:.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 4.10 Calibrated Radiocarbon Determinations 55

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.

1Source :http://www.nr.nps.govIiWisapi/explorer.dll?IWS SCHEMA=NRIS1 &IWS LOGIN=1 &IWS REPORT=100000044

9

m. The Earliest Alaskans

The following chapter considers the geographic focus of Paleoindian

research in Alaska and the distribution of early sites within regional subdivisions

of the state. It also reviews state and federal efforts in preservation for early sites

and information relevant in nominating archaeological sites to the NR. Finally, it

contains a discussion of the research methodology and categories of information

used to rank early Alaskan sites in the Appendix.

Table 3.1 displays 47 sites initially considered for nomination by this

project. Taken together, these sites constitute the basis for early site evaluation

in Alaska. Twelve of these sites were not included in the Appendix because they

did not contain enough information for evaluation, are currently awaiting further

research, or are already listed as NR properties or as NHLs with no significant

changes in their interpretation. One NHL, the Gallagher Flint Station, was

chosen for inclusion in the Appendix because continuing research has provided

additional information since it was first nominated, that site was not provided with

a site ranking as it is already an NHL.

10

L..J L...J

Table 3.1: Summa of Earl Alaskan ~)ites

o I hkNONE

• • A·

UNL 0054I I dA kLand Owner !k9.LQn Basal Date ~ Rank

ma nax san - una as a Aleu lans Yes LowAnangula-Ananiuliak2 SAM-012 NHL FWS Aleutians -8400 NoBatza Tena3 MLZ-2 NHS BLM Brooks Range 11,770+220 Yes MedBroken Mammoth4 XBD-131 NONE State Interior 11,770+220 Yes HighCarlo Creeko HEA-031 DOE State Interior 8400+200 Yes MedChuck Lakeo CRG-00237 NONE USFS, Tongass Southeast -8200-7300 Yes MedChugwaterf FAI-035 NHR COE Interior 9460+130 NoDelta River Overlook8 XMH-297 DOE DOD Interior 8555+380 Yes MedDonnelly Ridge9 XMH-05 DXS DOD Interior Yes MedDry Creek10 HEA-5 NHL State Interior 11,120+85 NoEroadawai 1 Pending NONE State Interior 8640+170 NoGallagher Flint Stat.1:l PSM-0050 NHL State Brooks Range 6960+90# YesGerstle R. Quarry13 XMH-246 DOE DOD Interior NoGround Hog Bay 214 JUN-037 NRXCL USFS, Tongass Southeast 10,180+800 Yes HighHealy Lake15 XBD-00020 NRXCL Native Allotment Interior 11,550+50 Yes MedHidden Falls16 SIT-00119 DOE USFS, Tongass Southeast -9500 Yes LowHill TOp11 not listed NONE BLM Interior Yes LowHog IslandH:l UNL-00115 NONE Ounalashka Aleutians 7960+90 Yes HighHoudini Creek19 HEA-295 NONE State? Interior 7880+60 NoIrwin Sluiceway20 Pending NONE NPSIWEAR Brooks Range 10,060+80 NoKoggiung[ NAK-00018 NONE Native Claim AK Peninsula 7945+90 Yes LowLast DayLL XHP-497 NONE NPSIWEAR Brooks Range 8530+60 NoLime Hills Cavesz; N/A NONE Private? Southwest 9530+60 Yes MedLisburne24 KIR-00096 NONE BLM Brooks Range -8000 Yes MedMead:lO XBD-00071 NONE Private Interior 11,600+80 Yes HighMesa:lO KIR-102 DOE BLM Brooks Range -10,000 Yes HighMoose Creek:l l FAI-206 NONE State Interior 11,190+60 Yes MedNR_5:l8 Pending NONE NPSIWEAR Brooks Range -10,000 No

Table 3.1: Summa of Earl Alaskan Sites (Continued)

LYS thFWSNONE

• • A..

BTH 069Nukluk MountainLand Owner ~ Basal Date ~ Rank

- ou wes es owOiled Blade;jU UNL-318 NONE Ounalashka Aleutians 8400-7900 cal Yes MedOn Your Knees Cave31 PET-00408 NONE USFS, Tongass Southeast -9200 BP Yes HighOnion Portage;jL AMR-1 NHL NPS Brooks Range 9857+155 NoOwl Ridge33 FAI-91 NONE BLM Interior 11,340+150 Yes MedPanguingue Creek;j4 HEA-137 NONE State Interior 9951+56 Yes MedPhipps;jb XMH-00111 NHS State. Interior 10,190 ave. Yes MedPutu-Bedwelfjl5 PSM-27 NONE BLM Brooks Ranoe 10,490+70 Yes MedRBS;j( Pending NONE NPSIWEAR Brooks Ranoe NoSlate Creek38 HEA- 00129 NONE State Interior Yes LowSpein Mountain,j~ BTH 62-65 NONE FWS Southwest 10,050+90 Yes HighSwan Point4U XBD-156 NONE State Interior -12,000 Yes HighTeklanika District41 HEA-85 NXS NPS Interior -10,000 NoTrail Creek Caves4L BEN-00001 NRXCL NPS/BELA Seward Penn 9070+250 Yes MedTuluaq Hi1l4;j DEL-360 NONE NPS/WEAR Brooks Range 11,110+80 Yes HighUgashik Narrows44 UGA-00001 NONE Native Claim AK Peninsula 8995±295 Yes HighUsibelli4b HEA-00128 NONE State Interior 3195+295 Yes MedWalker Road 40 HEA-130 NONE State Interior 11,300+120 Yes HighWhitmore Ridge47 XMH-072 NHS State Interior 10,360+60 Yes Med

References1Veltre et al 1984, McCartney & Veltre 1996, Knecht & Daviis 2001; 2Veltre et al 1984; 3Clark & Clark 1993; 4Yesner 1996; 5Bowers & Mason1992; 6Ackerman 1985; 7Lively 1996 (West editor); 8Holme!; 1979; !West 1967; 10 Hoffecker et a11985, Hoffecker 1988, Goebel et a11991;11Radiocarbon data published in Mason et a12001; 12Dixon 1975, Ferguson 1997; 13Potter 2001; 14Ackerman1992, 1996; 15Cook 1975, 1975,1996; 16Davis 1979, 1980; 17Bever 2001; 18Veltre et aI1984, Dumond & Knecht 2001; 19Mason et a12001; 2°Rasic 2000, 2002; 21Dumond 1981;22Gal 2003; 23Ackerman 1996; 24Bowers 1982, Gal 1980, LOJ( & Dixon 1998; 25Pewe 1983, Yesner 1996; 26Kunz & Reanier 1994,1995,1996;27Hoffecker et a11985, Hoffecker 1996~ Pearson 1999; 28Ra!.ic 2000; 29Ackerman 1996c; 30Knecht & Davis 2001; 31Dixon 1999; 32Anderson 1988;33Hoffecker et a11985, Phippen 1988; 4Hoffecker 1988, Powers & Hoffecker 1989; 3SWest et a11996; 36Ga11980, Reanier 1994,1996; 37Gal 2003;38Hoffecker et a11985; 39Ackerman 1996c, 2001, Bever 200'1; 4°Holmes 1998, 2003; 41West 1967; 42Larsen 1968; 43Rasic 2000, 2002; 44Dumond1975, Henn 1978; 45& 48 Hoffecker 1980, Hoffecker et aI19B:5, Powers & Hoffecker 1989; 47West 1996d

The remaining 34 sites appear in the Appendix, and are ranked as

possessing differing levels of integrity and significance from information

documented through interviews, newspapers, textbooks, professional papers, the

Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS), and professional journal articles. Of

these, eleven sites are recommended for NHL designation and seventeen for NR

nomination. Six sites, ranked "Low" within the context of the others, did not

provide sufficient information for recommendation. Their inclusion in the

Appendix provides additional historic contextual comparison.

A summary of the information documented in the Appendix used to

determine site ranks is outlined in Table 3.2. The information listed corresponds

to the information documented under specific categories. The category scientific

significance documents how each site has contributed to the Alaskan

archaeological record. Historical significance, similarly, contains information

about how the site has contributed to the history of archaeological theory in

Alaska. The categories spatial integrity, disturbance, and intact deposits help

establish the integrity of cultural deposits. Spatial integrity documents the nature

of deposition based on stratified or surface sites; sites listed as "buried" were not

surface sites but occurred in buried contexts that were not clearly stratified.

Disturbance estimates the degree to which deposits have been disturbed from

their original in situ deposition by accounting for site formation processes. The

category intact deposits estimates which of the sites may still contain cultural

13

material, although definitive conclusions were not possible. Early Alaskan

diagnostic artifacts document only the earliest components, without considering

later deposits (documented elsewhere). Secure dating is the degree in which

cultural deposits have been securely dated through multiple radiocarbon

determinations. The final category "Rank" are my recommendations for NHL and

NR nominations.

14

Table 3.2: Summa of Site Rankin s

MI I dA k

ati!!! Disturbance Intact ~ Secure .Ranklt~i!Y ~ Di~ DatillQ

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.

NRXCL DOE file inactive~~~~~~~~~,.~_._~_nM_"~"_ __••__.. .._ ",.._ _.,.."................ .. n _ _ .. '., •., , __ _ , .-__ __ ..M•.•_ , __ _ ...' _................. ..,., •. '_ n _ .

NON E The property has not been reviewed

The reason that cultural resource management archaeology exists in the

US today is to ensure surveys are completed so that nonrenewable cultural

resources will be protected and properly documented before any potentially

destructive action is undertaken, also to find and record previously unknown

sites. A site that may be eligible for the NR or documented through a

Determination of Eligibility (DOE) is treated as if it has already been nominated

(King 1998, Neumann and Sanford 2001).

20

JJ

The NATREG information for Alaskan archaeological sites and districts

dated between 8,000 and 12,000 rcybp was collected in an effort to establish the

state of early site preservation efforts in Alaska. For those sites lacking such

documentation, the category NONE was employed. The results depicted in

Figure 3.7 document the total number of known early sites. It indicates that the

system designed to track and preserve early Alaskan sites has not been

providing the necessary documentation.

Figure 3.7: National Register Designations for Early Alaskan Sites

30

25

20

15

10

5

oNONE NHL NHR NHS NRXCL NXS DOE DXS

21

One major reason for nominating sites to the NR or as NHLs is to facilitate

research; it is the only nationwide database of cultural properties and

archaeological sites. Another reason for nomination is to provide additional

visibility to nominated sites, allowing researchers access to basic information

regarding the quality and significance of data from different regions of the

country. Planning and stewardship makes agencies and developers aware of

important sites before a project begins, ensuring the property's protection for

future generations (Sprinkle 1994).

C. Alaskan Site Categories and Methods of Analysis

The arbitrarily set timeframe for this study (8,000-12,000 rcybp) reflects

the period from when early Alaskans lived and was the initial factor for

determining sites to include in the analysis. Keeping in mind some of the

difficulties inherent in 14C data, I have included most dates in the text as

uncalibrated. A comprehensive section on radiocarbon calibration into calendar

years appears in Chapter IV, Section E.

Several categories of information helped establish a framework within

which archaeological properties were compared. These categories include site

significance, integrity, environment, history, description, artifacts and features.

They document aspects of site location, design, setting, material, workmanship

and association used for considering a property's eligibility to the NR (Little et al

2000). With this information, it was possible to rank most of the properties as

22

having "High", "Moderate" or "Low" levels of integrity and significance based on

the Earliest Americans Theme Study guidelines (Anderson 2003). Ranking sites

based on integrity and significance was a sUbjective process completed through

a systematic search of the literature. Suggested ranks for each site are included

in the Appendix next to the site name. Sites considered for NHL status ranked

"High" and sites considered for nomination to the NR ranked "Moderate" (Med).

Sites ranking "Low" did not possess sufficient integrity or significance for

nomination consideration.

Table 3.8: Earl Alaska Site Cate ories..§.!!E? ~'§'!!.1.~ _ _ g.<?.!!.1p..!~~ _ _ ...§!!~.~..~.~~.E?!.J~.!j.B.§.L._ _......... '!.ir.~~!!.l_<?n.L _ _...!3.~g.I.<?.Q _ _1- - _ j

..!3~P.9.~J.!9.!:Y.................................. _.. _....................... ..§!gn!.f!~.§.!}~.<?......................... ..

..h§i.!29.<?~~.<?.~ .!..r.!.!<?g.t!.~y. ..Basal Dates Artifacts and Features'..·T..ra..Ciiti..on ·· · ··.. ···..··..·· · ·..·..··· , Oescripti..on ·..· ·· ·· ···..·..··· ··..·..···..··· _ ,

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).

36

Table 4.3: Earlv Alaska Technoloaical Classifications (Dixon 2001)Tradition· Complex Radiocarbon Range (rcybp)

Most archaeologists would agree with Dixon's (2001) summary of early

Alaskan technological classifications, despite the controversy surrounding his

proposal for the coastal migration into the New World around 13,500 rcybp

(Dixon 1999). Dixon (2001), however, did not compile a compete list of ail early

Alaskan assemblages, and many traditions contain several technological

complexes. For these reasons, a comprehensive discussion of each complex

and tradition utilized in this study is necessary.

... _-1.1...._ ....._ ... I~~L ..... -I "_!..... Jl.. ,.. ...... _~M ..,...1-_ -I:_J.: ..........L:~ ...... L __ l- I __ .w: .....l'IUfLlltnn rluu~u r-UIIIL vUIlIPI~A; 1II~ UI:::>llll\jlIV~ l~\j"IIUIU~Y I::>

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

Alaska (Ackerman 2001, Bever 2000, Bever 2001a, Kunz and Reanier 1995,

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

Interior, Nenana complex deposits occur stratigraphically beneath Denali

complex deposits in nearly every early site found in that region. Although there

are 47 early sites, there are 62 early Alaskan archaeological components

identified in the literature. These sites are depicted by frequency in Figure 4.5.

Those sites not classifiable at the complex level have been included in their

respective tradition. Table 4.6 lumps each complex into its respective tradition,

placing the Akmak and Denali complexes into the Paleoarctic tradition, and the

Nenana, Mesa, and Northern Fluted Point complexes into the Paleoindian

tradition. The charts compare early Alaskan components statewide and provide

a greater sense of technological diversity between 8,000 and 12,000 rcybp.

47

Figure 4.5: Early Alaskan Component Frequency

25.----------------------VJ 20 +------....=~ 15+------Qe10+------Q

U 5+------

o+--JI--....-

Figure 4.6: Percent of Early Alaskan Tradition Components

% l~~ jr--------------------;o;]~- I

f-----.---....------..-.-.-- !---"--r----J'---.-

D. An Alternative Approach: Primary Mode of Lithic Production

Primary modes of lithic production serves as an alternative method for

classifying the material technology of early Alaskans. The model assumes two

fundamental manners of lithic reduction, bifacial and unifacial; some technologies48

use one or the other of these modes, but the Paleoarctic tradition incorporates

both of these. Andrefsky (1998) explains lithic reduction stages as unifacial or

bifacial modes of production. Investigating trends in their use among early

Alaskans could be a viable and testable attribute, an attribute commonly

described in the archaeological literature.

Lithic reduction sequences from the Anangula and Northwest Coast

Microblade core-and-blade traditions appear as strictly unifacial flaking strategies

(Ackerman 1980, Matson and Coupland 1995, Veltre et al 1984). Paleoindian

tradition technology typically begins with the manufacture of bifacial blanks and

preforms. Although Paleoindian technology does contain small percentages of

unifacial tools, these were typically retouched flakes generated through bifacial

reduction (Goebel et al 1991). In contrast, Paleoarctic tradition technology

incorporates both unifacial and bifacial reduction techniques (Anderson, Douglas

1988) employing both modes of production simultaneously.

At this point, I must stress that these reduction strategies have been

assumed based on assemblage descriptions provided by site investigators.

Proving modes of reduction would require analyses of each early Alaskan

assemblage. Table 4.7 depicts how each assemblage would be categorized.

Table 4.7: Earl' Alaskan Technologic ClassificationsTradition Complex Primary Mode of ProductionPaleoarctic Denali, Akmak Both unifacial and bifacial···PaieoTri·d"fa·n·····..····..·.. '''i\Je-nana:-Mesa:-NorthernFTLitecfpoTilC........· ··Sifa·Claj····· ..··..··..···..·.. ··.. ··..··· ......··..·....·· ..·.... ··..};~?6~~~[~=::::::::::::::·::· _§.§!.rlg~.!~.~:=::=.~~===~=-~~=:=~~===~=::=~:::~~~:~: .:II6If~~[§L·::::::::::::~~~:~:::~::~::.:::::::::::::::.::::NW Microblade NW Microblade Unifacial

49

As groups migrated through Beringia and Northwest Alaska, some settled

in the Tanana and Nenana Valleys, gradually penetrating south of the Alaska

Range. Over the millennia, they trickled down to rich coastal regions in

Southeast, Southcentral Alaska and the Aleutian Islands (Yesner 1996).

Differences in lithic production techniques plotted across the state in Figure 4.8,

may represent separate migrations or diffusion of technology.

50

Figure 4.8: Mode of Production in Early Alaskan Components

~~r·,_- Biracial£i

Biracial & Unifacial

51

E. Calibrated Radiocarbon Determinations for Early Sites

Radiocarbon samples detect the decay of isotopic carbon beginning upon

the death of an organism. The older the sample, the greater the radiocarbon

determination diverges from the actual calendar date the organism died (Haynes

2002). There has been extensive analysis regarding radiocarbon calibration, and

calibrated dates appear in a variety of previously published articles and books

(e.g. Bigelow and Powers 2001:Table 3, Hamilton and Goebel 1999: Appendix).

The importance of radiocarbon calibration to the Early Americans Theme Study,

and to this project, is a need to convey site antiquity in the form of calendar years

before present, rather than in rcybp, making the age of sites comprehensible to

non-archaeologists (NPS 2003a).

In addition to problems of association, radiocarbon dates may be affected

by the marine reservoir of fossil carbon, if they are based on shell, fishbone, sea

mammal bone, or sea mammal fats. An additional problem of particular

relevance to the earliest Alaskan sites is the "radiocarbon plateau" around

10,000 rcybp, in which different calendar dates are associated with specimens

showing similar radiocarbon dates.

Radiocarbon dates from the 47 early sites listed in Table 3.1 represent a

range covering the period between 6,000 to 12,000 rcybp. The results appear in

Table 4.9 and Figure 4.10 including both radiocarbon samples obtained from

early Alaskan sites and their calibrated calendar year. Note that there are two

52

apparent slight inconsistencies in the calibration of data at approximately 9,700

and 11,100 rcybp.

53

]

J

1

Table: 4.9 Radiocarbon Determinations and Calibrated YearsSite Name Level RCYBP Deviation Median Low .tf.ighDelta River Overlook CZ2 6675 175 7523 7252 7840Gallagher 6960 90 7771 7612 7958Panouinoue Creek CII 7130 180 7942 7593 8336Broken Mammoth CZ2 7201 205 7991 7615 8394Jay Creek Ridoe 7220 110 7987 7792 8284Swan Point CZ2 7400 80 8182 8015 8378Koggiuna 7475 60 8253 8170 8391Broken Mammoth CZ2 7700 80 8439 8366 8631Koggiung 7765 95 8541 8385 8977Koooiuno 7895 90 8643 8451 9011Owl Ridge CII 8130 140 9028 8602 9471Panguingue Creek CI 8170 120 9088 8720 9471Chuck Lake Locale 1 8180 130 9127 8656 9486Chuck Lake Locale 1 8220 125 9208 8781 9516Carlo Creek CZ 1 8400 200 9448 8818 9890Last Day 8530 60 9596 9434 9596Delta River CZ 1 8555 380 9532 8564 10546Carlo Creek CZ 1 8690 330 9627 9001 10575Trail Creek Cave 9070 250 10220 9536 11064

H82 3 130 30 0239 ~787 0692n Knees Cave harcoal 210 0 0382 10235 0548HB2 3 220 0 0334 ~0218 0665roken Mammoth Z3 310 65 10434 ~0185 1112n Knees Cave uman 730 0 0330 ~0206 1128anguingue Creek I 836 2 11204 ~ 1167 ~1337.... v ............. ,.. r" .... ~ .... luman 00'"' '"' 10624 """"''' ... ... e"lI' r" It:;"C» \Jave OOU u IUo:>""U I I l~hJ

ipein Mountain 0050 0 1492 1229 12261wan Point Z3 0230 0 1790 1444 2715roken Mammoth Z3 0270 10 12021 1365 2791roken Mammoth Z3 0290 0 1997 1699 2753

!lead .jZ 3 0460 10 12492 1780 2911utu-8edwel! Putu .0490 .0 .2477 1961 .2907oose Creek II 0500 0 2472 11971 12908roken Mammoth 3 0790 30 2886 11985 3181roken Mammoth Z4A 1040 60 3779 ~2391 3013lry Creek Z1 1120 5 3376 12682 3137oose Creek I 11190 0 3153 2903 3752uluaq Hill 1200 0 13155 2911 3751roken Mammoth "z 48 1280 90 3174 2889 3807Valker Road 11300 120 3180 2787 3001wi Ridoe I 1340 50 3258 2998 13805roken Mammoth Z48 1420 0 3422 3149 13799roken Mammoth Z48 1510 20 3459 3153 13840ead Z4 1600 :sO 3492 3195 13862wan Point .jZ 4 1660 0 3700 3424 15053roken Mammoth CZ4C 1770 '10 3816 3180 15240

54

J]

9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 140008000

.f+T

f+ .+

"-+.+++ +

#:4"

~-t

*+.po

...:t"T

+

60007000

Figure 4.10: Calibrated Radiocarbon Determinations12000

.....s::::::Q)

m11000...0..G)o10000

'to­Q)

CD

~ 9000(0

~

E 8000..c...(0(.)

.2 7000"0(0

0::

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

\ \ I + Flake'. \ \ \ f-- X Microblade

\ \... Blade Core

~\,', \\ t \ I ~ ~:~d; 11

Point\ I .... Burin Spall

32 " \ \ \ . \1 Rejuvenation Flake" \ \ >- C) Charcoal

\ \ \\ \ \ I Vegetation Line

\ 'f \ \ \~30 I I I, \ \'

l ~ \ +,/ \ \+ '\ I I

:0- 28 +: ~).v·x ," + 1/ / + )' 'l + I Ic • T ~ / .• / ) 1,1'/1/ + + /1 ~ + I j/+ / I I

/ 1+ / + I /

26 l +t+ + / I II / / .,- + i i / / / /

24- ._ . r _l 1__,. j _,_i;-"t_y-L __ ./_ _.S328 330 332 334 336 338 340 342

eastin (ffiHters)

Core and blade technology only occurred in Cluster A and accounts for

one third of the total artifact collection by count. Proximal blade segments

comprised 58.1 % of the blade collection. Medial segments comprised 29% and

distal segments comprised 12.9% of the blades. Both the projectile point base

and the manufacture of microblades are consistent with activities expected to

occur around a small hunting party's fire hearth where lithic retooling took place.

Blade edge damage analysis did not necessarily indicate human use, but

instead provided a measure of time exposed on the surface. Blades with a high

(12.9%) amount of edge damage demonstrated a significant amount of edge

chipping along the majority of one or the better part of both blade edges.

Medium (6.5%) damage amounted to chipping along approximately half of a

single blade edge. Low (19.3%) levels of edge damage included those with a

minor amount of chipping along a single edge. Blades with no trace of edge

damage (61 %) were the most prevalent, and when combined with blades of low

damage levels, they represented over 80% of the total number of blades. Such

evidence indicated the majority of discarded segments remained close to their

original position of deposition with little or no movement across the gravel

surface.

A minimum number of three cores are represented in Cluster A, although

only the black ovate core was recovered. The first missing core produced the

61

majority of blades from gray chert. The second, a brown chert core, produced

two refitting segments of a core face rejuvenation flake.

Material type was classified by generic stone color. Several shades of

gray chert, including a gray and red variegated type, comprised 61 % of the total

number of chert artifacts. Two red chert waste flakes could have originated from

the red portions of the gray and red variegated core. Black chert was the second

most abundant material type (33.3%). Artifacts comprised of black chert were all

similar in grain and texture, including the ovate blade core and the largest of the

blades.

Based on weight, gray chert, including the red-banded variety, comprised

7.8% of the material type in Cluster A, whereas black chert comprised 86.7 %.

Varieties of dark gray and brown chert were the only other materials in Cluster A,

which consisted of less than 4.6% by weight. In Cluster B, gray chert (46.5%)

outweighed black chert (39%). Red-brown and tan varieties represented less

than 15% of the materia! based on weight.

All of the blades are within the general size classification for microblades,

with the exception of one outlier. All of the microblades were flaked from gray

chert, and the blade thickness v. width data (Figure 5.3) lead one to conclude

that they were derived from a single core. The single "macro blade" was flaked

from black chert, similar in texture and color to the ovate core. Its curvature

nearly matched the largest flake scar on the core face, and the blade length was

62

only slightly larger than the outermost scar. However, it was not a perfect match,

suggesting that the blade originated from an earlier reduction stage.

Figure 5.3: Blade Width vs Thickness

4.5

4

3.5

~ 3CII-CII

~ 2.5gIII

2IIICIIC

..:.:(J

:E 1.5...

0.5

•

•• t·•.... •• •

• •~ ~. ,..

oJI---r----,---+---------------------o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Width (millimeters)

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.

64

I

J"llllllillllll'IJ1IJIfIIIII'lllllllll'llllliIIUI-

Figure 5.4: Last Day (XHP-497) Lithic Artifacts

I

Special thanks to Richard Martin for his assistance in artifact photography

o

ULJ

J

65

VI. Results and Conclusions

The purpose of this project was to determine properties suitable for

nomination to the National Register of Historic Places, including those worthy of

nomination to the National Historic Landmark status. The Earliest Americans

Theme Study must include Alaska to be truly comprehensive on a national scale.

Once a Multiple Property Nomination is completed, it can be easily updated with

newly discovered sites. The need for such research is clear, to protect these

resources under the fullest extent of Section 106 of the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966, and to make available to the public information

pertaining to the peopling of the Americas.

Early Alaskan archaeological resources dating between 8000 and 12000

radiocarbon years share a common theme, "Peopling of the New World". The

analysis used to review literature pertaining to early Alaskan sites involved the

compilation of several categories of information. These included aspects of site

history, environment, integrity, artifacts and features, description of stratigraphic

context and scientific significance. Other documentation concerning the current

state of preservation efforts were based on a series of National Register

(NATREG) codes. Of the 47 early sites originally considered, documentation and

status in the NATREG system were considerations in choosing the 35 sites

described in the Appendix where a rank of "Low", "Moderate" or "High" levels of

integrity and scientific significance is provided.

66

In the northern half of the state, the Brooks Range contains eleven early

sites, two of which are already listed as NHLs (Onion Portage and Gallagher Flint

Station). Of these sites, three (Batza Tena, Lisburne, and Putu-Bedwell) are

recommended for NR nomination and two (Mesa and Tuluaq Hill) for NHL status.

The Seward Peninsula contains one site (Trail Creek Caves) recommended for

NR status.

Twenty-two early sites were considered from interior Alaska, of which four

are recommended for NHL status (Broken Mammoth, Mead, Swan Point, and

Walker Road) and ten for NR nomination (Carlo Creek, Delta River Overlook,

Donnelly Ridge, Healy Lake Village, Moose Creek, Owl Ridge, Panguingue

Creek, Phipps, Whitmore Ridge, and Usibelli). The Phipps and Whitmore Ridge

sites, located in the Tangle Lakes Archaeological District, are National Historic

Sites (NHS), recommended for NR nominations. Donnelly Ridge is a contributing

site in the Donnelly Dome Archaeological District and is recommended for NR

nomination. Dry Creek is already a NHL.

Sites recommended for NHL status in Southeast Alaska include Ground

Hog Bay 2 and On Your Knees Cave; Chuck Lake is recommended for the NR.

Southwest Alaska and the Alaska Peninsula contain 't'J'JO sites recommended for

NHL status (Spein Mountain and Ugashik Narrows), and one for NR nomination

(Lime Hills Cave). Anangula, in the Aleutians, is already a NHL site; Hog Island

is recommended for NHL status; and the Oiled Blade site for NR nomination.

67

This research forms the foundation of a future Multiple Properties

Nomination. Once completed, the MPN will be useful in nominating future sites.

The benefits of continuing the nomination process for early sites in Alaska, aside

from preservation, is to make information available and easily accessible to the

general public regarding the Earliest Americans and the Peopling of the New

World.

68

AMR-1PSM-50KIR-102

DEL-360MLZ-2KIR-96PSM-27

Table 6.2: Seward Peninsula

AkmakN. Fluted PointMesa

PaleoindianN. Fluted PointMesaMesa

Anderson, Dou las 1988Dixon 1975, Ferguson 1997Kunz & Reanier 1994-6Rasic 2000Clark & Clark 1993Bowers 1982Bever 2001, Reanier 1994

Table 6.3: InteriorSIte Name Number Complex References RankDry Creek HEA-005 Nenana, Denali Hoffeckeretal1985 NHLBroken Mammoth XBD-131 Nenana, Denali Yesner1996 HiahMead XBD-71 Nenana, Denali Yesner1996, Pewe 1983 HiahSwan Point XBD-156 Pre-Nenana?, Nenana, Denali Holmes 1998, 2003 HighWalker Road HEA-130 Nenana, Denali? Hoffecker 1980, Hiaas 1992 HighDelta River Overlook XMH-297 Denali Holmes 1979 MedCarlo Creek HEA-031 Unknown Bowers & Mason 1992 MedDonnelly Ridge XMH-005 Denali West 1967, 1996 MedHealy Lake Village XBD-020 Nenana Cook 1969 MedMoose Creek FAI-206 Nenana,Denali Hoffecker 1996, Pearson 1999 MedOwl Ridae FAI-91 Nenana, Denali Hoffecker 1985, Phippen 1988 MedPanauinaue Creek HEA-137 Denali, Nenana? Powers & Hoffecker 1989 MedPhipps XMH-111 Denali West et al 1996 MedWnitmore Kidge XMH·o72 Denali West 1996d MedUsibelli HEA-128 Nenana? Hoffeckeretal1985 Med

Table 6.4: SoutheastSite Name Number Complex Reference RankGround Hoa Bav 2 JUN·037 Denali? Ackerman 1992, 1996 HiahOn Your Knees Cave PET-4G8 NWCoast Dixon 1999 HiahChuck Lake CRG-237 NWCoast Ackerman 1985 Med

Table 6.5: Southwest & Alaska PeninsulaSite Name Number Complex Reference RankSpein Mountain BTH 62-65 Mesa Ackerman 2001 HighUgashik Narrows UGA-001 Denali Dumond 1975, Henn 1978 HighLime Hills Cave N/A Denali Ackerman 1996 Med

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

http://archnet.asu.edu/archnetftopicallcrm/usdocs/36cfr65.html

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

Dnin+ D."nor nro...on+o .,,+ +ho -:tn+h Annll."IIUloo+inl"l nf+ho AI."...... ."• "' ...... I "1"""" ...... ""'.g""' •••""' U....."" vv".. ,.., ........... .•.,,"' .....~ ", .......... ""''''WI'I''''

Anthropological Association, Fairbanks.

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.

Table 7.1: Broken Mammoth (Holmes 1996:Fig 6-5)level Description

..~J~~~.J2. __ g~ ..j_A, J.I?!.._9.r.!.9?. _ _ __._.._ ___ __ .__._ ___ ___ _ .r-§_tra~~g___ §.t.~rjJ~ ~_~r.!EL~9.Q!§!jr.!J.!Jg_.Q.9. ..g_~_!!~!.~! ..~9..!J~_~ _ _.._... . _. _ _§~at~__ 3, 4A, 48 and 4CStrata A Sterile sand containing no Cultural Zones

Cultural Zones 1A, 18 and 2 contained nine samples ranging between

2040:t.65 and 7700:t.80. Occupations in CZ-3 yielded five 14C dates: 9310:t.165,

9690.:t960, 10,270.:t11 0, 10,790.:t230 and 10,290.:t70AMs. Although throughout the

majority of the site a layer of sterile sand separates Cultural Zones 3 and 4,

apparent mixing between samples from 3 and 4A produced two dates of

11 ,040.:t80AMS and 11 ,060.:t90AMS (Holmes 1996).

There were three separate early occupations. CZ-4A yielded a date of

11,040.:t260. CZ 48 contained four dates: 11 ,280.:t190, 11 ,420.:t70AMS,

11 ,500.:t80AMS and11 ,51 0.:t120 and 4C contained two dates of 11 ,770.:t21°and

11,770.:t220. One final sample from 4C, a fragment of ivory raw material dated to

15,830.:t70AMS, is considered "old ivory" (Holmes 1996).

101

Table 7.2: Broken Mammoth (Hamilton et a11999, Yesner et al1992)CZ -em RCYBP

This date on bone is likely not accurate, CZ-4A was a paleosol with little evidence of human habitation(Yesner 2003 personal communication).

102

Name: Carlo Creek (Med)

Number: HEA-0031

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: DOE-S (Bowers and Mason 1992)

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Ownership: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: (-8500 rcybp) (Bowers 1978)

Complex: non-diagnostic

Environment: The site is located at mile 223.5 on the Parks highway in

the Central Alaskan Range on a bluff overlooking Carlo Creek, an eastern

tributary of the Nenana River (Bowers 1978).

History: Hamilton and Thorson discovered Carlo Creek in 1975 along the

road between Cantwell and Healy. Eroding from the cut bank were lithic and

faunal materials. Later that summer Holmes returned to the site for initial

evaluation and registration with the AHRS. Field excavations began the summer

of 1976 and continued the following year (Bowers 1978, Bowers and Mason

1992).

Significance: The site has been determined eligible for the National

Register for more than one of the criteria necessary. It satisfied Criterion D

based on its potential to provide further important data to prehistory as it has

103

already done (Bowers and Mason 1992). This data concerns the economies of

early Alaskan subsistence patterns.

Carlo Creek is a rare early Alaskan site, although the Iithics from its oldest

component were non-diagnostic, they most likely are associated with the Nenana

complex. Component II contained bifacial tools, blades and blade like flakes

(Hamilton and Goebel 1999) and are reminiscent of the Denali tool assemblages;

however, it lacked the diagnostic core and blade artifacts.

Integrity: During the 1976 and 1977 excavations, an estimated 45 cubic

meters of overburden were removed from the site, ranging in depth from 1.5 to 3

meters (Bowers 1978). This significant amount of soil deposition demonstrates a

high degree of integrity that aided in excellent preservation at the site.

Furthermore, after excavations were completed in 1977, the site was back filled

and re-vegetated (Bowers 1978). The site was not completely excavated and

has the potential to contribute further information about the early Holocene,

especially with regard to faunal remains related to subsistence patterns and bone

tool technology (Bowers and Mason 1992). An unknown amount of cultural

deposits remains the lowest components of the site.

Artifacts and Features: Component I, the lowermost occupation,

revealed two fire hearth features. Charcoal samples from these features

returned radiocarbon dates of 8400:t.200, 8690:t.330 and 10,040:t.435 rcybp. Soil

104

humic acid at this level returned a date of 5120±265 rcybp, but this date was

considered to be from contamination (Bowers and Mason 1992).

Lithic artifacts from Component I include: 3 complete bifaces, retouched

flakes (one large), tabular quarried argillite, and over 4000 pressure flakes and

waste flakes. Several of the bifaces displayed use wear. It is significant to note

that core and blade technology was not found in Component I (Bowers 1978).

In addition, Carlo Creek has added significance based on the faunal

remains scattered around two fire hearth areas in Component I including

"Rangifer sp., Ovis dalli and eitel/us sp". Cut marks were found on many of the

larger mammal remains and the long bones were broken in a manner that

suggested marrow was being consumed (Bowers 1978). Bowers (1978:6) has

reported the minimum number of individuals (MNI) at the site consisted of a

single caribou and a single sheep, 8 to 12 ground squirrels and several

unidentified "charred large mammal cranial fragments".

The rNO fire hearth features from Component I are believed to be from the

same occupation event and were spaced -5 meters apart. The artifacts

recovered from both hearths were similar in nature and they were

stratigraphically in the same level. In addition, there was a third feature

described as a "possible heat treatment pit", and the first known case of heat

treating lithics for improved workability in Alaska (Bowers 1978). Component II

was apparently a very brief occupation event, consisting of waste flakes.

105

According to Bowers (1978:4), Component II was completely excavated. This

occupation is believed to date to -6700.:t750 rcybp (Bowers and Mason 1992)

indicating a Late Denali association.

Description: The site stratigraphy was divided into 4 Units, Unit 1 was

basal gravel deposited by glacial outwash and was roughly 8 meters in thickness.

Unit 2 is "floodplain silt and fine sand" and is -3 meters in depth. Unit 3 overlies

Unit 2 comprised of "4 meters of bedded fluvial sands" (Bowers 1978). Unit 4,

the uppermost sedimentary unit, is -30 cm thick and is reworked alluvium, mostly

eolian in nature (Bowers 1978).

Two cultural zones were designated Component I and II. Component I,

the lowest stratigraphically, was 'consistently found to occur within a 5 cm zone

above Unit 2 or at the base of the Unit 3 strata in an area of approximately 12 x 5

meters in size' (Bowers 1978). The deposits in lower reaches of Unit 3 quickly

buried the first occupations under the fluvial deposits. Unit 3 geologic stratum

was described as a complex sequence of "finely laminated silt, fine sand, and

clay" (Bowers 1978). Component I lies on top of a weak paleosol located at the

contact area of Units 2 and 3 (Bowers and Mason 1992).

Table 7.3: Carlo Creek (Bowers 1918)Stratigraphy RCYBP Description Component -cmUnit 4 6700+750 Reworked alluvial eolian C II 30···Unii·3·····..·······..·..·······....···· ···S·4·00±200··············.. ···.. ··· ·..Fic)odpii:iin..siTt"&-·iine..sancj"....·.......... ·-c..r....·..·..·..........··....·..·..·......·300·......··....

8690.:!:33010,040+435·..Unit'2· · ·..· ·..·..·..· = ··Bedde·(j..fl..uviai·..sa·j1·ci's · · ··· _ ·..400 · ..

·..unirr..··· · ·· ·..BasarG·ra·ver ·..· ·..·..· ·..· · ·86'0· · ..

106

Name: Chuck Lake (Med)

Number: CRG-00237

Region: Southeast

NHR Designation: None

Repository: unknown

Land Ownership: USFS, Tongass

Basal Dates: -8200 rcybp

Complex: Northwest Coast Microblade

Environment: The Chuck Lake site is located on Heceta Island south of

Chuck Lake. Heceta Island lies to the south of Sea Otter Sound, to the east of

Iphigenia Bay and to the north of the Gulf of Esquibel. More generally, the island

is northwest of Prince of Wales Island across the Tonowek Bay. The island,

covered with low mountains, as is typical the Northwest Coast, a rain forest

environment. The soil is boggy and poorly drained, typical of the Tongass

National Forest (Ackerman 1985). During the VVisconsin glaciation, the

Cordilleran glaciation capped the island with over 1000 m of ice. Glacial retreat

in southeastern Alaska began approximately 14,000 rcybp with ice dissipating

completely from Heceta Island by 11,500 rcybp (Ackerman 1985).

History: Robert Ackerman discovered the site while conducting survey for

the Tongass National Forest on Heceta Island (Ackerman 1985).

107

Significance: This is the one of the earliest coastal site documenting a

mostly marine subsistence pattern (Ackerman 1996a:132). The core and blade

technoiogy resembled those in Component 2 at the GHB2 site and Component I

at the Hidden Falls site. Namu, in British Columbia, has an associated

technology (Ackerman 1985).

Chuck Lake is significant because the faunal assemblage was primarily

maritime consisting of sea lion, fish and mollusks. Small numbers of caribou,

wolf and beaver were found at Chuck Lake, as were several species of bird. The

earliest component represented a shift in economic patterns during changing

environmental conditions of the Early Holocene. Locality 1 was dated between

8200 and 7300 rcybp, but the maritime subsistence pattern continued at the site

well into the Holocene (Ackerman 1985).

Integrity: Ackerman (1985) designated six localities scattered on either

shore of Chuck Creek, which flows north into Chuck Lake. A Forest Service

access road or trail cut through three of these !ocalities (1,4 and 6). Two of the

localities (1 and 2) are bordered by a Forest Service tree harvest region (Unit

561-3) and the other localities (3-6) are immediately outside the harvest plot

(Ackerman 1985). Those sites within the harvest areas may be at risk from

ground erosion because of the loss of vegetation.

Artifacts and Features: Of the six localities, L2 was the only one not

found to contain evidence of core and blade technology. It was also the only

108

locality not containing lithic debris. Locality 1 yielded 572 artifacts from a shell

midden context. It contained a large deposit of mostly mollusk shell and other

small faunal remains (Ackerman 1985). The entire collection from all three

localities consisted of 610 lithic artifacts recovered with 90.16% directly related to

a split pebble micro core and blade technology. Of those, there were 472 were

waste flakes, 9 microblade cores, 3 cobble flaked macroblade cores, 11

microblade performs, and 58 complete and broken microblades. Other artifacts

included 2 hammerstones, 3 whetstones, a modified spall and 2 anvils. The lithic

raw material for these artifacts consisted of argillite, obsidian, marble, chert and

quartz. A fragment of a bone-barbed harpoon (40.4 mm in length and 13.2 mm

at its greatest width) was the only bone artifact recovered from L1 (Ackerman

1985).

Description: The stratigraphy at the Chuck Lake site contained Level 1

through Level 6 (not Localities). Level 1 was forest litter and was yellow/red in

color (5YR 4/6). !t consisted of mostly wood and root material. Level 2 was a

black silty loam (1 OYR 2/1) and included charcoal flecks and to a lesser extent

wood and root material. Level 3 was the deposit of mollusk shell and other

fauna! remains inclUding sea urchin. It's Munsel color was difficult to pin point

but fell between 10YR 7/1 and 7.5R 5/2. Level 4 was a thin layer of sandy gravel

described as gray/brown (10YR 5/2). L5 was weathered limestone, a dark brown

109

deposit of silty loam (10YR 3/3). Level 6 was limestone bedrock (Ackerman

1985).

Five non-AMS radiocarbon dates were recovered from three of the six

localities included three on shell and two on carbon. Those samples from L1

returned dates of 8220.:t.125 rcybp taken from charcoal, 8180.:t.130 rcybp taken

from shell and a sample of charcoal from the top of the midden dated to

7360.:t.270 rcybp. Locality 3 was also a shell midden dated by a shell fragment to

5240.:t.90 rcybp. Shell dated to 5140.:t.90 rcybp dated Locality 2. Based on

stratigraphy, sample integrity and associated artifacts it was suggested that

Locality 1 was deposited continuously between approximately 8200 - 7300 rcybp

(Ackerman 1985).

Table 7.4: Chuck lake Horizontal Provenience (Ackerman 1985)

....~gg.?!j!y. } .!.~.~.Q..t??Q..,(!9.P')! ~.??g,;!;;.1 ..??.!...~.~..~g.:!;;.~ ..~.Q §.~~!.1 ~.~.9..9~.~ .

....~g.~.?!.!.!y. ? !?.!.?.g.~ ..§.!.!! ~g?...~ ..Locality 3 5140+90 Shell Midden

Table 7.5: Chuck lake locality 1 Vertical Strati~raphy(Ackerman 1985)level RCYBP Description

....~.~.Y..~!.. ..~ F.g.~~.~.! ..!..\!!~r.' y.~.!.!9.~ ..r~.9 ..

....~.~X.~!.. ..? .7..~.§g,;!;;?.7..9. __ !?..!.?.~~ ..~.U.!Y. !g~~ ..Level 3 8220+125, 8180+130 Mollusk shell, sea urchin, other fauna

............................,........... ••••••••••••••••••••• t'l'r'W....................................•1'I'ft'f ..

....~.~.Y..~L.4 ~.?n.9.Y. ..£lE?Y.~! 9.E?.y.!~r9..~D .

....~.~y.~! ? ~~.~.~.~.!9.~~! 9.?E.~..~!.g~.Q ~!.!.!y. t9.?.~ ..Level 6 Limestone bedrock

110

Name: Delta River Overlook (Med)

Number: XMH-00297

Region: interior

NHR Designation: DOE-K

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Owner: DOD

Basal Dates: 8555.:t380 rcybp

Complex: Denali (Holmes 2000)

Environment: The Delta River flows north out of the Alaska Range

northern foothills and into the Tanana River. The region is filled with outwash

fans, moraines, lowlands, foothills and to the south "rugged mountains with valley

glaciers" (Holmes 1979). Bottomland spruce-poplar forest characterized the

immediate vegetation (1979:6). The site occupies a steep bluff, now US Army

Observation Point 10 at Fort Greely, along the east edge of the Delta River at an

elevation of -1650 feet (Holmes 1979). Lifted from the Delta River, eolian loess

is continuously deposited on the site and surrounding uplands.

History: The first written reports were published by Holmes (1979) and

Leehan (1980) in hard to locate militarj reports. The original evaluation in 1978

found a handful artifacts with insufficient time to conduct test excavations.

Despite this, a few artifacts and charcoal from 10 cm above the lowest of two

components were recovered (Holmes 1979).

111

Significance: The site likely has potential evidence of Denali occupations

from the Early Holocene from -8.5 kya and is in a region where deeply stratified

sites are hard to find and in danger of being destroyed. XMH-297, heavily used

by US forces conducting artillery training, lies at the edge of a military bombing

field. Because of its deeply stratified nature (Holmes 1979) it was one of the

most significant sites found during Holmes' initial survey at Fort Greely.

The Delta River Overlook site and other small Denali work areas in the

region represent a larger economic system in the Tanana River region (Holmes

2000). They were likely subsistence staging areas, like a "spike" radiating out

from more substantial home base sites like Broken Mammoth and Swan Point on

the North side of the Tanana River (Holmes 2000).

Artifacts and Features: Initial discovery of the site revealed, "five small

translucent gray chert flakes, one basalt flake, a unifacially retouched translucent

gray chert flake, and a small basalt biface fragment" from the lower occupations

-4 meters below the original surface. Also recovered was the charcoal sample

that returned the date of 85552:380 rcybp from a stratigraphic layer 10 em above

the lowest Cultural Component I containing artifacts (Holmes 1979:68).

Unfortunately, little information could be located with the actual artifact

assemblage described and pictured in the 1979 report. None appear to be

diagnostic (Holmes 1979:106) however they are suspected to be Denali complex

112

artifacts (Holmes 2000). Further evidence related to the tool assemblage is

necessary to firmly establish this site as a Denali Complex site.

Integrity: This is a stratified site in aeolian loess and sand/silt deposition

with excellent separation between culture zones. Holmes et al (Holmes and

Bacon 1982) describes the stratigraphy as being originally 5 meters thick, but

eroded down to approximately half that in some areas of the site. The lower half

is silt and sand deposits overlying glacial outwash gravel, the upper sand is more

uniformly parallel beds. Although military use of the area as an observation point

and bluff erosion have placed the site in danger of destruction, portions of it have

likely remained intact at lower levels. US Army Research Alaska (USARAK)

showed no interest in mitigating the damage.

Description: The stratigraphy consisted of six distinct cultural zones,

nine original paleosols and two layers of tephra. Loess 1, deposited directly on

top glacial outwash, was the lowest recorded stratum. The top of Loess 1, at the

transition to Paleosol 1, dated to 8555±38C rcybp. Samples from the top of

Paleosol 1 and the bottom of Loess 2 returned a date 7190±200 rcybp. Cultural

Zone 1 lies at the top half of Loess 1 situated well below Paleosol 1.

Cultural Zone 2 is located just above Tephra Layer 1, which separates L2

and L3, precisely between Paleosol 2 and Paleosol 3. Dates from the top of P1

(7190±200 rcybp) and from the bottom of P3 (6675.:t175 rcybp) provide a window

of time for dating the occupation (Holmes and Bacon 1982). Later occupations

113

occurred as follows: CZ 3 was located in L4 at the base of P4. Samples from

CZ4 returned a date of 3980:t150 rcybp. CZ4 occurred in L5, just below Tephra

2. Tephra Layer 2 separates L5 and L6 and occurs a total depth below the

original surface of nearly 3 meters or approximately 50 em below the present

surface. Paleosol 7 lies just above the Tephra 2 deposit. The final radiocarbon

date, from near the bison bone in L6, returned a radiocarbon date of 2280:t145

rcybp. Bison remains were recovered from the site and this is significant

because, in Alaska, few sites have yielded such data (Holmes and Bacon 1982),

especially dating to the mid-late Holocene period.

Table 7.6: Delta River Overlook (Holmes 1979, Holmes & Bacon 1982)Stratigraphy Cultural Zone .... em RCYBP

....~g.~~~ §. ".9..::?? " ?.?..~.9.;!;.1,.~.?. ...r~y..I?..P.".(~.PP§:r2 .

...T.§:.P.~.f.~ ?" ??. " .

....~.9..~~~ ? " g?. ~ ".??.~.Q " ~.~.~.9.;!;.1"?9. ..r.~y..1?..P. ,, ..

::I;~~~~4:::::=:::~:~:~:~:~~:::::::::::::::: ::::¢.?::~:::b.§.~~::2.fp.+~::~::::::::' 4~:~:$.j:::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Paleosol 3 81-97 6675,±175 rcybp

........................................".." " " " "..................................... .. " (I?.9.~9..~J.. " ..Loess 3 CZ 2 81-119

••••_ _ _ , n ,

....E.~J.§:g.~.9.! ?.!.T..~.P..~.r?.!"J " !1..~=.1 ..3~4.; "~ ""." "." ,, .Loess 2 134-140...................................................................................................................." - ..

....P..9..I.§:g.~g.'...J __ 1.~.9.=.~..~? ?.1.~.9.;!;?..9..9. ...r~y..I?..P. ..(!.9.p) ..Loess 1 top 1/2 150-175 8555.±380 rcybp (top)

CZ 1

114

Name: Donnelly Ridge (Med)

Number: XMH-00005

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: DXS

Repository: N/A

Land Ownership: Department of Defense

Basal Dates: N/A

Complex: Denali (West 1967)

Environment: The Donnelly Ridge site is located in the Northern Foothills

of the Alaska Range on a north-south trending ridge at 788 meters above sea

level near Donnelly Dome, a prominent geological feature along the eastern edge

of the Delta River -40 km south of its confluence with the Tanana River near

Delta Junction in the Interior region of Alaska. Most of the vegetation cover near

the site and in the surrounding region is low laying tundra shrub (West 1996a).

History: Michael Brady initially discovered Sites along the Donnelly Ridge

in 1963 as artifacts had been exposed in wind blowouts. The Donnelly Ridge site

was completely (100%) excavated in 1964 (West 1996a: 303).

Significance: The Donnel!y Ridge site was included in the Donnelly

Archaeological District and was a key type site in the development of the Denali

complex (West 1967). West (1996:305) described the lithic technology of the

Denali complex as "one of the most complex and efficient devices to have

115

developed in the realm of lithic technology" and a product of a rugged Ice Age

environment. Today, the site's significance centers on its impact in the history

and development of our knowledge of Alaska prehistory, especially the concept

of the Denali complex and Donnelly burins. However, the site lacks definitive

proof of its age, because it is a near - surface site with little soil deposition or

stratigraphy and no datable organic material had been preserved.

Integrity: Archaeological excavation completely removed all cultural

material present; therefore, it retains little in the way of site structural integrity

(West 1967).

Artifacts and Features: The site produced 1513 artifacts, over 1/3 were

utilized, mostly comprised of core and blade artifacts typical of Denali complex

sites. West described the core styles as wedge-shaped with single facets (1996:

303). Characteristic burin spalls are associated byproducts of the wedge-shaped

core and blade technology generated when a fresh platform-striking surface

made for blade removal. These distinct by-products ';,'Jere made ,,",hen 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" (\Nest

1996a: 303). A "side-blow" notch created another distinctive by product of the

technology called a termination flake. Other artifacts from the site included

burins, end scrapers, bifaces, and large blades (West 1996a).

116

Name: Gallagher Flint Station (No Rank)

Number: PSM-00050

Region: interior

NHR Designation: NHL (Bowers 1983)

Repository: N/A

Land Ownership: "State per B.King 5/12/93 memo" (AHRS 1997)

Basal Dates: 6960:t.90AMS, 10,540±150

Complexes: Paleoarctic, Northern Fluted Point (Ferguson 1997b)

Environment: Gallagher Flint Station (already an NHL) is nearby a

cluster of early sites including Putu-Bedwell and Hill Top near the North Ridge of

the Brooks Range (Bever 2001 b, Gal 1980). More specifically Gallagher Flint

Station is located west of the upper Sagavanirktok River "situated on a large ice­

contact kame formed during the Antler Valley stage of the Itkillik glaciation, a

[LGM] event" (Dixon 1975:68).

HistC)l"'j: The site was discovered by BLM archaeologists (Gal 1980) and

excavated by E. James Dixon, Jr. in 1970,1971 and again in 1974 (Hamilton and

Goebel 1999:175), when an early microblade component was identified as

possibly dating beyond 10,000 rcybp (Dixon 1975). The NHL was nominated on

June 2nd, 1978 (AHRS 1997).

Bowers (1983) undertook an extensive restoration project at the site

where he of backfilled previously excavated units and transplanted vegetation to

117

minimize the erosion of in situ artifacts. Blades, microblades, core fragments and

flakes were discovered in the backfill and were reburied near the datum for

Locality I, in plastic bags with a US penny dated to 1983. Specific site

boundaries were enlarged to accurately encompassed the artifact distributions

Bowers (1983:11) made recommendations for procedures to properly complete

final analyzes of the materials previously recovered.

Significance: A lengthy series of occupations have deposited cultural

material spanning 10,500 to 970 rcybp and although preservation is generally

poor, evidence of pottery, wood and bone occur in addition to a large quantity of

Iithics (Dixon 1975, Bowers 1983). The site was primarily used as a quarry site

and it represents evidence pertaining to the topic "expanding the American

3 Source: Bowers 1983 Table 1 page 5.118

economy" (NPS 2003b) because of its association with the production of lithic

tools.

Integrity: "[Three] localities were originally distinguished on the basis of

vertical stratigraphy, spatial relationships, typological comparison and

radiocarbon chronology" (Dixon 1975:68). Additional research revealed between

10 to 13 separate localities (Bowers 1983).

Ferguson (1997b) has questioned the relationship of the sample dated to

10,540±150 rcybp. He suggests it originated from "shallow and poorly defined

deposits" at a reported depth of 25cm. That depth is at odds with the field notes

which reported that only two carbon samples were taken, neither from more than

10-15 em below the surface. The core and blade material from Locality 1,

collected relatively close to the surface, was not from the same level as the 14C

sample. The few artifacts from "low in the stratigraphy" were likely the result of

secondary deposition (Ferguson 1997b).

Artifacts and Features: "Locality I contains percussion-flaked cores,

blades, platform flakes, unifacially retouched artifacts and waste flakes. Burins

and bifacially chipped stone artifacts are lacking.... these artifacts were [from]

calcareous mudstone" (Dixon 1975:68). Locality IA was a small cluster that

contained "bifacial projectiles a drill and waste flakes" made from a fine-grained

chert (Dixon 1975:68). Locality IA was a component superimposed in the

southeastern region of Locality I dated to 2620±175 rcybp. The artifacts included

119

"two bifacial point fragments and a drill, all of green-gray chert" (Dixon 1975:69).

Locality I contained core and blade technology but it did not contain bifaces or

burins. It did produce "120 core and core fragments" which included tabular,

conical and wedge shaped styles (Dixon 1975:69).

Artifacts from Locality II included "burins and bifacially chipped artifacts

distributed around two hearths. Fine grade cherts are common and pressure

flaking is characteristic of most of the specimens" (Dixon 1975:68).

Tentative conclusions (Bowers 1983) regarding technologic classification

of the artifacts from each locality suggests only a single Paleoarctic occupation

(Locality I) occurred at the site, one Northern Archaic occupation (Locality III) and

five definitive Arctic Small Tool tradition localities (lA, II, IV, VII, VIII). Locality V

contained a mixture of all the technologies and VI, IX-XIII where unidentifiable

(Bowers 1983).

Description: "Localities I and IA are located in the northwest quadrant of

the site and Locality II in the southeast quadrant. Locality I! is approximately 100

feet (30.5m) from I and IA and is on the opposite side of the kame" (Dixon

1975:68). There were as many as 13 clusters of artifacts on the southern

surface of the kame (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). Twelve radiocarbon samples

were taken from 6 of these localities and all date between 3200 and 1000 rcybp

(Hamilton and Goebel 1999:175). Eleven of the thirteen main clusters have

revealed non-diagnostic artifacts. Only two localities had dates beyond 8000 yrs

120

rcybp. One with six samples that ranged between 11,000-2500 rcybp (Hamilton

and Goebel 1999:175). Hamilton & Goebel (1999:176) cited D. E. Ferguson

(1997b) who claimed the 1O,540±.150 year old sample was from stratigraphically

lower than the main occupation layer. They claim the 6960±.90AMS date was more

accurate for the site (Ferguson 1997b, Hamilton and Goebel 1999:175 Ferguson

1997a) but the >10,000 rcybp date from Locality I cannot be completely ruled out.

Table 7.8: Gallagher Localities (Ferguson 1997a, Hamilton & Goebel 1999)Horizontal Stratigraphy RCYBP Vertical Level

....~g.9..?E!y. !................................................................ ...§.§'?.Q';;;.~.9.~~~1....1 ..9..1..?..4..9..*..1..?..Q................................................ ...~~y.~.!...? ..

....~g.9..?!..i.!y. !.A ???.Q,;;;J..?.§ ~.~y.~.!..J ..Locality II 1660+140,2920+155,3280+155 Levell

Table 7.9: Stratigraphy at all Three Gallagher Localities4

Stratigraphy Characteristics Locale RCYBP -inchesLevell Surface organic L lA, L 2 2620±.175, ~3 inches

.....................................................................................................................................................................~?..?..9.,;;;.~..9..?. ..(~P..9.E?.9..!.9.L .., , ..,·..t:~:: ..·~·· ..··..··..··········..·,·..~i~~·~· ..~9.·~·~·~··· ..........·..I..,·h···]········..····..·..···....··I·..~·B:~4~;1~·~6·· ..···..····'1··t~;af~={~if~j)···· .. I

4 Source: Dixon 1975, Ferguson 1997a, Hamilton and Goebel 1999121

Name: Ground Hog Bay 2 (High)

Number: JUN-00037

Region: Southeast

NHR Designation: NRXCL

Repository: Washington State University

land Owner: US Fish and Wildlife

Basal Dates: 9, 130.:t130 rcybp

Complex: Denali (variant) (Ackerman 1974, Matson and Coupland 1995)

Environment: The site is on a terrace along the shore of Ground Hog

Bay, located in the northern reaches of Icy Strait (Ackerman 1974:3). Icy Strait is

located south of Skagway and west of Juneau (Ackerman 1971: Fig. 1). It is an

area of deep fiord-like waterways bounded by rapidly shelving beaches and

steep cliffs. The mainland to the north, dominated by an extension of the Chilkat

Range, rises up to 1500 meters. In front of the terrace are several small islands

surrounded by shallow seas (Ackerman 1971).

During the Pleistocene, glaciers covered the Chilkat Mountains. Today,

remnant mountain valley glaciers remain (Ackerman 1971). The region was

initially deglaciated approximately 11,000 rcybp when a rise in sea level

submerged the site under -15 meters of seawater. Isostatic rebound was

measured in 1971 when the site was -14 meters above sea level. This process

left beach ridge markers where the sea made contact with land during different

122

intervals of the rebounding process. Erosion during the terminal Pleistocene left

signatures on Soil Zone IV (Ackerman 1980).

History: The site was the second discovered by R. Ackerman in his 1965

survey for the National Park Service in Glacier Bay National Monument and the

surrounding regions (Ackerman 1974:1). During the evaluation, 179 stone

artifacts and 45 organic artifacts were recovered, including a microblade core

and a single microblade (Ackerman 1971). After the site's initial discovery and

evaluation, Ackerman (1974) conducted excavations in 1971 and 1973,

establishing the great antiquity of early Alaskans on the Southeast Alaskan coast

(Matson and Coupland 1995).

Significance: Ackerman (1996a) described GHB2, Hidden Falls and the

Namu (BC) sites as the first to establish maritime subsistence lifeways on the

Northern Northwest coast of North America. The GHB2 site contained mUltiple

components representing three cultural phases demonstrating Denali migrations

into the region (Ackerman 1996a).

Artifacts and Features: At Ground Hog Bay, two of three phases dated

beyond 8000 rcybp. The middle component contained microblade core and

blade technology with occupations between 4180±65 and 8880±125 rcybp.

Radiocarbon dates from the earliest component, containing bifacial projectile

points, were dated between 9130.:t130 and 10,180.:t800 rcybp (AHRS 1997).

Ackerman suggested that the microblade technology likely dated between 5000

123

and 9000 rcybp. The unique microblade technology, with some use of obsidian,

could be associated with the end of the "Denali complex continuum" based solely

on artifact typology. The core and blades were similar, but not identical, to

Denali core and blade technology in the interior (Ackerman 1974, Matson and

Coupland 1995).

The earliest Component 1/1 dated to the Terminal Pleistocene/Early

Holocene and contained scattered artifact clusters and fire hearths. The early

occupations on the beach ridges produced two dates; 10,180±800 and a second

more reliable date of 9, 130±130 rcybp associated with obsidian bifacial

fragments (Ackerman 1974:3). Artifacts from Component /II occupations

consisted of two percussion flaked obsidian bifacial fragments, a water rolled

chert scraper, and five argillite flakes (Ackerman 1980).

Component /I was separated from Component III by a thin layer of sterile

yellowish clay (Ackerman 1980). Component /I was the middle and most

extensive occupation, showing little stratigraphic separation into distinct cultural

zones. Recovered from it were fire-cracked rock and hearth features including

charcoal, burned bone, cobbles, and a lithic assemblage found in the sandy loam

with microbiade and macroblade core and blades, flakes, choppers, scrapers,

utilized flakes, bifacial fragments and detritus, a technology believed to be a

Denali complex variant (Ackerman 1974, Matson and Coupland 1995).

124

Charcoal, sampled from the top and bottom of the excavation, yielded dates of

3750±100 rcybp and 8230±130 rcybp. (Ackerman 1974:3-4).

Component I from Soil Zone II represented a break in the long continuum

of occupations represented by the microblade using peoples in Component II and

it had no association with the Denali groups. It contained a plank shelter with

decorative beads and toggling harpoon heads. This component was dated

between 2500 and 400 rcybp (Ackerman 1980).

Integrity: In 1965, a six-meter trench was excavated in the region down

slope from the terrace (Ackerman 1971). Although parts of the earliest

occupations were disturbed during the construction activities of later inhabitants,

there were areas left unaffected by later postholes. In addition, a thin layer of

sterile gravel separated Component III from Component II (Ackerman 1974:2).

Description: Six geologic levels (Soil Zones I-VI) contained three cultural

components. Average excavation depths measured to 75 em to a basal gravel

designated Zone VI. Cultural Component i, in Soii Zone ii, was enciosed in

gravels and forest loam. Cultural Component II was assigned to Soil Zone IV

described as course pebbles and small cobbles, a lag concentrate, with finer

sediments (Ackerman 1996b). Ackerman (1971) described the lowest levels as

yellowish clay with small pebbles and large boulders, likely glacial till. Artifacts

from the lowest Zones V and VI were "rolled", a common disturbance found in

water worn artifacts (Ackerman 1971). Soil Zone V contained Cultural

125

Component III and was described as "beach sands and gravels" in a layer of clay

(Ackerman 1980). A detailed stratigraphic profile, including 27 radiocarbon

dates, accurately dated the three cultural components and site abandonment

(Ackerman 1996c).

Table 7.10: Ground Hog Bay 2 (Ackerman 199Gb: Fig 9-5 and text).Stratigraphy Component RCYBP SedimentSoil Zone I Duff···SoW·Zo·ne..·jj·..· ··..· -c..i···..··_··..··..·..··..··.. ···1··35±50:···1·55:t85·;,·····,··..··,··· ·..G'rav·eis..&..Forest"Co·am · · · ·

235±60,345±85455±85, 570±90,

............................................... ..._.._ _.............. ...~9.!?;t~.?.1 ..~}9;!;,?g .SZ Ilia 1525±85,1960!65, Dark brown humusSZ IIlb 2240±450, 2300±445, Charcoal lensSZ IIlc 2575±75,2970!90, Gravel

...§??..!.1.1.9 _._._ _._._._..}?.?.9~.?.9..L~.?.!?.9~.1g.O' !?.r.9..~~..~!.I~ .Soil Zone IV C II 4155±95, 4180!65, Dark brown loam with cobbles

5360±90, 5770!95,6755±110,7545±185,8230+130 8880+125

:::§£!L~9.:~i:V.::::::::::: ~~:=::=:~::=:=:=:=:::::. . ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::Y~!E?~!:~6.::¢.:!~y.::~Ii~~!:i~;:j)f.C:::::::::::::::::::: :~::::::::::::::Soil Zone VI C III 9130±130,9220±80,

10,180+800 Basal Gravel

126

Name: Healy Lake Village (Med)

Number: XBD-20

Region: Interior

Land Ownership: Native Allotment

NHR Designation: NRXCL

Repository: University of Alaska Fairbanks

Dates: L10-10,500.:t280, L9-9401.:t528, L8-11,090.:t170, L7-11,550.:t50AMS, L6-

11 410+60AMS L5-5000+60AMS L4-8960+150 L3-3350+50AMS L2-4460+60AMS

'-' -' -' -' -'

900.:t90 to modern (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

Complex: Nenana, Denali, Athapaskan

Environment: The site is located on a bench protruding into Healy Lake

from its eastern edge, approximately 55 kilometers east of Delta Junction or'" 70

kilometers east of the Broken Mammoth site in the Tanana River Valley (Cook

1996).

History: Test excavations at the site began in 1966 by Robert McKennan,

John Cook, William Workman, and AD. Shinkwin. The tests revealed great

potential for recovery of early archaeological materials, and seasonal

excavations began the following summer, continuing through 1972. The site

became the subject of Cook's PhD dissertation at the University of Wisconsin

(Cook 1969).

127

The site has significance in the history of Alaskan archaeological theory

because of the discovery of the diagnostic Chindadn projectile point and the

development of the Chindadn complex (Cook 1969, 1996: 327). The Chindadn

complex was later incorporated into the Nenana complex following the discovery

of Dry Creek, Moose Creek, Panguingue Creek and Walker Road (Goebel et al

1991, Hoffecker 2001) containing the technology in the Nenana River Valley.

Significance: The earliest occupations at the site lie beneath a later

Athapaskan village (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). The tool assemblage

suggested a home base occupation and subsistence strategies similar to other

early sites in the region. The artifact assemblage suggested possible

connections between the early Chindadn complex and modern Athapaskans

(Cook 1975:128-129). However, there was a gap in the stratigraphic sequence

spanning -4000 rcybp, rendering a direct connection between the lower and

upper assemblages difficult. The lack of artifacts from the middle Holocene has

been suggested to be due to the "lateral migration of the Tanana River" (Ager

1975:63), causing Healy Lake to run dry and the occupants to leave the area.

This suggestion is supported by core samples which indicate that a 4000 year

dry period took place beginning approximately 8000 rcybp and ending

approximately 4000 rcybp (Ager 1975, Hamilton 1973).

Artifacts and Features: Simple flakes, microblades, wedge-shaped

microblade cores and bipolar cores were recovered. The diagnostic artifacts

128

recovered were the "Chindadn" tear-shaped projectile points; other projectile

points were lanceolate in style. Included in the Chindadn assemblage were

unifacial and bifacial side-scrapers; and end-scrapers; angle, dihedral, and

transverse burins; a "notched tool"; gravers; and oval, triangular, and lanceolate

bifacial preforms. The large assemblage of scrapers and preforms were in

strong association with burnt earth, burnt bone, and waterfowl fauna in a hearth

or hearth smear consistent with typical Chindadn occupations (Hamilton and

Goebel 1999).

Integrity: The soil column was approximately 75 em thick, but ranged

from 50 to 100cm tick, and was generally unstratified. Cryoturbation and rodent

burrows decreased the site's structural integrity. Despite these disturbances,

below the organic layer (10 em thick) four soil horizons (A2, B2, A2b, B2b) were

distinguished (Cook 1969, 1996). The C-horizon had been divided into 2 non­

distinct layers characterized by a gradual transition from C1 into C2 (Cook 1969).

PiOblems with stratigraphic disturbance lead to the excavation of the site

in 5cm arbitrary levels; however, because the site was positioned on a sloping

lakeshore, and each unit was excavated arbitrarily, the excavated levels did not

correlate between units (Cook 1996), adding to a confusing sequence of artifacts

and radiocarbon samples depicted below in Table 7.11.

Description: Three "cultural stages" were identified through artifact

assemblages and radiocarbon dating taken from the surface downward,

129

identified cultural stages included Cl-1 (attributed to the so-called Athapaskan

tradition), Cl-2 described as "transitional" and Cl-3 associated with the

Chindadn complex. Due to the lack of stratigraphic integrity, the site was

excavated in 5 em arbitrary levels to a maximum depth of 50cm. The

Athapaskan tradition occupations, confined to L1I were stratigraphically above

the transition zone in L4 and the Chindadn occupations dispersed from L6

through L10. FOrty-two radiocarbon dates were recovered from the site,

including 16 AMS samples (Cook 1996, Hamilton and Goebel 1999). The three

radiocarbon samples from the Athapaskan L1 occupation ranged in date from

modern to 900:t.90 rcybp. Four samples submitted from L-4 returned dates of

2150:t.180 , 3020:t.50, 401 0:t.11 0 and 8960:t.150. Two samples from L5, one

modern and one 5000:t.60AMS, indicate the confusing nature of the stratigraphy and

excavation techniques (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). Levels 6 through 10

contained the diagnostic Chindadn artifacts in disturbed context. Radiocarbon

samples ranged in age from approximately 5000 to over 11000 rcybp however

these were not in stratigraphic sequence indicating disturbance (Cook 1996).

130

Table 7.11: Heal lake Villa e Site (Cook 1996, Hamilton at aI1999:188)level RCYBP - em Com onentL 1 Modern, 455:t130, 900:t90 0-5 Athapaskan

••·•···•·•····•·····•···•·······•···..· ·· ·A\\)\s ··..·..··· ..• ·· ·;r./;/fS· ·· · ··..···· · ..L 2 4460:t60 - 380:t50 6 samples 5-10

· · ··..· ·· · A\\)\s · ·..· · · · ·..·.. fi\\)\5 · ·..· · · · .L 3 3350:t50, 2660:t100, 1790:t50 10-15

.........................................................................................·..· · fi\\)\S· · · · · · ..

....~ 4............ +150, 4010:t110, 3020:t50 ,2150:t180 t?::?q ~.f..?Q.~.!!!.<?.I:) .L 5 _, odern 20-25

..........................................................................................................· · A\\)\s · · ·..AMS · · ..L 6 5110:t90,7920:t90,10,410:t60, 11,100:t60 , 25-30 Chindadn

11 ,41 0+60AMS....................................................mn fi\\)\S AMS ..L 7 8655:t280, 8680:t240, 8990+60 ,9245+213 , 30-35 Chindadn

9895+210AMS, 10,150+210AfVfS, 10,290+6QAMS, 11,550+50AMS..·Cif ··..1··{o90:fTio··..· ·.. ·· ..· =·· ·..· ··..·..· ·· ..· _ ~ ·..3·5~4·0..·· ·..ChTi1·d'ad'·n···..·..· ··..............................· · · · · · fiMS..· • · · ..L 9 6045:t280, 821 0:t155 and 9401:t528 40-45 Chindadn

....[ ..·1..0..·........·8465.f3·60';·..1·0;·040'±2·1·0:···1·6':0'434~2i9: ..·1'0'500£2s·o.... ·· .. ·· ......·· ..·..·....·..·....·..·4·5~5·0 .... ···C·j1·j·nd'a"d·n..·..·..·.... ··

131

Name: Hidden Falls (Low)

Number: SIT-00119

Region: Southeast

NHR Designation: DOE-K (Clark, G. 1978)

Repository: N/A

Land Ownership: US Forest Service, Tongass

Basal Dates: -9500 rcybp (Davis 1990)

Complex: Northwest Coast Microblade tradition (Ackerman 1996a)

Environment: The site is located -200 km south of the Ground Hog Bay 2

site (Davis 1989, Matson and Coupland 1995). Stanley Davis (1980)

characterized the region as steep fjords with high mountains, dense forest and

glaciers reaching the water's edge. The site is located in Southeast Alaska

approximately 25 miles from Sitka along the outer edge of the Northwest coast of

North America. It lies in a "low saddle on a small point jutting into Kasnyku Bay

with a freshwater lagoon to the west and Chatham Strait to the east" (Davis

1980).

History: The recent history of the site began in 1978 when artifacts were

unearthed during the development of a salmon hatchery. It suffered a great

amount of destruction upon its discovery, as a bulldozer plowed it through.

Excavations began shortly after in an attempt to salvage what remained (Davis

1980, Davis (ed) 1989).

132

Significance: This site has already been determined eligible based on

Criteria D of the National Register (Clark 1978) because it yielded information

important to prehistory. It was the second site excavated in Southeastern Alaska

that established Early Americans in the region ~10,000 rcybp (Clark 1978, Davis

1980). Data recovered from between 1,000 and 4,500 rcybp provided

information from a period, which is little understood (Davis (ed) 1989). The site

contained an impressive assemblage of core and blade technology in the lowest

component of the site (Davis (ed) 1989, Matson and Coupland 1995). Ackerman

(1996) included the Hidden Falls site, GHB2 and the Namu site in British

Columbia as the earliest human occupations on the Northwest Coast of North

America (Ackerman 1996). Although both microblades and ground stone

artifacts were found, there was "no evidence of a transition from the microblade

technology to a ground stone-and-bone industry" (Davis 1996).

Integrity: The site was well preserved in stratified sediments. A road cut

associated with the construction of a fish hatchery destroyed the center portion of

the site (Davis 1980, Davis (ed) 1989). Excavations, on either side of the road

cut revealed the deeply stratified occupations at Hidden Falls. The obsidian

artifacts in C-I, although slightly mixed, displayed no evidence of edge-wear or

rounding typically associated with glacial action. The earliest cultural deposits

(C-1) in stratigraphic Zones I, H1 and G were well documented by 14C

133

sequencing with fourteen dates between 7175±155 and 10,345±95 rcybp (Davis

(ed) 1989, Davis 1996).

Artifacts and Features: There were five components documented. The

latest in time was an historic sawmill. Beneath the mill was prehistoric

Component III, located in Zones C and D, where two fire hearth features dated to

1370±70 rcybp. Artifacts found in association with the hearths were not

diagnostic but included a stirrup-handled maul fragment, stone abraders, ground

stone and waste flakes (Davis, S. (ed) 1989).

Component III, found in Zone D, contained additional artifacts and

features, mostly concentrated in a reddish brown lens as thick as 20cm.

Features from this lens included shell midden and rock accumulations. Artifacts

from the lens-included ground slate knives and projectile points, adzes, abraders,

bone points, tooth pendants, shell beads and waste flakes (Davis 1989). Davis

(1989:42) provided a date between 2,300 and 1,300 rcybp and suggested the

occupation events were intermittent, representing periods of abandonment and

re-occupation possibly related to seasonal use.

Other evidence from Component III included numerous faunal remains, in

part due to the number of shellfish and the increased levels of calcium carbonate.

Fish represented the majority (over 67%) of the total bone weight; whale was

also significant subsistence resource (9%). Dog represented roughly half of the

134

land animal remains. In general, the dietary practices appeared to be extremely

diverse, including both large and small animals and birds (Davis (ed) 1989).

Component II had less preservation due to lesser amounts of shell and the

occupation was small, believed to be a short-term event making dietary

conclusions from the data difficult. Davis (1989:44) estimated C-II dated

between 3200 and 4600 rcybp. He described the artifacts as a "saw-and-snap

slate technology" (1989:44). It included used flakes, ground stone projectile

points, stone beads, labrets and ground adzes (1989:44). Faunal remains

included large amounts of whale. Additional sea mammals, other than whale,

nearly equaled the number of land mammals. In contrast, supplementary sea

resources comprised only 3% and included mostly unidentifiable fish. Bird

utilization appeared in smaller numbers (Davis (ed) 1989).

The earliest occupation was Component I discovered first in Zone G due

to mixing with the lower levels of Component II. They could be distinguished

easily based on soil characteristics and artifact types (1989:44). Artifacts from

Component I continued through Zone Hi. Those deposits included ground stone

and bone tools, split cobble, microblade core and blade, blade-like flakes, a

primary spall, an unifacial blade or point, burins, side scrapers, core scrapers,

notched scrapers, abrader, an incised stone, choppers, hammerstones, unifacial

tools, and waste flakes or debitage. Over 600 artifacts were recovered and 414

waste flakes (Davis 1996, Davis (ed) 1989). Of the fourteen-microblade cores,

135

nine were complete. Seven of the cores (3 obsidian, 1 quartzite, 3 other) were

classifiable into two stylistic categories, wedge-shaped on flakes (2) and split­

pebble (5) (Davis (ed) 1989).

Description: Stanley Davis (1989:41) described four cultural and ten

geologic stratigraphic layers designated A through J2 beginning with the surface.

Zone A, modern topsoil, was a 01-02 horizon covered with Sitka Spruce and

Western Hemlock saplings. The historic sawmill component of the site was

located in the Zone A horizon. At the base of Zone A was Component III, the

latest of the prehistoric occupations.

Stratigraphic Zone 8, described as a 02 organic horizon, had a Munsel

chart color determination of 5 YR 2.5/1, moist (Davis (ed) 1989). Zone 8 was

water saturated and capped two addition cultural components, C and D. Davis

(1989:42) described his confusion while assessing the strata. Zone C, although

appearing as a distinct cultural zone, formed through hydraulics and root action.

Zone D ranged in thickness between 20 em and a full meter in places dissipating

along site margins. It was comprised of silt and sand matrix with a with a Munsel

color of dark gray, 7.5 YR 2.5/0 moist with flecks of charcoal throughout. Larger

granite fragments or cobbies were aiso present.

Zone E was a paleosol 3 to 20 em thick and contained up to 60 % organic

matter making it a dark brown or black in color with a moist Munsel reading of 2.5

YR 3/3 (Davis (ed) 1989). Three sub zones E1, E2 and E3 divided the layer.

136

Component III, found in layer E2, dated between 3000 and 2,500 rcybp. It

included features of shell lenses and artifacts similar to those described above in

C-1I1 (Davis 1989:43).

Zone F was thicker in deposition ranging up two 150 cm and was dark

reddish brown in color. It was comprised of granite gravels mixed with charcoal

and other organic materials. Zone F contained the cultural horizon designated

Component II. Preservation from Zone F was poor because of lesser levels of

shell (Davis (ed) 1989).

The bottom levels of Zone F were slightly intermixed with the upper levels

of Zone G. Zone G, a transitional horizon, was between Zones F and I. The

cultural material was mixed in Zone F. Component I began to occur in Zone G

described as the "upper level of the glacial deposits" and as a transition into Zone

H1 (Davis (ed) 1989). Zone H1 was course sand and boulders. Zone I was

described as being -75 cm in Area B of the excavation with a Munsel color of 7.5

YR 3/3. The stratum was an organic lens paleosol comprised of twigs, wood

fragments, roots, needles and cones from Mountain Hemlock in a matrix of

course sand. Zone I held the Component I cultural material dated by radiocarbon

as the earliest occupations of beginning -10,400 rcybp and ending -8,000 rcybp

when it was abandoned due to an early Holocene glacial advance. The most

convincing deposits in Component I was a "possible hearth feature" which

returned a date of -9200 rcybp (Davis (ed) 1989).

137

Table 7.12: Hidden Falls (Davis (ed) 1989 pgs. 42-44)Strata RCYBP Description Component Cm thick

...~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............................................................."'"' , .

...f9..~.~ ~..1....... ...p..~!..~.9.~.9.! ?.Q.!~ 9.t9§D.i.~ ~.:?.Q ..

...f9.D.~ ~.? .!D.!!!.§.!...Q~g.!:!.p.~!!.~~ f !.!..! ..Zone E3 2500-3000 Paleosol................................................._ ,. .

...f9.D.~ F............ ...R.~9.9..!.~b ~.r.9.!Y.~.! gE.~y.~!.. 9. !.! ?:..1..~g ..

...f9.n.~ ~ ::::.~.9.g.Q Ir.~D.~!.!.~9.D~!.! g!.§g!.§.1....9.~.P.2~!!:? g !.. .

...f9.n.~ !j.1 ::::.~?.9..Q !.:\~!.§!!.9D !!.!!..! ~9..~.r.~~ ~.§.Q.9. g...I. !j.~§E!b ..Zone I -10,400 Organic lens, twigs, sand C I >75

138

Name: Hill Top (Low)

Number: N/A

Region: N/A

NHR Designation: None

Repository: N/A

Land Ownership: N/A

Basal Dates: 10,360 rcybp (Bever 2001a:101)

Complex: Mesa (Ackerman 2001 :94 Bever 2000, 2001a)

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

(Dumond and Knecht 2001).

143

Name: Koggiung (Low)

Number: NAK-00018

Region: Alaska Peninsula

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Oregon, Eugene

Land Ownership: US Government, Native Claim

Basal Dates: 7475:!:60, 7765:!:95, 7895:!:90 rcybp (Dumond 1981)

Complex: Koggiung (Dumond 1981)

Environment: The site is located in the Northern Alaska Peninsula

(Yesner 1998). "At Graveyard Point, on the east shore of Kvichak Bay, approx.

16km north of the mouth of Naknek River" (AH RS 1997). The site is located in

the middle of a runway used by the cannery at the mouth of the Kvichak River

(Dumond 1981).

History: "During the winter of 1973-74 I, [Don Dumond], was informed by

Karen Wood VVorkman, then Alaska State Archaeologist, that fisherman had

reported the finding of side-notched projectile points on a runway at a cannery

near the mouth of the Kvichak River, at a place known as Koggiung."

Paraphrasing Dumond continued; the site has had a lengthy history with local

antiquarians who have often taken artifacts from there (Dumond 1981).

144

Significance: The level of significance for Koggiung is low, local

antiquarians heavily impacted the site and no artifacts are reported to remain

(Dumond 1981).

Integrity: "This heavily disturbed site is located at the north end of the

abandoned airstrip, and east of the eroding cannery graveyard. Originally

reported as a site with side-notched projectile points, investigations in 1974 and

1975 also produced evidence of a core and blade component" (AHRS 1997). As

described, the area has often been a favorite for antiquarians and follow-up

reports indicated no other artifacts remained (Dumond 1981).

Artifacts and Features: Dumond (1981) refers to the earliest occupation

the Koggiung Phase, an early core and blade technology. Associated with this

earliest component were 1114 total artifacts, including one hundred blades.

Paraphrasing Dumond (1981), the Koggiung assemblage included utilized

blades, and blades with facets, burinized blades, non-utilized blades and blade

cores (3). There were numerous flakes and a single end scraper, also core

rejuvenation flakes (10). There was a single biface fragment associated with that

early component. The later Graveyard phase represented the second

component at the site, separated horizontally, and positioned in the stratigraphic

level that was just above the Koggiung Phase occupation. It contained bifacial

notched projectile points (Dumond 1981).

145

In addition to stone artifacts, "at least two and possibly as many as four

temporary campfires" were located (Dumond 1981).

146

Name: Lime Hills, Cave 1 (Med)

Basal Dates: 15,690:t140, 13,130:t180, and 9530:t60 rcybp

Complex: Denali (Ackerman, R. 2001 :94)

Landowner: Private?

Environment: The cave is found on the east side of the Lime Hills and is

.... 18 meters long by 2.5 meters high and 6.4 meters wide. The site is located

between the Swift and Stony Rivers, upper tributaries of the Kuskokwim River, a

short distance from Lime Village (Ackerman 1996c).

History: Dr. T. Bundtzen located the site while conducting geologic

studies in the area in 1992. Ackerman began excavations in the summer of 1993

(Ackerman 1996c).

Significance: The site had excellent preservation with bison bones,

displaying no sign of human modification, dated to 27,950:t560 rcybp. Caribou

bones with possible "butchery cut-marks" (Ackerman 1996c) returned a date of

15,690:t140 rcybp and additional caribou remains, also possibly modified by

humans dated to 13,130:t180 rcybp (Ackerman 1996c). The organic artifacts

found at Lime Hills Caves are among the oldest documented in Alaska. Organic

artifacts are rare from this early period and provide valuable evidence regarding

non-lithic technological artifacts that rarely preserve.

147

Integrity: Cave-ins have continuously added sediment to the floor of the

caves which has stratigraphy, in good context, to a depth of over a meter. See

figure 10-6 by Ackerman (1996c) for this stratigraphic profile.

Artifacts and Features: Ackerman (1996c) located a stone adze, worked

antler, and the fragments of caribou in the initial test excavation near the south

entrance of the cave. In the main section of the cave, just inside the entry, the

stratigraphy was deeper. Additional faunal remains were uncovered, including a

Bison astragalus and a possibly utilized caribou metapodial from a depth of 115

em (Ackerman 1996c:470).

A fragment of a "broad bone point or knife" was located 58 em below

surface. Also, higher in the stratigraphy, in the central portion of the cave, were

remains of several species of bird. Below this was an "antler arrow head with a

beveled tang and narrow grooves on opposing faces for the insertion of

microblades" (Ackerman 1996c:470). A single microblade fragment was

discovered while processing charcoal for 14C samples. The sample dated to

9530:t60 (Ackerman 1996c:470).

Description: Two cultural components, an upper and lower, were defined

in the stratigraphy. The upper component included antler, bone and stone

artifacts and the lower was mostly faunal (Ackerman 1996c). A microblade

fragment was recovered from charcoal in the laboratory. The antler projectile

point was also associated with an area directly above the 9530:t60 layer and was

148

similar in style and date to artifacts from Level III at Trail Creek Caves (Ackerman

1996c).

149

Name: Lisburne (Med)

Number: KIR-096

Region: Brooks Range

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Ownership: Bureau of Land Management

Dates: 8000 rcybp (AHRS 1997) 3470j:50 rcybp

Complex: Paleoarctic, Paleoindian, Arctic Small Tool, Northern Archaic

Environment: The Lisburne site is located 322km (200 miles) south of

Barrow, 80.5km (50 miles) northeast of Howard Pass on a bedrock bluff, with a

360 0 view, in the northern foothills of the Brooks Range at an elevation of 556.8

meters (1826.83 feet). It is situated on the eastern bank of the Iteriak Creek, an

eastern tributary of the Etivluk River and is roughly 10km down stream of the

Mesa site, (Bowers 1982).

local vegetation in the region includes alpine tundra, dwarf birch, narrow

leaf Labrador tea, cloudberry, moss and lichen. In the nearby drainage there is

lush willow groves, while in the meadows there are cotton grass tussocks,

monkshood and marigold (Bowers 1982).

History: The site was discovered and evaluation began in 1978 by USGS

and BLM archeologists (Bowers 1979). Systematic shovel testing was preformed

on a 4-foot interval (1.2m) grid system designed to systematically test 5% of the

150

site and define locale boundaries. Block excavations were centered on areas

containing cultural deposits (Bowers 1982).

Significance: The site was use by prehistoric hunters as a lithic

workshop, hunting overlook and lithic raw material quarry site (Bowers, P. 1979).

Area 22, one of two Paleoindian components, contained fluted and Mesa style

projectile points with blood residue. DNA analysis from the fluted point indicated

sheep and bear, or possibly just bear-if it ate the sheep (Bowers 1999). The

Mesa point also contained DNA residue, possibly mammoth and sheep (Bowers

1999, Loy and Dixon 1998)! If the evidence stands, it is the smoking gun

establishing mammoth procurement in Alaska, and the site's priority should be

raised from Medium to High, despite the lack of extensive radiocarbon data.

Integrity: Four separate cultural zones were identified A through D.

Culture Zone A was "the largest and most important locality within the site" and

consisted of several designated activity areas. Locality A was reported to cover

over 2787.09m2 (30,000 feet2), Locality B, 3251.61 m2 (35,000 feee) (Bowers

1979, 1982). A strong case a Paleoarctic tradition intrusion into Area 22,

suggested that Paleoindian tools found there were contemporaneous with Mesa

(Bm,vers 1982). Based on the sampling methods described (Bowers 1982),

significant portions of the site remain intact, thereby preserving much of the site's

structural integrity_

151

Artifacts and Features: More than 47,000 artifacts were recovered from

the Lisburne site. Approximately 98% were unused waste flakes suggesting

primary reduction activities took place there. Most of the raw materials originated

from a nearby quarry area or from cobbles in Iteriak Creek but non-local Batza

Tena obsidian was found in the form of waste flakes and microblades (Bowers

1982).

The two Paleoindian components contained fluted projectile points similar

to those found at the Putu, Girls Hill, Kugurok River, Utukok, Batza Tena and the

Nakvakruak sites. One of two features associated with Area 22 consisted of fire

cracked and reddened rocks (Bowers 1982:107). A soil sample from the 1970's

contained a fleck of charcoal that was dated to 3470.:!::SOAMS rcybp (Bowers 1999).

The late Holocene date led to conclusions that the microblades found in Area 22

were intrusive into the Paleoindian component. In reality, the date and artifacts

could be accurate and the occupation Late Paleoarctic. Further research is

recommended.

Description: Multiple occupation events represented in twenty-seven

activity areas (Bowers 1979). Two were Paleoindian, Areas 9 & 22, with some

intrusive Paleoarctic artifacts (Bowers 1999).

The generalized stratigraphy at Lisburne reached a depth of 10 inches

(-2S.4cm) beginning with the organic topsoil (-S.1cm) capping the A horizon

(-10.2cm). The A horizon, dark gravelly loam, ranged in depth and was

152

periodically interrupted by the basal C horizon, decomposed chert and limestone

bedrock, through frost heaves. The B horizon appeared as inconsistent patches

of silty clay loam generally 6 to 8 cm in thickness (Bowers 1982:adapted from

Table 1 and Figure 4).

153

Name: Mead (High)

Region: Interior

Number: XBD-00071

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Owner: Private

Basal Dates: CZ 4-11 ,6002:80AMS, CZ 3-10,4602:11 OAMS, CZ 2-9220, CZ 1­

14302:60

Complex: Nenana, Denali

Environment: The Mead site occupies the same bench as the Broken

Mammoth and Veasey sites, both considered Late Pleistocene sites (Yesner

personal communication, VanderHoek personal communication, Holmes

personal communication). They lie at the western edge above the Shaw Creek

Flats and are within 1.3 kilometers of one another.

History: Its original discovery resulted from construction activities for the

Richardson Highway (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). T. Pewe (1983) mapped the

site in the 1960s when the first mammoth tusk fragment was discovered (Pewe

and Reger 1983). Test excavations were conducted in the 1970s and then again

in 1991 during construction on the Mead family house (Yesner 2000).

Significance: The significance of the Mead site has been determined by

its association with other Terminal Pleistocene occupations in region, described

as the Shaw Creek Flat sites (Mead, Broken Mammoth, Swan Point and the

154

Veasey site) (Yesner 2000). These are the oldest well-dated occupations in

Alaska (with the exception of the Veasey site which remains to be investigated).

The Shaw Creek sites have collectively contributed a variety of faunal and other

data contributing to our understanding of the economic diversity in early Alaskan

diets. Swan Point and Mead, by themselves, have yielded over 1,000 bone

fragments (Yesner 1996).

Integrity: The site preserved at the base of two meters of loess under

similar conditions as the other Shaw Creek Flats sites, where two cultural

horizons in stratigraphic context were located near the basal gravel and dated to

the Holocene Pleistocene boundary. Other occupations occur higher in the

profile (Fig. 3 in (Yesner 1996, Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

Artifacts and Features: The site was at first paleontological containing

the remains of a mammoth, continued to produce mammoth tusk fragments

when discovered by Pewe (Yesner 2000). Artifacts from Culture Zone 4 (CZ-4)

included a projectile point made from proboscidean tusk (mammoth or

mastodon); lithic waste flakes, biface fragments and a scraper. The occupation

was reliably dated to -11,600 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:167-168).

Culture Zone 3 (CZ-3) was located above GZ-4 and dated between

-10,400 and 10,700 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:166). That occupation

contained Denali complex artifacts. Both CZ 3 and CZ 4 contained well-

155

preserved faunal remains similar to those at Broken Mammoth but those remain

unstudied (Yesner 2003 person communication).

Description: The geologic sequence, beginning with the basal levels, are

described here as geologic Unit A at a depth of approximately 190 to 200cm

below surface. Unit B ranged roughly around 50cm below surface where Unit C,

the uppermost unit, terminated. The organic topsoil, characterized as sod and

peat, ranged in depth from 0 to 10 em.

There are four cultural zones at the site. A total of eleven radiocarbon

dates have been sampled, five were AMS and two were considered problematic

(*) CZ-1 revealed a date of 1430:t.60, CZ-2 4050:t.160, 6070:t.170, and

9220:t.370*. Three samples were submitted from CZ-3 7620:t.100*, 10,410:t.80AMS

and 10,460:t.11 OAMS. A single sample between CZ-3 and CZ-4 returned a date of

10,760:t.170. CZ-4 has been dated by three samples 11 ,560:t.80 AMS, 11 ,600:t.80AMS

and 17,370:t.90 AMS. The final date of >17,000 was taken from a fragment

considered to be "o!d ivory", the likes of which often erode along the Tanana

River banks (Yesner 1996, Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

Table 7.13: Mead. (Hamilton & Goebel 1999, Yesner 1996)Culture Zone RCYBP Complex

....Q:?::J J.4..~.9.!§.9. .CZ-2 4050+160, 6070+170, and 9220+370*

..............................................................................~ _ l'ft'I'l\ ..mn .

CZ-3 7620:t.100*, 10,41 0:t.80 AMS, 10,41 0:t.80 AMS, Denali10,460+110..............................., ~ , , ,..

Transition 10,760+170.....................................................................................'"'"" , .CZ-4 11,560+80 AMS, 11,600+80AMS and 17,370+90AMS Nenana

156

Name: Mesa (High)

Number: KIR-102

Region: Brooks Range

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

land Ownership: United States Bureau of Land Management

Dates: -9,700-10,300 rcybp (Kunz et al 2003:19)

Complex: Mesa and some Paleoarctic tradition

Environment: The Mesa site is located on a bedrock knob rising 60

meters above the surrounding tundra along Iteriak Creek, a tributary of the

Colville River (Kunz and Reanier 1995). The Colville is the major drainage for

the western Arctic Slope. The region is characterized as northern tundra with

poplar thickets and shrubs mostly along tributaries; marshy muskeg covers

permafrost in lowlands. Benches and ridges, once used as outlooks, rise above

the tributaries in the Arctic Foothills of the Brooks Range providing ideal hunting

posts for Early Americans (Kunz and Reanier 1995, 1996).

The Iteriak tributary was likely not glaciated at any point during the past

500,000 years with an ecosystem capable of providing plant and animal

resources during prehistory (Kunz and Reanier 1996).

History: Mesa was discovered in 1978 during oil and gas related

exploration. Test excavations took place in 1979 and 1980. Full excavations

began in 1989 and continued between 1991 and 1999 (Kunz and Reanier 1994,

157

1996, Kunz et al 2003). "Most of the surface artifacts found at the site were

collected from [Locality A]" (Kunz et al 2003). Locality A had 100.5 grid squares

in four distinct activity areas equaling 1608 square feet (149.9 m2) excavated.

Locality Saddle had 23.5 grid squares removed from an area of 376 square feet

(34.9 m2) in size. Locality B had 56.5 grid squares removed totaling 904 square

feet (84 m2); and finally, the East Ridge location yielded a single block excavation

numbering 21 grid squares with 336 square feet (31.2) of material removed

(Kunz et al 2003:14).

Significance: Mesa quickly became a sensation among early American

researchers and the American public, appearing on the front page of the New

York Times (Wilford 1993), Chicago Tribune (Katz 1993), Anchorage Daily News

(Loy 1993) and in the Washington Post (Rensberger 1993). There were AMS

14C dates from a single hearth feature, which originally suggested occupations

before 11000 rcybp, although those dates are now disputed (Hamilton and

Goebel 1999). Agate Basin (Frison 1978) technology found in the Great Plains

shared similarities with Mesa and lead to claims that the Mesa complex

represented an ancestral technology to the Paleoindians in the lower United

States (Kunz and Reanier 1995,1996).

Evidence from the site suggested that early hunting outlook and retooling

activities took place there. Broken projectile point bases discarded in favor of

newly fashioned tools were recovered. The production of preforms and bifaces

158

occurred at quarry sites away from the overlook (Kunz and Reanier 1994, 1995,

1996). Lithic raw material was obtained from locally available outcrops and

stream cobbles. Similar activities have been described from interior early

Alaskan sites as an indication of people unfamiliar with local resources (Yesner

2001).

The Mesa complex, defined by Michael Bever (2001 a), includes artifacts

from the Lisburne site, the Hilltop site, and the TES-012, and MIS-131 sites. The

complex also includes the Spein Mountain site in Southwestern Alaska

(Ackerman 1996,2001). Bever (2001a) suspected that Tuluaq Hill could also be

a Mesa complex site.

Integrity: Mesa has soil deposition 5 to 35 em deep (Kunz and Reanier

1994, 1996). Cryoturbation and mixing of strata have played a role in site

formation (Hamilton and Goebel 1999). Despite these disturbances, radiocarbon

samples from the base of excavations atop the bedrock foundation indicate early

occupations from 9,700 and 11,700 rcybp. Based on Kunz's initial strategy for

excavation (see O'harra 1994), it is assumed some cultural material remains in

situ at the Mesa site.

Artifacts and Features: Despite shal!ow stratigraphy and arctic frost

conditions, 40 fire hearths were identified (Kunz et al 2003). Highly diagnostic

artifacts include resharpened Agate Basin-like projectile points, "fluted", basal­

notched projectiles, large bifaces, end scrapers and spurred gravers (Kunz and

159

Reanier 1995, 1996). The assemblage and its location suggest hunting overlook

activities. The majority of artifacts discovered were projectile points (154

complete and fragments) (Kunz et al 2003), with preforms or bifacial blanks

numbering 80% of the total artifacts. Other artifacts included hammerstones and

anvils, waste flakes (from tool reworking) and hematite (Kunz and Reanier 1996).

"All but two of the scrapers are associated with the only one [of the] hearths and

that hearth appears to have food preparation activities associated with it" (Kunz

et aI2003).

In addition to Paleoindian technologies at the Mesa site, there is an

unrelated component consisting of microblades, wedge-shaped microblade cores

and four examples of bifacial tool making found with Locality A. A total of 130

microblades were recovered and "at least 707 artifacts and detritus pieces can

be assigned to the microblade component" (Kunz et al 2003:38). Four examples

of bifacial tool making were found with one containing four flutes removed from

each end and meeting in the middle on both faces of the artifact (Kunz et al

2003:35). Also associated with the component, was an apparent disk pendent or

atlatl weight, described as a "skate-board wheel" (Kunz et al 2003:35).

Description: Radiocarbon analysis includes 51 samples submitted from

28 of the fire hearths (Kunz et al 2003). A date of 7620.:t95 has been

disregarded after comparing the suspicious date to an archived sample

(10,060.:t70) taken from the same hearth feature (Kunz et aI2003:19). Hamilton

160

and Goebel (1999) reviewed 27 of the radiocarbon data and agreed thatthe

7600 date was an error. The 26 remaining dates ranged sequentially between

9730.:t80 AMS and 11,660.:t80AMs, although, only three samples returned dates in

excess of 10,300 rcybp, two were >11,000 rcybp and are believed to be from

hearths containing "old wood". The third oldest sample returned a of

10,980.:t280AMS was also rejected. Based on the remaining 14C dates, it is most

likely that the Paleoindian occupations at Mesa occurred between 9,900 and

10,100 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:176).

Kunz et al (2003:19) also considered the >11,000 suspicious because

they originated from a single hearth. That heart was associated with a Mesa

style projectile point and numerous waste flakes. Kunz et al (2003: 19)

considered only the 44 AMS dates and estimate the Paleoindian component

dates between 9700 and 10,300 rcybp.

The mesa was divided into four prominent geologic sections labeled

Localities A, B, the Saddle and the East Ridge. The stratigraphy at Locale A was

generally no deeper than 10 cm and vegetated with lichen and moss. Locale B,

approximately -950m2 in size, was found in the northeastern section of the

mesa, -30m northeast of Locale A. In Locale B, the vegetation grew dense and

surface finds were low (Kunz and Reanier 1995:32). The Saddle (-760m2 in

size) is situated between Localities A and B with soil deposition of -30 cm with

161

an artifact cluster measuring -75m2. Finally, the East Ridge was divided from

Locale B by an outcrop with poorly developed soil (Kunz and Reanier 1995).

162

Name: Moose Creek (Med)

Number: FAI-00206

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

landowner: State of Alaska

Dates: Component I 11,190 .± 60 AMS (Pearson 1999)

Complex: Nenana, Denali

Environment: Moose Creek is a tributary of the Nenana River near

Walker Road in interior Alaska, generally southwest of Fairbanks. The view from

the site looks out across the Nenana River toward the south and west (Hamilton

and Goebel 1999, Hoffecker et aI1985).

History: J. Hoffecker and Waythomas discovered the site in 1978. Field

operations began the following year and uncovered 15 additional square meters

of the site. Further work continued in the 1980's when four more meters were

excavated (Hoffecker 1996). George Pearson continued excavations in 1996

bringing the total square meters excavated to just over 20 (Hamilton and Goebel

1999).

Significance: The Moose Creek site has been associated with the

Nenana complex based tentatively on the stratigraphy, time of occupation and a

lack of core and blade technology but also because it is located in close proximity

163

to the Walker Road and Dry Creek sites. It is a lithic retooling and outlook

occupation dated slightly older than 11,000 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

Bigelow et al (1990) suggested that the lowest component was technologically

Denali rather than Nenana and recommends further investigation before

attributing it to the Nenana Complex.

Integrity: Moose Creek is similar to other early sites in the Nenana Valley

in that faunal preservation was poor (Hoffecker 1996). Pearson's (1996) return to

Moose Creek recovered a diagnostic Nenana Chindadn projectile point deeply

stratified in aeolian loess atop a glacial outwash rock foundation. He found

cultural occupations sealed beneath several paleosols providing some mixing of

levels (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:162). Stratigraphic deposition from the ground

surface to the gravel base was approximately 1.8 meters (Hoffecker 1996).

Artifacts and Features: The artifacts from the site tended to cluster in

groups of 1 meter or less in diameter. From Component I, -2250 artifacts

(mostly lithic) were recovered during the initial excavation of the site (Hoffecker

1996). Pearson's 1996 excavations contributed a hearth feature and a single

Chindadn, sub-triangular, projectile point and multiple side-scrapers to the

evidence from Component!. Core and blade technology was lacking in the

earliest occupation (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Hoffecker 1996).

Component 1/ produced a definable Denali Complex occupation. Artifacts

recovered included a cluster of microblades and a transverse burin (Hamilton

164

and Goebel 1999, Hoffecker 1996). These artifacts were associated with an

ovate biface and 12 waste flakes found previously by Hoffecker (1996:365).

Hoffecker also recovered the basal portions of two lanceolate projectile points

from the lower Component I. The slight stratigraphic mixing caused Hoffecker to

reconsider the Nenana classification (Hoffecker 1996).

Description: Two components were located in situ between 55 and 150

em below surface. Component I lies -15cm below Component II (Hamilton and

Goebel 1999). Hoffecker collect four soil organics from the lower paleosol

complex, in stratigraphic order they were 8940.:t270, 8160.:t260, 11 ,730.:t250,

10640.:t28°(Hoffecker 1996). The samples from unidentifiable organics may

date the soil but do not precisely date the occupation. A later date from the

hearth associated with Component I discovered by Pearson was located slightly

below the previous excavations of Hoffecker dated to 11,190.:t60AMS (Hamilton and

Goebel 1999:162).

Pearson (1995) made the case for four identifiable artifact assemblages

associated with the site. He suggested Component I was associated with a fire

hearth and Chindadn technology. Component II was associated with the

microb!ades, lanceolate projectile points and bifacial fragments associated with

Early Holocene Denali Complex occupations. Component Ill, a Northern Archaic

occupation, and Component IV dated to the Middle Holocene. The picture of

165

Moose Creek occupations reproduces the stratigraphic findings at the Dry Creek

site (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:163, Pearson, G. 1999).

Table 7.14: Moose Creek5

Stratiqraphv Component RCYBP -depth em Component

...T9.f.?~g.i.!.. .-..-.................................... . ::::§. ..

...$..!!.~y. ..§.§.Q.9.................................................................. ...::::J.Q ..

....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

:::p.~:!~~~:9.C::~::::::::::::::::::: ::f::i:!::::~~::::::::::~::::::~~:: ::I9.:~:Q9.£§9.~~::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::~::::::::: ::::§.~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::Q~r.i?iC:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Loess 8160::t260, 8940::t270, -55-65

10640+280,11730+250*

::.~~~~~~~I;,:;::::.::::::.:::::::: :.~~!.:~~~::~.:~~~::.:~..:..~ :::!::!:.~::~~~~~:=:.:.:~~~:~~~::~:.:.::::: :.:~¥.~~:.:::: ..:::.:::.:..::::::::>.~~~.~.~:~:.:::.:::::::.::::::.:::::.:::.:.:.Basal gravel >75

Table 7.15: Moose Creek Calibrated (Pearson 1999:Table 2)Component Complex Calibrated RCYBP

....9.9.r.n.p..9.~.'?I!.~ !.'..! ~~.!'? P~.~.?.I.L ?~.~?.:.?~ ..~..1 ..

...gg.r.n.P..9.Q.'?Q.! !.!.. .P.~.n.?.!.L 1..?!.?.1..~.:.1..?..!.~J..§ ..Component I Nenana 13,170-13,097

5Source: Hamilton & Goebel 1999:160 & 186, Hoffecker 1988, Pearson 1999, Powers & Hoffecker 1989

166

Name: Nukluk Mountain (Low)

Number: 8TH-00069 & 8TH-00070

Region: Southwest

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: Washington State University

Land Ownership: USFW

Basai Dates: N/A

Complex: Denali

Environment: The site is located approximately 8 km west of the Kisaralik River

on a hill approximately 1.2 km northwest of the summit of Nukluk Mountain at an

elevation of 751 feet (AHRS 1997).

History: Robert Ackerman discovered the site in 1979 while conducting survey in

the area. Portions of both localities 8TH-69 and 8TH-70 were surface collected

(Ackerman, R. 1996c).

Significance: Nukluk Mountain is a characteristic Denali complex occupation.

Nukluk Mountain in some ways shares its significant with the nearby Spein Mountain site

because the two represent two contemporaneous technologies in the same territory.

Integrity: The site was deflating on the top of a ridge. Although the occupation

was mostly Denali technology, with a single projectile point that does not typically occur

in Denali assemblages. 8ecause of the lack of stratigraphy and preservation, there was

no datable material recovered (Ackerman 1996c).

Artifacts and Features: The artifacts included wedge-shaped microblade core

technology characteristic of the Denali complex. There was also an asymmetric

167

microblade core, burin, bifacial projectile point bases, biface, scrapers, and a cobble

core (Ackerman 1996c: Fig. 10-3 pg 463).

Description: Presently, lichen, moss and some shrubs dominate the site.

Aeolian silt or sand comprises a shallow matrix cover on shattered regolith (Ackerman

1996c).

168

Name: Oiled Blade (Med) Pending Research

Number: UNL-000318

Region: N/A

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: Museum of the Aleutians

Land Ownership: Ounalaska

Basal Dates: 8400-7900 calibrated years before present

Tradition: Anangula Core and Blade

Environment: The site is located on Hog Island approximately 100 meters

from the Hog Island site, near Dutch Harbor in the Aleutian chain (Knecht and

Davis 2001).

History: The site, recently excavated by Knecht and Davis (2001), is

currently pending analysis.

Significance: Anangula core and blade sites are rare, with less than five

sites located so far, including the Oiled Blade site (Knecht and Davis 2001). it

contains artifacts left by the earliest known inhabitants of the Aleutian chain.

Artifacts and Features: The artifacts, large unifacial blades, were

consistent with other Anangula core and blade tradition assemblages (Knecht

and Davis 2001).

Description: Unavailable

169

Name: On Your Knees Cave (High)

Number: PET-00408

Region: Southeast

NHR Designation: NONE

land Ownership: USFS Tongass

Repository: N/A

Basal Dates: -9200 rcybp

Complex: Northwest Coast Microblade

Environment: The site is located on Prince of Wales Island where sea

level elevations during the time of occupation (-9,000 and 9,500 rcybp) were 4 to

6 m above modern level, indicating that the island was not connected with the

mainland (Dixon 1999).

History: Timothy Heaton, a paleontologist originally discovered the

remains in 1996 (Dixon 1999, Fifield 1996). Excavations continued in 1997 and

1998 (Dixon 1999).

Significance: The site is significant for the rich archaeological,

paleontological and paleoclimatic data stored in its sediments, and because it

contained H ••• the oldest reliably dated human remains ever found in Alaska"

(Fifield 1996:5 quoting E.J. Dixon). Dentition analysis indicated two periods of

nutritional stress during the individual's >20-year life. The C13 isotope analysis

170

indicated the bones were from the same individual and that his diet consisted

almost entirely of marine animals (Dixon 1999:118).

"This site is significant because this is the first firm association of human

physical remains with distinctive early microblades in Alaska or the Pacific

Northwest" (Dixon 1999:119). In addition, there was evidence from the site

supporting trade routes for exotic lithic material and circumstantial evidence for

the use of watercraft, because the cave was on an island during the time of

occupation (Dixon 1999).

Integrity: The stratigraphic deposits contained "fine, water-saturated silts"

with excellent preservation qualities (Fifield 1996).

Artifacts and Features: The human remains consisted of two lower

mandible fragments with a nearly complete set of teeth, four vertebra, fragments

of the right pelvis and two ribs. The subject was an adult male, estimated to

have been in his early 20s at the time of death. Artifacts recovered included

"obsidian microblades, bifaces and other too!s" found in the same stratigraphic

level. The artifacts are characteristic of the Northwest Coast Microblade tradition

(Dixon 1999).

Description: The bones discovered just inside the entry to the cave were

deposited in a layer "fine, water-saturated silts" (Fifield 1996). Three charcoal

samples returned dates of 9,21 0.:t50AMS, 9, 150.:t50AMS and 8,760.:t50AMS rcybp.

Corrections based on other samples from the region suggest that the marine and

171

atmospheric carbon reservoir contains a difference of -600 rcybp. By subtracting

600 years from the dates on the skeletal material (9,730.:t60AMS and 9,880.:t50 AMS),

Dixon (1999) has estimated the age to -9200 rcybp, consistent with two of the

three charcoal determinations (Dixon 1999).

Table 7.16: On Your Knees Cave (Dixon 1999)AMS RCYBP Description Tradition9,210+50,9,150+50,8,760+50 Charcoal NW Microblade

......................rr:r. ...............................nm...............................mT:................................................. ............................................................".................... .-._....._......_....._....._.._....._.-9,730+60,9,880+50 Human Remains NW Microblade

172

Name: Owl Ridge (Med)

Number: FAI-00091

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NONE

Land Owner: US Bureau of Land Management

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Dates: C 1- 11,3402:150, C 11- 93252:305 (Hoffecker et al 1996)

Complex: Denali, Nenana (Hamilton and Goebel 1999)

Environment: The site is located on a glacial fluvial plain created during

the Healy Glacial period (Hoffecker et al 1996) located on the east bank of the

Teklanika River one valley to the west of the Nenana River (Hamilton and Goebel

1999, Phippen 1988).

History: D. Plaskett and R. Thorson discovered the site in 1976 and

excavated a single test pit. The following year R. Powers and T. Brink continued

excavations at the site. In 1978 T. Brink, R. Thorston and J. Hoffecker et al

conducted field operations during the North Alaska Range Early Man Project

(Hoffecker 1980). Between 1982 and 1984, continued excavations by P.

Phippen (1988) added 26 square meters to a total of approximately 30 square

meters of excavated units and assigned the lowest component to the Nenana

complex.

173

Significance: Component! and Component II (C-I, C-II) date to the Early

Holocene-Late Pleistocene periods. Although the earliest occupation contained

a small collection of non-diagnostic artifacts, it was tentatively placed in the

Nenana complex based on stratigraphic similarities with other Nenana sites in

the region and radiocarbon determinations (Hoffecker et al 1996:355). The site

also contained a possible tent like structure associated with the Denali

occupation in C-II (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Hoffecker et a11996, Phippen

1988). Evidence of housing structures is extremely rare in early Alaskan sites

with less than five known possible instances discovered during this research.

Integrity: A series of occupations buried in aeolian loess with eight

stratigraphic units between bedrock and the surface (Hoffecker et a11996: Fig. 7­

11). At its deepest, the complete soil formation was 1.2 meters providing

excellent stratigraphic chronology at the site with three archaeological

components: C-I (11,340 - 9060), C-II (9325-7230), and C-III (930-7035)

(Hoffecker et al 1996).

Artifacts and Features: The C-III assemblage included three cobble

tools, three flakes, a single utilized flake, two large bifaces, a "flake knife", a

burin, a hammerstones, and over 700 waste flakes (Hoffecker et al 1996,

Phippen 1988).

Denali complex artifacts were associated with C-II containing a single

utilized flake, three debitage fragments, ovate-biface, a blade fragment, a "sub-

174

triangular" biface and nine "cobbles" were found associated with an apparent

"tent ring" feature (Hoffecker et al 1996, Phippen 1988).

C-I contained two Clusters (A and B). Cluster A contained lithic debitage,

two retouched tools and charcoal samples. Cluster B also contained two tools, a

small amount of utilized flakes, lithic debitage, a single hammerstone, a fragment

of red ocher and samples of charcoal. The collection from C-I was non-

diagnostic tentatively attributed the Nenana Complex based on stratigraphy and

radiocarbon determinations (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Hoffecker et al1996).

Description: The geologic profile described in Phippen's (1988) MA

thesis documents eight separate units beginning with Strata Level 8, surface

topsoil organics (ca. 12cm below surface), Level 7 silt/sand (12 to 20cm below

datum), Level 6 silt/sand (ca. 20 to 50cm below surface) and Level 5 sand/schist

(ca 50 to 72cm below sUrface). C-II contained silt-sand and paleosols in the

upper regions of Level 4 (72 to 87 em below surface). Level 3 contained sand (-

87 to 95cm below surface). Leve! 2 contained C-l (11,300 rcybp) in a layer of silt

(roughly 90-95 to 110 em below surface). The C-I occupation lay at the transition

between Level 2 and Level 1 (the gravel foundation roughly 120cm below

"'urfa....",\ (~,.,,,,h,,,',,,f a' 1QQ1 Hamil+,.,n anrl ~O",h",1 1QQQ)"'" ., ""''''''}\,,-",''''''''"'''''''''''''''''''''" I '''''''OJ,' .• Itl\"V'J II ...... '-' ""'t",n.... IV...,_.

C-1I1 contained three radiocarbon dates at the transition of Levels 5 and 6

(1480.:t110*, 6900.:t265, and 7035.:t380). C-II in the center of Level 4 produced

five total dates. A date of 2470.:t120* was dismissed by the researchers as

175

problematic three more dates were obtained by submitting organic rich silt

(7230±100, 7660±100, 8130±140) (Hoffecker et aI1996:354). The final

radiocarbon sample (9325±305) from C-II dates the peat associated with the

possible tent ring structure.

Three samples submitted from the lowest component returned two dates

that were considered misleading 9060±41 0 and 2380±90* and likely brought to

lower levels from above. The date of occupation for C-I was based on the date

11 ,340±150 rcybp (Hoffecker et al 1996).

Additional samples taken from upper levels included 930±50 from the

transition of Strata 7 to Strata 6 and a sample taken from the middle of Level 6

dated to 4400±70 (Hoffecker et al 1996, Phippen 1988).

Table i.li: Owl Ridge (Hoffecker et ai 1996:354 Fig. 7-11)Level Component RCYBP Complex Description - cmL 8 Topsoil 12··L··7"········..· ·93·0+50 ·· · ·..· · · · ·s·iiilsan·(j·..· · · · 1·2:::20 _·

..L..i3 · · 44·00+7·0..· ·..·..· · · · ·· · · · ·..· ·..s'iit~sa·ii·(j ..fo·rest"..· ·50 ·..· ·..

:::t.:t:~:::::: .::=::::::::.:::.:":":::.::.:".:.:::. :::~~:~~~~~~:~ ..~~~~=~~.~::::~:~:~~=.~I9·* ..·..· j :::~~a~~J~~:~~:i:~:::::::: ::~~=:::..:: ~.L4 C·II 7230.:t100, 7660.:t100, 8130.:t140, Denali Silt, paleosol 72

2470+120*·..[..3 · · ~ · · ·~·I~~;~;, 90· · ·

:{~?:::::::::::: :::~;:;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::~~:~~~;~:~::~:~~~:~:~~~~~::~~~::~~~~;.~~~::::::~ ::::~~~::~::~::~. Basal ora·vei....·....··...... ···~~·iP.L·~

176

Name: Panguingue Creek (Med)

Number: HEA-000137

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Owner: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: C-I 8170+120AMS 9836+62AMS 10 180+130AMS C-II 8 500 - 7 500_ , _ J 1 _ J , ,

Complex: Nenana?, Denali (Goebel et a11988)

Environment: The site is located less than 5 km Northwest of Healy, AK

in the northern foothills of the Alaska Range along Panguingue Creek, a tributary

of the Nenana River (Goebel and Bigelow 1996). The sites above the Nenana

River drainage on a ridgeline uplifted by Pleistocene glacial till and alluvium

deposits an area characterized, today, as a transition zone from spruce forest to

herbaceous tundra (Hoffecker 1988).

History: Discovered in 1976 by T. Smith and j. Hoffecker and was first

tested in 1977 and again 1985. In 1991, large-scale excavations expanded the

excavated area from 25 metes2 to 100 meters2 (Goebel and Bigelow 1996).

Significance: Panguingue Creek is an extensive, weii-stratified site with

two Denali complex occupations vertically separated by -15-20 em. Although the

stratigraphy sequence is similar to other sites containing Nenana and Denali

complex deposits, the lowest component has not yielded diagnostic Nenana

177

tools. Despite this, the Component II deposits contained evidence of economic

and subsistence strategies of early Alaskans using Denali complex technology.

Integrity: The site was preserved on a Pleistocene river terrace overlain

by aeolian sand and silts to a depth over 1.8 meters. The stratigraphic profile

correlates to soil formations documented across the river at the Walker Road and

Moose Creek sites (Powers and Hoffecker 1989:269 Fig. 3). Additional links

correlations link Panguingue Creek Component II with a paleosol at Dry Creek

and with Component II at the Little Panguingue Creek site. The stratigraphic

correlations between the Nenana valley sites enhance the integrity for each of

the properties.

Artifacts and Features: Component II contained two separate activity

areas including a fire hearth with numerous fragments of burnt bone (Goebel and

Bigelow 1996) and lithic evidence including cores (9 total, 7 wedge shaped),

microblades (>150), burin spalls (10), and waste flakes (>5000). The formal

tools (60) were characteristic of the Denali complex and included lanceolate

projectiles (5), lenticular bifacial knives (2), parallel-flaked bifacial knives (2), side

scrapers (7), end scrapers (5), burins (5), reworked flakes (16), chopping tools

(2), hammerstones (2) and anvil stones (2) (Goebel and Bigelow 1996 citing

Powers 1986).

The uppermost Component III contained waste flakes (20), end scrapers

(2) and a side scraper. Component I (lower most), contained a sub-prismatic

178

blade/flake core, waste flakes, transverse scrapers (2) and lanceolate projectiles

(2) (Goebel and Bigelow 1996). C-I and C-1I1 did not contain enough diagnostic

artifacts for determining a classification.

Description: The base of the stratigraphic profile began with glacial

outwash deposited during the Healy glacial retreat (Hoffecker et al 1996,

Wahrhaftig 1958) capped with 10 em of aeolian silt dated to 13,535j:400/-380

rcybp (Goebel and Bigelow 1996) demonstrating the approximate time the region

became glacier free and vegetation began to emerge.

The next stratigraphic deposit was comprised of wind blown sand -1 Oem

thick and horizontal interruptions characteristic of water over-wash episodes

(Goebel and Bigelow 1996). The next layer (-10 em) is silt loam, capped by -30

em of granules and pebbles with Palesol I and Palesol II within the stratum. The

lowermost occupation, C-I contained in Paleosol II, dated to 9951j:56 based on

radiocarbon averages. The next stratigraphic layer (30 em thick) contains

Component II found in Paleosol 3 and dated by five radiocarbon samples

averaged to 7711 j:97. The modern soil horizon contained two samples that

averaged 5250j:54 (Goebel and Bigelow 1996) indicating a stable surface in the

region for the latter half of the Holocene.

Geoarchaeology in the Nenana Valley has provided a climatic view from

17,000 rcybp to present. The first occupations at the site (-9k to 10k rcybp) were

deposited during the Post Carlo Advance and the second occupations during the

179

Thermal Optimum, a period of intense windy conditions (Powers and Hoffecker

1989) also referred to as Milankovitch Thermal Maximum.

Table 7.18: Panguingue Creek 1

Soil Complex Comp RCYBP Paleosol - CMModern 5-10.............................................................................................................. " , .Silt loam Unknown C III 4150.:!:95,5620.:!:65 P IV 10-15·..·H·u·m'i'c· ······..· ···..·.. ··o,ena'i'j' · C..·j..j· ·, ..··..7'1·30:f'1·s6;··7430:t2'76ms· · ,..p..'i'j'j" , 1'5·:·1·7· ·

7595.:!:405, 7850.:!:180,..................., _ , ~.?Q9.;t?.9..9. ..Silt! loam 17-20........~ , ,.. , , , , , , , " .

....~.?.!!.9.Y. §J!!.. , 1\MS 1\M~ ?.9..:.~.Q .Humic 0 Unknown C I 8170.:!:120 AMS9836:!:.62 P II 30-40horizon Nenana? 10,180.:!:130 ,.............................._ ~ , .

...§.?n.9.Y. §.~!L , 4.9..:.?9. .Aeolian 55-75......................................................................................................." .. , " ,.. , , " " ,.," " ..Sand 75·"'Coess=g·ravej· , ·1·3~·535:t4'6'6j~·3·80'· ..· ·..··..·..· ·..··..· 1·0'0..·..· ·..

1 Sources: Goebel et a11996, Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Powers et al1989180

Name: Phipps (Med)

Number: XMH-00111

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NHS-Tangle Lakes Archaeological District

Repository: N/A

Land Ownership: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: 10,150±265 rcybp

Complex: Denali

History: "West originally located Denali core and blade material in sandy

blowouts on a low ridge about 1500' Southwest of the Denali Highway. In situ

material was excavated, to a depth of as much as 15cm, within a 4m x 4m area"

(AHRS 1997).

Significance: This site contains a single occupation Denali complex tool

assemblage of core and blade technology. It is included as a contributing

property in the Tangle Lakes Archaeological District and is one of a few sites

reported to contain in situ artifacts from that region (AHRS 1997).

Integrity: An undetermined amount of cultural material is reported to

remain in burled contexis (V'''est et al 1996) "but is threatened by the proximity of

a trash dump and by the continued erosion of the unfilled excavations (AHRS

1997).

181

Artifacts and Features: Characteristic Denali complex artifacts recovered

included core and blade technology and lanceolate projectile points (AHRS

1997).

Description: The stratigraphy of the Phipps site has been well

documented through a sequence of radiocarbon determinations (West et al

1996) beginning with the surface topsoil to a maximum depth of -50 cm. Soil

formations beneath the 0 horizon began at a depth of -20 cm with the A1 - A2

transition. The B Horizon was 10 to 30 cm thick. Radiocarbon analysis from soil

organics in the A1b horizon returned a date of 6,268 rcybp at a depth between 29

and 32 cm. Bb was the lowest of three buried soils. The Denali artifacts were

found scattered in all three soil formations, but the main concentration occurred

at a depth of -32-37 cm. Averaged radiocarbon dates from this occupation were

10,190 rcybp. A sample taken from unoccupied strata 50 cm in depth returned a

date of 11,015 rcybp (West et ai, 1996: 382).

182

Name: Putu-Bedwell (Med)

Number: PSM-00027a/PSM-00027b

Region: Brooks Range

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Ownership: US Bureau of Land Management

Dates: Bedwell: 10,490±70AMS Putu: SZ 2-8810±60AMs, 5700±190 SZ 1-650±100.

Complex: Mesa (Ackerman 2001 :94, Bever 2000)

Environment: Putu and Bedwell, considered two separate loci within a

single site, were discovered a few kilometers below the confluence of Atigun

River. Loci S-13A (Bedwell) is located on the hillcrest generally to the south of

Loci S-13B (Putu) found on a lower terrace (AHRS 1997). Like many early

Alaskan sites, Putu-Bedwell occupies a level bench 215 meters above the valley

providing a strategic view of the region (Reanier 1996). Putu-Bedwell is located

near other early sites found near the North Ridge of the Brooks Range including

the Gallagher Flint Station (already an NHL) and Hill Top (Bever 2001b, Gal

1980).

History: Discovered in 1970 by Herbert ,ll..!exander, the Putu-Bedwe!!

localities were lumped together as one archeological site, PSM-27a and PSM­

27b (Reanier 1996). It was the first site to produced radiocarbon dates

presumably associated with fluted projectile point technology (Alexander 1974,

183

Reanier 1995). Excavations began in 1970 and continued through 1973.

Alexander published on the site four years later (Alexander 1974, Reanier 1996).

Significance: Data from Putu-Bedwell may provide further information

regarding Paleoindian occupations in the Brooks Range region and may resolve

major theoretical principals regarding the prehistory of Alaska and the peopling of

the New World.

Fluted Paleoindian technology believed to date in Alaska between 6100

and 8450 rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999) and increasingly considered a Late

Paleoindian phenomenon. The significance of Putu is that it is one of several

sites near the Brooks Range region (Batza Tena, Lisburne and Mesa) with

similar basally thinned projectile points deposited in a hunting outlook situation.

However, the association of artifacts with the early radiocarbon samples continue

to be questioned (Bever 2001 b:155). Because of this, Putu-Bedwell is significant

as an intermediate Paleoindian site between the earlier Mesa technology and

later occupations at Gallagher Flint Station, Girls Hill and the fluted points from

Batza Tena.

Integrity: The stratigraphy at Putu is shallow and disturbed by

cryoturbation and rodent activity. The sediments are roughly 60 em in depth VJith

artifacts generally 2 to 8 cm above the bedrock foundation near the base of loess

deposits (Reanier 1995, Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

184

Artifacts and Features: Two fluted projectile points (one obsidian), three

lanceolate projectile points and one triangular point were found in addition to

large bifacial blanks, spurred gravers, end scrapers and side scrapers. The

lanceolate projectile points, one found in association with a fire hearth, are similar

to those found at the Mesa site. Putu also contained microblades and cores but

they are not typologically similar to any of the microblade technologies known in

Alaska (Reanier 1996).

Description: Alexander submitted organic material associated with the

fluted projectile points for 14e dating. The sample returned a date of 11 ,470±500

rcybp, a date largely discredited (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Reanier 1994).

Excavations at the site recorded three "stratigraphic zones" (SZ-1, SZ-2, and SZ­

3), (measurements converted into metric). SZ-I began at the ground surface and

reached a depth from 7.62 to 15.24 em. A late prehistoric occupation was

located in SZ-I, including a fire hearth. SZ-II ranged from a depth of 22.8 to 50.8

em below the ground surface and contained the Paleoindian fluted point

technology associated the lower fire hearth (Reanier 1996). SZ-1I1 was culturally

sterile gravel and bedrock.

Five radiocarbon samples are purported to define the age of each of the

stratigraphic zone. The fire hearth in SZ-I was near the surface and revealed a

date of 650±1 00. Samples from SZ-II returned dates of 5700±190, 6090±430,

8450±.130 and 8810±.60AMS (Reanier 1996, Hamilton and Goebel 1999:Appendix).

185

A fourth sample dated to 11 ,470.±:500AMS and was originally believed to be

associated the lower hearth, Feature 9. However, laboratory notes maintain it

came from the gravel of 8Z-111 (Reanier 1994, 1996). The inconsistency has

raised controversy with respect to this early date. At the earliest, a date of

approximately 10,500 rcybp is consistent with the 10,490.±:70AMS radiocarbon

determination from the Bedwell locality. Bedwell's association with the Putu

locality remains uncertain.

Table 7.19: Putu Locality (Hamilton et a11999, Reanier 1996)Stratigraphy Description RCYBP -cm

...?;9.D.~ ! §..~..~?g~:~.~.!?.~~.!f~g~! t!.~..~!!.~ ??9..:!:1..9..9. ? .Zone II Hearth, fluted points 5700.±:190, 6090.±:430, 5-40

.........................................................................................................._ .- .- ~4.?.9..:!:.1}.9.! ~.~..1..9;;!;;?..9.~~.~ .Zone III Bedrock & gravel 11,470+500AMS 20-40

186

Name: Slate Creek Site (Low) Potential for future information exists.

Number: HEA-00129

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NON E

Repository: University of Fairbanks

Land Ownership: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: unknown

Complex: Denali (Powers and Hoffecker 1989)

Environment: "Maxwell locates the site about 750m to the ENE of

Hoffecker's map location... on the northwestern side of Slate Creek, approx.

850m WSW of the Parks Highway crossing, approx. 16.3km NNW of Healy"

(AHRS 1997).

History: The site was discovered in the late 1970's and early 1980's

during the Early Man surveys sponsored by the National Park Service and

National Geographic Society (Hoffecker et al 1985).

Significance: "This site possesses at least two components, one of

which may be mid-Holocene or earlier in age" (AH RS 1997).

(Powers and Hoffecker 1989:272) and likely contains similar Denali and possible

Nenana occupations in good context (AHRS 1997). Scientific potential for the

187

Slate Creek and Usibelli sites remain unknown, although, anticipation is high for

information significant to the Nenana and Denali technological debate.

Artifacts and Features: The collection consisted of an "isolated

microblade find". The stratigraphy is similar to other Nenana and Denali sites

nearby (Powers and Hoffecker 1989).

188

Name: Spein Mountain (High)

Number: BTH-00062, BTH-63, BTH-64, and BTH-65

Region: Southwest

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: Washington State University

Land Owner: US Fish and Wildlife Service

Dates: 10,050.:t90AMS

Complex: Mesa (Ackerman 2001, Bever 2001a)

Environment: The site is 60 kilometers east of Bethel, surrounded mostly

by marsh and tundra on a ridgeline 1000 to 1250 feet above sea level, along the

Kisaralik River, a southern tributary of the Kuskokwim River. During the time of

occupation, the local environment dominated by Poacea (grass) which comprised

86.8% of pollen sample recovered from a pit feature (Ackerman 1996c:456-60).

History: The site was located in 1979 by Robert Ackerman, James

Gallison, and Lance Rennie. Ackerman returned to the site in 1992 and

excavated forty-one, one meter units (Ackerman 2001).

Significance: Spein Mountain is the only known Mesa complex site

outside of the Brooks Range. In addition to being contemporaneous with the

Mesa type site, Spein Mountain is more or less contemporaneous with many of

the Denali complex sites including the nearby Nukluk Mountain site (Ackerman

1996c:458-60, Ackerman 2001). Therefore, it may provide valuable information

189

about the interactions of two Early Holocene technologies in Southwestern

Alaska, in addition to providing evidence related to the expansion of Mesa

technology out of the Brooks Range.

Artifacts and Features: Of the 4,299 artifacts recovered, 190 were tools,

including lanceolate, pentagonal, and leaf-shaped projectile points. Other lithics

included ovate and preform bifaces, flake gravers, knives, scrapers, abraders, a

single notched flake spall, choppers, hammerstones, and waste flakes

(paraphrasing Ackerman 1996c:457-458).

"Aside from flakes... the most common tool type was a lanceolate to ovate

projectile point with sides tapering slightly to a straight to slightly rounded base.

Complete and nearly complete projectile points... were recovered from six

squares and were fairly dispersed throughout the excavated area. Several had a

small portion of the tip missing ... as a result of use" (Ackerman 2001 :86).

There was also a pit feature lined along its edges and filled in the bottom

with lithic waste flakes, burnt bone and much pollen and organic material

(Ackerman 1996c:457). "The pit was an oval-shaped (85x130 cm) depression

with a floor 43-45 cm below the ground surface" (Ackerman 2001 :91). "Fine

pieces of charcoal and calcine bone" found in a filtered sample indicate its use as

a fire hearth which dated 10,050.:t.90AMS rcybp (Ackerman 2001 :91).

Integrity: The ridge was covered by 15 to 25 cm of loess on top of

shattered basalt deposits. Stratigraphy was present with "two or three" soil

190

horizons. However, there has been a continuous downhill creep of soil and

freeze-thaw disturbance of the stratigraphic integrity (Ackerman 1996c:456-57).

Description: Four localities (BTH- 62, 63, 64 and 65) were documented

in the foothills of Spein Mountain. "Areas 062 and 065... did not have the volume

of lithic debris that we encountered at 063" (Ackerman 2001 :85). Only a few

items were collected from exposed areas on the surface of the four localities.

Excavations were only conducted at area 63, although bifacial fragments from

projectile points from the surface of 64 matched those recovered in Area 63

(Ackerman 2001 :85).

The stratigraphic column begins at the surface with a vegetation mat 3 to

6 em in depth covering a layer of "dark brown sandy, slit loam" 15-20 em thick

(Ackerman 2001 :84). Below this, the basal layer consisted of shattered regolith.

The artifacts were mixed but tended to cluster in the upper regions of the sandy

silt loam with some found in the top vegetation mat (Ackerman 2001 :84, See also

Ackerman 1996c:456-57).

Ackerman (2001 :85 Fig 3) subdivided Area 63 in three zones, and

considered all three contemporaneous. Zone A was the most extensive

excavation area with 73 meters2 in the southeastern portion of the site. This was

the same area surface collected in 1979. Zone B was randomly sampled, with

seven meters2 excavated. In Zone C, the western portion, five units were

excavated in both the vegetated and deflated areas (Ackerman 2001).

191

Name: Swan Point (High)

Number: XBD-00156

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

land Ownership: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: CZ 4-11,660 .:t 70, CZ 3-10,230.:t80, CZ 2 7400.:t80, CZ 1B

1750.:t80

Complex: Denali, Nenana, Pre-Nenana?

Environment: The paleo-environment described by Holmes (2000) was

open woodland containing dwarf-birch, willow shrub and tundra, between 11,800

and 10,300 rcybp, becoming forested with spruce and alder between 9000 and

9500 rcybp.

History: Richard VanderHoek and Tom Dilley discovered Swan Point in

1991 on top a bench above Shaw Creek several kilometers northeast of Broken

Mammoth. The site earned its name from the Trumpeter Swans heard from the

overlook (VanderHoek 2002 personal communication).

Significance: S\A/an Point is an important interior site because it

establishes the earliest use of wedge-shaped core and blade technology typically

associated with the Denali complex in Alaska (Hamilton and Goebel 1999,

Holmes 2000, 2003) although the tools at Swan Point are more similar to Dyuktai

192

than Denali. Swan Point is also one of few sites in Alaska suggesting that

humans and mammoth may have coexisted (Holmes 2000) and the two earliest

occupations may have been contemporaneous with the earliest deposits at the

Broken Mammoth site (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Holmes et aI1996).

Integrity: Swan Point was stratified beneath aeolian loess deposition

approximately one meter deep, half that found at Broken Mammoth. The loess

covered a foundation of irregular solid bedrock and provided some degree of

preservation (Holmes et al 1996, VanderHoek 2002 personal communication).

However, the overall preservation of fauna was not as great as that at Broken

Mammoth due to the lesser amount of loess accumulation (Holmes et al 1996,

Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

Artifacts and Features: Artifacts from the historic period included tin

cans, cartridges and a knife fragment. Prehistoric artifacts from Middle to Late

Holocene occupations included ground stone fragments, scrapers, microblades

and microb!ade cores (tabu!ar and subconica!), lanceolate projectile points, and a

flake spur graver. The lanceolate projectile points were characterized as having

converging bases with heavy grinding along some of the edges. Faunal

evidence from the Middle Holocene included ~J1oose remains (Holmes et a!

1996).

Artifacts from Cultural Zone 3 (Late Pleistocene/Early Holocene), included

lanceolate projectile points (convex and straight bases), triangular projectile

193

points, points reworked into spur gravers, choppers and hammer stones. The

"most distinct hearth features observed" (Holmes et al 1996) occurred in these

occupations described as "discontinuous hearth like charcoal smears at a depth

of 55 cm" (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

Cultural Zone 4 (Terminal Pleistocene) contained; ivory tools worked from

mammoth tusk fragments, microblades, microblade cores, microblade core

preparation flakes (ski spalls), blades, dihedral burins, red ochre, choppers, and

hammerstones. Faunal evidence included goose and large cervid faunal

remains in association with burnt Populus (Holmes et ai 1996).

Description: The geologic stratigraphy is one meter thick with

intermittent paleosols. Approximately 90 cm below surface is "pebbly" colluvium

capped by the 83 horizon 30 to 82 cm below surface with wind blown loess. The

82 horizon is approximately 8 to 35 cm below surface. The modern forested soil

at the surface began to develop 5000 rcybp and ranges from approximately 5 to

10 em in depth (Holmes et al 1996 Fig 6-8, Hamilton and Goebel 1999 Fig 4).

Table 7.20: Swan Point (Hamilton and Goebel 1999)Description - depth in cm

....f9.r.~~.!~9 ;s.9!.I...~.~!.: ?.9.Q.Q...r.~Y~E .9.:::.1..9. .82 & 83 Horizons 8-35..................................._ .

...::.p..~.~.~!.Y. ..g9.!.!.~.Y.!.~.~.~:. 3;0;-..8 ;2;.; 1Sand 90-100

The Cultural Zones (CZ) were labeled 1A, 18,2,3 and 4. CZ-1A was an

historic occupation. CZ-18 dated to between 1220.±70 and 1750.±80 and

194

occurred approximately 8 to 15 cm below surface. CZ-2 dates to 7400±.80 by a

single radiocarbon sample recovered from approximately 33 cm below surface.

CZ-3 contained one sample recovered from 50-55 cm below surface and dated

to 10,230±.80AMS rcybp. Three samples from one of the earliest occupations at the

site (CZ-4a), obtained from a depth of 80 cm below surface produced dates of

11,660±.70AMS, 11 ,660±.60AMS and a fragment of mammoth tusk that was

dated to 12,060±.60AMS rcybp (Hamilton and Goebel 1999, Holmes et a11996:Fig

6-8). A horizontally separate cluster (CZ-4b) contained the majority of

microblades and yielded four impressive dates averaged to 12,160±.65, which

broke the long held 12,000 rcybp barrier in Alaska (Holmes and Class 2003).

Table 7.21: Swan Point6

CZ RCYBP Complex - em

..J.A f.j.i.~.!~Ei~ _ ~.~.~gP.~§l.~_ .9..::.~ .is i220+70, i570+70, i670+60, i750+80 Athabascan 8--15.................._ _ .- - .2 7400 +80 Late Denali 33........................................""" " " , " .3 10,230+80 Denali 50-55.............................................- _ _ _ - .

.. ~.~ 1J.!.?§.9.:!:?9..!.JJ..!.§?..9.;t§.9..LJ..?.!.9..§9.;t§.9...(!.l:!.~.~) N.~.~.~.r:t.§l ~9. .4b 12,040+40,12,060+70,12,110+50,12,360+60 Pre-Nenana 80

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

Name: Tuluaq Hill (High)

Region: Brooks Range

Number: DEl-00360

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: National Park Service - WEAR

land Owner: National Park Service - WEAR

Basal Dates: 11200.:!:40, 11180.:!:80, 1111 0.:!:80, 7950.:!:40 rcybp (Rasic 2002)

Tradition: Paleoindian

Environment: Tuluaq Hill is located in Noatak National Park and Preserve

of the Western Brooks Range (Delong Mountains). The site is located on a hill

rising 259 meters above Wrench Creek, a tributary of the Kelly River (Rasic

2000). The surrounding region is difficult terrain including tussock (cotton grass)

and tundra with permafrost below the surface. There is generally very little

sediment deposition on top of the bedrock foundation.

Betll'Jeen 13,500 and 11,800 rcybp vegetation was rapidly reclaiming

areas recently deglaciation in the Brooks Range (Hamilton 1982:700). A soil

sample taken from an organic paleosol in a nearby cut bank at Tuluaq Hill

indicated the environment vias capable of supporting animal and plant species at

approximately 13,000 rcybp (Rasic 2000:22).

History: The site was discovered in 1998 during archaeological survey

along Wrench Creek, Noatak National Park. Upon its discovery, the crew

200

excavated a single test pit and conducted extensive surface collections with

further excavations continuing the following summer. To date, 30% m2 have

been excavated (Rasic 2000). Bob Gal and Jeff Rasic with the National Park

Service are currently defining this group of early Alaskans utilized herds of

caribou that continue to migrate in the region (Rasic 2000, 2002).

Significance: The region has significance to the Early Americans Theme

Study because of its location near the Pleistocene Bering Land Bridge. Tuluaq

Hill, in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene periods, was as a hunting

overlook and lithic retooling area with repeated visits over a limited amount of

time by two different technological groups separated by at least 3000 rcybp. The

oldest of the identifiable technology includes Paleoindian style projectile points;

however, a more specific classification is pending further research. The site is

significant to prehistory because it represents economic activities and resource

utilization by some of the earliest Alaskans (Rasic 2000, 2002).

Integrity: The stratigraphy atop Tu!uaq Hill was shallow, making

stratigraphic interpretation difficult; however, four stratigraphic units were

described (Rasic 2000:35). The site was used repeatedly during two relatively

constrained periods \A/ith litt!e admixture bet\AJeen different lithic components

making horizontal separation possible and compensating for the lack of easily

definable stratigraphy (Rasic 2000).

201

Artifacts and Features: Projectile points associated with the Paleoindian

tradition and similar to those found at Tuluaq dated between 9,500 and 10,000

rcybp at the Irwin Sluiceway and NR-5 sites (Rasic 2000:59). At Tuluaq fifty-five

of "[t]he large lanceolate-shaped points exhibit thick biconvex cross sections,

rounded bases, edge-ground proximal margins, and robust collateral pressure

finishing" (Rasic and Gal 2000:66). Additional artifacts included a fluted point,

"thick elongate unifacial tools (n=5), unifacial endscrapers (n=3), gravers, and a

variety of retouched or utilized flakes" (Rasic and Gal 2000:66).

Charcoal identified as poplar or willow obtained from discrete oxidized

clusters and found in association with chipped waste flakes produced "AMS

dates of 7950±40, 11,180±80, and 11 ,200±40 yr BP" (Rasic and Gal 2000:76).

An additional date of 11,11 0±80 rcybp was of uncertain association with the

artifacts (Rasic and Gal 2000:76). The radiocarbon dates are described in detail

from five of clusters defined as Features A, B, C, D, and E.

Feature A was as a stone lined pit approximately 110 cm in diameter and

35 cm deep, including the stone lining. It is located along the north side of the hill

and below the hill's crest. Rasic (2000) suggested it was a meat cache, based

on ethnographic data from similar features. Jl\ckerman (2001 :91) described a

similar feature containing burnt bone and evidence of fire at the Spein Mountain

site. Feature B contained the sample of uncertain association. Feature C was a

"bowl shaped oxidized patch of sediment" (Rasic 2000:55) containing fire

202

cracked waste flakes and dated from willow or poplar wood (7950±40 rcybp)

found in the bowl's matrix. Feature 0 (15 cm and was 4cm deep) contained

obvious clumps of charcoal and waste flakes some of which exhibited heat

fractures. The charcoal returned a date of 11 ,200±40AMS (Rasic 2000:57).

Feature 0 was not completely excavated leaving a portion of it intact. Feature E

was characterized as a flake pit 37 cm deep possibly formed at the based of a

natural slope but could be due to human activity (Rasic 2000).

Description: The Tuluaq Hill site is located in close proximity to an

outcrop of quality lithic chert resources DEL-236 (Rasic 2000). The association

of flake artifacts with the three >11,000 rcybp determinations is legitimate

however the association with Paleoindian projectile points is not certain. Based

on typology, Rasic (2001 :62-62) estimates the oblanceolate projectile points date

to approximately 10,000 rcybp.

203

Name: Ugashik Narrows (Med)

Number: UGA-00001

Region: Alaska Peninsula

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Oregon Museum of Anthropology

Land Ownership: US Gov/Native Claim

Basal Dates: 8995±295

Complex: Denali - Anangula?

Environment: The site was located 1.5 km south of the Pilot Point

cannery on Ugashik Bay near a line of alder and willow shrub approximately 200

meters long on the eastern shore of the narrows where two Ugashik lakes nearly

join. Approximately 150 meters of the site is along a grass-covered bluff,

extending past the bluff to the east (Henn 1978).

History: Winfield Henn (1978) conducted survey in the Ugashik Narrows

region beginning in 1974 and 1975, which led to tW'defining the Narrows phase.

Henn (1978) located 30 prehistoric sites along the Ugashik River drainage and

shoreline of Ugashik Bay.

Significance: Ugashik Narrows was the only site found in the area with

an early Holocene component. The artifacts are similar to the classic Denali

complex, making Ugashik Narrows significant based on the early migration of

peoples into the Alaska Peninsula from the Interior. The earliest technology

204

contains the largest blades known from Denali sites and transverse burins typical

of Anangula in the Aleutians. The assemblage contains large blades, similar to

those from Anangula although including bifaces, possibly representing a

technologic transition as early Alaskans began to migrate into the Aleutian chain.

SUbsequent use of the area left an archaeological record spanning the last 9000

years (Henn 1978, AHRS 1997).

Integrity: This was the most extensive site found in the Ugashik Lake

region with "58 house-like" depressions. Excavations included a single

stratigraphic trench and several test units. Thirty-six meters2 were excavated

(Dumond 1975) leaving much of the large site intact (Henn 1978).

Artifacts and Features: The artifacts from the Ugashik Narrows Phase

were date to the early Holocene. The artifact assemblage from Component F

included the diagnostic transverse burins on flakes and the wedge shaped core

and blade technology typically associated with the Denali complex as described

by Don Dumond (1975:3). !t included 'wedge-shaped microblade cores (8),

microcore rejuvenation flakes (3), microblades (-600), blades (6), core bifaces

(16), blade cores (11), utilized flakes (numerous), end-scraper (1), transverse

fragments (numerous), wedge-shaped blade cores (2), flake unifaces (2), small

point fragments (2), and large "haphazard" cores (2)' (Dumond 1975:3).

205

"The most frequent micro core in the collection is the wedge-shaped

variety... These were most commonly fashioned by bifacially flaking a thick flake

to form a keel. Rejuvenation of the core for further removal of microblades...

This core variety produced microblades which themselves were never modified

beyond edge retouch and snapping" (Henn 1978).

Description: A trench was excavated across the length of the site,

revealing extensive occupations and natural geomorphic processes. Five

components (A-F) were described with two components (0 and C) associated

with the same technological phase (Dumond 1975, Henn 1978).

The stratification began with surface vegetation, then a layer of sod - 10

cm thick, next was Stratum I - a dark brown layer of sand and midden. Stratum I

was variable in its distribution throughout the site, absent in some areas but as

thick as 60 cm in others. Then, there was a level of brown-green sand, originally

misidentified as Ash I. This was followed by Stratum II, a "reddish-brown soil"

from 15 to 35 em in thickness separated at its base by a thin black organic

horizon believed to be the main occupation surface. Below the organic horizon,

the earliest assemblage was found in Stratum III, described as compact light

brown soil, much !ike loess. The upper levels of this contained artifacts from the

Hill Top Phase (lila) and Stratum Illb contained the Narrows Phase artifacts.

Stratum III was deposited on top of glacial outwash (Henn 1978).

206

Table 1.23: Ugashik Narrows (Dumond 1915. Henn 1978),Stratum Camp Phase RCYBP -em thickSurface F Historic 10'..i ·..'"....,"',.."..,,', .. ,,' "..........,'E:""..,"",.. ""R'i'ver..'.."'''''"...... '''3'35+EiC)''''''"........,..·....,....,.."·..""..,,·,,·,',,·..·,, ..,,· .. ,,'',,·......""....""...", ..."".. ·"o~Eio'''''·,,· ..'' .. ''''' '' ..·..·

... 'Ii' ".."......."......".....·..···..6=6"..".... "'Lakes'''''''''''''''''' ·"930~75~· ..1·b'5·5±66;..·1·5·3·5£80·;..1·66·5£86;··..··....·....f5~35 ..·..·.. ··..·· ·.. ··..,..1885+90,2110+95

:::nI§.::::::::::::::::::::::::::: '::::::::::::::$.::::::::::::: ":BHCf.9:P.:::::::::::::: :::~:§~9.~§9.;:::~:$.:t§.~§9.;:::~:~?§.f~Q;:::~:4:$.:QI?§.::::::::: 3Ft9.i:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.!lIb A Narrows 76752:.260,84252:.115,89952:.295 0-1O?

207

Name: Usibelli Site (Med) (Potential to Provide Further Data)

Number: HEA- 00128

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

land Ownership: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: N/A

Complex: Nenana, Denali (Hoffecker 1980:16).

Environment: The site is "approximately 2.35km east of [the] Nenana

River, approx. 3km north of the confluence of Lignite Creek, approx. 8.4km north

of Healy. Maxwell locates the site about 750m to the ENE of Hoffecker's map

location ... on the northwestern side of Slate Creek, approx. 850m WSW of the

Parks Highway crossing, approx. 16.3km NNW of Healy" (AHRS 1997

abbreviations original).

History: The site was discovered during the Early Man project (Hoffecker

et al (eds) 1985).

Significance: "This site may contain as many as three components, the

lowest of which seems likely to be of terminal Pleistocene age (AHRS 1997).

Such documentation suggests this site could contain information relevant to the

ongoing theoretical debate regarding Nenana and Denali technological

208

populations (Powers and Hoffecker 1989). As a result, it is eligible for

nomination to the NR based on the potential for future research.

Integrity: The site appeared stratified, much like other confirmed Nenana

Complex sites in the region (Powers and Hoffecker 1989). Three cultural

components found with the basal component produced a characteristic Chindadn

projectile technologically associated with the Nenana Complex (Hoffecker

1980:16).

Artifacts and Features: "The Usibelli site may contain as many as three

components, the lowest of which seems likely to be of terminal Pleistocene age.

A small triangular point recovered from this level bears a strong typological

resemblance to the small bifacial point and point fragments on Component I at

Dry Creek" (Hoffecker 1980:16). However, a 14C sample from 23-32cm deep

produced a date of 31952:295 (GX-13013) (AHRS 1997).

Description: Artifacts recovered from what is believed to be three

components. The upper most region containing artifacts was at the base of the

organic topsoil. Two deeper components were found between 20 and 40 cm in

depth buried in silt. Basal gravel is reported from a depth of approximately 40 cm

(Hoffecker 1980:15 Figure 3). To date, Hoffecker has only tested the site and

excavations have not been undertaken.

209

Table 7.24: Usibeiii Site Hoffecker 1980: ada ted from Fi 3 a e 15Strati ra h Com onents Com lex -de th in em

...Q.r..g.?n..i~ ...1..!.1 ? ? .Silt II ? 20................................., " ..Silt I Nenana? 30r..s·as·ai·..G·rav·ei.. ··················..·..·rsterife···· 1" ·····..·..···· · ······· ··················1 40············· · · ····· ··· ··1

210

Name: Walker Road (High)

Number: HEA-00130

Region: Interior

NHR Designation: NONE

Repository: University of Alaska, Fairbanks

Land Ownership: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: 11 ,300:t120AMS

Complex: Nenana, Denali? (unknown)

Environment: The Walker Road site is located near Healy, AK in the

foothills north of the Alaska Range along an overlook of the Cindy-James Creek

at it's confluence with the Nenana River in Interior Alaska (Goebel et al 1996).

History: Walker Road, discovered in 1980 by Hoffecker and Wilson, was

first excavated by Powers and Hoffecker in 1984. Further excavations took place

between 1985 and 1990 resulting in nearly 200 excavated square meters

(Goebel et al 1991, Goebel et al 1996).

Significance: Walker Road is one of four sites that have come to define

the Nenana complex characterized by the diagnostic teardrop shaped Chindadn

projectile point. The four sites (\Na!ker Road, Dry Creek, Ow! Ridge and Moose

Creek) are often described as the most likely antecedent to Clovis groups further

to the south which emerged during the terminal Pleistocene (Goebel et al1991).

211

Obsidian artifacts, traced to Batza Tena and Wrangle Mountains, were

found in the earliest occupations at Walker Road and Broken Mammoth and

couid provide further information regarding Pleistocene lithic acquisition and wide

spread economic activities (Hamilton and Goebel 1999:184 citing personal

communication with John Cook).

Integrity: Much of the original integrity of the earliest occupations at

Walker Road remain in place and were subjected to only slight freeze thaw

activity (Goebel et al 1996). Paleocomplex I dated by a single sample to

8720±.250 was described from loess Layer 4 at a depth of approximately 50 cm

below surface. Artifacts from this occupation were non-diagnostic (Powers and

Hoffecker 1989:269 Fig. 4). Paleocomplex II was found at a depth of

approximately 80cm below the surface and contained the Nenana complex

artifacts associated with four 14C dates (11,01 0±.23°,11,170±.180, 11 ,300±120,

11 ,820±200) (Goebel et al 1996).

Artifacts and Features: Activity Area 1 (AA-1), one of the larger event

areas, contained unidentifiable burnt bone, anvil stones, red ocher. The

collection of lithic tools included scrapers (end & side), gravers, cobbles,

rewor!<.ed flakes and blades; also over 1000 fragments of lithic debitage were

recovered. Hearth Feature I was associated with this activity area (Goebel et al

1996).

212

AA-2 contained a "bowl shaped hearth" (Feature II) from which wood,

traces of red ocher and burnt bone were present. Lithics from AA-2 include anvil

stone, cobbles, many end scrapers, side scrapers, wedges, planes and

Chindadn projectile points. The lithic debitage numbered over 2000 items. The

majority of activities in this component involved fine retooling of end scrapers

(Goebel et al 1996). AA-2 levels contained no evidence of microblade use

(Goebel et al 1991).

AA-3 was a single tool-manufacturing event; several of the tools made

here were identified in other Activity Areas. The brown chert raw material was

obtained locally (Goebel et al 1996). AA-4 was also a small occupation

associated with tool maintence/manufacturing. The artifacts recovered included

hammerstones, pressure flakes, cores and fragments of cores, reworked flakes,

a "retoucher", debitage, end and side scrapers (Goebel et al1996). In total, there

were approximately 15 tools and associated debitage believed to be left from the

manufacture of a single Chindadn projectile (Goebel et al 1996).

Description: The geologic stratigraphy included two Paleosols (I and II)

(Goebel et al 1991) and the present topsoil. Six layers of wind blown loess

episodes separated these and sealed the occupations. T\'/O cultural zones 'vvere

identified the lower Component I. Component II has been dated to the early

Holocene at 8720.:!:250 and is associated with Denali technology (Goebel et al

1991, Goebel et al 1996).

213

Component I was associated with the Nenana complex and dated to the

late Pleistocene and early Holocene periods. It included two areas of lithic debris

and unidentifiable burnt bone in association with hearths, areas of lithic

refinement, retooling, repair and discarding (Goebel et al 1996). The earliest

date from hearth Feature 1 in "basalloess" is considered problematic by the

investigator (11 ,820:t200*). Two additional dates from hearth Feature I returned

dates of 11,01 0:t120AMS and 11, 170:t180AMs. Samples from hearth Feature II

resulted in a date of 11 ,300:t120AMS (Goebel et al 1996) placing the earliest

Nenana occupation for Walker Road between 11,000-11,300 rcybp. Component

II was not as straightforward and included the sporadic samples 3816:t70AMs,

4414:t95 and 8720:t250AMS (Goebel et al 1991, Goebel et al 1996).

Lithic raw material from Component I originated from a local source,

cobbles from the nearby Nenana River. Obsidian was present (0.4%), and was

the only non-local lithic resource at the site (Goebel et al 1996). This pattern is

consistent with evidence from Broken Mammoth (Yesner 1996) suggesting that

early occupants used local materials first, before gaining local knowledge of more

efficient lithic resources in the region (Hamilton and Goebel 1999).

214

Name: Whitmore Ridge (Med)

Number: XMH-00072

NHR Designation: NHS -Tangle Lakes Archaeological District

Region: Interior

Land Owner: State of Alaska

Basal Dates: 10,360:!:60, 1o,270:!:70, 9830:!:60, 9600:!:140, 9890:!:70, 5480:!:300,

5080:!:130, 3800:!:180* (West, Robinson and West 1996)

Complex: Denali (West, Robinson and West 1996)

Environment: "This site is located on the crest of a north-south trending

esker ridge" (AHRS 1997) "...truncated just to the south by Rock Creek. It is on

the face of this truncation that the fossil beaver dam is exposed. The site lies

about 600 m west of Butcher's Pond" (West, Robinson and West 1996:386).

Significance: Whitmore Ridge was one of Fred West's (1967,1975)

original type-sites for the Denali complex. It is already a contributing site in the

Tangle Lakes Archaeological District. It is "one of the most important and

productive sites within the Tangle Lakes Archaeological District" (AHRS 1997).

Integrity: The artifacts at Whitmore ridge were found in situ, buried

shallowly in early Holocene deposits. Although wind erosion and deflation was

reported along the ridge, three site locales were defined within an area of

approximately 40 meters (West, Robinson and West 1996).

215

Artifacts and Features: "Excavations conducted by West yielded wedge­

shaped cores, conical cores, knives, projectile points, bifaces, scrapers, and

burins" (AHRS 1997). Locus 1 was the least extensive artifact cluster, consisting

of wedge shaped microblade cores and associated byproducts. West et al

(1996:386) describes "fine-grained lustrous chert" as the material type in Locus

1. Locus 2 was located 15 meters south of Locus 1 and 8 meters north of Locus

3. Conoidal blade core, biface fragments and a burin. "The conoidal cores are

predominately of a black marine chert with a few specimens of red sardo The

technology is quite unlike that seen in Denali" (West, Robinson and West

1996:386).

Locus 3 was a dense area of debris and waste flakes, "mostly large flakes

indicative of bifacial thinning". The material type was mostly comprised of

argillite (West, Robinson and West 1996:386).

Description: Three clusters of artifacts were scattered "continuously over

40 meters" (West et aI1996). West et al (1996) describe the artifacts in situ

within the buried soil (Lower Holocene Podzol). "On this high exposed ridge the

soil column is quite shallow and in a few places, the double soil is either absent

or cannot be definitively identified" (West, Robinson and West 1996:386).

216