figure 3.7 National Register Designations for Early Alaskan Sites 21
Table 3.8 Early Alaska Site Categories 23
Figure 4.1 Alaska Paleoglaciation 32
Figure 4.2 Beringia Digital Elevation Model 33
Table 4.3 Early Alaska Technological Classifications 37
Table 4.4 Mesa Complex Sites 42
Figure 4.5 Early Alaska Component Frequency 48
Figure 4.6 Percentages of Early Alaskan Components 48
Table 4.7 Early Alaskan Technologic Classifications 49
Figure 4.8 Mode of Production in Early Alaskan Components 51
Table 4.9 Radiocarbon Determinations and Calibrated Years 54
Figure 5.1 Spatial Integrity at the Last Day Site 59
Figure 5.2 Artifact Types in Cluster A at Last Day 60
Figure 5.3 Blade Width verses Thickness 63
Figure 5.4 Last Day (XHP-497) Lithic Artifacts 65
Table 6.1 Brooks Range 69
Table 6.2 Seward Peninsula 69
Table 6.3 Interior 69
Table 6.4 Southeast 69
Table 6.5 Southwest and Alaska Peninsula 69
Table 6.6 Aleutians 69
v
Tables and Figures (continued) Page
Table 7.1 Broken Mammoth 101
Table 7.2 Broken Mammoth 102
Table 7.3 Cario Creek 107
Table 7.4 Chuck Lake Horizontal Provenience 110
Table 7.5 Chuck Lake Locality 1 Vertical Stratigraphy 110
Table 7.6 Delta River Overlook 115
Table 7.7 Excavated Areas at Gallagher Flint Station 118
Table 7.8 Gallagher Localities 121
Table 7.9 Stratigraphy at all Three Gallagher Localities 121
Table 7.10 Ground Hog Bay 2 126
Table 7.11 Healy Lake Village Site 131
Table 7.12 Hidden Falls 138
Table 7.13 Mead 156
Table 7.14 Moose Creek 166
Table 7.15 Moose Creek Calibrated 166
Table 7.16 On Your Knees Cave 172
Table 7.17 Owl Ridge 177
Table 7.18 Panguingue Creek 180
Table 7.19 Putu Locality 186
Table 7.20 Swan Point 194
Table 7.21 Swan Point 195
Table 7.22 Trail Creek Caves 199
Table 7.23 Ugashik Narrows 207
Table 7.24 Usibelli Site 210
I would like to extend special thanks to my parents, Robert andKaren Wygal, and my family who have offered infinite supportand enduring patience during my academic pursuits. Theseaccomplishments would certainly not have been possiblewithout their assistance and support and, as a result, I wouldlike to dedicate this thesis to them.
vii
I. Introduction
The nomination of archaeological sites to US National Landmark status
has been a part of federal policy since the 1930's. As a part of that continuing
effort and to re-invigorate the National Historic Landmark program, the United
States Senate mandated the Earliest Americans Theme Study as a national
endeavor in 1995. The "Earliest Americans" was selected as a theme based on
the importance of the peopling of the Americas as a broad theoretical issue for
both professional archaeologists and the American public (Grumet 1995). In the
summer of 2000, the National Park Service Alaska Support Office initiated
research on early Alaskan cultural resources as a contribution to the theme
study. This thesis is a culmination of that research and a review of Alaska's
cultural resource management documentation and policies pertinent to the
cultural preservation of early Alaskan sites. The information provided here
establishes the necessity for future work and the development of a Multiple
Property Nomination document.
Following federal guidelines, early Alaskan archaeological resources are
considered those that date between 8,000 and 12,000 radiocarbon years before
present (rcybp), an arbitrary span of time representing the Terminal Pleistocene
Early Holocene transition in Alaska. A literature search, standardized by several
categories of data based on aspects of scientific significance, integrity, and
control over accurate dating methodology, has identified 47 early Alaskan sites
for consideration. Those sites form the framework and establish the context for
the comparison of individual sites. Thirty-four well-documented early Alaskan
sites were judged to possess "High", "Medium," or "Low" levels of integrity and
scientific significance, respectively, within this context. These ranks determine
the SUitability of cultural properties (archaeological sites) for nomination to the
National Register of Historic Places (NR) and the designation of National Historic
Landmarks (NHL). The remaining 13 sites are discussed further in Chapter III.
Why is the nomination of sites necessary for cultural resource
management in Alaska? The purpose of the NR is to "serve as a planning
document alerting Federal agencies to the existence of historic properties that
may come under their jurisdiction" (Neumann and Sanford 2001). It is a list
referred to by agencies and decision makers regarding compliance with the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. This involves not only checking the
NR to determine if a property has already been listed, but also requires
determining potential impacts by agency undertakings or actions associated with
federal money on any cultural properties, documented or not. Sites eligible for
the NR under its criteria for evaluation (NPS 1991 a) are afforded the same
consideration as if they were a NR property (King 2001). Although some
agencies treat all sites on federal land as though they were eligible, when a site
is actually on the NR it increases management awareness. If threatened, a NR
2
or NHL site or National Register eligible site is "mitigated" in order to preserve
site data and integrity as much as possible.
How does the State Historic Preservation Officer and Federal Agencies
currently manage resources in relation to the NR? Alaskan cultural resources
are classified based on a system of codes and "Determinations of Eligibility"
(DOE). The DOE is the standard document that cultural resource offices and
contractors use when evaluating sites for potential nomination. These
evaluations influence mitigation that follows and the determination of eligibility for
the NR in no way immediately halts the development or undertaking of a
particular project (King 1998, 2001).
A NHL is the highest level of designation on the NR. NHLs possess levels
of national significance and integrity as cultural properties, and are afforded the
highest levels of protection1. NR properties, considered significant on a local or
regional scale, are also closely monitored and provided significant protection.
Theme studies generate NHLs and have documented and protected North East
Coast Lighthouses, Covered Bridges, and Underground Railroad properties
under NHL status. The first theme study was a pioneering effort, prepared by
Marie Wormington (1960) on "Prehistoric Hunters and Gatherers", focusing on
Earliest Americans west of the Mississippi River. Her work successfully
1 The term protection is used as in a relative sense, as federal regulators simply require that the effects ofpotentially destructive actions be considered within the NHPA 106 process.
3
nominated the Clovis and Folsom sites as NHLs in New Mexico (Grumet 1995,
NPS 2003a).
Theme Studies serve as a heuristic device and aid in the interpretation of
America's shared cultural heritage through a multidisciplinary approach (NPS
2003b). However, there is a major difference between the Earliest Americans
Theme Study and those of the past: the inclusion of supplemental documentation
separate from the perspective of cultural resource management. The National
Museum of the American Indian plans to record American Indian perspectives on
the Earliest Americans theme and their own perspectives on how their ancestors
came into the Americas (Grumet 1995).
Thematic studies do not replace primary archaeological research or other
scientific inquiry. Instead, they are a methodical way of interpreting
archaeological data for the American public. A major goal of the Early Americans
Theme Study is to facilitate the development of educational programs essential
for providing information to the people through literature, internet addresses, and
outreach programs capable of bridging a widening gap between professional
archeologists and the public at large.
Aside from explanations of the Earliest Americans Theme Study and the
methods of analysis developed for the documentation of early Alaskan sites in
the Appendix section, the discussions that follow focus on Alaska's geographic
regions, paleoecological factors, and radiocarbon determinations in relation to
4
early Alaskan sites. Also addressed are an alternative to traditional technological
classifications used for early Alaskan assemblages, and a case study from XHP
497, in which an assemblage unclassifiable by current typologies was analyzed
and problems regarding the integrity of surface sites in the Brooks Range.
5
II. The Earliest Americans Theme Study
Theme Studies designed by the NPS encompass major segments of
American History. They provide an historic context of properties and evaluate
their significance in determining property eligibility for NHL status (Code of
Federal Regulations 2003).
The NPS monitors NR and NHL properties for the purposes of recognition,
planning, preservation, and public education (Shull 2002:3). Educational
information about listed properties is immediately accessible via the National
Register internet site, accessed by over 50,000 people per week, 2.6 million
"visits" per year (Shull 2002). Such accessibility allows millions of individuals the
ability to research, teach, learn, or travel to our nation's most treasured cultural-
historical properties.
Properties associated with America's earliest inhabitants represent someof the nations most significant and most threatened groups of culturalresources. Responding to this challenge, the National Park Service isworking with its partners in the government, scholarly, avocational, tribal,and historic preservation communities to develop the Earliest AmericansNational Historic Landmark Theme Study. This project is a multi-yeareffort to recognize and protect nationally significant archeologicalproperties associated with America's first inhabitants (Grumet 1995:14).
Nationwide work on the Earliest Americans Theme by State Historic
Preservation Offices (SHPOs) indicates that only 35 states have some degree of
documentation on Paleoindian sites within their boundaries. Furthermore, only
24 of these states have documented their properties on a statewide scale (NPS
6
2002a). Alaska can provide a major contribution by compiling such information
from within its borders.
David Anderson (2003) provides a perspective on the Earliest Americans
Theme Study and the development of NHL and NR properties.
Linked with the evaluation of specific NHL property classes andcategories is an assessment of their integrity. Three levels of integrity areemployed in the present NHL theme study, High, Moderate, and Low.PiOperties whose integrity is High are potential NHLs or have nationallevel NR significance. Sites with High integrity have clearly identifiedPaleoindian component(s) in secure context, and with precise calendricdating. That is, the geologic and sedimentary context of theassemblage(s) are well documented, with sources of intrusion ordisturbance recognized and controlled, and the age of the depositsascertained using one or more absolute dating procedures, such asradiocarbon or OSL dating. Sufficient age determinations must, however,have been obtained from samples in secure context to ensure confidencein the results. Individual dates, accordingly, or even large numbers ofdates from controversial associations, will probably not be consideredsufficient, unless supported by other kinds of evidence, such asunambiguous geological or biotic associations. Where materials forabsolute dating are not available, the assemblage(s) must be of highlyunusual significance. In the Southeast, properties with high integrity andnational level significance include Cactus Hill, Sloan, Dust Cave, andvarious sites in the Allendale, South Carolina, Aucilla River, Florida,Christian County, Kentucky, and Nottoway River, Virginia localities(Anderson, David 2003).
Areas first focused on by the Earliest Americans Theme Study included
those not documented by Wormington's (1960) "Prehistoric Hunters and
Gatherers", the first federal document summarizing Paleoindian sites. Her work
depicted big game hunters on the Western Plains. Today, in light of the time gap
since her earlier and influential research, there is a substantial need for changing
the American public's perception regarding Paleoindian subsistence strategies
away from stereotypes propagated by the big game kill sites found in the western
7
central United States. Archaeological evidence from sites east of the Mississippi,
for example, indicates that Paleoindians possessed a much more diverse
economic strategy (NPS 2003a). David Anderson (2003) has described the
eastern United States regional divisions: the Midwest, the Northeast, and the
Southeast.
During the Pleistocene, the Midwest region (Wisconsin, Minnesota and
Michigan) was a dynamic ecosystem, a difficult periglacial environment with melt
waters and torrential rivers. The earliest inhabitants of the Midwest region likely
arrived approximately 13,500 calendar years ago (NPS 2003a).
The Northeast bordered a shallow sea in present day New England. In
this region, there were low population densities of Early Americans living a
pattern of seasonal migrations. In addition to hunting the plentiful herds of big
game they fished, hunted birds, and collected crustaceans. During the harsh
winters they may have migrated along rivers, following familiar routes and
hunting smail-to-medium sized game like rabbit, deer, caribou, and beaver (NPS
2003a).
Finally, the Southeast region was more bountiful than regions to the north.
Glacial meltwaters ran south supporting marine and marshland ecosystems
downstream. The earliest people who settled here traveled south along the
Appalachian Mountains. They trapped fish and other marine animals along the
coasts of the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico (NPS 2003a).
8
JJ
Further to the west, across the Mississippi River, there were different
animals including bear, elk, large herds of giant bison, and various plants that
existed in the woodland areas bordering the Great Plains (NPS 2003a). Future
efforts on behalf of the Earliest Americans Theme Study plan to incorporate the
Great Plains and regions throughout the Western United States.
In Alaska, four early sites have previously been placed on the list of NHLs:
the Onion Portage site (1972), the Dry Creek site (1974), the Gallagher Flint
Station (1978), and the Anangula site (1978). Onion Portage was designated a
NHL because it was favored by early Paleoarctic hunters, defined by Anderson
(1988) as the Akmak complex dated prior to 8,000 rcybp, in addition to eight
other groups each using different technology at Onion Portage throughout the
Holocene. When Dry Creek became a NHL, it was the earliest archaeological
site in Alaska with fragmentary remains of large Pleistocene fauna (bison, wapiti,
and mountain sheep) similar to species from Siberia. The Gallagher Flint
Station, at the time of its nomination, was the oldest documented site in northern
Alaska. Anangula became a NHL because, at the time, it represented the
earliest group of maritime peoples living along the coast of the former Bering land
bridge. Today, Anangula and Onion Portage retain most of their original
significance; Dry Creek and Gallagher Flint Station remain historically significant
despite additional research and the discovery of additional sites (N PS 2003d)1.
ma nax san ed Low Stratified Med Possible Anangula Low LowBatza Tena High Med Surface Low Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic Low MedBroken Mammoth High High Stratified Low Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic High HighCarlo Creek High Med Stratified Low Possible Unknown High MedChuck Lake High Low Stratified Med Possible NW Coast Microblade High MedDelta River Overlook Med Low Stratified Med Yes Paleoarctic High MedDonnelly Ridge High High Surface N/A No Denali Low MedGround Hog Bav 2 High Med Stratified Med Possible Denali (variant) Yes HighHealy Lake Med High Buried High ? Nenana Med MedHidden Falls Med Low Stratified High Yes NW Coast Microblade Med LowHillTop Med Low Surface Unknown N/A Mesa Med LowHog Island High High Stratified Low Yes Anangula High HighKoggiung Low Low N/A High No Paleoarctic Med LowLime Hills Caves Med Med Stratified Low Yes Paleoarctic High MedLisburne Med Med Surface Med Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic Med MedMead High Med Stratified Low Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic High HighMesa High High Surface Low Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic High HighMoose Creek High Med Stratified Med Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic High MedNukluk Mountain Low Low Surface High Possible Paleoarctic Low LowOiled Blade High Low Stratified Low Yes Anangula High MedOn Your Knees Cave High High Stratified Low Possible NW Coast Microblade High HighOwl Ridge High Med Stratified Med Possible Paleo indian? Paleoarctic High MedPanguingue Creek High Med Stratified Low Possible Paleo indian? Paleoarctic High MedPhipps Med Med Stratified Low Yes Paleoarctic High MedPutu-Bedwell Med Med Surface High Possible Paleoindian, Unknown Med MedSlate Creek Unknown Low Stratified Low Yes Paleoarctic Low LowSpein Mountain High High Stratified Med Yes Paleoindian High HighSwan Point High High Stratified Low Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic High HighTrail Creek Caves High Med Stratified Med Possible Paleoarctic High MedTuluaq Hill High High Buried Low Yes Paleoindian High HighUgashik Narrows High High Stratified Low Yes Paleoarctic/Anangula? High HighUsibelli High Low Stratified Low Yes Paleo indian, Paleoarctic Low MedWalker Road High High Stratified Low Yes Paleoindian, Paleoarctic? High HighWhitmore Ridge Med Med Buried Med Possible Paleoarctic High Med
]
~
JJ
A. Geographic Focus
The geographical focus for the early Alaskan project encompasses the
Alaska state boundaries, a huge region. Because Alaska is varied in its reaches,
I have subdivided the state into nine geographic regions for analytical purposes:
Southeast Alaska, Southwest Alaska, Southcentral Alaska, the Interior, the
Brooks Range, the Arctic Slope, the Aleutians Islands, and the Seward and
Alaska Peninsulas.
Figure 3.3: Distribution of Early Sites
a 500 1000 2000~i~~~~~~~~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~,'Kiiometers
16
Figure 3.3 illustrates 42 of the 47 sites dated within the temporal focus of
the project. "Unknown" sites (sites pending further research) were not included
in the figure. Those depicted are a representative sample of the sites that satisfy
age categories for inclusion in the analysis. It is important to keep in mind that
many points overlap on this map; some sites appear in clusters. In an effort to
conceal specific locations, each triangle covers an area larger than five square
miles. Specific location information is available for these sites only through the
State Historic Preservation Office.
Lime Hills Caves, Spein Mountain, and Nukluk Mountain were the few
sites found in southwestern Alaska. On the Alaska Peninsula were the Ugashik
Narrows and Koggiung sites. In the Aleutian Islands were the Hog Island, Oiled
Blade, and Anangula core-and-blade sites. Southeast Alaska revealed several
sites, including Ground Hog Bay 2, Hidden Falls, and On Your Knees Cave.
17
J
Figure 3.4: Northern Distribution of Early Sites
"
o •
Figure 3.4 depicts the Arctic Slope region with its major drainage, the
Colville River, the Brooks Range, with the Noatak and Kobuk Rivers draining that
region to the west and the Seward Peninsula (located in the southwest corner of
the map). The Brooks Range contains ten early Alaskan sites, including the
Mesa, lisburne, and Putu-Bedwell sites located in the northern foothills bordering
the Arctic Slope region. On the Seward Peninsula, Trail Creek Caves is the only
early Alaskan site identified to date.
18
]
j
Figure 3.5: Interior Distribution of Early Sites
Interior Alaska contains the majority of early sites, in part due to the
development of the Alaska Highway system and the opportunity it has provided
for archaeological discovery. The Shaw Creek Flats sites, the Gerstle River
Quarry site, sites in the Nenana Valley, and the Tangle Lakes and Teklanika
Archaeological Districts appear in Figure 3.5. Also depicted is one of the major
interior drainages, the Tanana River draining northwest into the Yukon River.
The Alaska Range formed a formidable mountainous glacial barrier during the
19
Pleistocene and, as it did then, it continues to provide great relief feeding the
Tanana River from the south with snow and glacier runoff.
B. The State of Early Alaskan Cultural Resources
There are 31 National Register Designation Codes (NATREG) designed to
rank cultural properties based on National Register criteria. The codes assist in
planning the mitigation of impacts to cultural properties that may come under
threat. Table 3.6 lists (in a simplified version) the codes that pertain to
Paleoindian sites in Alaska.
Table 3.6: National Register Designation Codes (AHRS 2003)Designation Code Translation_.Q_Q_~ p.t_~P~.r:1:Y.__9_~.!~r..t1Ji.Q_~_~I. __~!_t9.i~!~ __f9.E_!b_~ .. ~_~!i.9_Q?.L.B~g!§!~E .... _. ._.Q~_§' §J_!~_gE~_!t~~!~E~IJY.i.!~!_Q ~_Q ~!!9_i.~_~~ gQ.~ __~~_§. §J_!~ __9.E~_~E~_~!~E~~_i.!~ __~_Q ~~~_~_~_~9.!_9.gig_~'___g_!§!tig! .. ___~_t1_h N_~!!9.IJ~LtlJ.~!9Ei~~__~_Q_9_t1J_?E~ __~.. QLN_§.!ig_Q§_'__$_!.g_Qifi.~_§_Qg_~ __NHR Nominated to the National .... of Historic Places
:EE$:::::::::::::::~:::::: __ :::_:~:::_:~_: __ National Historic Site ...'"C.
The category site name documents the common name by which sites are
referred, often used in place of the more formal site number provided by the
Alaska Heritage Resource Survey (AHRS). The category region documents
where in Alaska each of the sites occur. The category repository documents the
institution where artifacts are formally housed. Landowner records the agency
where each site is located, and who is responsible for site preservation; it also
documents sites located on private land. Basal date is a category containing the
oldest single radiocarbon date or an approximate radiocarbon age accepted by
23
consensus in literature. Its purpose is to provide a general estimate of site age.
Site integrity played a role in selecting the basal date; basal date is not
necessarily the absolutely earliest date of cultural material from any given site.
Many of the basal dates were used in the discussion of radiocarbon calibration.
The term tradition is widely used in North American archaeology to
describe wide-spread and lasting technological attributes. Traditions suggest a
larger temporal cultural continuity than do complexes. Technological complexes
occur in similar context and within a relatively constrained period of time and
geographic location. Typically, several complexes comprise a single tradition.
Tradition and complex could be thought of as similar to a genus and species
system, not in an evolutionary sense, but rather as a taxonomic system that
becomes more specific in the classification of assemblage attributes, in this case
artifact attributes.
William Andrefsky (1998) has described various approaches for attribute
analysis. Assemblage attributes are snapshots of always-changing lithic tool kits.
Artifacts recovered at any stage of their use-life can represent a number of
shapes or functions, and archaeologists may find them at any given point during
a reduction sequence (Andrefsky 1998).
In an attempt to standardize the classifications used, two classifications
were not employed: West's (1981 :163) "Beringian Tradition" and Davis'
"Paleomarine Tradition" (Davis 1989). This is because, in my opinion,
24
"Paleomarine" is better subdivided into the Anangula and Northwest Coast
Microblade traditions, and the Beringian tradition is simply too broad in scope,
covering both NE Asia and Alaska, and was documented here as either Denali or
Paleoarctic.
Complex is an analytical classification based on artifacts that occur
together in association. To define the category complex, I used generally
accepted terminology in current archaeological literature. Flaws in that
terminology exist with "the notion of tracing the evidence of the oldest human
occupation from lower North America back to Alaska, and ultimately to Asia,
produced expectations about the archaeological characteristics of late
Pleistocene Alaska" (Bever 2001 b). In some ways, a uniform classification
system is still needed in Alaskan archaeology (Bever 2001a: 98). Despite these
difficulties, a description of technological temporal persistence, presented by Gal
and Hall (1982), has been a useful conceptual device for organizing various
archaeological components left by the earliest Alaskans. However, this system is
similar to the way in which archaeologists have attempted artifact classification
for years, with one exception. Gal and Hall (1982) recognized that mUltiple
assemblages likely co-existed in time and space. With this important addition,
"tradition" and "complex" are defined in a manner consistent with the definitions
set fourth by original investigators. For occasions where there has been
25
disagreement, I have sided with the researcher who put forth the most complete
documentation.
To what degree can the tool kits of Paleoindians tell us about their cultural
identities? Such questions demonstrate the difficulty in relying solely on
technological determinations in tracing "cultures" through time, yet such evidence
remains essential to tie people to the ground. Tool kits and subsistence patterns
can provide information related to economic levels of societies and establish a
geographic home. Although genetics and linguistics can establish connections
between groups geographically and in time, they analyze evidence that is mobile,
or not physically tied to the ground. Genetics or linguistic markers in Native
Alaskans could have developed anywhere in Asia or North America but material
technology is left in situ and is therefore, immobile.
It is interesting to note that Paleoindian archaeologists in the contiguous
United States are grappling with similar problems of technological classification.
Using the concept of "co-traditions", investigators find multiple technological
"cultures" co-existing during the Terminal Pleistocene.
In several places, some archaeologists believe that Clovis is one ofseveral contemporary traditions existing in North America at 11000rcybp... in post-Clovis times the simultaneous existence of differenttraditions - such as Folsom, Midland, Agate Basin and Plainview ataround 10200 rcybp ...Some archaeologists are not convinced thatseveral types coexisted (Haynes 2002:257).
In Alaska, several site components are labeled "unknown" because they
contain non-diagnostic artifacts. Many of the unknown assemblages are
26
assumed to be small collections from Denali or possibly Nenana complex
occupations, based on stratigraphy and radiocarbon determinations. Others
sites have been labeled "unknown" because they are currently under
investigation. Occupations of unknown affinity may be determined eligible for
nomination due to their potential to contain important cultural resources if
deposits remain intact. In terms of the NR criteria, the potential to reveal
significant information is enough for nomination (NPS 1991 a).
Environment documents the immediate surroundings and geological
characteristics associated with the site location, ie, nearby seashores, rivers, and
lakes; the local vegetation; and topography. Many site locations on record are
inaccurate, recorded before the development of Global Positioning System
(GPS) technology. At some point, it will be necessary to verify many of the
coordinates with state-of-the-art GPS readings.
The category history describes the research history of each site intended
to document how much material 'v'v'as excavated at each site, as well as who
worked there and when. To some degree, previous interpretations of site
significance have been discussed under History, including instances when re
excavation or re-analysis has uncovered nevv evidence, e.g. at the vvell-known
Campus site (Mobley 1991), at the Putu-Bedwell site (Reanier 1994, Hamilton
and Goebel 1999), at the Mesa sites (Kunz and Reanier 1994, Hamilton and
Goebel 1999) and at the Gallagher Flint Station (Ferguson 1997a, 1997b).
27
Significance and integrity playa major role in the ranking of each site
within this historic context. Significance is a statement of scientific relevance to
the theme "Peopling of the New World". Sites can be significant in a number of
ways and archaeologists often disagree about what makes a site or artifact
collection significant; regardless, a concise statement of scientific significance
has been provided for each site. Artifacts and features is an inventory of artifacts
recovered from each component. The information recorded within this category
establishes the technological complex or tradition present at each site.
Integrity plays a crucial role in assessing site significance, because
artifacts and radiocarbon determinations require strong association for proof of
provenience. The category description documents the precise spatial
provenience of artifacts and associated radiocarbon samples as a priority for
determining integrity. It also documents the geological sediments in relation to
one another. Concerning the categories integrity and description, stratified sites
with obvious separation bet\i'Jeen occupations were ideal, for example, the NHLs
Onion Portage (Anderson 1988) and Dry Creek (Powers and Hoffecker 1989).
However, it was necessary to consider the integrity of horizontally separate
components, similar to those at the Lisburne (Bowers 1982, 1999) and Putu
Bedwell sites (Reanier 1994, 1996). As an example, a case study of the Last
Day site (Chapter V) includes a brief lithic analysis and demonstrates the spatial
characteristics of surface components with a high degree of horizontal integrity.
28
IV. Pleistocene/Early Holocene Environment and Archaeology
Over the last 15,000 rcybp, Alaska has undergone significant
environmental and climatic changes. These changes are an essential factor in
the interpretation of archaeological evidence. The first people to arrive in
Beringia, between 12,000 and 15,000 rcybp, lived in a different environmental
context than those who lived between 9,000 and 7,000 rcybp. Understanding
these changes in different regions of the state allows consideration of major
environmental barriers and specific adaptations made by early Alaskans.
A. Paleo-environment of the Pleistocene and Early Holocene
Dale Guthrie (1996:172) described the "Mammoth Steppe", as a late
Pleistocene grassland reaching from northeastern Europe across Siberia, China,
and Mongolia, spreading out of Central Asia (Guthrie 1990, 1996, Bonnichsen
and Turnmire 1999:6). The mammoth steppe is often characterized as both
tundra and steppe, with similar megafaunal species existing in across two difficult
but similar periglacial environments.
During Pleistocene cycles of low solar input, this grassy biome spreadwestward across Europe to the Atlantic, northward to the Arctic Oceanonto the huge exposed continental shelf of North Asia, and eastward toNorth America via the exposed Beringian land bridge. This combinationof cold and aridity led to the elimination of wood plants, and favoredcertain arid-adapted grasses and forbs (Bonnichsen and Turnmire1999:6).
According to Gary Haynes (2002:160),Tundra greatly expanded, and there was a [common zone] betweentundra and steppe, perhaps possessing characteristics of both biomes.Beringia was unambiguous tundra, but the huge region of central Asiaand southern and south-eastern Europe [was steppe].
29
In the Great Plains of the United States and southern Canada, there was a
similar ecology as described in Europe, Asia and Beringia during the Pleistocene.
How did this Pleistocene world affect modern humans as they populated the
northern hemishperes?
Western Beringia was the last part of the Old World populated during the
Pleistocene. In central Russia, the availability of large game played a major role
in providing abundant resources for a growing population of modern humans.
Biotic productivity peaked in central Russia between 25,000 and 20,000 years
ago; by 18,000 -12,000 years ago productivity was decreasing and megafauna
were becoming extinct (Soffer 1985:206). Ancestors of the early Alaskans
emerged from the north Eurasian environment moving eastward through Beringia
on the continuous "Mammoth Steppe".
Geologists have discovered that large regions of interior Alaska and the
Arctic Slope, in Eastern Beringia, remained ice-free during the Last Glacial
Maximum (LGM) and only the Brooks and Alaska Ranges had local glaciation. In
the Brooks Range, the most recent glacial episodes of Northwest Alaska are
apparent in the Noatak River drainage. There, the most recent Anisak glacial
advance dated from 13,600 years ago, marking the end of the LGM for the
western Brooks Range. Anisak was contemporaneous with the less extensive
Douglas Creek and Itkillik Creek advances from the central Brooks Range. The
30
massive ice dammed Lake Noatak formed in the Delong Mountains from the
runoff of these two glaciers (Hamilton 2001).
Sedge, poplar (Populus sp.), and birch (Betula sp.) were present in the
southern Brooks Range during the LGM (Anderson and Brubaker 1996). It is
certain that megafaunal species like horse, antelope, steppe bison, and
mammoth roamed the Beringian landscape until present tundra environments
emerged (Guthrie 1990, Walker et al 2001).
A modern analog for the Beringian landscape does not occur on earth
today (Elias 2001). Similar vegetation patterns may have been similar to
present-day dry tundra environments characterized as less acidic and with less
cotton grass or tussocks. Studies indicate that Moist Non-acidic Tundra (MNT)
dominated Pleistocene Beringia with more stable footing than the tussocks
common in the Moist Acidic Tundra (MAT) found in most of Northern Alaska
today. In addition to higher nutrients, MNT also contains more sedge and dwarf
birch. The shifting of Beringia from a landscape dominated by large patches of
MNT to MAT likely had a role in the extinction of Pleistocene megafaunal species
(Walker et al 2001).
As vegetation began to reclaim the now fertile periglacial regions, so did
species of fauna and human habitation was not far behind (Hamilton 1982).
Figure 4.1 shows the extent of ice in Alaska during the LGM and the Late
31
J
J
J
Pleistocene, allowing a reconstruction of regions where initial peopling most
probably occurred.
The oldest dates of colonization occurred between 11,500 and 12,000rcybp. Earliest sites found in the interior of Alaska contained evidencethat they were a colonizing population. In Northern and Interior Alaska,there was a push-pull effect from the changing climatic conditions of thedisappearing Bering Land Bridge because of rising sea levels. The rise ofbirch-poplar may have killed mega-fauna, "obligate grazers" mammothand horse. The increased birch and poplar supported large elk... ratherthan traditional mega fauna. There were also varieties of bird, smallgame and fish. The "Younger Dryas reversal" was dwarfed by the MidHolocene period of dry windy conditions, during a period when the interiorwas likely largely abandoned (Yesner 2001 :315).
Fi ure 4.1: Alaska Late Pleistocene Glaciation 1
Alaska Paleo-Glaciation_ Terminal Pleistocene
Last Glacial Maxim um
1 Adapted from Coulter et al 1965 and from National Park Service AlaskaPak GIS Meta Data (NPS 2002b)
32
uuj
The Bering Land Bridge became the Bering Sea approximately
11,000 rcybp (Elias 2000, 2001), closing the Asia-Alaska connection.
Stabilization of the American coast occurred in the Aleutians at
approximately the same time as in Chile, during the Early Holocene
(Yesner 1996:250). Portions of central Beringia inundated by water are
easily visible in maps of today's coastline, depicted in Figure and 4.2.
The Late glacial period (14,000-10,000 yr BP) was an interval of rapidenvironmental change throughout Beringia. Climatic fluctuations broughtabout wholesale changes in the distribution of Beringian plants andanimals, and may have played the most important role in the regionalextinction of many mega faunal mammal species... The pollen evidenceindicates that herbaceous tundra vegetation dominated much of Beringiaat the end of the last glaciation, giving way to shrub tundra in mostregions between 14,000 and 12,000 yr BP (Elias 2001:10).
Figure 4.2: Beringia Digital Elevation Modef
2 Source: AlaskaPak GIS package (NPS 2002b)33
Elias (2001) explains that in Northwest Alaska the transition from lush
moss and lichen vegetation during the Late Pleistocene began approximately
14,000 rcybp. This occurred in Siberia between 13,000 and 12,500 rcybp (Elias
2001: 10). After the Bering Sea expanded into lowland Beringia (11,000 yr BP),
the Younger Dryas cooling trend emerged in the Early Holocene between 10,800
and 10,000 rcybp causing the shrub tundra vegetation to decline and herbaceous
tundra expanded once again in interior regions (Elias 2001). The Milankovitch
Thermal Maximum (10,000-9,000 cal BP or 9,000-8,000 rcybp) followed the
cooling trend with increases in average temperature (Mason et al 2001 :525).
Later, the remnant Beringian landmasses (the Lena Basin, Alaska and the
Mackenzie territory) developed coniferous spruce forests between 8,500 and
8,000 rcybp (Elias 2001:10-11).
The exact route(s) from Beringia southward across Canada into the lower
contiguous states remain unknown. For decades, the picture of an "ice-free
corridor" from Alaska through Canada has dominated our perception of big game
hunters with fluted projectiles leading the southern migration. Today, offshore
submarine evidence from the Northwest Coast indicates the former existence of
ice-free refugia with the capacity for human habitation between 14,000 and
10,000 rcybp. This environment may have supported marine mammals (walrus
and ringed seal) throughout the Pleistocene, providing the possibility for coastal
subsistence and possibly early migrations (Mandryk et al 2001).
34
Evidence from Cold Bay, near the start of the Aleutians chain, indicates
that the glacial ice centered over the Pacific shelf was in rapid retreat between
14,000 and 12,000 rcybp (Mann and Peteet 1994). A radiocarbon determination
from a willow leaf from a deeply stratified profile suggests vegetation was present
11,520.::t100 rcybp (Jordan 2001 :512). The sample was recovered at the bottom
of a well-documented series of peat sediments deposited throughout the
Holocene and provides an indication to when the region became inhabitable.
Shortly after the ice retreated, regional landmasses began
rebounding upward as the immense weight of glacial ice was lifted. In
Glacier Bay, Southeastern Alaska, despite geologic uplift, rising water has
submerged any sites along the coast older than 13,000 rcybp (Mann and
Streveler 1997), making it difficult to understand the extent of maritime
economies during the Terminal Pleistocene.
Some archaeologists (Le., Yesner 2001) suggest that Alaskan
maritime economies emerged as environmental conditions in the interior
deteriorated, Le., changing paleoenvironments had a "push-pull" effect on
early peoples living in Beringia (Yesner 2001). Others believe (Dumond
2001, \/Vorkman and McCartney 1998) site preservation biases in
southeastern Alaska and the Aleutians make the discovery of sites dated
between 7500 and 9600 rcybp very difficult, and as a result very few are
known today. This disparity is the result of complex coastal interactions of
35
eustatic, isostatic, and tectonic processes that eroded or obscured sites
from that period (Jordan 2001 :520).
B. Earlv Alaskan Archaeoloaical Classifications. ~
Some archaeologists resist using traditional technological classification
systems because of the cultural connotations they generate. Despite this,
without making statements regarding ideology, material cultures are theoretically
classifiable by assemblage attributes (Andrefsky 1998). The following
discussions of late Pleistocene/early Holocene archaeological complexes in
Alaska based is on artifact assemblages from a broad sample of sites exhibiting
similar shared attributes. It attempts to subsume the range of variation of early
Alaskan technological complexes, while realizing that alternative constructs might
be developed to accomplish the same goal. Note that, at times, archaeologists
have lumped both the Akmak and Denali complexes into the Paleoarctic tradition
(Mason et al 2001), and have lumped both Nenana and Denali complexes with
Dyuktai into the Beringian tradition ('Nest 1981).
Dixon (2001 :283-287) has synthesized the archaeological technologic
traditions in eastern Beringia based on the Alaskan archaeological literature.
Table 4.3 presents a summary of his synthesis and the range of radiocarbon
dates within which he believes each technology occurred (Dixon 2001 :295).
associated with the Northern Paleoindian tradition often considered to have
originated from the Nenana complex (Goebel et al 1991). Many examples of
fluted point technology occur in the Batza Tena area where 18 fluted points have
been recovered, four times the number found in the rest of Alaska (Clark and
Clark 1993, Hamilton and Goebel 1999:181). Despite similarities with the classic
Paleoindian Tradition, recent work suggests a "strong association" (Kunz et al
2003) between the fluted projectile points in the Brooks range and microblade
technology (Bowers 1982, Reanier 1995).
37
The Batza Tena fluted point sites represent the basis for the Northern
Fluted Point complex, appearing most commonly in, or near, the Brooks Range.
in the Batza Tena region, additional tools associated with the points include
endscrapers, graver spurs, blade-like flakes, utilized or waste flakes, bifacial
tools, bifacial cores and flaked unifacial tool fragments (Clark and Clark 1993).
A single point described as "fluted" was found in Anaktuvuk Pass in
association with the Kayuk complex (Campbell 1959:6). The Kayuk complex
contained large, finely crafted bifacial projectile points and a unifacial core-and
blade technology, including spalls and reworked spalls left over from blade
production. The Kayuk lanceolate projectile points measured between 5.5 and
12.5 cm with "thick ovate to diamond cross sections, convex base, and finely
executed parallel oblique flaking which extends downward from left to right
across both sides of the blade" (Campbell 1959:98).
Kayuk's relationship to Northern fluted points remains unclear (Campbell
1959, Alexander 1969). The relationship of the technology with Sluiceway
projectiles at the Tuluaq Hill site (Rasic 2000) is also unclear. Most of all,
Sluiceway's relationship to the Mesa complex at the Putu (Reanier 1994, 1996)
and Lisburne sites (Bowers 1979, 1982, Loy and Dixon 1998) is just as unclear.
In fact, fluted projectiles tend to appear almost randomly in a variety of Alaskan
Paleoindian assemblages.
38
Initially, there was an attempt by Clark to suggest that the Northern Fluted
Point complex was ancestral to Paleoindians in the Western United States (Clark
1991). Unequivocal proof of this has not been forthcoming. As Clark and Clark
(1993:80-82) have more recently noted, the technology in Alaska has long been
the subject of confusion.
The points described here [Batza Tena] differ from classic Clovis points inthat the shallow medial flute of the classic point usually is larger than thelateral flutes or 'guide flakes' as they are called in that case. Detachmentof the medial flute in the case of the Alaskan and Yukon points leaves thelateral flutes intact to a substantial degree, so that many of these pointscan properly be described as triply fluted or channeled. Many southernPaleo-Indian sites, however, are characterized by points which in terms oftheir multiple fluting are not particularly different from the Alaskanspecimens... and this especially is the case for points from westernCanada...There is considerable variation in the size of specimens fromvarious assemblages, but those from the north tend to be smaller thanclassic Clovis points.... Critical to interpreting the significance of northernfluted points is the question of their age. This is not completely settled.For the southern approaches there is an unreliable radiocarbon date ofapproximately 9,500 years from a fluted point component at SibbaldCreek, Alberta and three closely clustered dates, averaging 10,500 years,from the fluted point component of Charlie Lake Cave... Regarding theearlier Nenana sites... This negative evidence suggests that the Alaskanpoints either date to yet an earlier or later period, or that whatever theirage they are so uncommon that they are not present in many siteassemblages (Clark and Clark 1993:80-82).
Clark and Clark (1993) did not associate fluted points from Batza Tena
with the Nenana complex, nor did they assume they represent temporal
ancestors to classic Clovis technology further south. In Alaska, fluted point
technology appears to be an early Holocene technological phenomenon
appearing between 10,000 and 10,500 rcybp (Dixon 2001: 289). Fluted points in
Alaska may have derived from Northern Paleoindian traditions, but many
39
Alaskan archaeologists believe that the technology originated in the south and
migrated north, an idea Dixon (1999:188) originally attributed to Wormington and
Forbis (1965:183-188) based solely on typological distributions. When
radiocarbon dates from sites with Clovis-style fluted projectile points from the
contiguous United States are compared with dates associated with similar tools
in Canada and Alaska, the oldest dates occur furthest south and consistently
become younger through the western Canadian corridor. The trend possibly
continues northward into Alaska, suggesting that interior continental migrations
occurred in a direction opposite the classic "Clovis-First" model. Admittedly,
there are few securely dated examples of Paleoindian sites in western Canada
and Alaska, but the presence of lanceolate points found in Mesa complex sites
have also been suggested to have resulted from a reverse migration from the
northern Plains to Alaska during the early Holocene (Roper and Wygal 2002).
The similarities between Mesa complex Paleoindian artifacts with those from
Agate Basin, Wyoming (Frison 1978) were first purposed by Kunz and Reanier
(1994, 1995). Such evidence leaves the technological origins of Alaskan fluted
points, as well as their relationship to early lanceolate point industries, enigmatic
and unresolved at best.
Mesa Complex: The sites listed below (Table 4.4) represent the Mesa
complex, including two geographic outliers: Spein Mountain, located in
southwestern Alaska, dating to 10,050.:t90 rcybp (Ackerman 2001:91), and the
40
multicomponent Engigstciak site along the Beaufort Sea coast in NW Canada,
dating between 9,400 and 9,900 rcybp (Mann et al 2001).
Typically, Mesa technology occurs in the Brooks Range (Kunz and
Reanier 1995) in relative close proximity to "Sluiceway" sites. Sluiceway is
currently an unclearly defined technology featuring sites such as Irwin Sluiceway,
Tuluaq Hill (Rasic 2000,2002), and NR-5 (Anderson, Douglas 1979, Rasic
2000). Bever (2001a: 101) has written that the Tulauq and Mesa sites share
many attributes, including >11,000 rcybp determinations (Rasic 2000, 2002) from
both sites. Despite the earlier 14C date at the Tuluaq site, Rasic (2000:64)
tentatively suggests that the oblanceolate projectiles points found there date to
approximately 10,000 rcybp. So far, the secure dating of the Paleoindian
technology at Tuluaq Hill, and its relationship to the Mesa complex, remain
uncertain (Dumond 2001: 201).
Although it lacks Mesa-style projectile points, the Tuluaq assemblage isdominated by broken bifaces and bifacial waste flakes. It appears to bevery similar to the Hill Top assemblage, though whether it is apart of theMesa complex is unclear (Bever 2001a: 101).
The Mesa, Lisburne, Putu-Bedwell, Hilltop (Bever 2001a), and Spein
Mountain sites (Ackerman 2001) comprise the majority of Mesa complex sites.
Bever (2001a) also included TES-012 and MIS-131 in the Mesa complex;
however, additional analysis is necessary to clearly establish these as Mesa
sites.
41
]
Mesa technology is an important component of the Paleoindian tradition in
1996). It is securely dated between 9,900-10,200 rcybp, based on averages
from Mesa, though not including two outlying >11,000 rcybp dates (Hamilton and
Goebel 1999). Evidence from other Mesa complex sites supports this age range
(Bever 2001a).
Table 4.4: Mesa Complex SitesSite Citations
Nenana Complex: The Nenana Complex is "more closely related to the
Clovis tiadition than to the Denali compiex" and commoniy found in the interior
region of the state (Goebel et al 1991). Nenana and Clovis technology were
roughly contemporaneous and possessed similar attributes, especially when
ignoring their respective distinctive Chindadn and fluted lanceolate projectile
points. Without these, the rest of the assemblages are comparable (Goebel et al
1991 :73).
The Nenana complex includes characteristic triangular and teardrop
shaped projectile points and an absence of core-and-blade technology. The
Nenana complex was originally discovered and defined as "Chindadn" in the
lowest levels of the Healy Lake site (Cook 1969), and later identified in early sites
42
in the Nenana River Valley including Dry Creek, Walker Road, and Moose Creek
dated at approximately 11,300 rcybp (Hoffecker 1996). The Shaw Creek Flats
sites along the Tanana River, northwest of Healy Lake Village, have more
recently been found to contain the earliest evidence of Nenana technology, dated
to approximately 11,800 rcybp (Yesner 1996, Holmes 2000). Although these
dates are, to some extent, contemporaneous or slightly earlier than Clovis
occupations in lower North America, there is as yet no definitive link between the
two technologies. Despite this, the Nenana complex still represents the
strongest possibility for an ancestral connection between Paleoindian sites in
Alaska and the lower contiguous states (Goebel et al 1991).
Artifact types that define the Nenana complex are: (1) triangular and"teardrop-shaped" projectile points and knives, (2) straight - or concavebased lanceolate projectile points, (3) perforators, (4) end and sidescrapers, (5) burins, (6) hammer and anvil stones, (7) unifacial knives andscrapers. Flakes, small stone wedges (piece esquille'e), and lithicdebitage are also associated with these sites. These diagnostic types ofstone artifacts have been found at Component I at the Dry Creek site, theVVa!ker Read site and the Moose Creek site (Dixon 2001 :283).
Paleoarctic Tradition: The core-and-blade technology associated with
the Paleoarctic tradition is derived from the Dyuktai tradition from Siberia where it
dates approximately between 23,000 and 10,500 rcybp (Slobodin 2001: 38). It
may have appeared in the Alaskan archaeological record as early as 12,000
rcybp (Holmes 2003) but was more fUlly developed in the Paleoarctic traditon.
Paleoarctic sites are characterized by a unifacial core-and-blade technology and
the manufacture of bifacial lenticular projectile points (West 1975). Similar
43
technology existed for at least another 8000 rcybp in Alaska (Clark and Clark
1993) and became one of the most prevalent lithic evidence left by early
Alaskans.
Denali Complex: West (1967,1975, 1996a: 303) described Denali core
styles as generally wedge-shaped with mUltiple microblade facets. The Denali
complex was a core-and-blade technology that included bifacial tools such as
lanceolate projectile points as well as large flakes and blades. Also associated
with the wedge-shaped core and blade artifacts were core tablets created when
a fresh platform surface was generated with the purpose of renewing the striking
surface for blade removal (West 1996a). The distinct core tablet by-products
were produced when the "spall then hinged up about one-fourth to one-third of
the distance back from the face. A stop notch on the top at that point ensured
the termination of the core tablet spall there and prevented the entire core top
from being carried away" (West 1996a: 303). Other artifacts from the Denali
complex include endscrapers, cobble spalls, large blades, and the distinctive
Donnelly burin.
Holmes (1998, 2003), has recently established core-and-blade technology
in situ in the lowest levels of the Swan Point site in the central Tanana Valley,
effectively placing core-and-blade technology contemporaneously with the
earliest Nenana complex artifacts. However, he suggests that the early
44
microblade technology at Swan Point is more similar to the Dyuktai culture of the
Lena River Basin than to the Denali complex.
The Denali complex typology commonly applied to sites in the interior
regions of Alaska (West 1967, 1975) includes a variant technology appearing
south of the Alaska Range early in the Holocene (see Ackerman [1992, 1996a,
1996b] for Southeast Alaska, and Henn [1978], Dumond [1975,1981, 2001] for
the Alaska Peninsula). These sites appear shortly before estimates indicate
Denali population density was highest, between 8500 and 8000 rcybp based on
radiocarbon dates from 71 sites (Mason et al 2001).
Akmak: Originally defined by Douglas Anderson (1968, 1984, 1988), the
classic Paleoarctic tradition type-site, Onion Portage, was discovered by Louis
Giddings (1967) along the Kobuk River. The Akmak complex is often lumped
into the Denali complex (Mason et al 2001). The technology includes bifacial
projectile points and unifacial core and blade technology (Anderson, Douglas
1970, 1984, 1988).
Vitreous chert (Inupiaq akmaq) was used for many tools in the Akmakcomplex. The assemblage is characterized by large cores on whichsteeply angled platforms were created for the purpose of striking off bladepreforms. The preforms were reworked to end scrapers, gouges, severalkinds of knives, and shaft smoothers. Narrow grooved shaft straightenersof basalt suggest that bows and arrows were used. Microblades found inthe complex were produced from narrow wedge shaped cores of a typefound at sites in Siberia, Mongolia, Japan and central Alaska (there calledCampus type microblade cores); and the Akmak specimens undoubtedlyowed their method of manufacture to techniques developed earlier inEurasia (Anderson, Douglas 1984:81-82).
45
Anangula: Anangula technology occurs in the Eastern Aleutian Islands.
Few sites contain the unique Anangula unifacial core-and-blade technology,
distinguished from Denali by a lack of bifacial reduction. The characteristic
attributes include the micro-to-medium-sized conical cores and associated
blades, produced through unifacial reduction techniques. The assemblage
contains no bifacial artifacts (Aigner 1978, Veltre et aI1984). The Anangula
tradition may have ancestors in the Sumnagin technology in Siberia, dated
between 10,500 and 6,000 rcybp (Powers 1996:237-238).
Northwest Coast Core and Blade: The Northwest Coast Microblade
tradition core-and-blade technology, concentrated in coastal regions of southeast
Alaska and British Columbia, shares similarities with the Anangula tradition in
age as well as a focus on unifacial reduction strategies, but the technologies are
clearly derived from different sources. The Ground Hog Bay 2 site in Southeast
Alaska contained "crude bifaces" and obsidian from the Wrangell Mountains,
found in the earliest levels, which provides evidence that the Northwest Coast
Microblade tradition derived from Denali complex technologies (Ackerman
1996b).
The Northwest Coast Microblade Tradition extends from the northernAlexander Archipelago of the Alaskan Panhandle to just north ofVancouver Island and consists of microblades, pebbles tools, and flakes,and contrasts with other early cultures in having very few or no bifaces.The Northwest Coast Microblade Tradition is dated from approximately9000 [rcybp] to 5000 or 4500 [rcybp] and includes clear evidence of theuse of coastal resources... and is clearly related to the Denali Complexbut differs from it... Wedge-shaped cores, which are distinctive of centralAlaska and Late Paleolithic northeast Asian assemblages... are found on
46
the Northwest Coast, but the nodular core form is more common... Inaddition, burins and burinated flakes, are common in many East Asianand Alaskan assemblages, but only burinated flakes are found on theNorthwest Coast, but these are not common (Matson and Coupland1995:82).
C. Early Alaskan Component Frequencies
It is important to note that many early Alaskan sites, especially in the
Interior, contain multiple cultural deposits or components. For example, in the
Figure 4.10 provides rough calibrations of radiocarbon years before present intocalendar years ago.
55
v. Spatial Integrity of Ancient Surface Sites: A Case Study at Last Day1
Spatial analysis has played, and will continue to play, an important role in
assessing the significance and integrity of Paleoindian sites. Anderson and
Gillam (2000) indicate the usefulness of spatial analysis and encourage the use
of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in Paleoindian studies.
There have been comparatively few studies at the continental orhemispherical scale, directed to resolving specific routes taken bycolonizing peoples-that is, which particular rivers, passes, lake margins,or other landscape features were likely used by colonizing peoples.Where were major barriers to movement located? What landscapefeatures may have predisposed movement? While there have beenprecursor studies, the availability of GIS technology and globalenvironmental data sets offer, for the first time, the opportunity to explorethese questions quantitatively at a high level of resolution and precision(Anderson and Gillam 2000:44).
GIS can depict technology in different regions of the state during the
Terminal Pleistocene and Early Holocene. The large-scale maps appearing in
previous chapters show the distribution of these technologies in relation to
topography and Pleistocene glaciers. Alaska's vast geography, visible through
GIS, provided many barriers to it's earliest inhabitants.
One major geographic barrier to the first Alaskans/Americans was the
Alaska Range. The Brooks Range did not have the same inhibiting effect, and
many early sites exist there. However, unique environmental circumstances
characterize the region, posing certain difficulties for archaeologists. Deeply
stratified sites are rare; more common are lithic surface scatters lacking
substantial organic preservation. Cryoturbation is also a factor, although hearth
1 Portions of this chapter are pending pUblication elsewhere under co-authorship with Robert Gal. 56
smears occur and radiocarbon samples are recoverable. These circumstances
have led archaeologists to refocus on the potential value of small sites rather
than dismiss them as unproductive scatters. Hall (1982) recognized the potential
for "small site archaeology" in the region, where isolated lithic scatters can
identify lithic typologies present in more complicated Brooks Range sites.
The Lisburne site (Bowers 1979), repeatedly occupied in prehistory,
exhibits multiple overlapping archaeological components that have proven
difficult to sort apart. In contrast, isolated lithic scatters at the Last Day Site
(XHP-497) contained only 87 total artifacts, recovered from surface and
subsurface proveniences. The small site provides an excellent snapshot of a
prehistoric lithic tool kit without multiple overlapping components.
The Last Day site contained two artifact clusters separated by a slight
ridgeline significant enough to keep artifacts from Cluster B from eroding downhill
into the vicinity of Cluster A. Cluster A, the larger of the two components,
contained 75 artifacts including an wide oval-platformed blade core (Anderson
1970:11), a single blade fragment, a burin spall, and a thin notched projectile
point reminiscent of Nimiuktuk-11 style points first described by Anderson (1972).
The assemblage also included tvVo fragments of a core face rejuvenation flake,
29 microblade fragments, and 38 waste flakes, several showing retouch. A fire
hearth feature in Cluster A produced three conventional radiocarbon dates,
8990.:t60, 8830.:t60 and 8540.:t60 rcybp (R. Gal pers. comm. 2003).
57
Two clusters are visible in Figure 5.1. Seventy-five artifacts in Cluster A,
depicted in more detail in Figure 5.2 are consistent with a single occupation
event. Only 12 artifacts were recovered from Cluster 8; these included
retouched flakes, waste flakes, and utilized flakes. The long axes of the oblong
distributions are roughly perpendicular to the slope, which suggests that less
than ten artifacts in Cluster A have been transported a short distance downslope
by erosion and gravity. The remaining artifacts are deposited in a pattern very
close to their original deposition.
Douglas Anderson (1988) found, at Onion Portage and Cape Krusenstern,
that human activity areas generally fall within clusters approximately two-meters
in diameter. At the Last Day site, prior deflation of the terrace surface and
downslope transport of some artifacts has result in the two clusters becoming
distributed in a more circular pattern. The current distribution is similar to
Anderson's concept of human activity areas, only altered by the downslope
movement of less than 10% of the total artifact collection. The relationship
between the two clusters is uncertain; deposition of artifacts could have occurred
simultaneously, or at intervals separated by millennia.
58
Figure 5.1: Spatial Integrity at the Last Day Site
so- .. 1 _t, I - ~ ~, r - r -, , -I II I I
I, • II t , ,
I, I !Go j ~ ~
I 't) ... ~-
45 I . I, I I ,I '. \ I II .
\ ! () I I I I •I " , II \ .
( \, , t I Ii,
/ , " I I .40 I \
. ': II , ,I I \ \
I, I ,,\! ( (
, \ \. \~ \ \ \ \I \
I \ \35 \ \
, \ ~ \:' \ ''':>
II
30...... __ ofF-2?
QII 25~ •I q;)Cl ! , ..' IC .1:1:: 20), '..0 \C
,I II , .-- ,I, I I~
9 ,
15. I \ II
,., J
l,\
,.... \..... -_. .- - I 'I \ .
10~ ,, I . \...., \ 0:> III I\ I
i I~ "
I5.- 'I'> \ I...I t ,
I I I j'
I I II I,
I ,I , /.
0 ~~ ..----- II II I' ..... \
I--'""'---- _........~
I, I IT • T T' , - I
305 310 315 320 325 330 335 340 345
59
Q)o
L.J
Figure 5.2: Artifact Types in Cluster A at Last DayI - \ I .. '! Map legend
The Last Day Site displays lithic attributes produced from both bifacial and
unifacial modes of lithic reduction, and is a strong candidate for some of the
earliest notched point technology in Alaska. The association of a notched bifacial
projectile point with core-and-blade technology is persuasive, especially if one
accepts the spatial integrity of artifact distributions around activity areas two-
meters in diameter as suggested by Anderson (1988) and the significance of
small site archaeology as proposed by Hall (1982).63
Small surface scatters, or single occupation events, can assist in the
interpretation of more complicated multiple component surface sites (Hall 1982).
Although preservation is limited in surface sites, Iithics and provenience alone
can provide significant information and radiocarbon determinations are often
recoverable from calcined bone or hearth smears still present in the soil. The
recovery of data from the Last Day site suggests the integrity of small early sites,
an essential characteristic for eligibility to the NR, as emphasized by Hall (1982).
Acceptance of the importance of these sites has another ramification. AsTainter (1979) has pointed out, some archaeologists, convinced of theunimportance of small sites or frustrated by the difficulty of dealing withthem, have attempted to define such sites out of existence by labelingthem as "scatters" or "localities" rather than sites. By doing so they donot allow for the possibility that small sites are eligible for the NationalRegister of Historic Places and, further, that excavation and analysis ofcultural material from these sites might be important in our efforts tounderstand the past. The analysis of... small, single component, specificactivity sites may be crucial in that effort.
Table 6.6: AleutiansSite Name Number Complex Reference RankAnanaula·Ananiuliak SAM-012 Ananaula McCartnev & Veltre 1996 NHLHoa Island UNL-115 Ananaula Knecht & Davis 2001 HiahOiled Blade-Hog Isle UNL-318 Anangula Knecht & Davis 2001 Med
69
Notations
AA
L
AMS
SZ
CZ
C
kya
rcybp
yrBP
P
TL
14C
GHB2
*
MPN
NR
NHL
NXS
DOE
Activity Area
Locality
Approximate
Accelerated Mass Spectrometry radiocarbon determination
Stratigraphic Zone
Culture Zone
Component
Thousands of Calendar Years Ago
Radiocarbon years before present
Years before present
Paleosol
Tephra Layer
Carbon 14
Ground Hog Bay 2
Problem Date
Multiple Property Nomination
National Register of Historic Places
National Historic Landmark
Site contributing to an archaeological district
Determination of eligibility
70
References Cited
Ackerman, R.1971 Archeological Investigations in the Icy Strait Region, Southeastern
Alaska. National Science Foundation Grant Proposal. WashingtonState University Pullman.
1974 Post-Pleistocene Cultural Adaptations on the Northern NorthwestCoast. Paper presented at the International Conference onPrehistory and Paleoecology of the Western Arctic and Subarctic,Calgary, Alberta
1980 Microblades and Prehistory: Technological and CulturalConsiderations for the North Pacific Coast. In Early NativeAmericans: Prehistoric Demography, Economy, and Technologyedited by D. L. Browman, pp. 189-197. Morton, The Hague.
1986 Archaeology ofHeceta Island: A Survey of 16 Timber Harvest Unitsin the Tongass National Forest, Southeastern Alaska. WashingtonState University, Pullman. Center for Northwest AnthropologyProject Report No.3
1992 Earliest Stone Industries of the North Pacific Coast of North America.JJ.r,.ti,. JJ.nfhrnnn/nNtr ?Q/?\"UL?7... - - -""---:::1.1 --,-/- .- _..
1996a Early Maritime Culture Complexes of the Northern Northwest Coast.In Early Human Occupation in British Columbia edited by Carlson,D. and R. Bona. pp. 123-132. University of British Columbia Press,Vancouver.
1996b Ground Hog Bay, Site 2. In American Beginnings: The Prehistoryand Paleoecology ofBeringia edited by F.H. West, pp. 424-430.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
1996c Kuskokwim Drainage, Southwestern Alaska. In AmericanBeginnings: The Prehistory and Paleoecology ofBeringia edited byF. H. West, pp. 461-470. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
2001 Spein Mountain: A Mesa Complex Site in Southwestern Alaska.Arctic Anthropology 38(2):81-97.
71
J
Ackerman, R., Hamilton, T. and R. Stuckenrath1979 Early Cultural Complexes on the Northern Northwest Coast.
Canadian Journal ofArchaeology 3:195-210.
Ager, T.1975 Late Quaternary Environmental History of the Tanana Valley, Alaska.
Ohio State University Research Foundation. Institute of Polar StudiesNo. 54.
Alaska Historic Register Survey (AHRS)1997 Alaska Department of Natural Resources: State Historic Preservation
Office, Anchorage. [In Microsoft Access Database Format]
Aigner, J. S.1978 The Lithic Remains for Anangula, an 8500 year-old Aleut Coastal
Village Urgeschichtiche Material hefte. No.3 Institut furUrgeschichtiche. University of Tubingen, Tubingen.
Alexander, H.1969 Prehistory of the Central Brooks Range: An Archaeological Analysis.
PhD Dissertation, University of Oregon. Eugene.
1974 The Association of Aurignacoid Elements with Fluted Point~n""nlovoc> in Nnr+h Arnori,..", D",nor nroC>on+o.... "'+ +ho In+orn",+inn",1_"""""'1"''''''''' II' .~...,• .... ..."•••"'. I",g•• Q.t'~. ""1 "q" ~ u. I" IIW"''''' IWI
Conference on the Prehistory of Paleoecology of Western NorthAmerican Arctic and Subarctic, Calgary.
Anderson, David G.2003 Early American Theme Study -- Draft: Southeast: Project Area
Historic Context. National Park Service. Available online at:http://www.cr.nps.qov/seac/outline/02-paleoindianlsepaleo/11-evaluation.htm.
Anderson, David G. and C. Gillam2000 Paleoindian Colonization of the Americas: Implications from an
Examination of Physiography, Demography, and ArtifactDistribution. American Antiquity 65(1 ):43-66.
Anderson, Douglas W.1968 A Stone Age Campsite at the Gateway to America. Scientific
American 218(6):24-33.
72
1970 Microblade Traditions in Northwestern Alaska. Arctic Anthropology7(2):2-17.
1972 An Archaeological Survey of the Noatak Drainage. ArcticAnthropology 9(1 ):66-117.
1984 Prehistory of North Alaska. In Handbook ofNorth American Indians:Vol 5: Arctic, edited by D. Damas, pp. 80-93. Smithsonian Institution,Washington, D.C.
1988 Onion Portage: An archaeological site on the Kobuk River,northwestern Alaska. Anthropological Papers of the University ofAlaska 20(1) 2:27-48.
Anderson, P. and L. Brubacker1996 Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Pollen Records from the
Southern Brooks Range. In American Beginnings edited by F. H.West, pp. 71-82. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Andrefsky, W.1998 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
RO\lor M__ W'lIrI, ••••
2000 Paleoindian Lithic Technology and Landscape Use in LatePleistocene Alaska: A Study of the Mesa Complex. PhD Dissertation.University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
2001a Stone Tool Technology and the Mesa Complex: Developing aFramework of Alaskan Paleoindian Prehistory. Arctic Anthropology38(2):98-118.
2001b An Overview of Alaskan Late Pleistocene Archaeology: HistoricalThemes and Current Perspectives. Journal of World Prehistory15(2):125-191.
Bigelow, N. and W. R. Powers2001 Climate, Vegetation, and Archaeology 14,000-9000 Cal Yr B.P. in
Central Alaska. Arctic Anthropology 38(2):171-195.
73
Bigelow, N, Beget, J. and W. R. Powers1990 Latest Pleistocene Increase in Wind Intensity Recorded in Eolian
Sediments from Central Alaska. Quaternary Research 34:160-168.
Bonnichsen, R. & K. Turnmire1999 An Introduction to the Peopling of the Americas. In Ice Age Peoples
of North America: Environments, Origins, and Adaptations of theFirst Americans, edited by R. Bonnichsen and K. Turnmire, pp. 1-26.Center for the Study of the First Americans, Oregon State UniversityPress, Corvallis.
Bowers, P. M.1978 Research Summary: 1977 Investigations of the Carlo Creek
Archeological Site, Central Alaska. University of Alaska Museum,Fairbanks.
1979 Preliminary Investigations of the Lisburne Site (KIR 096). Paperpresented at the sixth Annual Meeting of the Alaska AnthropologicalAssociation, Fairbanks.
1982 Lisburne Site: Analysis and Cultural History of a Multi-ComponentLithic Workshop in the Iteriak Valley, Arctic Foothills, NorthernAlaska. Archaeological Investigations In the National PetroleumDoc:onu:~ In JJ 1!!:lc:Ir!!:l JJn+hrnnn/nn;"!!:l1 D!!:lnorc: n# +ho Iln;"orc:;+" n# JJ 1!!:lc:Ir:a...---.. - ~.__ - ,..... _,.,_.-::1. __.. -,,--- -- - _ _._...1 -- •••-_•• -
20(1-2): 79-112.
1983 A Status Update on the Gallagher Flint Station National HistoricLandmark. Arctic Resource Area: Bureau of Land Management,Faibanks.
1999 AMS Dating of the Area 22 American PaleoArctic TraditionMicroblade Component at the Lisburne Site, Arctic Alaska. CurrentResearch in the Pleistocene 16:12-15.
Bowers, P. M. and O. K. Mason1992 Cultural Resources Inventory and Assessment of a Proposed Power
Transmission Line between Cantwell and McKinley Village, Alaska.Northern Land Use Research, Fairbanks.
Campbell, J.1959 The Kayuk Complex of Arctic Alaska. American Antiquity. 25(1):94
105.
74
Clark, D.1991 The Northern (Alaska-Yukon) Fluted Points. In Clovis Origins and
Adaptations, edited by R. Bonnichsen and K. Turnmire. pp. 35-48Center for the Studies of the First Americans. Oregon StateUniversity, Corvallis.
1995 Batza Tena: The Trail to Obsidian. Arctic Anthropology. 32(1):82-91.
Clark, D. and A. Clark1993 Batza Tena: Trail to Obsidian: Archaeology at an Alaskan Obsidian
Source. Archaeological Survey of Canada Mercury Series Paper No.147. Canadian Museum of Civilization, Hull, Quebec.
Clark, G.1978 Determination ofEligibility Notification- Hidden Falls Site. United
States Department of Forestry. 3130-1R COE.
Code of Federal RegUlations (36CFR65)2003 Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property. Part 65:
National Historic Landmarks Program. National Park Service, USDepartment of the Interior. Hypertext Transfer Protocol, Accessedon November 30th 2003. Available online at:http://frwetlqate.acr~ss.qpo.OQv/CQi-bin/mu!tidb.caiand
Cook, J.1969 Early Prehistory ofHealy Lake, Alaska. PhD Dissertation. University
Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
1975 Archaeology of Interior Alaska. The Western Canadian Journal ofAnthropology 5(3-4):125-133
1995 Characterization and Distribution of Obsidian in Alaska. ArcticAnthropology. (32)1 :92-1 00
1996 Healy Lake. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology of Beringia edited by F.H. West, pp. 323-327. Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago.
Coulter, H.W., D. M. Hopkins, T. Karstrom, T. Pewe and C. Wahrhaftig1965 US Geological Survey, Washington, DC. Miscellaneous Geologic
Investigations. Map 1-415: Extent of Glaciation in Alaska.75
Davis, S.1980 Hidden Falls: A Multi-component Site in the Alexander Archipelago
or the Northwest Coast Paper presented at the 45th Annual Meetingof the Society for American Archaeology, Philadelphia
1990 Prehistory of Southeastern Alaska. In Handbook ofNorth AmericanIndians: Northwest Coast Vol 7: 197-202, edited by W. Sturtevant, [W.Suttles, general editor]. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
1996 Hidden Falls. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology ofBeringia, edited by F. H. West, pp. 413-423.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Davis, S. (editor)1989 The Hidden Falls Site: Baranof Island, Alaska. Aurora, Alaska
Anthropological Association Monograph Series. No.5, Anchorage.
Dixon, E. J.1975 The Gallagher Flint Station: An Early Man Site on the North Slope,
Arctic Alaska, and its Role in Relation to the Bering Land Bridge.Arctic Anthropology 12(1):68-75.
1999 Bones, Boats, and Bison: Archaeology and the First Colonization ofW<l:l~f<l:l,.n Nnrlh JJ,"<I:l";"~ Ilnh'<l:lI"c:i+" nf NO\AI Movi,.n PI"OC:C:.. _--- _ -..__. _····_·_··1 _ _ __.__ . ----,Albuquerque.
2001 Human Colonization of the Americas: Timing, Technology andProcess. In Quaternary Science Reviews. 20:277-299.
Dixon, E. J., G. Smith and B. Saleeby1985 Susitna Hydroelectric Project: Cultural Resources Investigations
1979-1985. Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage.
Dumond, D. E.1975 Archaeological Research on the Alaska Peninsula. University of
Oregon. Submitted to Secretary of the Interior. 77-AK-048 & 75-AK051.
1981 Archaeology on the Alaska Peninsula: The NAKNEK Region, 19601970. University of Oregon Anthropological Papers No. 21, Eugene.
76
u
2001 The Archaeology of Eastern Beringia: Some Contrasts andConnections. Arctic Anthropology 38(2):196-205.
Dumond, D. E. and R. Knecht2001 An Early Blade Site in the Eastern Aleutians. University ofOregon
Anthropological Papers 58:9-34.
Elias, S.2000 Late Pleistocene Climates of Beringia, Based on Analysis of Fossil
Beetles. Quaternary Research 53:229-235
2001 Beringian Paleoecology: Results from the 1997 Workshop.Quaternary Science Reviews 20:7-13.
Ferguson, D.1997a Gallagher Flint Station, Locality I: A Reappraisal ofa Proposed Late
Pleistocene Site in the Sagavanirktok River Valley, Arctic Alaska.unpublished MA thesis, University of Alaska, Fairbanks.
1997b Revised Temporal Assessment of a Proposed Paleoarctic Site in theSagavanirktok Valley, Northern Alaska. Current Research in thePleistocene 14:24-26.
~ifioll'l T• "''''I~, I.
1996 Human Remains Found in Alaska Reported to be 9730 Years Old.SAA Bulletin 14(5):5.
Frison, G.1978 Prehistoric Bison Hunting on the Northwestern Plains. In Prehistoric
Hunters of the High Plains. Academic Press, San Diego.
Gal,R.1980 Recent Bureau of Land Management Archeological Fieldwork in the
National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska. Paper Presented at the 45thAnnual Meeting of the Society for American Archeology,Philadelphia.
Gal, R. and E. Hall1982 A Provisional View of North Alaskan Culture History. (Gal and Hall,
eds). In Anthropological Papers of the University ofAlaska:Archaeological Investigations In the National Petroleum Reserve InAlaska 20(1-2).
77
Giddings, L. J.1967 Ancient Men of the Arctic. Knopf, New York.
Goebel, T., Powers, W. R. and N. Bigelow1991 The Nenana Complex of Alaska and Clovis Origins. In Clovis Origins
and Adaptations, edited by Bonnichsen and Turnmire. pp. 49-79.Center for the Studies of the First Americans. Oregon StateUniversity Press, Corvallis.
Goebel, T., Powers, W. R., Bigelow, N., and A. S. Higgs1996 Walker Road. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and
Paleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 356-363.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Goebel, T. and N. Bigelow1996 Panguingue Creek. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and
Paleoecology of Beringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 366-370.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Grumet, R.1995 Earliest Americans National Historic Landmarks Theme Study.
Cultural Resource Management 18(4):14-19.
~ ..+h ..io g n....... '-41"••• '''''' • , ......
1990 Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe: The Story ofBlue Babe.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
1996 The Mammoth Steppe and the Origin of Mongoloids and TheirDispersal. Prehistoric Mongolid Dispersals, edited by J. Akawzwa,pp. 172-186. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Hall, E.1982 Small Site Archaeology (title may be mistaken). In Anthropological
Papers of the University ofAlaska: Archaeological Investigations Inthe National Petroleum Reserve In Alaska (Gal and Hall, eds) Vol20(1-2).
Hamilton, T. D.1982 A Late Pleistocene Glacial Chronology for the Southern Brooks
Range: Stratigraphic Record and Regional Significance. GeologicalSociety ofAmerica Bulletin 93:700-716.
78
2001 Quaternary Glacial, Lacustrine, and Fluvial Interactions in the WestNoatak Basin, Northwestern Alaska. Quaternary Science Reviews20(1-3):371-391.
Hamilton, T. D. and T. Goebel1999 Late Pleistocene Peopling of Alaska. In Ice Age Peoples of North
America edited by R. Bonnichsen and K. Turnmire, pp. 156-199.Center for the Studies of the First Americans, Corvallis.
Haynes, G.2002 The Early Settlement of North America. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Henn, W.1978 Archaeology on the Alaska Peninsula: The Ugashik Drainage, 1973
1975. University ofOregon Anthropological Papers No.14, Eugene.
Hoffecker, J.1980 Archeological Field Research 1980: The North Alaska Range Early
Man Project. US National Park Service and National GeographicSociety.
1988 Applied Geomorphology and Archaeological Survey Strategy for~i+o.. ",f Dloi..+",,..ono A",o' An C::v""rY\nlo fr"'rY\ ~on+r",,1 AI"".. a.."" In"rn~1..., ..."v ",..." ........"""'....... " ,....,.,tI". ,....,.,1 ..."'.... ""'1"'" II ""1' _VII •• "",. ,....,., ..........,_. I •• _.
of Archaeological Science 15:683-713.
1996 Moose Creek. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. West, pp. 363-366. Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago.
2001 Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Sites in the Nenana RiverValley, Central Alaska. Arctic Anthropology. 38(2):139-153.
Hoffecker, J., and W. R. Powers1985 North Alaska Range Early Man Project. National Geographic Society
Research Reports No. 19, Washington, DC.
Hoffecker, J., Powers, W. R. and P. Phippen1996 Owl Ridge. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and
Paleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 353-356.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
79
]
Holmes, C. E.1979 Report ofArcheological Reconnaissance: Withdrawal Areas, Fort
Greely, Alaska. United States. Army Corps of Engineers,DACA85-79-M-Q001.
1996 Broken Mammoth. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 312-318 Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago.
1998 New Data Pertaining to Swan Point, the Oldest Microblade SiteKnown in Alaska. Current Research in the Pleistocene 15:21-22.
2000 Classification of Early Alaskan Archaeological Assemblages theSearch for Useful Criteria. Paper presented at the 33rd AnnualMeeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association, Ottawa.
Holmes, C. E. and G. Bacon1982 Holocene Bison in Central Alaska: A Possible Explanation for
Technological Conservatism. Paper presented at the Ninth AnnualMeeting of the Alaska Anthropological Association, Fairbanks
Holmes, C. E. and B. Class2003 Early Cultural Components in Central Alaska: An Update from Swan
Holmes, C. E., VanderHoek, R. and T. Dilley1996 Swan Point. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and
Paleoecology of Beringia edited by F. West, pp. 319-322. Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago.
Jordan, J.2001 Late Quaternary Sea Level Change in Southern Beringia: Postgacial
Emergence of the Western Alaska Peninsula. Quaternary ScienceReviews 20:509-523.
Katz, M.1993 Discovery Rocks Theories on Earliest North Americans. In Chicago
Tribune. Thursday, March 25th• pp.1 and 24, Chicago.
80
Jl
King, T.2001 Section 106 in the New Millennium: Playing the Game Under the 1999
Regulation. In Federal Planning and Historic Places: The Section 106Process, pp. 25-97. Altamira, Walnut Creek.
1998 Impacts on Historic Properties: Section 106 ofthe National HistoricPreservation Act (NHPA). In Cultural Resource Laws and Practice:An Introductory Guide, pp. 59-148. Rowman and Littlefield, WalnutCreek.
Knecht, R. and R. Davis2001 A Prehistoric Sequence for the Eastern Aleutians. University of
Oregon Anthropological Papers 58:269-288.
Kunz, M., Bever, M. and C. Adkins2003 The Mesa Site: Paleoindians Above the Arctic Circle. US
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management AlaskaOpen File Report No. 86. Anchorage.
Kunz, M. and R. Reanier1994 Paleoindians in Beringia: Evidence from Arctic Alaska. Science
263:660-662.
Arctic Anthropology 32(1 :)5-30.
1996 Mesa Site, Iteriak Creek. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 497-504.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Larsen, H.1968 Trail Creek: Final Report on the Excavation of Two Caves on Seward
Peninsula, Alaska. Acta Arctica No 15.
Leehan, D.1980 Preliminary Report on the Sediments at XMH-297 and XBD-110.
Alaskaarctic, Fairbanks.
Little, B., Seibert, E., Townsend, J., Sprinkle, J. and J. Knoerl2000 National Register Bulletin Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering
Archeological Properties. National Park Service. Accessed online onFebruary 03 2003. http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/arch/index.htm.
81
1
J
J
Lively, R.1996 Chugwater. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and
Paleoecology of Beringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 308-311.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Loy, T. H. and E. J. Dixon1998 Blood Residues on Fluted Points From Eastern Beringia. American
Antiquity 63(1 ):21-46.
Loy,W.1993 History Unearthed at Brooks Site. In The Anchorage Daily News.
Thursday, March 25th. pp A1. Anchorage.
Mandryk, C., Josenhans, H., Fedje, D. and R. Mathewes2001 Late Quaternary Paleoenvironments of Northwestern North America:
Implications for Inland Versus Coastal Migration Routes. QuaternaryScience Reviews 20(1-3):301-314.
Mann, D. and D. Peteet1994 Extent and Timing of the Last Glacial Maximum in Southwest Alaska.
Quaternary Research in Southwest Alaska. Quaternary Research 42:136-148.
lUI",.,..,. n Do+oo+ n ~o",niQr ~ M Klln7•••u •••• , , I "",,,,,, , , • , __ , , _ ••_
2002 Responses of an Arctic Landscape to Lateglacial and Early HoloceneClimatic Changes: The Importance of Moisture. QuaternaryResearch 21 :997-1021.
Mann, D.; Reanier, Peteet, D. Kunz, M. and M. Johnson2001 Environmental Change and Arctic Paleoindians. Arctic
Anthropology 38(2):119-138.
Mann, D. and G. Streveler1997 Final Report on Geological Investigations Associated with 1995 SAIP
Survey in Glacial Bay National Park and Preserve, Alaska. NationalPark Service.
Martin-Seibert, E.2002 Multiple Property Documentation for Planning and Interpreting
Archeological Resources. CRM 25(1 ):30-32.
82
Mason, Owen K., Bowers, Peter M. and D. Hopkins2001 The early Holocene Milankovitch thermal maximum and humans:
adverse conditions for the Denali complex of eastern Beringia.Quaternary Science Reviews 20(1-3):525-548.
Matson, R. and G. Coupland1995 The Initial Colonization ofthe Northwest Coast In Prehistory of the
Northwest Coast, pp. 49-94. Academic Press, San Diego.
Mobley, C.1991 The Campus Site: A Prehistoric Camp at Fairbanks, Alaska.
University ofAlaska Press.
1996 The Campus Site. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology of Beringia edited by F. West, pp. 296-301. Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago.
Neumann, T. and R. Sanford2001 Laws, Regulations, and Guidelines. In Cultural Resources
Archaeology: An Introduction, pp. 27-54. Altamira Press, WalnutCreek.
National Park Service (NPS)1991a How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Nationa!
Register Bulletin 15.
1991b How to Complete the National Register Multiple PropertyDocumentation Form. National Register Bulletin 16B.
1997 Earliest Americans Theme Study. National Park Service ProjectReport 3.1.
2002a Earliest Americans Theme Study. National Park Service HypertextTransfer Protocol Accessed on Feb 13 2002, Available Online athttp://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/nhlleam5.htm
2002b AlaskaPak. National Park Service, Geographic Information Systemspackage. Hypertext Transfer Protocol Accessed Feb 2002. Availableon line at: http://www.nps.gov/akso/gis/av31/getakpak.htm
2003a The Earliest Americans. National Park Service. Hypertext TransferProtocol Accessed on Oct 12th 2003, Available Online at:http://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/eam
83
2003b History in the National Park Service. National Park ServiceHypertext Transfer Protocol. Accessed on Oct 12th, 2003. Availableat: http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/hisnps/NPSThinking/revthem.htm
2003c Current National Historic Landmark Theme Studies. National ParkService Hypertext Transfer Protocol. Accessed November 25th 2003.Available online at http://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/themes/themes.htm
2003d National Register database. National Park Service HypertextTransfer Protocol. Accessed Online October 21 st 2003. Availableonline at:http://vMw.nr.nps.gov/iwisapi/explorer.dll?IWS SCHEMA=NRIS1 &IWS LOGIN=1 &IWS REPORT=100000044
O'Harra, D.1994 In Search of the First Alaskans Mesa People. In Anchorage Daily
News, pp. A1 Anchorage.
Pearson, G.1999 Early Occupations and Cultural Sequence at Moose Creek: A Late
Pleistocene Site in Central Alaska. Arctic 52(4):332-345.
Pewe, T. and R. Reger1983 Middle Tanana River Valley. In Guidebook to Permafrost and
Quaternary Geology along the Richardson and Glenn Highwaysbetween Fairbanks and Anchorage, Alaska. edited by T. Pewe and R.Reger. Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological andGeophysical Surveys, Fairbanks.
Phippen, P.1988 Archaeology at Owl Ridge: A Pleistocene-Holocene Boundary Age
Site in Central Alaska. Master's, University of Alaska.
Potter, B.2001 Recent Investigations at the Gerstle River Site, a Multicomponent
Site in Central Alaska. Current Research in the Pleistocene. 18:52-54
Powers, W. R.1996 Siberia in the Late Glacial and Early Postglacial. In Humans at the
End of the Ice Age: The Archaeology of the Pleistocene-HoloceneTransition. Edited by Straus, Eriksen, Erlansdson and Yesner. pp.229-242. Plenum Press, New York.
84
Powers, W. R. and J. Hoffecker1989 Late Pleistocene Settlement in the Nenana Valley, Central Alaska.
American Antiquity 54(2):263-287.
Rasic, J.2000 Prehistoric Lithic Technology at the Tuluaq Hill Site, Northwest
Alaska. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Department of Anthropology,Washington State University, Pullman.
2002 Paleoindian Archaeology and Paleoecology in Northwest Alaska.Paper presented at the Annual International Beringia DaysConference, Museum of History and Art, Anchorage
Rasic, J. and R. Gal2000 An Early Lithic Assemblage from the Tuluaq Site, Northwest Alaska.
Current Research in the Pleistocene 17:66-68.
Reanier, R.1994 The Putu Site: Pleistocene or Holocene? Current Research in the
Pleistocene 1:148-150.
1996 Putu. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Paleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. West, pp. 505-511. The University of ChicagoD ..,aC!-C!- (,hi",~,..""• l'OiOO, """I""'Q~V.
Rensberger, B.1993 Find of Hunters' Tools Suggests Multiple Migrations from Asia. In
The Washington Post. Thursday, March 25th. pp. A3, Washington.
Roper, D. and Wygal, B.2002 The Spatial Component ofthe Western Clovis Chronology. Current
Research in the Pleistocene 19:76-78
Schaaf, J.1988 The Bering Land Bridge National Preserve: An Archaeological
Survey. National Park Service. Submitted to Resources ManagementReport. AR-14.
Shull, C.2002 The National Register of Historic Places Today. In Cultural Resource
Management. 25(1):3-5.
85
JJ
Siobodin, S.2001 Western Beringia at the End of the Ice Age. Arctic Anthropology.
38(2): 31-47.
Sprinkle, J.1994 Research, Stewardship, Visibility, and Planning. In Cultural Resource
Management. 17(2):12
Soffer, O.1985 The Upper Paleolithic of the Central Russian Plain. Academic Press.
San Diego.
Tainter, J. A.1979 The Mountainair Lithic Scatters: Settlement Patterns and
Significance Evaluation of Low Density Surface Sites. Journal ofField Archaeology 6(4): 463-469
Veltre, D. W., McCartney, A, and Veltre, M, and J. Aigner1984 An Archaeological Site Survey ofAmaknak and Unalaska Islands,
Alaska. Alaska Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation. HistoricPreservation Fund Grant. Project 84197, Anchorage.
Wahrhaftig, C.1958 Quaternarl and Engim~ering Geology in the Central Part of the
Alaska Range. US Geological Survey Professional Paper No. 293,Washington, DC.
Walker, D., Bockheim, J., Chapin III, F., Eugster, W., Nelson, F. C. and Ping2001 Calcium-rich Tundra, Wildlife, and the "Mammoth Steppe".
Quaternary Science Reviews 20(1-3):149-163.
West, F. H.1967 The Donnelly Ridge Site and the Definition of an Early Core and
Blade Complex in Central Alaska. American Antiquity 32(3):360-382.
1975 Dating the Denali Complex. Arctic Anthropology 12(1 ):76-81.
1981 The Archaeology of Beringia. Columbia University Press.
1996a Donnelly Ridge. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory andPaleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. H. West, pp. 302-307.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
86
1996b Trail Creek Caves, Seward Peninsula. In American Beginnings: ThePrehistory and Paleoecology of Beringia edited by F. H. West, pp.482-484. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
West, F., Robinson, B., and M. Curran1996 South Central Alaska Range: Tangle Lakes Region. In American
Beginnings: The Prehistory and Paleoecology ofBeringia edited byF. West, pp. 375-408. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
West, F., Robinson, B. and West, C.1996 Whitmore Ridge. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and
Paleoecology ofBeringia edited by F. West, pp. 386-394. TheUniversity of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Wormington, M.1960 Prehistoric Hunter and Gatherers. National Historic Landmark
Theme Study. National Historic Landmark Survey, National ParkService. Washington, D.C.
1962 A Survey of Early American Prehistory. American Scientist. 50(1)230-242.
1965 An Introduction to the Archaeology ofAlberta, Canada. Proceedingsof the Denver Museum of Natural History 11"
1983 Early Man in the New World: 1970-1980. In Early Man in the NewWorld. Edited by Richard Shutler, Jr. Sage Publications, Berkeley.
Wilford, J. N.1993 Clues to Earliest Americans In 11,700-Year-Old Campsite. In The New
York Times. pp. A1 and B10. Thursday, March 25th• New York
Workman, W. and A. McCartney1998 Coast to Coast: Prehistoric Maritime Cultures in the North Pacific.
Arctic Anthropology. Vol 35(1): 361-370.
Yesner, D. R.1996 Humans at the End of the Ice Age: Archaeology of the Pleistocene
Holocene Transition edited by L. Straus, Eriksen, B., Erlansdson, J.and Yesner, D., pp. 243-276. Plenum Press, New York.
87
1998 Origins and Development of Maritime Adaptations in the NorthwestPacific Region of North America: A Zooarchaeological Perspective.Arctic Anthropology 35(1 ):204-222.
2000 Human Colonization of Eastern Beringia and the Question ofMammoth Hunting. Proceedings of the International Conference onMammoth Site Studies, Occasional Papers in Anthropology No 22pp. 69-84. University of Kansas, Lawrence
2001 Human Dispersal into Interior Alaska: Antecedent Conditions, Modeof Colonization, and Adaptations. Quaternary Science Reviews20:315-327.
Yesner, D. R., Holmes, C. E. and K. T. Crossen1992 Archaeology and Paleoecology of the Broken Mammoth Site, Central
Tanana Valley, Interior Alaska. Current Research in the Pleistocene9:53-57.
Yesner, D. R., Pearson, G. A. and D. Stone2000 Additional Organic Artifacts from the Broken Mammoth Site, Big
Delta, Alaska. Current Research in the Pleistocene 17:87-90.
88
APPENDIX I
Name: Amaknax Island (Low)
f'Jumber: UNL-0054
Region: Aleutian Islands
NHR Designation: None
Repository: Museum of the Aleutians
land Ownership: Ounalashka Corporation
Basal Dates: N/A
Tradition: Anangula, Aleut (Knecht and Davis 2001, Veltre et al 1984)
Environment: The site is located along the "western shore of Amaknak
Island, northeast of Cave Rock" (AHRS 1997). Amaknax is in the eastern
Aleutian Islands near Unalaska.
History: According to the AHRS database, the site discussed by
numerous archaeologists including Hrdlicka, Jochelson, McCartney, Banks and
Bruce Ream (AHRS 1997). Each author referred to the site by different names
including Amoknak and as Amaknak site B. In 1984, testing of the site was the
focus of Veltre's field season (Veltre et al 1984).
Significance: Although there were no 14C samples recovered for
Amaknax, its oldest component was technologically associated with Anangula
tradition (Veltre et al 1984). It is believed to date to a similar period as the
nearby Hog Island site UNL-115 dated to between 7960±90 and 8050:t80
89
(Dumond and Knecht 2001, Veltre et al 1984). The site is significant under the
theme "peopling places" because is suspected associated the earliest known
lithic industry Aleutian Islands (Veltre et al 1984).
Integrity: Military activity has heavily disturbed the site. It consisted of
redeposited artifacts in disturbed bulldozed contexts. Several previous
excavations have also scarred the site. One amateur archaeologist, Cahn,
excavated a more recent portion of the site to a depth of 5.8 m of continuous
cultural deposits. Despite the site's lengthy history of disturbance, it contains
undisturbed deposits (Veltre et al 1984:29 and Fig. 10). The deposits could yield
significant information from lower levels of the site; artifacts found in association
with a level of volcanic ash (Veltre et al 1984) could provide accurate dates
without recovering radiocarbon samples.
Artifacts and Features: The earliest assemblage, described as a
unifacial reduction scheme typical of the Anangula tradition, included core and
blade technology and lacked bifacial attributes (Veltre et al 1984:24).
Description: Two loci were identified; the hill top and shell midden
localities. The core and blade technology was limited to the hill top location, a
disturbed portion of the site (Veltre et al 1984). The shell midden locality was
stratified and portions of it remained intact. The nature and relationship between
the midden and the Anangula component from the hill top locality remain
90
unknown although the midden deposits are considerably younger in age (Veltre
et al 1984:25).
91
Name: Batza Tena (Med)
Number: MLZ-00002
Region: Southwest
NATREG: NHS Archaeological District
Repository: Canadian Museum of Civilization, Quebec
land Owner: US Bureau of Land Management
Basal Dates: The site could date in excess of 11,700 rcybp (Hamilton and
Goebel 1999:184)
Traditions: Paleoindian, Late Paleoindian, Paleoarctic
Environment: The Batza Tena obsidian quarries lie approximately 300
kilometers southeast of Onion Portage and nearly 500 kilometers east of the Trail
Creek Caves site, 30 kilometers south of Hughes (Clark and Clark 1993). More
specifically, the location is southeast of Anaktuvuk Pass in the headwaters of the
Koyukuk River where the Kokrines-Hodzana Highlands convene with Koyukuk
Lowlands. The sites of prehistoric obsidian quarrying activities lies east, a few
kilometers, from the main river channel where a major obsidian source is found
on a "flat topped" ridge positioned between the Indian and Little Indian creeks,
"100- 150 kilometers above the Koyukuk flats" (Clark 1995). The local vegetation
consists of tussock, shrubs and mixed spruce-birch forest, to the west (Clark
1995).
92
History: Clark and Clark conducted the original archaeological
exploration of the region in 1968 through 1971, documenting 89 sites indicating
heavy use in prehistoric times. Fifty of these were included in the Batza Tena
Archaeological District created in 1972 (Clark 1995, AHRS 1997).
Significance: "The Batza Tena obsidian locality in northwest Alaska was
utilized at least as early as 11,700 BP, with obsidian distributed at least as far as
the Tanana Valley... " (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:184). Obsidian artifacts,
traced to Batza Tena sources, have been recovered from the Component II at
Dry Creek, Band 7 at Onion Portage, the Mesa site, and from the earliest
occupations at Broken Mammoth (Cook 1995:95). Such evidence makes the
Batza Tena District significant to understanding early Alaskan trade and
economic activities. Cook's (1995) obsidian sourcing project shows the quarry at
Batza Tena was used for at least 10,000 rcybp (11,700 when one considers the
material in the lowest levels of Broken Mammoth).
Paleoindian fluted projectile points in the Batza Tena region (n=18), out
number by four-times those found in any other site in Alaska (Hamilton and
Goebel 1999:181). Unfortunately, the evidence remains undated, there is
however a growing pool of evidence that suggests the spread of Paleoindian
lithic technology occurred from the south to north through Canada and into
Alaska beginning 10,500 rcybp and arriving in Alaska shortly before -10,000
rcybp (Dixon 2001 :289, Roper and Wygal 2002) and persisting there for an
93
undetermined amount of time. Because so much of the fluted point evidence has
been found at Batza Tena, it is significant for the contribution it could make in
understanding connections with similar-earlier Paleoindian technologies in the
lower forty-eight states.
Artifacts and Features: Artifacts from the Batza Tena District include
fluted, side-notched, and lanceolate projectile points, bifaces, end scrapers and
utilized flakes in high quantity. Lithic reduction waste flakes and cores litter the
region, signs that it underwent extensive use as a prehistoric lithic quarry site.
The region also includes obsidian lithic resources from the surface in rivers and
along lakeshores. Ten of the 89 surface scatters discovered by the Clark's
contained fluted projectile points (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).
Integrity: All of the sites were surface scatters making direct dating of the
Batza Tena sites difficult because of general mixing and possible reuse of
artifacts found there (Bever 2001b:155). 14C material was not recovered and the
evidence indicated lithic raw material quarrying and stone tool manufacturing was
taking place. Obsidian hydration analysis has been mostly inconclusive (Clark
and Clark 1993). One group of fluted projectile points produce a cluster
hydration rind thickness suggesting a date of 9000 rcybp; however, due to
extreme environmental conditions, the obsidian hydration results varied widely
from 1800 rcybp to as old as 21,000 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). If
obsidian from Batza Tena, conclusively, is from the lower levels of known early
94
sites, then Batza Tena must have been a quarry site from those periods. This
may be the only method useful in determining the exact nature of the area's early
use.
Description: The Batza Tena Archaeological District contained 50 of the
known 89 surface sites in the region, which contain clusters of distinguishable
components with relatively intact horizontal separation (Clark and Clark 1993,
AHRS 1997). Each component, both in and out of the district boundaries, likely
contains significant data from the prehistory of Alaska, but as described above,
these data will be difficult to develop.
95
Name: Broken Mammoth (High)
Number: XBD-131
Region: Interior
NHR Designation: NONE
Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Land Owner: State of Alaska
Basal Dates: CZ 4-11 ,770.:t21 0
Complex: Nenana, Denali
Environment: Broken Mammoth is located on a bench overlooking the
juncture of Shaw Creek and the Tanana River. This region, along the
Richardson Highway between Fairbanks and Delta Junction, has been covered
with wind blown aeolian sediment creating excellent stratigraphic integrity at the
site (Holmes 1996, Yesner 1996).
History: C. E. Holmes' discovery and Holmes and D. McAllisters' test
excavation of the Broken Mammoth site in 1989 led to joint excavations in 1990,
1991, 1992 and 1993 by the University of Alaska, Anchorage and the Alaska
Office of History and Archaeology. After a five-year hiatus, the University of
Alaska Anchorage excavations resumed in 1998, 2000 and 2002. The site
received its name from the broken fragments of mammoth ivory originally
discovered there (Holmes 1996).
96
Integrity: Despite eight seasons of excavations, the site continues to add
information to our understanding of early Alaskan prehistory. An estimated 650
square meters remains intact. Approximately 75% of the site was removed by
pre-excavation gravel operations and 25% of the currently existing site remains
to be excavated. Artifacts in significant amounts likely exist in the areas east and
west of the excavated region. A section of unexcavated area remains in the
center of the site although there is evidence of disturbance by gravel operations
in part of that area (Yesner 2003 personal communication).
Early occupations at Broken Mammoth have excellent organic
preservation in stratified contexts, buried beneath wind blown glacial silts, from
the Tanana Valley (Yesner 1996, 2000). Over 10,000 faunal elements have
been recovered from the Broken Mammoth site and strata dated to the early
Holocene and late Pleistocene periods yielded 70% of the total amount of faunal
remains, due to environmental conditions allowing for greater preservation in the
ear!y !evels (Yesner 1996).
Further evidence indicated an increasingly efficient economy and lithic
resource use during the terminal Pleistocene, where there was general increase
in activity and more frequent and "deeper" fire hearths with distinctive "toss
zones" and larger mammal fauna represented. A "tent-like" structure, similar to
structures at Walker Road, suggested "longer term residence" patterns at the site
(Yesner 2001).
97
Most recently, rock-quarrying activities have resumed on the terrace
containing Broken Mammoth, Mead and Veasey sites. Broken Mammoth is
located on state land, and is possibly in great danger of destruction by present
quarrying activities both directly and indirectly via erosion.
Significance: The Broken Mammoth site has provided some of the
earliest known, well-documented evidence of American Indians in Alaska.
Broken Mammoth remains one of the key type-sites for the state's earliest
inhabitants. Important faunal remains recovered from CZ3 and CZ4 included a
variety of birds, including ptarmigan and waterfowl (duck, geese and tundra
swan), small mammals (rodent, marmot, and beaver), carnivores (fox and wolf),
and large game (bison, caribou, and mountain sheep). Evidence of salmon in
early occupations indicates a small amount of fishing activity. The great diversity
in subsistence provides evidence regarding early Alaskan economic activities
and resource use (Yesner 1996, 2000, 2001).
Another major significant discovery at the Broken Mammoth site are the
obsidian artifacts traced to Batza Tena and the Wrangle Mountains found in the
earliest components there. Similar finds supporting a widespread distribution of
obsidian in Interior Alaska are found at VValker Road (Hamilton and Goebel
1999:184 citing personal communication with John Cook). These finds could
indicate important trade networks during this early period.
98
Artifacts and Features: The two earliest components at the site included
artifacts and features from CZ 3: bifacial projectile points, knives, scrapers,
cores, hammer stones, choppers, anvils, bone needles or clothing fasteners,
large hearths, hearthstones, work areas and a possible tent structure (Yesner
1996,2000,2001). Diagnostic artifacts from Cultural Zone 3 included "two
basally thinned, edge-ground "Paleoindian" projectile points"... The bifacial
artifacts, along with unifacial microblade technology, both recovered from CZ 3
are generally associated with Denali Complex assemblages (Yesner 1996).
Further microblade evidence came in a slot carved into a mammoth ivory
fragment. The slot contained a "chert microchip" (Yesner 2000, 2001).
Cultural Zone 3, occupied on a seasonal basis, contained evidence of a
population with more efficient economic use of resources than their
predecessors. Ventifacts and river cobbles made up a smaller amount (30%) of
lithic raw material from that occupation. The majority of raw material from CZ 3
originated from a greater distance than material in CZ 4. Landmark Gap quarries
near Tangle Lakes were the source of the material quarry indicating technology
that is more efficient. It comprised 60% of the total lithics from CZ 3 occupations
(Yesner 2001).
Cultural Zone 4, on the other hand, contained mostly unifacial scraper
technology and a few bifacial tools. General conclusions associate occupations
from Cultural Zone 3 with the Denali Complex and Cultural Zone 4 with the
99
slightly earlier Nenana Complex (Yesner 2000, Yesner 1996). The latest
interpretations reveal a clear distinction between Cultural Zones 3 and 4. The
earlier occupations in Cultural Zone 4 contained artifacts rendered from lithic raw
material immediately available. The majority of which were obtained from "dunal
sands and deposits directly underlying the site" (Yesner 2001). Tools were
readily available from the smashed fragments from quartz ventifacts. This
behavior produced a full 60% of the lithic resources discovered in the CZ-4
occupations. A remaining 30% of the lithics from CZ-4 were artifacts produced
from river cobbles also acquired locally (Yesner 2001). However, a few obsidian
artifacts found in CZ-4 may partly contradict this evidence.
Part of what makes the Broken Mammoth site unique is the wide variety of
faunal remains recovered from the site making this site rare when compared to
the rest of Alaska. The faunal evidence prOVides evidence of seasonal use in the
area, suggesting late fall or winter occupations at the site (Yesner 1996).
Faunal remains from CZ 3 and CZ 4 differ. Moose and caribou were used
more frequently in CZ-3.ln addition there were greater amounts "of snowshoe
hare, arctic fox, marmot and other small mammals" in CZ 3. CZ 4 had more
wapiti than CZ 3. Salmonid fish were utilized more than birds in CZ 3 in
comparison with CZ 4 where birds contributed 60% of the total faunal
assemblage (Yesner 1996).
100
Description: Nine separate Cultural Zones (CZ) were identified in four
geologic sequences A, 8, C and 0 (A is the basal unit & 0 is the upper most
unit). Multiple uncalibrated 14C samples have reliably dated each cultural
occupation. The stratigraphic sequence appears below.
:::§£!L~9.:~i:V.::::::::::: ~~:=::=:~::=:=:=:=:::::. . ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::Y~!E?~!:~6.::¢.:!~y.::~Ii~~!:i~;:j)f.C:::::::::::::::::::: :~::::::::::::::Soil Zone VI C III 9130±130,9220±80,
...~gD.~ ..~ !Y.1g9.~E.~ !~.P~gJ.!.. !j.!~!~.r.!g ..Zone B Water saturated C III.................................................................ON................... . , .
...?9.D.~ 9 t:!.Y~E.§.~.!.!g.~ §.:..r.9.g~ ~9.~~.9.!.! '" g..!.!.! ..Zone 0 1370+70 Silt-sand matrix/charcoal C III 20-100............................................................."'"' , .
Environment: Hill Top is located in a cluster of early sites along the North
Ridge of the Brooks Range including the Gallagher Flint Station (already an NHL)
and Putu-Bedwell (Bever 2001 b, Gal 1980). It is -250 km from Mesa and "a few
miles below the confluence of Atigun River and Sagavanirktok Rivers. Like the
Mesa site, it occupies the top of a prominent geologic feature (Bever 2001a).
History: Initial testing of the site began in 1970 and continued in 1973
(Bever 2001 a).
Significance: The Hill Top site has provided information on the economic
and hunting lifeways of early Alaskan using Mesa technology in the Brooks
Range. Bever (2000, 2001a and 2001b) and Ackerman (2001) have
documented the Mesa sites, including Hill Top, and it remains one of the best
defined Paleoindian complexes in Alaska.
139
integrity: Many of the flakes recovered from the original investigations
were given a single catalog number and more than 1300 artifacts are missing
entirely (Bever 2001 a), Site integrity was difficult to ascertain during this
research.
Artifacts and Features: The site contained Mesa style projectile points
and waste flakes. Artifacts consistent with repairing and rehafting activities
included large amounts of projectile point fragments and "tools manufactured
from the byproducts of a bifacial technology" (Bever 2001a:104).
Description: The area was 150 m2 concentrated in two localities
designated east and west. The majority of artifacts originated in the western
locality where two radiocarbon samples were recovered from the highest
concentration of artifacts (Bever 2001a).
140
Name: Hog Island (High)
Number: UNL-115
Region: Aleutians
NHR Designation: NONE
Repository: Museum of the Aleutians
Land Ownership: Ounalashka Corp
Basal Dates: 80502:80, 7950±90 (Dumond and Knecht 2001 :12)
Tradition: Anangula Core & Blade
Environment: Hog Island is located in Unalaska Bay northwest of Dutch
Harbor and Amaknax Island. The site lie between two radio towers on the
southeastern side of the island (Veltre et al 1984).
History: The traditional name for the island is Ukaadax and at least three
archaeological sites exist there (Veltre et al1984). Richard Knecht conducted
additional archaeological survey and testing in one of the blowouts from which
core and blade material was eroding. He returned to the site, again in 1999, to
conduct follow up investigations (Dumond and Knecht 2001).
Significance: As one of the earliest occupations known from the
Aleutians, Hog Island is significant as evidence related to the initial peopling of
that part of Alaska. It is especially significant because it contains evidence of a
living structure (Dumond and Knecht 2001 :27), a rarity in early Alaskan sites.
141
Integrity: Surveys by Knecht noted further erosion of core and blade
artifacts from blowouts (Dumond and Knecht 2001). The site was located
U[w]ithin the Dutch Harbor Naval Operating Base and Ft. Mears NHL (UNL-120)"
but the UNL-115 site (Hog Island) does not contribute to that NHL designation.
Military activity on Hog Island has affected several of the sites; although wind
eroded blowouts have had a greater impact on UNL-115.
Artifacts and Features:
There seems little doubt that the primary affinity of the people here... is toa population such as that of the... contemporary Anangula Blade...[dated] from some centuries before 8,000 [rcybp]. [The] five consistentdeterminations apparently most clearly from occupation surfaces inshallow depressions interpreted as houses... and calculated on theconventional radiocarbon half-life of 5568 years, yield a weighted meanage of 8002:!:.92 years (Dumond and Knecht 2001 :27).
Blades and flakes observed in a number of large, shallow blowouts(among 3-4 large radio antennas), which extend across much of theisiand's width. in '1997, Knecht, Dumond, and Dickson excavated three2m x 2m test units and found a 10cm thick cultural layer, which yieldedblades, microblades, microblade cores, burins, ocher grinders, anddebitage... This is the second Anangula tradition site so far known"(AHRS 1997).
Dumond and Knecht (2001) published artifact descriptions and that
inventory is paraphrased in the following: There were nine flaked cores and core
preparation flakes including platform, ridged, core side and side-struck flakes.
Numerous blade segments were recovered both without retouch (369) and
retouched (101). There were transverse burins (18), flake burins (10) and burin
spalls (37) as well as miscellaneous scrapers (17) and end scrapers (7). There
142
were also found several pumice abraders (4), and an ochre grinding stone (1). It
is important to note that, as was the case at the Anangula type-site, there were
no biface implements at Hog Island (Dumond and Knecht 2001).
Description: The first stratigraphic level was only 5 to 10 em consisting of
wind-eroded pyroclastic debris originating from Makushin Volcano (Dumond and
Knecht 2001: 10). The second stratigraphic level, described as "silt-like" matrix
four-eight em thick, was red in nature but contained some sand sized pumice
mixed in from the first layer. In this layer Dumond and Knecht (2001) note light
charcoal stains and fragmentary blades. Below this was a sterile layer,
described as blue-gray in color, upon a brown-gray bed of tephra. The cultural
horizon at Hog Island was located in a blowout 10 cm below the surface
....g~f.!.~~ ..9.f..9.§f.!.!~~ Q...!Y............................. . il.:MS ::::.1.?:??. ~§.~~ tlg.l9.9.l?,.f.1~ ..Sand C III 5680+50 -35-60 Late Denali
6 Sources: Holmes & Class 2003, Hamilton & Goebel 1999, Holmes et al1996195
Name: Trail Creek Caves (Med)
Number: BEN-00001
Region: Seward Peninsula
NHR Designation: NRXCL
Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Land Ownership: USNPS, BELA
Basal Dates: 9070.±,250 rcybp (Hamilton & Goebel 1999, West 1996b)
Complex: Denali, unknown
Environment: The site was found "near the head of Trail Creek, about
20km north of Imuruk Lake" (AHRS 1997), in a region described as "Trail Creek
Caves" located along the south east side of the ridge in the region of the NE
Seward Peninsula (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). Thirteen of the caves were
sufficient in size for human use (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Schaaf 1988).
History: The first recorded visit to the cave was in 1928 when T. Moto and
A. Karum sought shelter there and found the first reported artifacts (Larsen 1968,
West 1996b). Later, D. Hopkins conducted investigations of the region in 1948
and H. Larsen continued the effort in 1949 and again in 1950. Eleven of the
thirteen caves determined inhabitable by humans were tested in 1985 by the
National Park Service (Schaaf 1988, Hamilton and Goebel 1999).
Significance: The Trail Creek Caves site is significant because of the
discovery of rare organic artifacts primarily associated with inland caribou
196
hunting. The artifacts are similar to traditional Western Thule and Ipiutak or
Choris people. Also recovered were microblades and longitudinally grooved
organic projectiles resembling those used by the Denbigh Flint complex (AHRS
1997).
Integrity: Cave 2 and Cave 9 were the only two of the inhabitable caves
that contained archeological evidence. The nature of the stratigraphy and the
nature of the excavation techniques led to confusion when faunal remains dated
to 13 and 15 kya. The confusion centered on pre-human fauna remains and the
likely hood that older bone deposits where not associated with human activity.
The evidence for Pleistocene use of the cave by humans continues to be
criticized and Hamilton and Goebel (1999: 179) believe the earliest human
artifacts date to -9100 rcybp.
Artifacts and Features: Faunal remains included a mammoth scapula
(11,360:t.280 rcybp) from the floor of Cave B a fragment of mammoth vertebra
(14,270.:t950 rcybp) from just above the floor of Cave B (Hamilton and Goebel
1999). Unit IV of Cave 9 contained a bison calcaneus and from the same
provenience, a horse scapula dated to 15,750:t.350 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel
1999).
Description: Cave 2 was 21.4 meters long with stratigraphy 60 to 140 cm
in depth (Larsen 1968, West 1996b). Beginning atthe cave surface, Unit I has
been characterized as "black, loose-texture, sandy humus". Unit II, characterized
197
as "brown, loose-texture, stony soil or silt" beginning at a depth of -30 cm below
surface. Unit II was as thick as 50 cm and contained artifact remains. The Unit
III stratum, between zero and 40cm thick, described as "micaceous sandy silt"
and angular rocks. The Unit IV layer contained paleontological specimens just
inside the entrance and was described as "sticky, silty, clay" (Hamilton and
Goebel 1999).
Historic and Denbigh artifacts were found in Units I and II. Units III and IV
fused together in some areas of the cave. Artifacts from Unit III included
"microblades and slotted antler spearheads" (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).
Faunal remains from Unit IV included mountain sheep, elk, caribou, horse and
bison. Horse and bison found outside the entry of Cave 9 represent Pleistocene
fauna (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). In all seven antler points and four
microblades were recovered. They are the only known occurrence of slotted
bone points and microblades in eastern Beringia with the exception of the Lime
Hills Cave I site (\/Vest 1996b).
Larsen (1968) believed that a section the bison calcaneus dated
13,070.:t.280 had been broken in a manner consistent with human action,
although his claim continues to be heavily criticized (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).
198
Table 7.22: Trail Creek Caves1
Unit Description Artifact RCYBP -em thick...~.~.19g~ r.n.9.~rn9.~b, ..'!..~~~.t.>r.?.~ ~.4.1.??9.,;!;,@.?9. ......~D!.t1 ~!.?g~..§.9D.9..¥..!J.~.~.~§ 9.:::?.9. ......~!:1.!~...I.L.......................... i ~r.9.~f.l ~.~9.n~y...§.!!.t , , , .Q~.?.9. .Unit III cave 2 sandy silt microblade slotted spear
large angular rocks point 0-40caribou bone 9070+150·..Uni'f··iV'·c·ave..g· ·s·ficky..·sl·ity..·Ci'ay ·bl·son..c·ai·can·e·u·s·'· ·· ·..T3';o70:t2·s'O..·· ·..25~T1·5 ·horse scapula 15,750+350
1 Sources: Larsen 1968, Hamilton and Goebel 1999:179 & 191199