THE WISCONSIN ARCHEOLOGIST

THE W

ISCO

NSIN

AR

CH

EOLO

GIST

Volum

e 95, Num

ber 2 July–Decem

ber 2014

Volume 95, Number 2July–December 2014

THE WISCONSINARCHEOLOGIST

ISSN 0043-6364

ContentsEditors’ Corner

Constance M. Arzigian, Katherine P. Stevenson, and Vicki L. Twinde-Javner ................................................................................................ 3

Archaeology, Zooarchaeology, and Malacology: A Festschrift for James L. ThelerGuest Editor, Matthew G. Hill

A Festschrift for James L. Theler: An Introduction Matthew G. Hill .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4

Mentoring Jim: David A. Baerreis from an Oklahoma PerspectiveDon G. Wyckoff ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 18

Lunch with JTRobert F. (Ernie) Boszhardt .............................................................................................................................................................................. 31

Identity, Ideology, and the Effi gy Mound–Oneota TransformationWilliam Green ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 44

Dating the Nebraska Variant of the Central Plains Tradition Joseph A. Tiffany and Stephen C. Lensink ....................................................................................................................................................... 73

The Swennes Site: A Winter Oneota Occupation in La Crosse, Wisconsin Constance Arzigian ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 125

Upper Valley Dalton at the Sucices Site in Northwest WisconsonJohn M. Lambert ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 152

Changing Narratives at Perrot’s Post near Trempealeau, WisconsinJeremy L. Nienow............................................................................................................................................................................................ 158

The Theler Approach to Faunal Analysis, and Its Application to Oneota ResearchKatherine P. Stevenson ................................................................................................................................................................................... 166

Review of Bison Remains at Wisconsin Oneota SitesRobert F. Sasso ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 173

Bison Scapulae from Hoxie Farm, Illinois: Perspectives on Upper Mississippian Subsistence and Regional InteractionTerrance J. Martin .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 185

A Sandhill Crane Eggshell Fragment from Brogley Rockshelter, Grant County, WisconsinJanet M. Speth and Thomas Erdman .............................................................................................................................................................. 197

The Nye Site, Wisconsin: The Search for Early Man in the Upper Midwest, Investigative Incursions, and PaleozoologyMatthew G. Hill, Marlin F. Hawley, Christopher C. Widga, Laura A. Halverson Monahan, and Alan D. Wanamaker, Jr. ...................... 200

Alluvial Stratigraphy in an Unnamed Western Tributary, Ash Hollow State Park, NebraskaDavid W. May, David J. Rapson, and Matthew G. Hill ................................................................................................................................ 239

Ecology and Environmental Degradation of Two Little Ice Age Earthlodge Villages in North Dakota: The Micromammal EvidenceHolmes A. Semken, Jr., and Carl R. Falk ....................................................................................................................................................... 249

Holocene Range Extension of Pronghorn into the Southern Prairie PeninsulaR. Bruce McMillan ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 269

Freshwater Mussels from the Liverpool Landing Site, Illinois: Paleoenvironmental Modeling, Community Dynamics, and Novel Ideas for Home Decor Robert E. Warren ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 284

CommentJean Nicolet (Again): Comment on Ronald J. Mason’s “Where Nicolet and Winnebagoes First Met”

Nancy Oestreich Lurie and Patrick J. Jung .................................................................................................................................................... 303

THE WISCONSIN ARCHEOLOGISTVolume 95, Number 2 July–December 2014

Copyright © 2014 by the Wisconsin Archeological Society. All rights reserved.Published by the Wisconsin Archeological Society, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Archaeology, Zooarchaeology, and Malacology:A Festschrift for James L. Theler

Guest EditorMatthew G. Hill

The Wisconsin Archeologist, 2014, 95(2):73–124

Abstract

We propose a new chronology for the Nebraska variant of the Central Plains tradition. Recalibration and analysis of radiocarbon dates coupled with cross-dating of Nebraska variant materials from well-understood sequences else-where—the Oneota tradition, the Mill Creek culture/Initial Middle Missouri variant, Arkansas Valley Caddoan, and Cahokia—lead to a proposed revision of the Nebraska vari-ant to a relatively short occupation span from A.D. 1200 to 1350.

Background

Central Plains tradition sites have been recog-nized for more than 130 years (Gilder 1907; Proud-fi t 1881). The Nebraska variant of the Central Plains tradition spans an approximate 200-year period and refers to late prehistoric Plains Village farmsteads and hamlets occurring in a 450-km-long area paralleling the Missouri River and its tributaries from Kansas City, Missouri, to Sioux City, Iowa (Billeck 1993:1–2; Blakeslee and Caldwell 1979:21; Krause 1969) (Fig-ure 1); the extension of the variant to Kansas City from the accepted spatial defi nition encompasses the Steed-Kisker phase and the Lower Platte Valley local-ity in Missouri. We include Steed-Kisker because, as we argue later, there are no clear temporal, spatial, or formal criteria to separate the Steed-Kisker phase from the Nebraska phase as presently construed (Greatorex 1997; O’Brien and Wood 1998:274–275). Instead, there appears to be a continuum of gradually changing traits along the north–south extent of the Nebraska variant as we have defi ned this spatial unit.

The history of regional research and taxonom-ic machinations has been extensively covered by

Blakeslee and Caldwell (1979), Gradwohl (1969), and Wedel and Krause (2001). Termed the Nebraska phase in the literature (Blakeslee and Caldwell 1979) and in present use, we recognize taxonomic revisions based on Krause’s (1969) model which defi nes a Nebraska variant of the Central Plains tradition as a more appro-priate application of Willey and Phillips’s (1958) ter-minology, but we do not use Krause’s phases in his defi ned Nebraska variant that have not stood up to continued research in the Central Plains tradition since his work was published. We outline our viewpoint in the following summary but will expand our reasoning in two forthcoming publications on Glenwood locality sites.

Willey and Phillips (1958:22) defi ne a phase spa-tially as restricted to a locality or region and say that “local sequences, which are the very stuff of archae-ology, abound” (Willey and Phillips 1958:25). There are cultural chronologies on the Plains composed of regional phases, grouped in time periods such as the Arkansas Valley Caddoan sequence (Brown 1996:27). The major village cultures recognized in the Upper Midwest and Plains, however, are built on phases in local sequences that are part of larger temporal peri-ods, variants, or both, defi ned by horizon markers such as the Middle Missouri tradition or the Oneota tradition.

There are two reasons for rejecting the Nebraska phase taxon. First, the Nebraska phase clearly encom-passes a spatial area too large for a locality, and the spatial unit—variant or regional (spatial) variant—as Krause (1969) defi ned it, is a more appropriate taxon. Krause (1969:95) used Lehmer’s (1971:32) later pub-lished defi nition of a variant: “a unique and reason-ably uniform expression of a cultural tradition which has a greater order of magnitude than a phase, and which is distinguished from other variants of the same

Joseph A. Tiffany, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist of Iowa, University of Iowa, Iowa City; Stephen C. Lensink, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist of Iowa, University of Iowa, Iowa City

Joseph A. Tiffany and Stephen C. Lensink

Dating the Nebraska Variant of theCentral Plains Tradition

Figure 1. Stylized depiction of the Central Plains tradition, its constituent cultural components, and other phases.

precise data are collected and examined, redefi ned localities, new phases, or a new model beyond what we propose may occur.

The Nebraska variant is composed of a number of distinct site clusters or localities, some much bet-ter defi ned and studied than others, whose constitu-ent sites can be analyzed like the Glenwood locality. which has an accepted local site sequence. The study of the Nebraska variant should be that of comparing local sequences regionally from locality to locality, not collectively across localities by assuming that they are all the same thing (a Nebraska phase), as Blakeslee and Caldwell did in their study.

For example, the result of Blakeslee and Caldwell’s seriation (1979:Table 32) of the Nebraska variant sites they studied places two Kullbom sites (13ML11 and 13ML13) early in their sequence based on the high percentage of plain rims and the low percentage of collared rims. Ludwickson and Bozell (1994:Figure 14) report similar results. Anderson (1961) had these sites late in the Glenwood local sequence (the Kull-bom phase or currently subphase) for the same reason, lower collared rim percentages compared to McVey types, but also anchored on sound cross-dating with Oneota materials found in the Kullbom sites. One of us (Tiffany 2012), using the same seriation technique as Anderson, replicated his seriation, placing the Kullbom sites late based on the presence of Oneota pottery. Billeck (1993:264) also states that these sites

tradition by its cultural content, its age, and or its geo-graphic range.” Second, and more importantly, the component spatial units of the Central Plains tradition, such as the Nebraska phase, are all essentially contem-poraneous. Unlike the well-studied Arkansas Valley Caddoan, there are no regional sequences among the Central Plains tradition sites. There are ample radio-carbon data and analyses now available to verify this proposition, data that Blakeslee and Caldwell (1979) did not have when they established the Nebraska phase per Gradwohl’s (1969) or Brown’s (1966) defi ni-tion of that taxonomic unit.

Thus, the Nebraska phase as a taxon is replaced by the Nebraska variant. The Nebraska variant is one of several broadly contemporaneous, spatially segregat-ed clusters, or regions, of the Central Plains tradition now termed phases where variant is more appropri-ate (Krause 1969; Steinacher and Carlson 1998; Wedel 2001). Each variant, or region, is composed of locali-ties containing constituent phases. The phases consist of components or sites that refl ect neighborhoods and communities per Willey and Phillips (1958:49). Collec-tively, the Central Plains tradition represents groups of people loosely affi liated in a clan-band level of social organization. We continue the anthropological theme below because we believe that the archaeologi-cal taxa, per Willey and Phillips, should have socio-cultural meaning about which archaeologists agree and not constitute just empty jargon. Further, as more

74 Tiffany and LensinkDating the Nebraska Variant of the Central Plains Tradition

and Phillip’s (1958:49) defi nition of a phase as equiva-lent to a society—“a group of people acknowledging a single political authority, obedient to a single system of law, and to some degree organized to resist attack from other societies.” Rather, the data refl ect develop-mental sequences of neighborhoods and communities (components) of phases locally defi ned.

Thus, the Glenwood phase comprises several sites, or neighborhoods, of a community forming the Glenwood local sequence when studied chronologi-cally. Within the Glenwood locality there are three site clusters, one along the Pony Creek Valley, another along the Keg Creek Valley and its tributaries, and a third overlooking the Missouri Valley (Anderson 1961:4; Anderson and Zimmerman 1976:141–142). An authoritative summary of the Glenwood phase is available (Pepperl 2006), complementing other works on the Nebraska variant (Alex 2000; Bozell and Lud-wickson 1994; Gradwohl 1969; Pope et al. 2010).

The Nebraska variant’s cultural landscape con-sists primarily of dispersed, short-lived (ca. 10 years or less), single-component, unfortifi ed individual house sites (farmsteads) and small house site clusters (ham-lets or villages), termed a “mosaic” by some research-ers (Blakeslee 1999:36). These are associated with com-munal mortuary sites in some localities. The houses can be arranged in a linear fashion along second- and third-order tributaries (Blakeslee and Caldwell 1979; Brown 1967; Roper 2006:122–123; Sterns 1915; Wedel 1959, 1961; Wedel and Kivett 1956; Wood 1969a). The linearity observed in site distribution, however, is essentially a function of the landscape on which these sites are found. Where valleys are narrow, sites con-sisting of individual lodges forming a neighborhood or community are strung out along the valley; where valleys are wider or widen into larger river systems, there are clusters of sites (hamlets or villages). For example, in the Glenwood locality, the distribution of sites where the Pony Creek Valley opens onto the broader Missouri Valley system is termed a village (Perry 2006). This is an example of the phenomenon of landscape infl uencing lodge distribution.

Nebraska variant houses are located in four gen-eral landscape positions: within valleys in the fl ood-plain, on gently sloping valley side slopes, on older terraces, or on ridge tops. They are recognizable as surface depressions where plowing has not occurred or as artifact scatters in cultivated fi elds. Small group-ings of individual house sites and larger clusters may represent serial occupations, contemporary occupa-tions, or both. In this regard, compare observations by Anderson and Zimmerman (1976), Gradwohl (1969), and Wedel (1959:560). The hallmark of the Nebraska variant is the squarish, semisubterranean house or

are late. Anderson, Billeck, and Tiffany all examined developmental changes in a locality as the basis for comparison with other Nebraska variant localities. How the data are approached can greatly alter the product and interpretation of what the Nebraska vari-ant represents.

Here we use the Glenwood locality as an example of the application of phase, local sequence, and variant. There are 275-plus sites with a Nebraska variant com-ponent recorded in the Iowa Site File that extend over a 730-km2 area of the Loess Hills in Mills, Pottawato-mie, and Fremont Counties in western Iowa. This is a “fl oating” total, as are the Mills County totals to fol-low, since individual lodge sites, village sites, mortu-ary sites, and artifact scatters have been assigned site numbers (Peterson et al. 2010:36). The main cluster of Iowa Nebraska variant sites is in a 70-km2 area in Mills County, Iowa, where there are 223 reported Nebraska variant sites in the Glenwood locality. Except for the Medicine Creek locality, the Glenwood locality is the largest cluster of Central Plains tradition sites. Billeck (1993:10) has estimated that there are between 500 and 1000 lodge sites in Mills County. To repeat, the high site totals in Iowa refl ect the predominance in Iowa of giving a site number to each individual lodge rather than collectively to apparent lodge clusters, and researchers tabulating the sites differently (Pepperl 2006).

Originally, the Glenwood lodge site cluster was termed the Glenwood focus (“culture”), named after the City of Glenwood, Iowa (Keyes 1951) (Figure 1). Anderson’s (1961) pioneering study defi ned three phases in the Glenwood locality. He did not address why he did not defi ne a “Glenwood phase.” The com-mon practice on the Plains was to convert Midwestern Taxonomic Method foci into phases since the de facto defi nition of a focus on the Plains often involved space and time parameters. Anderson, however, grouped his three-phase local sequence into the then-accepted larger spatial unit, the Nebraska aspect (Anderson 1961:72; Billeck 1993:35). Later researchers have rede-fi ned Anderson’s phases as temporal subphases of the Nebraska phase (Billeck 1993; Brown 1967).

We now defi ne this Nebraska variant site clus-ter as the Glenwood phase of the Glenwood locality. Following Willey and Phillips (1958:49), a phase is represented by one or more components; the compo-nents collectively are conceived as neighborhoods or communities in the anthropological sense, manifested within a locality or region, whose temporal span is rel-atively brief and can be studied regionally by compari-son with other local sequences. There is no evidence in the Central Plains tradition to suggest a larger socio-political unit, e.g., the phase as a society per Willey

75Vol. 95, No. 2 The Wisconsin Archeologist

Figure 2. House plan, 13ML130 (after Hotopp 1978:Figure 32).

Figure 3. Excavation plan view, 13ML130.

lodge with an extended covered entryway. Typically, houses have a four-post central support system, a central hearth area, and interior and possibly exter-nal storage pits, with limited evidence for wattle and daub usage and probable sod covering (Figures 2, 3).

The Central Plains tradition farming peoples had a broad-spectrum subsistence system. There is ample evidence from numerous sites for cultivation of corn, beans, and squash with hunting of deer and elk as primary game, and limited bison use. Resource use varied. In the Glenwood locality, where the most comprehensive subsistence data are reported, Nebras-ka variant peoples collected and cultivated a range of starchy and weedy plants and tobacco in addi-tion to maize and squash (Adair 2010a). The fauna recovered suggest a localized, mixed, and diverse economy based primarily on the heavy utilization of deer and elk, birds, and fi sh with a lesser reliance on mollusks, crustaceans, reptiles, and small mammals (Theler 2010). The use of mollusks, crustaceans, rep-tiles, and small mammals suggests the possibility of periodic dietary stress. Regarding bison, Peterson et al. (2010:29) observed that “there is relatively little evidence of bison remains that speak to subsistence or manufacturing-related processing in midden and pit deposits at Nebraska phase earthlodge sites.”


Figure 4. Selection of shell-tempered rims and a restored vessel from the Kullbom village site (13ML10): a, b, e, Cor-rectionville Trailed Oneota rims; c, d, Majors Opposed Diagonal.

are predominant (Billeck 1993:56, 225; Blakeslee and Caldwell 1979). The varying frequencies of these rim types defi ne the Nebraska variant with regard to related complexes such as the Upper Republican and Smoky Hill variants.

Using Glenwood locality pottery to illustrate the Nebraska variant, there are mostly grit-tempered vessels but also low and varied frequencies of shell-tempered globular jars, a few bowls and seed jars, and rarely bottles (Figure 5). In Steed-Kisker sites, there is more shell- than grit-tempered pottery, but both Steed-Kisker and other Central Plains variant sites share in what has been termed a dual ceramic tradi-tion of grit- and shell-tempered ceramics (Greatorex 1997). Jars can have strap or loop handles and lugs, the latter of which can also be found on bowls. Handles and lugs may be in zoomorphic forms (Figures 6, 7); zoomorphic appliqués are rare (Figure 8) (Anderson 1961:Figure 25h; Laird 1985:38–39). In some cases, geo-metric trailed patterns are added to the globular ves-sel shoulder. These geometric patterns represent two different groupings. One consists of both locally made shell- and grit-tempered examples of Majors Opposed Diagonal found on all Steed-Kisker phase sites and many other Nebraska variant sites (Figure 9). The oth-er grouping is composed of later, locally made vessels with Oneota and Oneota-like shoulder design motifs reported from Glenwood locality sites (Anderson

The typical range of Plains Village stone and bone tool assemblages are found on Nebraska vari-ant sites. The defi ning feature of the Nebraska vari-ant when compared to other Central Plains tradition variants is the type and frequency of grit, sand, and, less commonly, shell-tempered globular jars used for cooking and storage. Vessels including globular pots, bowls, and seed jars can be red slipped on the interior, exterior, or both. The major pottery wares consist of grit-tempered globular jars with smoothed-over cordmarked bodies decorated by several meth-ods confi ned primarily to the lip and exterior vessel rim and less so to the upper body. Decoration on the vessel body consists of trailed lines in geomet-ric patterns typical of the Majors Opposed Diagonal type (Greatorex 1997; Scott 1995). Glenwood houses at the Kullbom site (13ML10) have Majors Opposed Diagonal designs as well as locally made Oneota vessels and designs associated with the Correction-ville phase in northwest Iowa, and red-slipped pot-tery (Anderson 1961:67; Anderson and Anderson 1960:36; Billeck 1993:249; Zimmerman 1977a:80) (Fig-ure 4). Rim profi les are fl ared, collared, or S-shaped. The fl ared rims are typed McVey ware; collared and S-shaped rims are typed Beckman ware and Swo-boda ware, respectively (Gunnerson 1952; Ives 1955). While Nebraska variant pottery has all three forms, the fl ared or direct rims as termed in the literature


Figure 5. Restored Glenwood culture pottery, Charles R. Keyes collection.

Figure 6. Seed jar with effi gy handles, 13ML324 (Cat. No. 324-180).

Figure 7. Zoomorphic handle, 13ML237 (Cat. No. Ms-1557).

Figure 8. Hands and handle, 13ML237, House site X-11 (Cat. No. Ms-1564).

1961; Josephs 2011) (Figure 4). Mississippian motifs, such as the Weeping Eye (Figure 10) have been recov-ered (Anderson and Anderson 1960:33, 36; Anderson 1961; Billeck 1993:142). Bowls, bottles, and seed jars may be red slipped (Figure 11). Ceramic fi gurines (Figure 12) (Anderson 1961:98, 13ML239) and pipes, both undecorated and decorated, and in human or animal effi gy forms, are also reported (Billeck 1993:93, 102, 118; McNerney 1987; Pepperl 2006; Tiffany 2012) (Figures 13, 14).


Figure 9. Steed-Kisker vessel from 13ML119 (Cat. No. 300-11).

Figure 10. Seed jar with Weeping Eye motif, 13ML339 (Cat. No. 339-37).

Figure 11. Red-slipped high-neck bottle, 13ML119 (Cat. No. 300-12).

Figure 12. Figurine, 13ML239, House X-16 (Cat. No. MS-1542).

Figure 13. Ceramic pipes, 13ML119 (a, Cat. No. 300-16; b, Cat. No. 300-14).

Figure 14. Ceramic pipe, 13ML176 (Cat. No. F4-12).


development and change in the Central Plains. These are very exciting times for Plains archaeology.

Goals of This Study

In this chapter, we propose to use artifact cross dating to establish the chronological boundaries of the Nebraska variant. Previously obtained radiocarbon dates will be used to test the reasonableness of the proposed chronology. We will not spend a lot of time rehashing prior temporal models and research based on them, nor will we will propose new local sequences within the variant, but rather we will forge ahead with examination of cross-dating artifacts, assemblages for comparative corroboration, and our radiocarbon research.

Methods

We propose to examine four working assump-tions:

1. Exclusivity Principle. There are no other contem-poraneous groups occupying a Nebraska vari-ant locality except constituent Nebraska variant communities. The only overlap of differing cul-tures may occur with the Pomona and Nebraska variant in northeast Kansas (Logan 2011) or with Great Oasis and Mill Creek in the Glenwood locality (Lensink and Tiffany 2005; Tiffany et al. 1998). There were certainly contacts in the Glen-wood phase with the Oneota tradition (Ander-son 1961; Josephs 2011), but Oneota groups did not occupy the locality while Nebraska variant people were in residence. By and large, we will show that for the Glenwood locality at least, arguments for contemporaneity of other cultures in a Central Plains tradition variant are based on sites with mixed components, problematic radio-carbon dates, or both.

2. Radiocarbon Conundrum. Radiocarbon data always involve more uncertainty than statisti-cal counting errors alone. Therefore, archaeo-logical common sense coupled with well-dated sequences should always temper interpretations of radiocarbon results from individual sites.

3. Brief Time Frame. As Blakeslee and Caldwell (1979:18) observed, the Nebraska variant occu-pation is relatively short, representing just a few generations with low overall population density in the constituent localities. Recalling Caveat 2, however, radiocarbon dates by themselves are not enough to date the Steed-Kisker phase or other Central Plains tradition complexes authori-tatively.

The Problem

Researchers have relied largely on calibrated radio-carbon dates and varied levels of analysis of those cali-brated dates to establish the age of the Central Plains tradition. Earlier estimates dating the Nebraska variant by Wedel (1959:568) place it from A.D. 1300 to A.D. 1500. Roper (2006:110–111) gave a calibrated range pf A.D. 900–1400 for the Nebraska variant, but now Roper (2013:153) provides a range of A.D. 1250–1350. Other researchers report different time ranges for the Central Plains tradition and Nebraska variant depending on the locality examined and dates available for analysis. Examples from the Glenwood locality include A.D. 1050–1225 (Zimmerman 1977b:125), A.D. 1000–1300 (Hotopp 1978a:119), A.D. 1150–1300 (Billeck 1993:181), and A.D. 1250–1400 (Lensink 2010; Tiffany and Lensink 2010). Researchers have dated the Nebraska variant to A.D. 1050–1425 (Blakeslee and Caldwell 1979:20), A.D. 1000–1400 (Billeck 1993:1), and A.D. 1000–1300 (Bozell and Ludwickson 1999:102–105).

We challenge the view of an early, permanent, settled agricultural life in the Nebraska variant, uti-lizing artifact cross-dating and reanalysis of radio-carbon dates. The Cahokia, Mill Creek, and Oneota tradition chronologies and associated material culture are well established (Boszhardt and Hall 2004; Fortier et al. 2006; Hall 1991; Lensink 2005; McNerney 1987; Milner et al. 1984; Pepperl 2006; Tiffany 1997, 1998, 2010). Cross-dating of ceramic styles and other arti-facts between the Oneota tradition and the Cahokia sequence suggests the Nebraska variant should date to a time interval between approximately A.D. 1200 and 1400 (Tiffany 2012). Other artifacts are attributable to contact with the Arkansas Valley Caddoan groups, or other contemporaneous contact with Mississippian manifestations such as Cahokia. We complement this hypothesis with an examination of 191 radiocarbon dates from 69 Nebraska variant sites in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska to support a new time span for the Nebraska variant of A.D. 1200–1350.

Our new chronology signifi cantly changes the present interpretive models of Central Plains tradi-tion cultures. Almost everything written prior to Len-sink (2010), Tiffany and Lensink (2010), and Roper and Adair (2011) regarding Central Plains chronol-ogy, Central Plains origins, and relationships among Central Plains groups requires revision. The need for revising models of the Central Plains tradition is not stated lightly but to point out that the developing data with AMS dating is completely altering our picture of the tradition. We have new, highly refi ned chronologi-cal data based on AMS dates, and as a result, we need new thinking on the process of Plains Village cultural


pottery of the preceding Stirling phase at Cahokia. Ramey Incised with low rolled-lip vessels and cari-nated shoulders with curvilinear designs fall out of usage in the Moorehead phase (Emerson 1997:52–53). Cordmarking is present, but plain-surfaced ves-sels “dominate” the Moorehead phase (Milner et al. 1984:175), while “exterior surfaces of Sand Prairie phase jars are either cordmarked or plain” (Milner et al. 1984:179). For a visual characterization see Milner et al. (1984:160, Figure 64). The reader can compare the Cahokia sequence for Moorehead and Sand Prairie pottery forms and decoration with a range of Glen-wood phase pottery, representative of the Nebraska variant, which we illustrate in Figure 5. The items absent in the Nebraska variant when compared to the Milner et al. (1984:Figure 64) depiction are quintes-sential Mississippian forms such as plates, pans, juice presses, and stump ware.

The Mill Creek CultureThe Nebraska variant ceramic data collectively

point to a regional ceramic tradition that refl ects post–Stirling phase times, an argument we will repeat. Locally made and traded, low rolled-rim Ramey ves-sels with curvilinear scroll designs on sharply cari-nated shoulders characteristic of the Stirling phase at Cahokia (Milner et al. 1984:160, 168–173) are found in the Big Sioux and Little Sioux phases of the Mill Creek culture villages in Iowa and other Initial Middle Mis-souri variant sites in South Dakota. Ramey Incised rep-resents a signature pottery complex used to cross-date the Initial Middle Missouri variant with the Cahokia sequence. Stirling phase pottery forms and shoulder designs are absent from Nebraska variant sites includ-ing the Glenwood phase and the Steed-Kisker phase (Billeck 1993:273; Logan 2010, 2011). Hall (1991:11–12) referred to Steed-Kisker pottery as “Cahokia related’ and as “varieties of Ramey Incised and infl uenced types,” with which we concur. Steed-Kisker phase pottery does not include imported Ramey Incised pot-tery of the kind associated with the Initial Middle Mis-souri variant and the Stirling phase. We will expand more on Steed-Kisker shortly.

Mill Creek pottery is reported from Glenwood lodge sites (Anderson and Anderson 1960:37–38; Ives 1955:18–19; Tiffany and Alex 2001), although the illus-trated examples (Anderson and Anderson 1960:37) look like Great Oasis types. These Great Oasis types were unknown when Anderson and Ives did their analyses, but Great Oasis sites and associated ceram-ics are now better documented in the Glenwood local-ity (Lensink and Tiffany 2005). Billeck (1993:124–125) reports one Mitchell Modifi ed Lip from the Kuhl site (13ML136) (Cache 6) and two Mitchell Modifi ed Lip

4. Regional Cultural Sequence. For most of the Mis-souri Valley under study (excluding the Kansas City region), the late prehistoric archaeological sequence of interest includes the Great Oasis cul-ture (A.D. 950–1100) (Lensink and Tiffany 2005); Initial Middle Missouri variant (A.D. 1100–1250) (Lensink 1993, 2005); Nebraska variant (A.D. 1200–1350, this paper), Initial Coalescent variant (A.D. 1300–1500) (Ahler and Toom 1995:21); and Oneota tradition (A.D. 1250–contact) (Boszhardt 2004; Tiffany 1997, 1998). The Central Plains tra-dition St. Helena phase is transitional and has been considered part of the Initial Coalescent tradition group continuity (Blakeslee 1993; Lud-wickson et al. 1993:164; Spaulding 1956:110; Stei-nacher and Carlson 1998:258; Tiffany 2007b:114–116). The Kansas City region is the exception in that no clear Great Oasis or other terminal Late Woodland precursor to the Nebraska variant is present unless the Pomona variant is considered.

Artifact Cross-DatingComparison with Cahokia

The Cahokia cultural chronology developed by Hall (1991) is widely accepted, but it is an arbitrary chronological construct based on the best available data at that time. Fortier et al. (2006) have proposed minor revisions to the Mississippian period phases. Regardless, we, and many others, use the Cahokia chronology as the standard to compare regional devel-opments. The direct rim vessels of the Nebraska vari-ant (McVey ware), in terms of rim profi les and vessel forms, are a close match for post–Stirling phase pottery at Cahokia beginning with the Moorehead phase (A.D. 1200–1300) and continuing into the Sand Prairie phase (A.D. 1300–1400) (Fortier et al. 2006:173; Hall 1991:10, 13; Milner et al. 1984:173–179) where correspondence between the Central Plains tradition and Cahokia is best. Oneota pottery appears in the Vulcan phase fol-lowing the Sand Prairie phase at Cahokia. We note that O’Brien (1993:66) categorized the Steed-Kisker phase as representing a Moorehead phase interaction, and we will continue to explore her observation.

Globular vessels with fl ared rims (termed “angled” at Cahokia) and plain or cordmarked bod-ies are found in both the Moorehead and Sand Prairie phases. The fl ared rims become the dominant form in the Sand Prairie phase, and seed jars disappear in the Moorehead phase while bowls continue. Rolled rims like the few reported from Glenwood and other Nebraska variant localities are similar to those illus-trated for the Moorehead phase. A hallmark for cross-cultural comparison of Cahokia and Plains interaction is locally made and traded examples of Ramey Incised


(Tiffany 2007b:78–79) when, in fact, an equally rea-sonable hypothesis is that the Initial Middle Missouri variant collared rims represent an infrequent indig-enous local ware of the Middle Missouri tradition that refl ects a much broader collared-ware horizon style. If the latter observation is correct, collared-rimmed vessels in Central Plains and Middle Missouri sites are examples of a horizon style present across the upper Midwest. The style includes Aztalan Collared to the east and contemporary Hartley Fort and Fred Edwards collared forms of the terminal Late Wood-land of the Upper Mississippi Valley (Finney 1993; Spaulding 1956:79; Tiffany 1982). The Initial Middle Missouri variant, Aztalan, and terminal Late Wood-land sites mentioned all have locally made or traded Ramey Incised pottery. The presence of Ramey Incised pottery in all but the Central Plains sites dates this col-lared-rim horizon from A.D. 1100 to 1200. The collared wares continue in Central Plains and Coalescent tradi-tion sites, however, after A.D. 1200.

The Mitchell Modifi ed Lip types are readily iden-tifi able, but the Kimball type, even with the more com-mon angular interior neck profi les of the Initial Mid-dle Missouri variant, would be diffi cult to distinguish from McVey Tool Decorated without a large sample to examine, such as the McVey rims Ives reported from two Big Sioux phase Mill Creek sites (Ives 1962:23). Anderson and Ives were both quite familiar with Glenwood and Mill Creek pottery, so their identifi ca-tions are acceptable to us.

Glenwood houses occasionally produce earlier Woodland pottery and other earlier types such as Sterns Creek, Missouri Bluffs, Feye Cord Impressed, and Grasshopper Falls phase pottery. The Sterns Creek pottery from one lodge (13ML204) is probably an earlier component over which a Glenwood house was constructed (Brown 1967:57, 63). Great Oasis pot-tery is also reported from Glenwood locality lodge sites (Lensink and Tiffany 2005:239).

Middle Woodland, Sterns Creek, and Late and Terminal Woodland ceramics, in that order, are reported in well-stratifi ed components in the Glen-wood locality and southwest Iowa below and sepa-rated from Central Plains tradition contexts, and thus predate the Central Plains tradition Glenwood occupation (Keyes 1949). Their mixed association in a later Glenwood house hardly raises an eyebrow. Yet, when Great Oasis and Mill Creek ceramics closer in age to the Glenwood phase are reported in comparable mixed contexts, it is tempting to declare these fi nds contemporary. The known contexts for the Mill Creek pottery in Glenwood lodges are sec-ondary, such as pit fi ll, surface fi nds, or house entry fi ll.

rims from site 13ML139 (entryway and surface). Cur-rent work on the US-34 project has provided us with the opportunity to reexamine the Mitchell Modi-fi ed Lip rims Billeck reported. We concur with Bil-leck’s (1993) identifi cations. This ongoing research on US-34 project ceramics has resulted in identifi cation of another Mitchell Modifi ed Lip rim from the sur-face of 13ML139 and a probable Sanford Plain from an unnumbered cache pit from lodge 13ML133. All the Mill Creek rims examined are small lip-rim frag-ments; however, the two recently identifi ed specimens have angular interior neck angles typical of Mill Creek pottery. Billeck also reports one Mitchell Modifi ed Lip rim and two Kimball Modifi ed Lip rims identifi ed by John Ives (1955) from three lodges excavated by the late D. D. Davis, as well as another Kimball rim from the mouth of Pony Creek in the Rowe Collection. Bil-leck (1993:142–143) illustrates and briefl y discusses a Swoboda Decorated rim with what he characterizes as Chamberlain Incised–like decoration. One example of this decorative form, termed Motif 21, is present in the Glen Elder locality (Blakeslee 1999:112–113) and is not exclusive to Mill Creek or the Initial Middle Missouri variant. It fi rst appears with earlier Great Oasis pottery and is a trailed decorative version of earlier twisted-cord decorative styles on Late Woodland pottery such as Missouri Bluffs and Feye Cord Impressed. Billeck notes (1993:125) that all the reported Mill Creek rims he examined (three Mitchell Modifi ed Lip rims) were found near the mouth of Pony Creek (site 13ML136 and the Kuhl site). Site 13ML133 is on a ridge over-looking Horse Creek. As far as we are aware, similar examples of Mill Creek pottery do not occur elsewhere in either Nebraska variant sites or other Central Plains tradition sites.

Ives (1962:23–24) reported both McVey Plain and Beckman Tool Impressed rims from the Broken Kettle (13PM1) and Kimball (13PM4) Mill Creek sites. He notes that these classifi cations were “tentative” and that the collared rim may be associated with the St. Helena phase. Collared rims are uncommon but reported from the Phipps and Chan-ya-ta sites in the Little Sioux phase (McNerney 1987; Tiffany and Adams 1998:40) and are reported in small numbers as Stuart Collared from Initial Middle Missouri variant sites along the Missouri Valley (Tiffany 2007b).

The profi les on Stuart Collared are different from those on Beckman ware. Stuart Collared has a thicker wedge, a shorter panel height, a more sharply defi ned interior neck contour, more variation in lip form, and different trailed decoration (Tiffany 2007b:78–80). While these observations are impressionistic, they should be explored since it has been argued that the Stuart Collared rims refl ect Central Plains contact


researchers. They are either Oneota or Steed-Kisker—Mississippian in the broadest sense at the time of Wedel’s observation (Wedel 1959:614–615). Since ves-sel forms and rims are similar on grit- and shell-tem-pered Nebraska variant vessels, a rim with the ves-sel shoulder, regardless of temper, needs to be pres-ent to determine whether the specimen is decorated with various patterns associated with Steed-Kisker (Greatorex 1997; O’Brien 1978) or with Oneota design patterns of comparable age, namely, the punctate-bor-dered chevron of the Correctionville phase (Anderson and Anderson 1960:36). Based on Glenwood sites we have examined, trailed shoulders occur almost exclu-sively on shell-tempered vessels.

A pressing question for several generations of Plains archaeologists is, how “Mississippian” is the Steed-Kisker phase, and, if linked to the Cahokia sequence, when did Mississippian or Mississippian-derived materials appear on the eastern Plains? Our examination of Steed-Kisker materials, together with the results of a comprehensive comparative analysis of Steed-Kisker pottery (Greatorex 1997), suggests the following. The Steed-Kisker site cluster in the Kansas City area refl ects an initial trait-unit intrusion, pre-sumably from Cahokia, into a local Nebraska variant culture group. This hypothesis is the accepted current thinking (Logan 2010; O’Brien and Wood 1998:274) and harks back to Henning’s (1967) observation that Steed-Kisker refl ects the product of diffused Missis-sippian traits into a local population. The Mississip-pian “intrusion”—if it is even correct to call it that in the Kansas City locality—was not as extensive or as directed as the comparable, earlier site-unit intru-sions of Mississippians into the Upper Mississippi Valley (Emerson 1991; Henning 1967, 1998; Green and Rodell 1994; Theler and Boszhardt 2003; Tiffany 2003). This earlier expansion of Mississippian culture in the Upper Mississippi Valley was rapid and resulted in the incorporation and assimilation of shell tempering and shoulder design patterns into local cultural tradi-tions. The ceramic traits are similar, or can be related, to those at Cahokia during the Lohmann phase but primarily associated with the Stirling phase (Emerson 1997; Green 1997:204; Hall 1991).

Any “Mississippian elements” in the ceramics in Steed-Kisker and Central Plains sites are generalized but indicative of initial trait-unit contact at the earli-est during the Moorehead phase (A.D. 1200–1300). Current AMS dating reported in this study suggests a revised time frame for some Steed-Kisker sites to the thirteenth century. Roper and Adair’s (2011:20) place-ment in the twelfth century seems early given the vir-tual lack of actual traded Ramey Incised pottery with rolled lips, carinated shoulders, and scroll designs in

In all likelihood, the Mill Creek pottery predates Glenwood since the two cultures occupied the Mis-souri Valley sequentially (Exclusivity Principle). The 50-year overlap in the radiocarbon dates between the Nebraska and Initial Middle Missouri variants, including the Mill Creek culture, is most likely due to statistical and systematic errors along with effects of the radiocarbon calibration curve (see Lensink 1997 for a similar explanation of Initial Middle Missouri and Extended Middle Missouri overlap). All the ear-lier Initial Middle Missouri materials found in Glen-wood houses may be explained by the fact that Glen-wood peoples built into earlier site components or used materials for building containing earlier pottery. The alternate explanation is that these Initial Middle Missouri rims refl ect contemporaneity between the Nebraska and Initial Middle Missouri variants. Except for the few Initial Middle Missouri variant rims reported from Glenwood culture sites we and others report (Anderson and Anderson 1960; Billeck 1993; Ives 1962), and possible specimens from four Mill Creek sites, there is no evidence for any direct, con-tinuous contact between Glenwood and Mill Creek/Initial Middle Missouri variant.

Both Mill Creek and Glenwood lack the constel-lation of cultural traits and settlement systems that defi ne a Mississippian occupation (Hall 1967; Hen-ning 1967). Further, the presence of shell-tempered Oneota and Steed-Kisker–related pottery in Nebraska variant sites and their total absence from Mill Creek sites strongly suggests the two complexes are sequen-tial. Mill Creek and other Initial Middle Missouri sites have no evidence of any Oneota or Steed-Kisker pot-tery because the Initial Middle Missouri peoples had departed the region when the fi rst Central Plains tra-dition and Oneota traditions later appear in the area.

Steed-Kisker PhaseWe agree with Roper and Adair’s (2011:31) obser-

vation that the Steed-Kisker phase is the southern end of the Nebraska variant. Blakeslee and Caldwell (1979:57) report that with regard to the direct or fl ared rim ware (McVey), shell-tempered vessels in Nebraska variant sites differ only in temper and have more dec-orated shoulders when compared to Nebraska variant pottery. Billeck (1993:251) concurs with this observa-tion for Glenwood locality shell-tempered pottery, as do we. Roper et al. (2010:138, 151) note that while shell tempering is dominant in the Steed-Kisker phase, shell- and grit-tempered vessels are locally produced throughout the Central Plains, and both are part of Central Plains assemblages.

There are two possibilities for the source of shell tempering, both of which are well established by


many rolled-lip rims are actually present in Steed-Kisker sites and their distribution. Shippee (1960:282) illustrates a Steed-Kisker vessel from the Grisham site and profi les from other rims that include rolled lips. Our hunch is that rolled-lip rims are as uncommon in Steed-Kisker sites as they are in the Glenwood locality and the Nebraska variant generally and are of the later Moorehead phase form.

The rest of the shell-tempered, shoulder-deco-rated vessels that make up the Steed-Kisker phase have mostly geometric rather than curvilinear designs (Greatorex 1997; Hall 1991). This shift from curvilinear to more geometric scrolls begins in late Stirling and increases in popularity during the subsequent Moore-head phase. Nebraska variant sites have neither trad-ed Ramey or Powell vessels nor locally made copies of typical Stirling phase vessels. Seed jars and bowls are minor vessel forms in the Nebraska variant. The predominance of bowls over seed jars is another post–Stirling phase correlation with the Cahokia sequence.

Steed-Kisker and other Nebraska variant sites share similarities in their artifact assemblages, settle-ment and subsistence patterns, and burial practices. The Steed-Kisker phase is part of the Nebraska variant in which potters made both grit- and shell-tempered pottery in varying frequencies. Shell tempering is much less common north of St. Joseph, Missouri, but it is present in Nebraska variant assemblages (Gre-atorex 1997:ii). Wedel (1961:97) noted that groups on the Central Plains “were in contact with alien peoples with whom they doubtless traded and intermarried and from which they certainly borrowed ideas.” The trait-unit intrusion of Cahokia-related Mississippian culture into the Lower Platte Valley locality between St. Joseph and the Kansas City, Missouri, area bears out this observation.

O’Brien’s (1993:71) commentary on Steed-Kisker supports our argument:

But Wedel did not discover a complete array of Middle Mississippian elements at Steed-Kisker. That is, he did not discover a temple-mound town or a village or traits like a classic rectan-gular wall trenched house with Ramey Incised and Powell Plain ceramics and lithics made of Crescent Quarry chert, items which would be considered proof positive of migration. Rather, Steed-Kisker material culture is basically of local manufacture but imitates American Bottom architectural, ceramic and lithic styles.

Wedel (2001:181) comments that Steed-Kisker is “a much watered down version of Mississippian cul-ture… and aside from pottery, looks much like a Nebraska phase manifestation.”

Steed-Kisker collections. Nebraska variant sites also have Steed-Kisker decorated shell-tempered vessels, as discussed; the ceramic tradition in the Nebraska variant most closely refl ects the Moorehead and later Sand Prairie phases (A.D. 1200–1400).

In the Upper Mississippi Valley, earlier Lohmann (A.D. 1050–1100) and Stirling phase (A.D. 1100–1200) contact and interaction led to more dynamic interac-tion with local terminal Late Woodland peoples. This occurred at Aztalan in southern Wisconsin, with ter-minal Late Woodland peoples in southwest Wiscon-sin and northeast Iowa, with the Apple River culture in northwest Illinois, and in the Red Wing–Diamond Bluff area along the Mississippi Valley. The latter derives from initial contact near La Crosse, north to Trempealeau, Wisconsin, and then to Red Wing, Min-nesota. Fortifi ed towns with platform mounds are associated with this Mississippian expansion into the Upper Mississippi Valley and signify a site-unit intru-sion.

The Steed-Kisker settlement system, artifact assemblages, burial patterns, and subsistence are essentially Central Plains (Greatorex 1997; Logan 2010; O’Brien 1978). There are no fortifi ed sites with plat-form mounds. Logan (2010:234) reports only one wall-trench house, while O’Brien (1993:64–65) and Shippee (1960, 1972) suggest possible wall-trench houses from three other sites. Clearly, wall-trench houses, the so-called alternate Steed-Kisker house form, are not dis-tributed extensively in the Lower Platte Valley local-ity. Burial items that Shippee (1960) discusses are of either Cahokia or Caddoan origin; our view is that they are of Caddoan origin. Steed-Kisker sites have no classic imported Powell Plain or Ramey Incised pot-tery with scroll designs on vessels that have sharply carinated shoulders characteristic of the Stirling phase at Cahokia (A.D.1100–1200) and occasionally recov-ered from Mill Creek sites. Logan (2010:234, 2011:134) reports one Ramey Incised vessel from the Coons site (23PL16), which he stipulates is also the only Steed-Kisker site with the wall-trench house, although Ship-pee (1960) claims there was a Mississippian house at the Gresham site (23PL48) that as described appears to have been a rectangular Central Plains tradition house with a central hearth but no wall trenches. A vessel from the Coons site with a curvilinear shoulder design has a rim form that is Moorehead/Sand Prai-rie phase in style (high fl ared rim) as illustrated by O’Brien (1993:85); the shoulder form, whether angular or smoothly rounded, is indeterminate.

In Mill Creek culture sites, both traded Ramey and “Local Ramey Knock-Offs” (Tiffany 2007a) are readily identifi able by shoulder decoration on vessels with low rolled rims. It is diffi cult for us to determine how


Thus, there seem to be plausible reasons for framing the hypothesis that the technique of incising pottery shoulders entered the Central Plains via the medium of Mississippian groups along the Missouri River in eastern Nebraska, where it was adopted by the Nebraska aspect. From the time of the fi rst appearance of the tra-dition of shoulder incising in the Central Plains, the patterns are predominately rectilinear, with curvilinear elements exceedingly rare.

Finally, Henning’s (1970:158–159) observations are abbreviated to the point we are making:

Steed-Kisker ceramics are similar in shape to Ramey Incised and Powell Plain…., but the decorative motifs applied are characteristically rectilinear or repetitive ‘sunrise’ motif quite in contrast to curvilinear line motifs on the Ramey Incised jars. …Steed-Kisker remains are found in direct association with those of the Nebraska cul-ture…If Steed-Kisker is Mississippian derived, it would appear that the principal Mississippian survivals are ceramic in nature and even those are greatly attenuated.

In summary, the Steed-Kisker phase is the result of initial, indirect contact and rapid assimilation of new ideas from the Cahokia area into a regional Plains Vil-lage manifestation. This is refl ected in a local pottery tradition in which both Nebraska variant pottery and Mississippian elements are indicative of initial contact during the Moorehead phase (A.D. 1200–1300). The Mississippian presence in the St. Joseph–Kansas City area was not as extensive or directed as the compa-rable earlier site-unit intrusions of Mississippians into the Upper Mississippi Valley. Contact consisted of a more generalized trait-unit intrusion that was ongo-ing but undirected and discontinuous with Cahokia, in our opinion. It continued at least through the Sand Prairie phase at Cahokia (A.D. 1300–1400).

The Oneota TraditionWe begin again with the conclusion of our analy-

sis. Steed-Kisker and Oneota pottery are reported from Nebraska variant sites, but there is no Steed-Kisker or Oneota pottery in Initial Middle Missouri variant sites because the Nebraska variant postdates the Initial Middle Missouri variant.

The Oneota tradition is now well dated. The tra-dition is broken into three time periods, each defi ned by horizon styles that refl ect specifi c shoulder designs on the pottery shared among culturally related Oneo-ta groups distributed in Oneota localities throughout the Prairie Peninsula and the eastern Plains border. Many Oneota sites are multicomponent. One of us

As we have shown, Nebraska variant pottery can be tied into the well-dated sequence at Cahokia. The Mississippian rims at Steed-Kisker and at other Nebraska variant sites are “low and often rolled” according to Logan (2010:234), but shoulder designs are primarily rectilinear rather than curvilinear, as noted, and sharply carinated vessel shoulders with low rolled lips typical of Ramey and Powell Plain are virtually absent (Greatorex 1997:59, 61). Recall that low rolled-lip vessels with curvilinear scroll designs on sharply carinated shoulders typical of Ramey Incised are characteristic of the Stirling phase at Cahokia (Milner et al. 1984:160, 168–173). The rolled-lip forms and decoration Logan and others describe are like similar forms in the Moorehead phase. Ramey Incised or Powell-like pottery appears to be absent at Steed-Kisker, and these forms are certainly absent from the Glenwood locality, and from other Nebraska variant sites and regional variants such as Smoky Hill and Upper Republican.

O’Brien (1993:66) states that earlier Steed-Kisker shoulder designs are more curvilinear, while later sites produce pottery with more rectilinear designs. This may be the case, but this hypothesis should be reevaluated based on additional research. Even the curvilinear design patterns depicted by Greatorex (1997:59; “Sunburst,” “Bands with Sun,” and “Nested Chevron”) for Steed-Kisker have geometric elements/motifs, and when totaled, these shoulder design forms are 42 percent of the Steed-Kisker shoulder decorative forms she analyzed from three sites. The rest are geo-metric designs (58 percent). The most common shoul-der design is Majors Opposed Diagonal, which Scott (1995:48) reports from 37 sites in Kansas, Nebraska, and Missouri representing Nebraska, Smoky Hill, and Pomona variants, and the Steed-Kisker phase. Greatorex (1997:59–60) terms this shoulder pattern “Alternative Hatchered (sic Hachured) Triangles.” This design dominates the Glenwood locality shell-tempered specimens we have seen. O’Brien notes that the rectilinear designs on Steed-Kisker pottery, such as the alternating-triangle motif, are also on Wells Incised plates from Cahokia and can be assigned to the Moorehead phase, and we agree. She further states that Steed-Kisker shoulder designs align with late Stir-ling or Moorehead phase pottery at Cahokia (O’Brien 1993:66). Her dating of Steed-Kisker is too early, based on the limited radiocarbon dates available to her for Steed-Kisker, but she correctly assigns Steed-Kisker assemblages time-wise by cross-dating of the artifacts to appropriate later Mississippian phase sources.

Many years ago, Wood (1962:34) made these observations regarding the source and style of shoul-der designs on Plains pottery:


Anderson and Anderson 1960:36) correlated the punc-tate-bordered chevron designs found at Kullbom with the Correctionville phase. Oneota pottery found with Initial and Extended Coalescent and St. Helena phase sites can be used to cross-date those sites as well, based on the shoulder design patterns present (Carlson and Bozell 2010; Henning 2007:74–75; Spaulding 1956:80, 82; Tiffany et al. 2011).

With Steed-Kisker type shoulder decoration, the shoulder designs are either opposed diagonals or geo-metric designs with curvilinear elements. The latter can be considered prototypes for the punctate-bordered chevron Oneota design, such as the Steed-Kisker vessel from the Lincoln I site (13ML119) (Greatorex 1997:61, “Sun Burst”; Tiffany 2010:Figure 8.18) (Figure 9). Early Period Oneota pottery clearly shows affi nities with Steed-Kisker pottery found in the Glenwood locality (Billeck 1993:122–123).

Tiffany (1979) has long argued that the opposed diagonal shoulder motif on Oneota pottery was Plains derived. Given the AMS dates from Steed-Kisker sites in the Kansas City, this locality now appears the likely source for this shoulder pattern, rather than the Lower Loup Valley as originally proposed. Regardless, the alternating diagonal shoulder decoration is another horizon style marker, not only for Oneota sites, but for Central Mississippian and Coalescent sites that date to the same time period (Wood 1962:34).

The mix of Oneota shoulder designs and vessels features found in the Glenwood locality along with Steed-Kisker designs is not unique. The Leary site (25RH1) has both Central Plains and Oneota compo-nents (Ritterbush 2002). These materials are mixed and indicate either direct interaction or sequential occupations of the site. The cross-dated materials in the Glenwood locality support either interpretation.

Years ago, Henning (1970:148) noted that there was no Oneota regional continuity that culminated in any of the historic Dhegihan-speaking tribes who resided in the general area of the Nebraska variant. There is no parallel process similar to that of the trans-formation of regional terminal Late Woodland groups in the Upper Mississippi Valley into Oneota (Gibbon 1972; Henning 1961:43). Since there are “pure” Early Period Oneota sites in western Iowa, southwest Min-nesota, southeast Nebraska, and Central Kansas, it would seem to us that the presence of Oneota pottery among Nebraska variant sites means only that they were contemporaneous. Regional temporal primacy goes to Central Plains tradition sites. Oneota infl uence appears to be later within established Nebraska vari-ant sites. The origins of Dhegihan-speaking Siouan groups and their arrival on the Central Plains can thus be tied directly to unmixed Early Period Oneota sites

(Tiffany 1979, 1997, 1998) established these relation-ships based on data from single-component Oneota sites in southeast Iowa and Henning’s (1970) pio-neering study. Early Period Oneota sites (A.D. 1250–1400) have vessel shoulders decorated primarily with punctate-bordered chevrons and loop or strap han-dles attached to the exterior lip-rim. Middle Period sites (A.D. 1400–1500) have shoulder designs com-posed of opposed diagonal lines. Loop handles are gone, and strap handles are attached to the exterior lip-rim. On Late Period Oneota sites (A.D. 1500–post-contact), shoulder designs consist predominately of punctate-fi lled chevrons with bordering lines and strap handles attached below the rim exterior (Tif-fany 1997, 1998).

Examples of Oneota pottery types corresponding to these three periods go by various names. They are:

1. Early Period: Perrot Punctate in the La Crosse locality, Schmeiser ware in southeast Iowa (Tif-fany 1979), or Correctionville Trailed in western Iowa

2. Middle Period: Midway Incised in the La Crosse locality, and Bastian (13CK28) and Dixon site (13WD8) pottery in western Iowa (Fishel 1999);

3. Late Period: Allamakee Trailed as depicted on the local sequence for the La Crosse locality and throughout the spatial extent of the Oneota tradi-tion (Boszhardt 1994:Figure 13; Tiffany 1998:Fig-ure 4).

As the La Crosse locality sequence shows, there are other shoulder designs (Koshkonong Bold for exam-ple), but the general pattern from punctate-bordered chevrons, to opposed diagonals, to punctate-fi lled chevrons is repeated regionally throughout the expanse in space and time of the Oneota tradition (Henning 1998). The earliest Oneota and related regional complexes in Wisconsin have curvilinear motifs closely related to Ramey Incised (Carcajou Cur-vilinear; Hall 1962a, 1962b, 1991:23–25). These forms are not found on the Plains and eastern Plains border, but the rectilinear shoulder designs are. The earliest Oneota pottery on the Plains dates between A. D. 1300 and 1400 and is characterized by punctate-bordered chevron designs on the vessel shoulders.

The Glenwood phase and Central Plains tradition pottery have some general Oneota features such as globular vessels and strap handles attached to the rim exterior. Occasionally, high fl ared and everted shell-tempered rims characteristic of the Correctionville phase are found and have been classifi ed as Oneo-ta, McVey ware, or Steed-Kisker in the Glenwood and other Nebraska variant localities. Glenwood phase pottery is reported from the Correctionville Oneota site (Henning 1961:15), and Anderson (1961;


vessels (Hedden and Horgen 2012). Bell (1983) sum-marizes the long-recognized cultural affi nity of the Central Plains tradition with the Arkansas Valley Caddoan sequence based on a range of cultural traits and artifact forms. Bell identifi es the Early Caddoan period Harlan phase (A.D. 1000–1200) as the “launch-ing point” for the spread of Caddoan speakers into the Central Plains. Of interest, Holly Fine Engraved pot-tery is associated with the Harlan phase (Bell 1984), and a Holly Fine Engraved vessel was recovered from a Mill Creek burial complex near Sioux City, Iowa (Anderson and Tiffany 1987). This vessel cross-dates Mill Creek culture (A.D. 1100–1250) to the Arkansas Valley Caddoan sequence. A Harlan phase Crockett Curvilinear vessel was reported years ago from the Whiteford (Salina Burial) site (14SA1) in central Kan-sas (Wedel 1959:519–520). Cross-dating indicates con-tinued contact with the Nebraska and Central Plains tradition variants through the Norman and Spiro phases (Brown 1984, 1996).

A pipe from the Wall Ridge site (13ML176) (Fig-ure 14) has unique decorative features for the Nebras-ka variant. It has a trailed hand on the pipe stem and a trailed face on the front of the bowl. A shell-tempered bird effi gy pipe from the Lincoln I site (Figure 13) is stylistically similar to pipes reported from Spiro and is attributed to Arkansas Valley Caddoan interaction (McNerney 1987:31–32).

Another specimen is the red-slipped bottle (Fig-ure 11) from Lincoln I identifi ed as Sanders Plain from the Sanders focus (phase) of the old Gibson aspect (McNerney 1987:40; Suhm and Jelks 1962:139, Plate 70). Brown (1996:403) notes that Sanders Plain is “dis-tributed extensively in the Arkansas River valley dur-ing the Norman [A.D. 1250–1350] and Spiro phases [A.D. 1350–1450].” In one interpretation, the Sanders phase is a regional variant representing a site-unit intrusion of the Arkansas Valley Caddoan Spiro phase (A.D. 1350–1450) (Brown 1984:262, 1996:27, 402–403; Bruseth et al. 1995).

Schambach (1993:13–14) argues that red-slipped bottles comparable to the Lincoln I site specimen are examples of Sanders Plain, and this type is an Arkan-sas Valley Caddoan variety of the Middle Mississip-pian type, Old Town Red. The narrow neck, shell-tempered bottle form of Old Town Red has a wide distribution in the Central Mississippi and Lower Ohio valleys (Hilgeman 2000:43–44). At the Angel site, ceramics with features comparable to the Glenwood assemblage date to the Angel 2 and Angel 3 periods, A.D. 1200–1325 and A.D. 1325–1450, respectively (Hil-geman 2000:213–216, 221–222, 226–227). Hilgeman views these various ceramic features as local expres-sions of horizon styles, and we concur.

and components that appear after A.D. 1300 region-ally.

Our current assumption is that all, or virtually all, Glenwood pottery was made locally by women who emulated the designs, vessel forms, and temper shown by contemporary Nebraska variant peoples via the dif-fusion of ideas. This includes shell-tempered pottery (Steed-Kisker and later Oneota), all of which is repre-sentative of a shared pottery tradition. That diffusion was by direct contact, the result of local and non-local Nebraska variant women in various localities produc-ing pottery. The women propagated the ceramic con-tinuities regionally as a result of marriage and other alliances among Nebraska variant peoples, including those of the Steed-Kisker phase as one local Nebraska variant site cluster, like Glenwood. Similar marriage and alliance networks account for the rapid dissemi-nation of shared Oneota shoulder designs throughout the upper Midwest and their replacement periodically in the form of horizon styles demarking periods in the Oneota tradition. With regard to Steed-Kisker and Oneota infl uences in Glenwood, a fresh perspective suggests that these shell-tempered ceramic elements are locally made versions of shell-tempered pottery. Other items, such as red-slipped pottery or bowls in Glenwood or other Nebraska variant complexes (Bil-leck 1993:249–251), are part of a shared ceramic tra-dition typical of the Nebraska variant. By and large, the Nebraska variant is an in-situ development—a regional expression of the Central Plains tradition that is replaced along the Missouri Valley by the Oneota tradition beginning after A.D. 1300 and completed by A.D. 1400.

In sum, Anderson (1961) and Billeck (1993) both argued that Steed-Kisker–like pottery was early in the Glenwood sequence and that more Oneota-like pottery comparable to the Correctionville phase was late. Current research on ceramic seriation shows that Steed-Kisker shell-tempered pottery is of very low fre-quency, with a couple of site exceptions, throughout the locality during the Glenwood phase (Tiffany 2010).

Southern PlainsVarious locally made and traded artifacts refl ect-

ing contact with Arkansas Valley Caddoan groups have been reported from Mill Creek, St. Helena phase, Initial Coalescent, and Central Plains sites, as well as from sites of the Glenwood phase and the Nebraska variant (Bell and Gilmore 1936; Gilder 1907; Hill and Cooper 1937; McNerney 1987; Neuman 1989; Strong 1935; Wedel 1959). Artifacts include anthropomorphic and zoomorphic and bird effi gy pipes, a mace-shaped pipe from site 13ML64, vessel appendages, fi gurines, Southeast Ceremonial Complex designs, and ceramic


turkey cock gorgets have been recovered from Initial Middle Missouri variant sites, but at least one has been found in a Glenwood phase lodge, site 13ML139 (Figure 16).

Tri-Notched PointsNebraska variant sites, including the Glenwood

and Steed-Kisker phases, produce side- and corner-notched points—the so-called Cahokia point (Billeck 1993; Blakeslee 1999; Logan 2011:146, Nelson 2006a) (Figure 17). Billeck (1993) used the multiple-notched point form to ordinate several Glenwood lodge sites using radiocarbon dates and point frequencies. The Cahokia multiple-notched point was no longer used at Cahokia after A.D. 1200 (Hall 1967:177; Milner et al. 1984:175), and, generally, side-notched points gave way to simple triangular points after A.D. 1300 throughout the upper Midwest in the Oneota tradition.

The continued use of these notched point forms in the Nebraska variant is typical of the Plains, where side-notched points were produced to Contact. Side- and basally notched points (Harrell points) contin-ued to be used on the Southern Plains, where they are found in the late prehistoric Washita phase (A.D. 1250–1450), for example (Drass 1999; Morgan and Drass 2004:21–22). Thus, the multi-notched Cahokia point in Glenwood was a continuance of a point style that fell out of favor at Cahokia before the Glenwood occupation and does not represent direct contact with Cahokia during the Lohmann (A.D. 1050–1100) and Stirling (A.D. 1100–1200) phases when this point style was popular there (Milner et al. 1984:165, 170). It does refl ect continuing regional contact with the Southern Plains.

Radiocarbon Dating

Through the years, researchers have applied the most recent radiocarbon calibration curves to evalu-ate the suite of available Nebraska variant dates (Bil-leck 1993; Blakeslee and Caldwell 1979; Bozell and Ludwickson 1999; Roper 2006:110–111). While many of the house sites with calibrated dates fall into the time span we propose, others do not. With the excep-tion of recent AMS dates from Central Plains tradition sites (Roper and Adair 2011, 2012), most of the sites in question have been dated from radiocarbon assays on wood charcoal samples, frequently involving only a single date per site. Except for some Glenwood dates, the wood is seldom identifi ed to genus or spe-cies, nor is the location of the sample with regard to the wood structure—interior or exterior rings, branch-es—provided. The current radiocarbon dates do not

Sanders Plain is grog or grit tempered. The speci-men from the Lincoln I site may be grog tempered; there is certainly some grit in the paste. The problem is the vessel has been restored, and without breaking the restoration, there is currently no way to get a clear look at the vessel paste in cross-section. This particular vessel has been described by both McNerney (1987:40) and Tiffany (2010) and is a locally made or traded item.

The Sanders Plain vessel is an example of what one of us observed, that “Glenwood contact with Mississippian culture is restricted, indirect, and dis-continuous…. the Mississippian presence in the Glen-wood culture need not be from Cahokia given the generalized nature of Mississippian materials from Glenwood culture sites” (Tiffany 1991:188–189). Bil-leck (1993:272) concurs: “The Mississippian traits in the Glenwood locality are generalized traits that are the product of regional interaction rather than derived from a single source such as Cahokia.” Billeck’s com-ments were made before the Glenwood phase and Nebraska variant were redated to A.D. 1200–1400 (Lensink 2010). Another ceramic item refl ecting Mis-sissippian infl uence reported by Billeck (1993:88, Fig-ure 4.6) is a small red-slipped, shell-tempered sherd from site 13ML128 (Figure 15). Decoration consists of a combination of punctates and curvilinear trailed lines of a style associated with Mathews Incised vari-ety found in the lower Mississippian Valley and other contemporaneous Mississippian complexes (Hilge-man 2000:114–115; Phillips 1970:128).

The late dates explain much with regard to the lack of Mississippian infl uence from Cahokia in the Nebraska variant that is present in the Mill Creek cul-ture and other Initial Middle Missouri sites that date to the Stirling phase at Cahokia (A.D. 1100–1200). McNerney’s (1987:25) observation is on the mark: “Many of the Mississippian-like traits manifested in the Nebraska phase are highly attenuated. The hypothesis offered here is that [this] attenuation is the result of Nebraska phase contact with or diffusion through an intermediate Caddoan source.”

Shell ArtifactsIn the Midwest and eastern Plains, long-nosed

god masquettes made of marine shell occur in early Mississippian contexts dating to A.D. 1050–1250 (Wil-liams and Goggin 1956). Two such masquettes have been recovered from Mill Creek sites in northwest-ern Iowa (Jones site, 13CK1, and Siouxland Sand and Gravel site, 13WD402). To date, no masquettes have been found in Nebraska variant sites. Conversely, shell gorgets bearing turkey cock motifs are part of the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex and are well dated to A.D. 1200–1400. (Kneberg 1959; Sullivan 2001). No


Figure 15. Mathews Incised variety Manly, 13ML128 (Cat. No. 322-1245).

Figure 16. Turkey cock pendant, 13ML139 (Cat. No. 339-C2-3).

Figure 17. Tri-notched points from the Glenwood locality.

accurately characterize either the age of a particular lodge or the time span of the Nebraska variant. Our cross-dating of the Nebraska variant with well-dated sequences from Cahokia, Great Oasis, Initial Middle Missouri, and Oneota indicate that the Nebraska vari-ant is encumbered with a series of problematic dates.

As part of the research associated with this proj-ect, one of the authors (Lensink) fi rst reanalyzed the extant dates from the Nebraska variant. The reas-sessment of available radiometric dates for Nebraska variant sites indicated that the dates were consistent with our original proposed duration for the Nebraska variant of A.D. 1250–1400 (Lensink 2010; Tiffany and Lensink 2010). This analysis enlarges upon and con-siderably refi nes that initial research.

MethodsTable 1 lists all known radiocarbon age determi-

nations (n = 191) available from 69 Nebraska variant sites in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Of the 191 age determinations, 64 are from 20 Steed-Kisker phase sites, while 127 are from the remaining 49 Glen-wood phase sites. Table 1 also provides data on pro-venience, material dated, and sources. We utilized primary sources whenever possible, with dates from published sources verifi ed with original laboratory reports when available. Three radiocarbon age deter-minations reported by Roper and Adair (2011:Table 1) from Features 17 and 20 at site 23CL276 as dating the Steed-Kisker phase at the site were not included in Table 1. McHugh et al. (1982:174–177) argue that these two features are associated with the earlier Woodland component and not the Steed-Kisker house.

Twenty-one radiocarbon age determinations list-ed in Table 1 were initially rejected because of clear problems with the dates or their associations. These

include all 11 dates (GaK-266, 330, 590, 1672, 1673, 1993–1995, and 6224–6226) reported by the radiocar-bon laboratory at Gakushuin University, Japan—a lab-oratory noted for its inconsistent archaeological dates (Blakeslee 1982, 1994). They also include one date (GX-2006) in a questionable context, one date (WIS-699) for a wood charcoal sample incompletely pretreated by the radiocarbon laboratory, two dates (WIS-2294 and 2343) reported as less than 300 years in age and lacking associated errors, one modern date (M-1396) of 50 B.P.,


TABL

E 1.

RA

DIO

CA

RBO

N A

GE

DET

ERM

INA

TIO

NS F

ROM

NEB

RASK

A V

ARI

AN

T SI

TES.

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

Iow

a:13

ML1

19Li

ncol

n I

hous

eG

X-20

0310

65 ±

105

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t32

, 47,

48,

68

yes

hous

eG

X-20

04a

1030

± 1

00—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost f

ragm

ent

33, 4

7, 4

8, 6

8ye

s13

ML1

21—

hous

eG

X-20

0710

80 ±

95

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, Ca

rya

sp.

36, 4

7, 4

8, 6

8ye

sho

use

GX-

2008

690

± 10

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost,

Ulm

us s

p. o

r Celt

is oc

cide

ntal

is 37

, 47,

48,

68

yes

13M

L124

Gam

ble

hous

eG

X-20

0573

5 ±

95—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, p

ole

frag

men

ts, T

ilia a

mer

icana

and

Que

rcus

alba

34, 4

7, 4

8, 6

8ye

s4

cm s

ub-P

ZG

X-20

06b

1520

± 1

00—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, r

ing

poro

us h

ardw

ood

35, 4

7, 4

8, 6

8no

13M

L126

Kuh

lho

use,

fl oo

rW

IS-6

3273

0 ±

55–2

6.1

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, P

opul

us d

eltoi

des

10, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-633

985

± 45

–27.

3ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, 203

-mm

cen

tral

sup

port

pos

t, Q

uerc

us ru

bra

10, 4

7ye

sho

use,

cac

heW

IS-7

1684

0 ±

60–2

6.1

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, U

lmus

rubr

a or

Celt

is oc

cide

ntal

is10

, 47

yes

13M

L128

John

son

Farm

hous

eW

IS-5

6082

0 ±

50—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost

9, 4

7ye

sho

use,

pit

WIS

-565

790

± 50

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

9, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-566

855

± 55

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, ent

ryw

ay p

ost

9, 4

7ye

s13

ML1

29Jo

hnso

n Fa

rmho

use

WIS

-559

820

± 55

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, cen

tral

sup

port

pos

t9,

47

yes

hous

eW

IS-5

6276

5 ±

55—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost

9, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-564

825

± 60

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, roo

f bea

m, U

lmus

am

eric

ana

9, 4

7ye

s13

ML1

30Jo

hnso

n Fa

rmho

use

I-629

571

5 ±

90—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost,

Ulm

us fu

lva

or C

eltis

occi

dent

alis

47ye

sho

use

I-629

694

5 ±

100

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, U

lmus

fulv

a or

Celt

is oc

cide

ntal

is47

yes

hous

eI-6

297

765

± 11

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost,

Ulm

us a

mer

ican

a47

yes

13M

L132

Inst

itutio

n G

rds.

hous

eW

IS-7

0831

0 ±

60–2

5.4

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost,

Ulm

us ru

bra

or C

eltis

occi

dent

alis

10, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-709

860

± 55

–25.

6ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, U

lmus

rubr

a or

Celt

is oc

cide

ntal

is10

, 47

yes

hous

eW

IS-7

1036

0 ±

55–2

5.5

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, i

nter

ior p

ost,

Ulm

us ru

bra

or C

eltis

occi

dent

alis

10, 4

7ye

s13

ML1

35In

stitu

tion

Grd

s.ho

use

WIS

-713

860

± 60

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, U

lmus

rubr

a or

Celt

is oc

cide

ntal

is10

, 47

yes

hous

eW

IS-7

1797

5 ±

60–2

8.4

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, 1

27-m

m ro

of ti

mbe

r, Q

uerc

us a

lba

10, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-719

910

± 60

–26.

2ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, 76–

89-m

m w

all p

osts

, Que

rcus

alb

a10

, 47

yes

13M

L136

Kuh

lho

use,

cac

heW

IS-6

9787

5 ±

60–2

5.7

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, d

ispe

rsed

frag

men

ts fr

om c

ache

, Ulm

us ru

bra

10, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-698

775

± 55

–25.

6ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, roo

f bea

m fr

agm

ent,

Ulm

us a

mer

ican

a10

, 47

yes

hous

eW

IS-6

99c

865

± 55

–25.

5ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, out

er ri

ngs

of 2

12-m

m w

all p

ost,

Que

rcus

alb

a;

sam

e as

WIS

-720

10, 4

7no

hous

eW

IS-7

0269

0 ±

50–2

5.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, o

uter

ring

s of

212

-mm

wal

l pos

t, Q

uerc

us a

lba;

sa

me

as W

IS-6

9910

, 47

yes

13M

L138

Kuh

lho

use,

cac

heW

IS-7

2910

10 ±

55

–10.

9ra

diom

etri

cch

arre

d m

aize

ker

nels

10, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-700

835

± 55

–25.

3ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, U

lmus

rubr

a or

Celt

is oc

cide

ntal

is10

, 47

yes

hous

eW

IS-7

0185

0 ±

55–2

4.1

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost,

Ulm

us ru

bra

or C

eltis

occi

dent

alis

10, 4

7ye

s


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED).

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

(Iow

a)13

ML1

39K

uhl

hous

eW

IS-6

9144

0 ±

45–2

5.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, e

ntry

way

pos

t, U

lmus

rubr

a or C

eltis

occid

enta

lis10

, 47

yes

13M

L145

McG

eeho

use,

cac

heW

IS-8

9470

0 ±

55−2

6.0

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, 1

20-m

m p

ost,

Popu

lus d

eltoi

des

11, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-896

770

± 60

−27.

4ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, 75-

mm

roof

bea

m fr

agm

ent,

Frax

inus

amer

icana

11, 4

7ye

sho

use,

fl oo

rW

IS-9

0075

5 ±

55−2

5.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, t

wig

-siz

ed fr

agm

ent,

Ulm

us a

mer

ican

a11

, 47

yes

13M

L155

Stat

e Sc

hool

hous

eW

IS-8

7769

0 ±

50−2

6.6

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, 1

27-m

m c

entr

al s

uppo

rt p

ost,

Ost

yra

sp.

11, 4

7ye

sho

use

WIS

-878

705

± 50

−26.

3ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, 152

-mm

wal

l pos

t, Ju

glan

s nig

ra11

, 47

yes

13M

L175

d—

near

F2

ISG

S-31

4484

0 ±

70−2

5.9

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al49

, 71

yes

near

F3

ISG

S-31

4576

0 ±

70−1

1.2

radi

omet

ric

carb

oniz

ed g

rass

ste

ms

50, 7

1ye

sne

ar F

3IS

GS-

3147

710

± 90

−16.

9ra

diom

etri

cca

rbon

ized

gra

ss s

tem

s (9

0%) a

nd w

ood

char

coal

(10%

)51

, 71

yes

near

F3

ISG

S-31

4872

0 ±

70−2

4.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al52

, 71

yes

13M

L176

Wal

l Rid

geho

use

WIS

-207

612

00 ±

70

−25.

7ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, out

er ri

ngs

of c

entr

al p

ost,

Ulm

us ru

bra

41, 8

2ye

sho

use,

F4

WIS

-229

4<

300

−26.

9ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, dis

pers

ed42

, 43,

67

noho

use,

F5

WIS

-229

543

0 ±

70−2

7.1

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, d

ispe

rsed

42, 4

3, 6

7ye

sho

use,

F5

ISG

S-A

3132

760

± 20

−25.

1A

MS

carb

oniz

ed n

utsh

ell f

ragm

ents

, Jug

land

acea

e25

, 91

yes

hous

e, F

5Be

ta-3

8284

381

0 ±

30−2

5.2

AM

Sca

rbon

ized

nut

shel

l fra

gmen

ts, J

ugla

ndac

eae

14, 2

3ye

sho

use,

F7

ISG

S-A

3181

720

± 15

−22.

9A

MS

carb

oniz

ed fo

od re

sidu

e fr

om in

terio

r of g

rit-te

mpe

red

body

sher

d26

, 92

yes

hous

e, F

8IS

GS-

A31

3364

5 ±

15−9

.9A

MS

carb

oniz

ed m

aize

cob

frag

men

t, Ze

a m

ays;

sam

e as

Bet

a-38

2844

27, 9

1ye

sho

use,

F8

Beta

-382

844

650

± 30

−10.

5A

MS

carb

oniz

ed m

aize

cob

frag

men

t, Ze

a m

ays;

sam

e as

ISG

S-A

3133

14, 2

4ye

s13

ML2

16Li

ttle

Pony

Hou

se 2

I-693

750

± 90

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, lod

ge ti

mbe

r19

, 70

yes

13M

L219

Ston

ebro

okH

ouse

1SI

-210

670

± 70

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, cen

tral

pos

t19

, 62

yes

Hou

se 2

, fi ll

SI-2

1110

50 ±

90

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

19, 6

2ye

s13

ML2

22St

einh

eim

erpo

stho

leSI

-212

740

± 80

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

19, 6

2ye

s13

ML3

60Ba

reho

use,

fl oo

rBe

ta-5

5494

620

± 60

−26.

0ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, 8-c

m b

eam

, Ulm

us am

erica

na, o

uter

10

of 2

0 rin

gs12

, 15

yes

13M

L361

Mill

iped

eho

use,

fl oo

rBe

ta-5

5495

690

± 60

−9.1

radi

omet

ric

char

red

mai

ze k

erne

ls, Z

ea m

ays

12, 1

5ye

s13

ML4

29D

avis

Ori

ole

hous

e, fi

llBe

ta-2

6704

561

0 ±

40−9

.1A

MS

char

red

mai

ze, Z

ea m

ays

13, 9

4ye

sho

use,

fi ll

Beta

-267

046

510

± 40

−9.4

AM

Sch

arre

d m

aize

, Zea

may

s13

, 94

yes

Kan

sas:

14D

P10

Nuz

umho

use,

fi ll

GaK

-167

2e42

0 ±

90—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al54

, 96

noho

use,

F6

GaK

-167

3e37

0 ±

90—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al54

, 96

noho

use,

F4,

F5

WIS

-326

860

± 55

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, lar

ge p

ost

8, 9

6ye

s14

DP1

3*Sq

uaw

Cre

ekho

use

(?),

F2M

-106

939

0 ±

75—

radi

omet

ric

char

red

mat

eria

l, pr

obab

ly b

ark

28, 4

5ye

sho

use

(?),

F2IS

GS-

A14

5770

5 ±

15−7

.9A

MS

char

red

mai

ze k

erne

l, Ze

a m

ays

3, 5

3, 6

5, 7

7f , 80

, 87,

93

yes


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED).

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

(Kan

sas)

(14D

P13*

)(S

quaw

Cre

ek)

hous

e (?

), F2

ISG

S-A

1458

685

± 15

−24.

8A

MS

char

red

bean

seed

, Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris3,

53,

66,

77f ,

80, 8

8, 9

3ye

s

14LV

380*

Zach

aria

sA

rea

4, F

9Be

ta-3

4371

900

± 50

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

57ye

sA

rea

4, F

9Be

ta-3

6366

910

± 50

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

57ye

sA

rea

2A

A43

407

789

± 39

−25.

3A

MS

char

red

pit,

Prun

us s

p.61

yes

Are

a 3

Beta

-363

6511

90 ±

70

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

57, 6

1ye

s14

LV10

71*D

B16

0N, 5

7EBe

ta-1

0187

671

0 ±

40−7

.4A

MS

char

red

mai

ze k

erne

l, Ze

a m

ays

58ye

s14

9N, 5

7EN

SRL-

3434

550

± 60

−8

.0A

MS

char

red

mai

ze k

erne

l, Ze

a m

ays

58ye

s14

LV10

82*S

cott

hous

e, fl

oor

ISG

S-50

7463

0 ±

70−2

5.9

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, b

eam

59ye

sho

use,

F2

ISG

S-55

4061

0 ±

70−2

5.3

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, r

ed e

lm, U

lmus

sp.

59, 6

1ye

sho

use,

fl oo

rO

S-44

5077

0 ±

25−2

6.74

AM

Sch

arre

d nu

tshe

lls, C

oryl

us s

p.59

, 61

yes

14LV

1083

*Cae

nen

hous

e, in

terio

rO

S-49

0541

5 ±

26−2

8.59

AM

Sch

arre

d nu

tshe

ll60

yes

Mis

sour

i:23

AN

56C

obb

Hou

se 1

, F3

Beta

-106

92g

670

± 70

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

40, 8

4ye

sH

ouse

1, F

3Be

ta-1

0693

g83

0 ±

90—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al40

, 84

yes

23BN

2*C

love

rdal

eho

use

ISG

S-A

1460

905

± 15

−20.

8A

MS

char

red

food

resi

due

from

she

rd5,

77,

90

yes

hous

e, in

terio

rIS

GS-

A17

2686

0 ±

20−2

6.2

AM

Sch

arre

d fo

od re

sidu

e fr

om sh

ell-t

empe

red

sher

d78

yes

hous

e, in

terio

rIS

GS-

A17

2785

0 ±

20−2

3.7

AM

Sch

arre

d fo

od re

sidu

e fr

om c

ordm

arke

d sh

erd

78ye

s23

CL1

08*

Che

ster

Ree

ves

Mou

ndSE

Qua

dU

Ga-

1149

995

± 70

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

74ye

sSE

Qua

dU

Ga-

1200

920

± 70

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

74ye

sSE

Qua

dU

Ga-

1201

980

± 65

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

74ye

s23

CL1

09*

Rich

ards

on

Hul

seF4

UG

a-11

4586

5 ±

70—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al74

yes

F5U

Ga-

1146

1260

± 9

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al74

yes

F5U

Ga-

1147

835

± 75

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

74ye

sF5

AA

4143

484

2 ±

38−2

6.9

AM

Sch

arre

d be

an s

eed,

Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris1

yes

F5IS

GS-

A14

5676

0 ±

15−2

5.5

AM

Sch

arre

d be

an s

eed,

Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris5,

77

yes

F5IS

GS-

A14

5983

5 ±

15−1

0.0

AM

Sch

arre

d m

aize

ker

nel,

Zea

may

s5,

77,

89

yes

F6U

Ga-

1148

695

± 10

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al74

yes

23C

L113

*Fr

iend

and

Foe

Hou

se 1

, F20

1M

-903

6/7

850

± 11

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al20

, 81

yes

Hou

se 2

, F27

GaK

-199

3e98

0 ±

90—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, C

arya

sp.

20, 8

1no

Hou

se 3

, F12

5G

aK-1

994e

900

± 90

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

20, 8

1no

Hou

se 3

, F13

4G

aK-1

995e

1190

± 8

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, p

ost

20, 8

1no


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED)

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

(Mis

sour

i)23

CL1

15*

—F3

AA

4143

380

4 ±

42−2

4.2

AM

Sch

arre

d be

an s

eed,

Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris1

yes

F3IS

GS-

A14

5580

0 ±

15−2

4.3

AM

Sch

arre

d be

an s

eed,

Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris5,

77,

85

yes

F3IS

GS-

A17

8167

0 ±

15−2

5.4

AM

Sch

arre

d be

an s

eed,

Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris78

yes

23C

L118

*Bu

tche

rF3

01M

-217

911

70 ±

150

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

20, 3

1ye

s23

CL1

63*

Kat

zF3

Beta

-976

0389

0 ±

40—

AM

Sw

ood

char

coal

4ye

s23

CL1

64*

Cra

btre

eho

use,

F1

Beta

-121

008

890

± 50

−27.

6A

MS

woo

d ch

arco

al6,

7ye

sho

use,

F2

Beta

-121

009

930

± 50

−28.

0A

MS

woo

d ch

arco

al6,

7ye

s23

PL4*

W. W

. You

ngH

ouse

1, F

11M

-234

666

0 ±

100

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

31, 8

1ye

sH

ouse

1, S

wal

l M

-234

788

0 ±

110

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, pro

babl

e ex

teri

or s

uppo

rt p

ost

31, 8

1ye

sH

ouse

1, F

7IS

GS-

A17

2579

0 ±

20−2

3.6

AM

Sch

arre

d re

sidu

e4,

78

yes

Hou

se 1

, F17

ISG

S-A

1731

685

± 20

−26.

9A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

4, 7

8ye

sH

ouse

1, fl

oor

ISG

S-11

732

685

± 20

−25.

4A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

4, 7

8ye

s23

PL6*

Van

dive

r Md.

CBu

rial

C13

GaK

-266

e66

0 ±

80—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al56

, 81

no23

PL13

*St

eed-

Kis

ker

mid

den

M-1

395A

840

± 11

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, c

harr

ed m

aize

cob

and

ker

nels

, Zea

may

s30

, 81

yes

mid

den

M-1

395B

950

± 11

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, c

harr

ed m

aize

cob

and

ker

nels

, Zea

may

s30

, 81

yes

Hou

se 3

M-1

396

50 ±

100

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, lar

ge c

entr

al p

ost

30, 8

1no

Hou

se 3

, hea

rth

M-1

397

1090

± 1

10—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al30

, 81

yes

Hou

se 3

M-1

399

720

± 10

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al80

yes

Hou

se 3

ISG

S-A

1728

900

± 20

−23.

1A

MS

char

red

food

resi

due

from

she

ll-te

mpe

red

sher

d4,

5, 7

8ye

sH

ouse

3IS

GS-

A17

2988

5 ±

20—

AM

Sch

arre

d fo

od re

sidu

e fr

om s

hell-

tem

pere

d sh

erd

4, 5

, 78

yes

Pit 3

9M

-139

874

0 ±

110

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

30ye

spi

tG

aK-5

90e

870

± 80

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

55no

23PL

16*

Coo

nsH

ouse

1U

Ga-

392

635

± 60

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

73ye

sH

ouse

1, fi

llU

Ga-

466

645

± 60

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

73ye

sH

ouse

1, F

1BU

Ga-

467

1045

± 6

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al73

yes

Hou

se 1

, F1B

UG

a-37

511

80 ±

110

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

73ye

sH

ouse

1, F

1, h

eart

hA

A41

431

656

± 68

−28.

5A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

1, 4

, 5ye

sH

ouse

1, F

1A

A41

432

858

± 39

−24.

7A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

1, 4

, 5ye

sH

ouse

1, fi

ll, 0

N, 1

5EIS

GS-

A17

3066

0 ±

20−2

7.6

AM

Sch

arre

d be

an s

eed,

Pha

seol

us v

ulga

ris4,

78

yes

23PL

48*

War

ren

Gre

sham

Hou

se 1

, fl o

orM

-112

210

75 ±

75

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, pol

e fr

agm

ent

28, 8

1ye

s23

PL54

*M

cCla

rnon

Hou

se 1

, fl o

orG

aK-3

30e

690

± 90

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, lar

ge p

ost

56, 8

1no

23PL

80*

Whi

teho

use,

F3

ISG

S-A

1733

720

± 20

−9.7

AM

Sch

arre

d m

aize

ker

nel,

Zea

may

s74

, 78

yes


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED)..

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

(Mis

sour

i)(2

3PL8

0*)

(Whi

te)

hous

e, F

3IS

GS-

A17

3480

5 ±

20−1

0.2

AM

Sch

arre

d m

aize

ker

nel,

Zea

may

s74

, 78

yes

hous

e, F

2IS

GS-

A17

3579

0 ±

20−9

.7A

MS

char

red

mai

ze k

erne

l, Ze

a m

ays

74, 7

8ye

sN

ebra

ska:

25BT

1H

oust

onH

ouse

1, P

it 2

SI-6

3185

0 ±

140

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

79, 8

3ye

sH

ouse

2, fl

oor

SI-6

3268

0 ±

140

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

79, 8

3ye

s25

CC

1A

shla

ndH

ouse

1, C

3SI

-623

1040

± 1

00—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

25C

C17

T. D

avis

Hou

se D

M-1

367

705

± 10

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al29

, 38,

39

yes

25C

C44

Zess

enF2

M-1

366

585

± 10

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al19

, 29

yes

25C

C71

Dod

son

Hou

se 2

NW

U-6

681

0 ±

80—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al15

, 22,

63

yes

Hou

se 2

NW

U-6

773

0 ±

95—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, p

ost

15, 2

2, 6

3ye

s25

CC

96C

ass

hous

e, F

7SI

-620

540

± 11

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

hous

e, F

1SI

-621

615

± 11

5—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

25C

C22

8Li

ttle

Paw

nee

Cr.

Hou

se 1

, F89

04W

IS-2

150

660

± 50

−25.

6ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

17, 7

5ye

sH

ouse

1W

IS-2

151

595

± 50

−26.

1ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t or r

oof r

afte

r17

, 75

yes

Hou

se 1

GX-

1643

163

5 ±

75ra

diom

etri

cse

dim

ent h

umat

es fr

om s

oil z

one

in w

hich

Hou

se 1

was

bu

ried

17ye

s

25D

K7

—H

ouse

2M

-107

351

5 ±

75—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, p

ost

28ye

sH

ouse

2M

-107

483

0 ±

75—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, s

ame

post

as

M-1

073

but s

atur

ated

with

pa

raffi

n28

no

25D

O2

Min

nie

Park

erH

ouse

1, fl

oor

SI-6

2855

5 ±

65—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

Hou

se 4

, fl o

orSI

-629

775

± 17

5—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

Mid

den

3SI

-630

290

± 12

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

25LC

1Sc

hrad

erH

ouse

1, fl

oor

SI-6

3653

5 ±

115

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

83ye

s25

NH

2M

ajor

sH

ouse

1SI

-619

910

± 14

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

25N

H88

Duc

k C

reek

Hou

se 1

Beta

-242

275

810

± 50

−22.

9ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

21, 4

4ye

sH

ouse

1Be

ta-2

4227

889

0 ±

40−2

4.6

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al21

, 44

yes

F23

Beta

-242

276

950

± 50

−24.

5ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

21, 4

4ye

sH

ouse

2Be

ta-2

4463

286

0 ±

60−2

4.8

AM

Sw

ood

char

coal

21, 4

4ye

s25

OT2

4—

Hou

se 1

GaK

-622

4e78

0 ±

170

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

17no

Hou

se 1

GaK

-622

5e94

0 ±

110

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

17no

Hou

se 1

GaK

-622

6e98

0 ±

100

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

17no

25RH

1Le

ary

hous

eSI

-617

620

± 10

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, l

odge

pos

t69

, 83

yes


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED).

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

(Neb

rask

a)(2

5RH

1)(L

eary

)ho

use

SI-6

1762

0 ±

100

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, lod

ge p

ost

69, 8

3ye

sho

use,

F14

SI-6

1811

70 ±

60

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, lod

ge p

ost?

69, 8

3ye

sho

use,

pos

t mol

dBG

S 23

0164

1 ±

40−2

5.83

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al64

, 69,

76

yes

hous

e, p

ost m

old

BGS

2302

548

± 40

−26.

36ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

64, 6

9, 7

6ye

s25

RH60

—F1

WIS

-230

912

75 ±

60

−26.

9ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

18, 4

6ye

s25

RH69

—ho

use

Tx-8

523

620

± 45

−26.

3ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, ou

ter r

ings

, sam

e po

st a

s Tx-

835

18, 7

2, 9

5ye

sho

use

Tx-8

524h

920

± 55

−26.

0ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, tim

ber,

oute

r-m

id ri

ngs

18, 7

2, 9

5ye

sho

use

Tx-8

525i

610

± 45

−26.

4ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, wal

l pos

t, in

ner r

ings

, sam

e po

st a

s Tx-

823

18, 7

2, 9

5ye

sho

use,

fl oo

rTx

-852

781

5 ±

40−2

6.4

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, d

ispe

rsed

18, 7

2, 9

5ye

sho

use,

F3

Tx-8

526

–323

± 4

6−2

7.2

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost (

?) o

r roo

f raf

ter (

?)18

, 72,

95

no25

RH70

—ho

use,

fl oo

rTx

-852

976

5 ±

45−2

6.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, d

ispe

rsed

18, 7

2, 9

5ye

sho

use,

F12

OS-

1814

390

5 ±

50−9

.08

AM

Sch

arre

d m

aize

ker

nel,

Zea

may

s72

yes

F1 (e

xter

nal)

Tx-8

528j

945

± 45

−25.

9ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, dis

pers

ed18

, 72,

95

yes

F1 (e

xter

nal)

Tx-8

530

1085

± 5

5−2

6.4

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, d

ispe

rsed

18, 7

2, 9

5ye

s25

SY1

Farn

swor

thH

ouse

1, C

1SI

-624

735

± 11

5—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

Hou

se 2

, fl o

orSI

-625

610

± 14

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

25SY

2C

orni

sh M

eado

ws

Hou

se 1

SI-6

2255

0 ±

100

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, pos

t83

yes

25SY

31Pa

tters

onH

ouse

1, fl

oor

WIS

-231

032

5 ±

40−2

6.9

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, r

oof t

imbe

r46

, 63

yes

Hou

se 1

WIS

-231

154

0 ±

55−2

6.2

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, w

all p

ost

46, 6

3ye

sH

ouse

1, fl

oor

Tx-8

318

k64

5 ±

40−2

6.9

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al64

, 95

yes

Hou

se 1

, fl o

orTx

-831

9 l72

0 ±

45−2

6.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al64

, 95

yes

Hou

se 3

, pit

Tx-8

320m

745

± 55

−26.

3ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

64, 9

5ye

sH

ouse

3, p

itTx

-832

183

0 ±

40−2

6.3

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al64

, 95

yes

Hou

se 3

, pit

Tx-8

322n

745

± 80

−26.

3ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

64, 9

5ye

sH

ouse

3, p

itTx

-832

372

0 ±

40−2

5.1

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al64

, 95

yes

Hou

se 3

, fl o

orTx

-832

4o71

0 ±

45−2

5.2

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al64

, 95

yes

Hou

se 4

WIS

-215

393

0 ±

50−2

4.7

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, p

ost

17, 6

4, 7

5ye

sH

ouse

4, F

8411

AA

3610

778

5 ±

40−9

.4A

MS

char

red

mai

ze k

erne

l, Ze

a m

ays

1, 2

yes

Hou

se 4

, F84

07A

A36

108

810

± 45

−29.

0A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

1, 2

yes

Hou

se 4

, F84

11A

A36

109

780

± 40

−25.

3A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

1, 2

yes

Hou

se 4

, F84

11A

A36

110

825

± 45

−26.

5A

MS

char

red

bean

see

d, P

hase

olus

vul

garis

1, 2

yes

Mid

den

1W

IS-2

152

765

± 50

−25.

4ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

17, 6

4, 7

5ye

s


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED).

Site

Site

Nam

ePr

oven

ienc

eLa

bora

tory

Sa

mpl

e N

o.A

ge (B

.P.)

δ13 C

(‰)

Dat

ing

Met

hod

Mat

eria

l Dat

edSo

urce

Dat

e U

sed

(Neb

rask

a)25

SY45

Plat

tford

Hou

se 1

, fl o

orTx

-857

682

0 ±

130

−25.

5ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

16, 1

8, 9

5ye

sH

ouse

1, P

N21

8Tx

-857

964

0 ±

40−2

5.4

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, p

ost

16, 1

8, 9

5ye

sH

ouse

1, p

itTx

-858

0p66

5 ±

45−2

5.9

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al16

, 18,

95

yes

NSH

S-2,

Pos

t 1

Tx-8

578

630

± 95

−26.

5ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

, ent

ryw

ay p

ost

16, 1

8, 9

5ye

sN

SHS-

2, P

ost 9

Tx-8

577

770

± 14

5−2

6.5

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al, e

ntry

way

pos

t16

, 18,

95

yes

25TS

1—

Mid

den

1W

IS-2

343

< 30

0−2

4.8

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al18

, 46

no25

TS2

Ross

Hou

se 1

SI-6

3372

0 ±

140

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

83ye

sH

ouse

2SI

-634

750

± 12

0—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

Hou

se 3

SI-6

3558

5 ±

115

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

83ye

s25

TS3

—H

ouse

1W

IS-2

344

690

± 60

−26.

44ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

18, 4

6ye

s25

WN

1Fr

ank

Park

erH

ouse

1SI

-626

360

± 50

—ra

diom

etri

cw

ood

char

coal

83ye

sH

ouse

2SI

-627

515

± 11

5—

radi

omet

ric

woo

d ch

arco

al83

yes

Not

es:

Site

: * =

Ste

ed-K

iske

r pha

se s

ites;

rem

aini

ng s

ites

are

Gle

nwoo

d ph

ase.

Prov

enie

nce:

C =

Cac

he, F

= F

eatu

re, N

SHS

= N

ebra

ska

Stat

e H

isto

rica

l Soc

iety

, PN

= P

rove

nien

ce N

umbe

r, PZ

= p

low

zone

; unl

ess

desi

gnat

ed b

y a

num

ber,

“hou

se”

sign

ifi es

the

sam

e ho

use

for a

ll pr

oven

ienc

es w

ithin

a s

ite.

Labo

rato

ry S

ampl

e N

umbe

r: A

A =

Nat

iona

l Sci

ence

Fou

ndat

ion–

Ari

zona

Acc

eler

ator

Mas

s Sp

ectr

omet

ry L

abor

ator

y, U

nive

rsity

of A

rizo

na; B

eta

= Be

ta A

naly

tic In

c.; B

GS

= Ra

dioc

arbo

n D

atin

g La

bora

tory

, Dep

artm

ent o

f Ear

th S

cien

ces,

Bro

ck U

nive

rsity

; GaK

= R

adio

carb

on L

abor

ator

y, G

akus

huin

Uni

vers

ity; G

X =

Geo

chro

n La

bora

tori

es, I

nc.;

I =

Tele

dyne

Isot

opes

, Inc

., IS

GS

= Ill

inoi

s St

ate

Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y Ra

dioc

arbo

n D

atin

g La

bora

tory

; M =

Uni

vers

ity M

emor

ial–

Phoe

nix

Proj

ect R

adio

carb

on L

abor

ator

y, U

nive

rsity

of

Mic

higa

n; N

SRL

= La

bora

tory

for A

MS

Radi

ocar

bon

Prep

arat

ion

and

Rese

arch

, Ins

titut

e fo

r Arc

tic a

nd A

lpin

e Re

sear

ch (I

NST

AA

R), U

nive

rsity

of C

olor

ado

at B

ould

er; N

WU

=

Neb

rask

a W

esle

yan

Uni

vers

ity R

adio

carb

on L

abor

ator

y; O

S =

Nat

iona

l Oce

an S

cien

ces

Acc

eler

ator

Mas

s Sp

ectr

omet

ry F

acili

ty, W

oods

Hol

e O

cean

ogra

phic

Inst

itutio

n; S

I =

Smith

soni

an E

nvir

onm

enta

l Res

earc

h C

ente

r Rad

ioca

rbon

Dat

ing

Labo

rato

ry, S

mith

soni

an In

stitu

tion;

Tx

= Ra

dioc

arbo

n D

atin

g La

bora

tory

, Bal

cone

s Re

sear

ch C

ente

r, U

nive

r-si

ty o

f Tex

as–A

ustin

; UG

a =

Geo

chro

nolo

gy L

abor

ator

y (n

ow C

ente

r for

App

lied

Isot

ope

Stud

ies)

, Uni

vers

ity o

f Geo

rgia

; WIS

= W

isco

nsin

Rad

ioca

rbon

Lab

orat

ory,

Uni

vers

ity

of W

isco

nsin

–Mad

ison

14C

Age

: All

date

s fo

r the

Rad

ioca

rbon

Dat

ing

Labo

rato

ry, B

alco

nes

Rese

arch

Cen

ter,

Uni

vers

ity o

f Tex

as–A

ustin

(Tx)

are

bas

ed o

n th

e or

igin

al p

rim

ary

labo

rato

ry d

ata

(Win

ans

2010

). Th

e da

tes

wer

e ro

unde

d fo

llow

ed th

e co

nven

tion

set f

orth

by

Stui

ver a

nd P

olac

h (1

977)

.D

ate

Met

hod:

AM

S =

acce

lera

tor m

ass

spec

trom

etry

.a D

ate

repo

rted

as 1

030

± 10

0 B.

P. b

y H

otop

p (1

978b

:221

, Tab

le 2

5, 2

6; 1

978c

) and

as 1

030

± 10

0 B.

P. b

y G

eoch

ron

(197

0b) i

n th

e or

igin

al la

b re

port

. The

Geo

chro

n la

b va

lue

is u

sed

here

.b D

ate

not u

sed

in th

e an

alys

is b

ecau

se o

f poo

r ass

ocia

tion

with

the

lodg

e an

d su

spec

t loc

atio

n ju

st 4

cm

bel

ow th

e pl

owzo

ne (H

otop

p 19

78b:

222)

.c D

ate

not u

sed

beca

use

the

sam

ple

was

trea

ted

usin

g on

ly H

Cl r

athe

r tha

n th

e st

anda

rd H

Cl a

nd H

3PO

4 (H

otop

p 19

78b:

217–

218)

.d A

lthou

gh th

ese

date

s ar

e no

t ass

ocia

ted

with

a d

efi n

ed lo

dge,

the

num

erou

s refi t

s fr

om th

e ar

ea e

xcav

ated

(Mor

row

199

5:38

–39)

impl

y co

ntem

pora

neity

of t

he d

ates

.e D

ate

was

not

use

d be

caus

e th

e C

entr

al P

lain

s tr

aditi

on d

ates

pro

vide

d by

Gak

ushu

in L

abor

ator

y in

Japa

n ar

e no

w c

onsi

dere

d to

be

unre

liabl

e (B

lake

slee

199

4, B

lake

slee

198

2).

f Site

mis

iden

tifi e

d as

14D

P25

by R

oper

and

Ada

ir (2

011:

Tabl

es 2

and

3).

g Dat

e re

port

ed a

s B.

C. r

athe

r tha

n A

.D b

y W

alte

rs (1

984:

14).


TABL

E 1

(CO

NTI

NU

ED).

h Dat

e re

port

ed a

s 92

5 ±

55 B

.P. b

y Bo

zell

et a

l. (1

999:

Tabl

e 36

) and

as

920

± 55

B.P

. by

Win

ans

(201

0). D

iffer

ence

may

be

due

to ro

undi

ng c

onve

ntio

n us

ed.

i Dat

e re

port

ed a

s 61

0 ±

50 B

.P. b

y Bo

zell

et a

l. (1

999:

Tabl

e 36

) and

as

610

± 45

B.P

. by

Win

ans

(201

0). D

iffer

ence

may

be

due

to ro

undi

ng c

onve

ntio

n us

ed.

j The

δ13

C v

alue

for t

his

sam

ple

is re

port

ed b

y th

e so

urce

s lis

ted

as −

2.59

, whi

ch is

cle

arly

inco

rrec

t for

woo

d ch

arco

al a

nd n

o do

ubt r

esul

ted

from

a la

b er

ror i

n pl

acin

g th

e de

cim

al

poin

t. Th

e pu

tativ

e co

rrec

t val

ue o

f −25

.9 is

use

d he

re, a

nd th

e lis

ted

14C

age

has

bee

n re

calc

ulat

ed fr

om th

e or

igin

al la

b da

ta (W

inan

s 20

10).

The

date

was

ori

gina

lly re

port

ed a

s 13

50 ±

50

B.P.

by

Boze

ll et

al.

(199

9:Ta

ble

36) a

nd a

s 13

50 ±

45

B.P.

by

Win

ans

(201

0).

k Dat

e re

port

ed a

s 65

0 ±

40 B

.P. b

y Lu

dwic

kson

et a

l. (1

999:

Tabl

e 4)

and

as

645

± 40

B.P

. by

Win

ans

(201

0). D

iffer

ence

may

be

due

to ro

undi

ng c

onve

ntio

n us

ed.

l Dat

e re

port

ed a

s 72

0 ±

40 B

.P. b

y Lu

dwic

kson

et a

l. (1

999:

Tabl

e 4)

and

as

720

± 45

B.P

. by

Win

ans

(201

0). D

iffer

ence

may

be

due

to ro

undi

ng c

onve

ntio

n us

ed.

mD

ate

repo

rted

as

750

± 50

B.P

. by

Ludw

icks

on e

t al.

(199

9:Ta

ble

4) a

nd a

s 74

5 ±

55 B

.P. b

y W

inan

s (2

010)

. Diff

eren

ce m

ay b

e du

e to

roun

ding

con

vent

ion

used

.n D

ate

repo

rted

as

750

± 80

B.P

. by

Ludw

icks

on e

t al.

(199

9:Ta

ble

4) a

nd a

s 74

5 ±

80 B

.P. b

y W

inan

s (2

010)

. Diff

eren

ce m

ay b

e du

e to

roun

ding

con

vent

ion

used

.o D

ate

repo

rted

as

750

± 50

B.P

. by

Ludw

icks

on e

t al.

(199

9:Ta

ble

4) a

nd a

s 71

0 ±

45 B

.P. b

y W

inan

s (2

010)

.p D

ate

repo

rted

as

660

± 50

B.P

. by

Boze

ll et

al.

(199

9:Ta

ble

36) a

nd B

leed

et a

l (20

08:T

able

2-2

), an

d as

665

± 4

5 B.

P. b

y W

inan

s (2

010)

. Diff

eren

ce m

ay b

e du

e to

roun

ding

con

ven-

tion

used

.

Sour

ce: 1

Ada

ir 2

003

25C

orde

ll 20

14c

49Ill

inoi

s St

ate

Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y 19

95a

73N

oake

s an

d Br

anda

u 19

762

Ada

ir 2

010b

26C

orde

ll 20

14d

50Ill

inoi

s St

ate

Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y 19

95b

74O

’Bri

en 1

977:

82, 8

4, 9

2, 1

983

Ada

ir 2

014a

27C

orde

ll 20

14e

51Ill

inoi

s St

ate

Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y 19

95c

75Pr

ior a

nd P

help

s 19

924

Ada

ir 2

014b

28C

rane

and

Gri

ffi n

1963

52Ill

inoi

s St

ate

Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y 19

95d

76Ri

tterb

ush

2002

5A

dair

201

4c29

Cra

ne a

nd G

riffi

n 19

6453

Illin

ois

Stat

e M

useu

m 1

983

77Ro

per a

nd A

dair

201

16

Ang

elbe

ck 1

999:

67–6

830

Cra

ne a

nd G

riffi

n 19

6654

Kig

oshi

196

878

Rope

r and

Ada

ir 2

012

7A

ngel

beck

and

Mar

tin 1

999:

App

endi

x 4

31C

rane

and

Gri

ffi n

1972

55K

igos

hi a

nd K

obay

ashi

196

679

Shaw

197

4:10

, 15

8Be

nder

et a

l. 19

7032

Geo

chro

n La

bora

tori

es 1

970a

56K

igos

hi e

t al.

1964

80Sh

ippe

e 19

599

Bend

er e

t al.

1973

33G

eoch

ron

Labo

rato

ries

197

0b57

Loga

n 19

9081

Ship

pee

1972

:810

Bend

er e

t al.

1976

34G

eoch

ron

Labo

rato

ries

197

0c58

Loga

n 19

9882

Stev

ento

n an

d K

utzb

ach

1990

11Be

nder

et a

l. 19

7835

Geo

chro

n La

bora

tori

es 1

970d

59Lo

gan

2004

:50

83St

ucke

nrat

h an

d M

ielk

e 19

7212

Beta

Ana

lytic

Inc.

199

236

Geo

chro

n La

bora

tori

es 1

970e

60Lo

gan

2005

:46

84W

alte

rs 1

984:

1413

Beta

Ana

lytic

Inc.

200

937

Geo

chro

n La

bora

tori

es 1

970f

61Lo

gan

2010

85W

ang

2010

a14

Beta

Ana

lytic

Inc.

201

438

Gra

dwoh

l 196

762

Long

and

Mie

lke

1966

86W

ang

2010

b15

Bille

ck 1

993:

158,

162

, 167

, Tab

le 5

.139

Gra

dwoh

l 196

9:14

663

Ludw

icks

on 2

014

87W

ang

2010

c16

Blee

d et

al.

2008

:21–

22, T

able

2-2

40G

rant

ham

201

2:20

, Tab

le 8

64Lu

dwic

kson

et a

l. 19

99:1

7–18

, Tab

le 4

88W

ang

2010

d17

Boze

ll an

d Lu

dwic

kson

994

:18–

19, 1

02–1

0341

Gre

en 1

989

65M

ande

l 200

9a89

Wan

g 20

10e

18Bo

zell

et a

l. 19

99:T

able

36

42G

reen

199

066

Man

del 2

009b

90W

ang

2010

f19

Brow

n 19

67:7

–9, 2

7, 3

6, 4

843

Gre

en 1

992

67M

cJun

kin

1993

91W

ang

2014

a20

Cal

abre

se 1

969:

62–6

5, 1

89–9

0, T

able

s 10

–11

44H

atfi e

ld 2

014

68M

cKus

ick

1970

92W

ang

2014

b21

Car

lson

200

9:17

–18,

Tab

le 3

.245

Hea

vin

1970

69M

iddl

eton

200

393

Wat

t 201

422

Col

eman

197

646

Hild

ebra

nd 2

014

70M

isso

uri B

asin

Pro

ject

196

2:5

94W

hitta

ker 2

014

23C

orde

ll 20

14a

47H

otop

p 19

78b:

206–

245,

Tab

les

25, 2

671

Mor

row

199

5:40

95W

inan

s 20

1024

Cor

dell

2014

b48

Hot

opp

1978

c72

Nel

son

2006

b:35

–36,

Tab

le 3

.596

Woo

d 19

69b


1958; Ward and Wilson 1978; Wilson and Ward 1981). For this study, we have used the methods for compar-ing and combining dates provided by Ward and Wil-son (1978). They consider two cases when combining determinations. Case I pertains to age determinations obtained from the same sample, while Case II applies to age determinations obtained from different samples known from archaeological evidence to be approxi-mately contemporaneous. In this study, Case I applies to only one site provenience, the house at the Wall Ridge site (13ML176), where two age determinations (ISGS-A3133 and Beta-382844, Table 1) were obtained from the same maize cob fragment. For the Wall Ridge site, two age determinations (WIS-699 and WIS-702, Table 1) were obtained from the outer rings of a wall post. One of those (WIS-699), however, we rejected earlier because it had been obtained from a portion of the sample that had been treated using only HCl rather than the standard HCl and H3PO4 treatment the other sample had received.

Following Ward and Wilson (1978), two error fac-tors in addition to the counting variance, Ei

2, need to be considered when combining age determinations subsumed by Case II. These are the calibration curve error, Fi

2, and an error factor, Gi2, for the “sunspot

effect” when short-lived materials such as seeds or food residues are used to obtain age determinations. The total error is then Si

2 = Ei2 + Fi

2 + Gi2. Citing Clark

(1975:256), Ward and Wilson (1978) provide values for Fi

2 of 502 and 602 years for age determinations less than and greater than 2700 years B.P., respectively. These values were reasonable for Clark’s calibration curve of 1975, but considerable reduction in curve errors has been achieved since then. To arrive at an appropri-ate value for Fi

2 when calibrating age determinations using Calib Rev 7.0.2 based on the Intcal 13.14c cali-bration curve (Reimer et al. 2013; Stuiver and Reimer 1993), we averaged the reported standard errors for the periods A.D. 1000–1500 and A.D. 1200–1400 (data from http://www.radiocarbon.org/IntCal13%20fi les/intcal13.14c) and obtained averages of 11.1 years (range 9–12 years) and 11.3 years (range 10–12 years), respec-tively. A rounded value for Fi

2 of 11 years seems rea-sonable and has been used in all calculations and sta-tistical tests associated with combining dates.

While Ward and Wilson provide a “sunspot effect” error value (Gi

2) of 702 years, we use a value of 12 years. A detailed derivation of this value is pre-sented in Appendix A.

Table 2 provides all the data and computation necessary to arrive at Si

2 for all approximately contem-porary site proveniences with two or more age deter-minations. The table also reports the results of the initial t-tests for each provenience. The statistical tests

one date run on a post treated with paraffi n (M-1074), and one date (Tx-8526) reported as ultramodern. In addition, we excluded all three age determinations from the Chester Reeves Mound site (23CL108), as all three samples (O’Brien 1977:92) appear to have been obtained from the mound fi ll rather than the burials proper (Finnegan 1977:Table 25) and, hence, are ques-tionably associated with the mound construction.

Combining DatesWe consider the remaining 170 radiocarbon age

determinations as potentially viable data to determine the dates of individual sites. More secure dates for archaeological sites with short-term occupations, how-ever, can be obtained by combining multiple radiocar-bon age determinations from the same contempora-neous site provenience (Ward and Wilson 1978). Fol-lowing the dictum that “one date is no date” (Aitken 1990:95), we will consider only those proveniences with two or more age determinations that have been obtained from a short-duration cultural activity at a site. The pooling of 14C ages will permit statistical test-ing for homogeneity on all sets of age determinations to be considered for dating. Age determinations will be combined for each contemporary site provenience whenever statistically permissible.

In most cases, the contemporary site proveniences were Nebraska variant houses or other features such as a storage pits or middens. In one case, site 13ML175, lithic retrofi ts were used to establish contemporaneity. All of these features represent the results of relatively short-term cultural activities that can be considered approximately contemporaneous. Most storage pits were fi lled within a year or two of use, and earth-lodge houses were used for 20 years or less (Toom 1992a, 1992b; Weitzner 1979; Will 1930; Wilson 1934). One of us (Tiffany) has recently completed a detailed analysis of ceramics and estimated duration of storage and house fl oor area to compute the average length of occupation of 15 houses for the Glenwood phase in Iowa. The results indicate that houses were occupied for 4 ± 3 years with a range of 1 to 9 years. Apparent occupancy considerably less than the 20-year house use life may be due to the fact that the houses were intermittently occupied, perhaps seasonally, but it does reinforce that we have every reason to believe the 14C age determinations from a single house should be highly contemporaneous.

Prior to combining the age determinations from a site provenience, determinations must be statistical-ly compared to determine whether they derive from the same population. Several studies have developed methods for comparing and combining age determina-tions (Long and Rippeteau 1974; Shott 1992; Spaulding


TABLE 2. STATISTICAL TESTS AND POOLED AGE DETERMINATIONS FOR CONTEMPORARY NEBRASKA VARIANT PROVENIENCES WITH MULTIPLE DATES, OUTLIERS NOT REMOVED.

Site ProvenienceLaboratorySample No.

14C Age(B.P.) Ei2 Fi2 Gi

2 Si2T-Test Results

by Site and ProvenienceIowa:13ML119 house GX-2003 1065 1052 112 — 1062 statistically the same, p < .05

GX-2004 1030 1002 112 — 1012 t = .057 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 1047 732

13ML121 house GX-2007* 1080 952 112 — 962 statistically different, p < .05GX-2008* 690 1002 112 — 1012 t = 7.83 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1)

13ML126 house WIS-632 730 552 112 — 562 statistically different, p < .05WIS-633* 985 452 112 — 462 t = 12.74 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-716 840 602 112 612

13ML128 house WIS-560 820 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-565 790 502 112 — 512 t = .74 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-566 855 552 112 — 562

Pooled values 820 302

13ML129 house WIS-559 820 552 112 — 562 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-562 765 552 112 — 562 t = .68 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-564 825 602 112 — 612


13ML130 house I-6295 715 902 112 — 912 statistically the same, p < .05I-6296 945 1002 112 — 1012 t = 3.03 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)I-6297 765 1102 112 1112


13ML132 house WIS-708 310 602 112 — 612 statistically different, p < .05WIS-709* 860 552 112 — 562 t = 56.88 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-710 360 552 112 — 562

13ML135 house WIS-713 860 602 112 — 612 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-717 975 602 112 — 612 t = 1.79 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-719 910 602 112 — 612


13ML136 house WIS-697 875 602 112 — 612 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-698 775 552 112 — 562 t = 5.43 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-702 690 502 112 — 512


13ML139 house WIS-691* 440 452 112 — 462 statistically different, p < .05WIS-700 835 552 112 — 562 t = 44.01 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-701 850 552 112 — 562

13ML145 house WIS-894 700 552 112 — 562 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-896 770 602 112 — 612 t = .82 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)WIS-900 755 552 112 122 572


13ML155 house WIS-877 690 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-878 705 502 112 — 512 t = .043 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 698 362

13ML175 Near F2/3 ISGS-3144 840 702 112 — 712 statistically the same, p < .05ISGS-3145 760 702 112 122 722 t = 1.88 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)ISGS-3147 710 902 112 122 912

ISGS-3148 720 702 112 712


13ML176 house WIS-2076* 1200 702 112 — 712 statistically different, p < .05WIS-2295* 430 702 112 — 712 t = 91.65 (χ2 = 11.1, df = 5)ISGS-A3132**** 760 202 112 122 262

Beta-382843* 810 302 112 122 342


TABLE 2 (CONTINUED).



2 Si2T-Test Results

by Site and Provenience(Iowa)13ML176 house ISGS-A3181*** 720 152 112 122 222

Pooled maize cob values*a

646 — — — 162

13ML429 house Beta-267045 610 402 112 122 432 statistically the same, p < .05Beta-267046 510 402 112 122 432 t = 2.70 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 560 302

Kansas:14DP13 house (?) M-1069 390 752 112 — 762 statistically different, p < .05

ISGS-A1457* 705 152 112 122 222 t = 15.87 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)ISGS-A1458 685 152 112 122 222

14LV380 Area 4 Beta-34371 900 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05Beta-36366 910 502 112 — 512 t = .019 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 905 362

14LV1082 house ISGS-5074 630 702 112 — 712 statistically different, p < .05ISGS-5540 610 702 112 — 712 t = 6.62 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)OS-4450* 770 252 112 122 302

Missouri:23AN56 House 1 Beta-10692 670 702 112 — 712 statistically the same, p < .05

Beta-10693 830 902 112 — 912 t = 1.92 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 731 562

23BN2 house ISGS-A1460 905 152 112 122 222 statistically the same, p < .05ISGS-A1726 860 202 112 122 262 t = 3.12 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)ISGS-A1727 850 202 112 122 262


23CL109 F5 UGa-1146* 1260 902 112 — 912 statistically different, p < .05UGa-1147 835 752 112 — 762 t = 31.49 (χ2 = 9.49, df = 4)AA41434 842 382 112 122 412

ISGS-A1456 760 152 112 122 222

ISGS-A1459 835 152 112 122 222

23CL115 F3 AA41433 804 422 112 122 452 statistically different, p < .05ISGS-A1455 800 152 112 122 222 t = 19.56 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)ISGS-A1781* 670 152 112 122 222

23CL164 house Beta-121008 890 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05Beta-121009 930 502 112 — 512 t = .31 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 910 362

23PL4 House 1 M-2346 660 1002 112 — 1012 statistically different, p < .05M-2347 880 1102 112 — 1112 t = 13.291 (χ2 = 9.49, df = 4)ISGS-A1725* 790 202 112 122 262

ISGS-A1731 685 202 112 122 262

ISGS-A1732 685 202 112 122 262

23PL13 midden M-1395A 840 1102 112 — 1112 statistically the same, p < .05M-1395B 950 1102 112 — 1112 t = .49 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 895 782

House 3 M-1397 1090 1102 112 — 1112 statistically the same, p < .05M-1399 720 1002 112 — 1012 t = 6.25 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)ISGS-A1728 900 202 112 122 262

ISGS-A1729 885 202 112 122 262


23PL16 House 1 UGa-392 635 602 112 — 612 statistically different, p < .05UGa-466 645 602 112 — 612 t = 64.90 (χ2 = 12.6, df = 6)UGa-467* 1045 602 112 — 612

UGa-375* 1180 1102 112 — 1112





2 Si2T-Test Results

by Site and Provenience(Missouri)(23PL16) (House 1) AA41431 656 682 112 122 702

AA41432* 858 392 112 122 422

ISGS-A1730 660 202 112 122 262

23PL80 house ISGS-A1733* 720 202 112 122 262 statistically different, p < .05ISGS-A1734 805 202 112 122 262 t = 6.09 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)ISGS-A1735 790 202 112 122 262

Nebraska:25CC71 House 2 NWU-66 810 802 112 — 812 statistically the same, p < .05

NWU-67 730 952 112 — 962 t = .41 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 777 622

25CC96 house SI-620 540 1102 112 — 1112 statistically the same, p < .05SI-621 615 1152 112 — 1162 t = .22 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 576 802

25CC228 House 1 WIS-2150 660 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05WIS-2151 595 502 112 — 512 t = .80 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1)GX-16431 635 752 112 — 762


25NH88 House 1 Beta-242275 810 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05Beta-242278 890 402 112 — 412 t = 1.49 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 859 322

25RH1 house SI-617 620 1002 112 — 1012 statistically different, p < .05SI-618* 1170 602 112 — 612 t = 77.78 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)BGS 2301 641 402 112 — 412

BGS 2302 548 402 112 — 412

25RH69 house Tx-8523 620 452 112 — 462 statistically different, p < .05Tx-8524* 920 552 112 — 562 t = 28.33 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)Tx-8525 610 452 112 — 462

Tx-8527 815 402 112 — 412

25RH70 house Tx-8529* 765 452 112 — 462 statistically different, p < .05OS-18143* 905 502 112 122 532 t = 3.98 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1)

F1 Tx-8528 945 452 112 — 462 statistically the same, p < .05Tx-8530 1085 552 112 — 562 t = 3.73 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 1001 562

25SY31 House 1 WIS-2310* 325 402 112 — 412 statistically different, p < .05WIS-2311* 540 552 112 — 562 t = 49.78 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)Tx-8318 645 402 112 — 412

Tx-8319 720 452 112 — 462

House 3 Tx-8320 745 552 112 — 562 statistically the same, p < .05Tx-8321 830 402 112 — 412 t = 5.08 (χ2 = 9.49, df = 4)Tx-8322 745 802 112 — 812

Tx-8323 720 402 112 — 412

Tx-8324 710 452 112 — 462


House 4 WIS-2153** 930 502 112 — 512 statistically the same, p < .05AA36107 785 402 112 122 432 t = 6.23 (χ2 = 9.49, df = 4)AA36108 810 452 112 122 482

AA36109 780 402 112 122 432

AA36110 825 452 112 122 482


25SY45 House 1 Tx-8576 820 1302 112 — 1302 statistically the same, p < .05Tx-8579 640 402 112 — 412 t = 1.76 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)


were performed using Calib 7.0.2 (Reimer et al. 2013) to calculate the test statistic T as follows:

n

ipi SAAT1

22

n

i

n

iip SSAA1

2

1

2 1

1

1

21

n

ip SAV

where Ai are the individual age determinations, and Ap is the pooled mean of n age determinations given by

When the t-test indicates that the null hypothesis of contemporaneity cannot be rejected, the age deter-minations are pooled, and a variance V(Ap) for each pooled mean is calculated using

Table 2 provides the pooled means and variances for all site proveniences where the age determina-tions are found to be statistically homogeneous. A total of 25 site proveniences with multiple age deter-minations, or 60 percent of all sites, are found to be statistically the same and can have their age determi-nations pooled. The pooled means, while refl ecting age determinations that are statistically homogenous, do not necessarily accurately estimate the true age of the provenience. In a number of instances, multiple age determinations were obtained from the same laboratory in uninterrupted, or nearly uninterrupted, succession. Errors in calibrating counting equipment can introduce similar systematic errors in all of the dates in the series. There is no way to test for this

possibility except to obtain additional age determi-nations.

Identifying OutliersTable 2 also lists the remaining 16 sites provenienc-

es (40 percent) found to have age determinations that are statistically different, i.e., the null hypothesis that Ho:θ1 = 0 can be rejected. Since age determinations for these proveniences are not temporally homogenous, they should not be pooled without further consider-ation. Typically, under such circumstances, attempts should be made to objectively identify age determina-tions that are outliers. Two of the site proveniences have only two age determinations each—houses for sites 13ML121 and 25RH70. For these proveniences, no additional analyses can be conducted, and hence the proveniences must be eliminated from further con-sideration. The remaining 14 site proveniences that have statistically different age determination can be examined for outliers.

Two basically different approaches to identify-ing outlying dates have been utilized. The fi rst tests for outliers utilize t-test statistical tests prior to cali-bration (e.g., Cook and Comstock 2014; Wilson and Ward 1981), while the second calibrates the age deter-minations then uses Bayesian statistics to identify outliers (e.g., Ramsey 2009). We use the fi rst of these approaches in a protocol similar to that used by Cook and Comstock (2014) and Shott (1992). For each of the 14 site proveniences where sets of age determinations were found to be statistically different (Table 2), we constructed a matrix of pair-wise t-tests. The 14C sam-ple having the largest set of T values (i.e., most signifi -cantly different at p ≤ .05) was excluded as an outlier. The remaining age determinations were then retested

.

.




2 Si2T-Test Results

by Site and Provenience(Nebraska)(25SY45) (House 1) Tx-8580 665 452 112 — 462


NSHS-2 Tx-8577 770 1452 112 — 1452 statistically the same, p < .05Tx-8578 630 952 112 — 962 t = .65 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 673 802

Notes:*Age determinations found to be outliers by pair-wise t-tests and rejected for further analysis.**Age determination rejected because of suspected old wood effect, t-test signifi cant at p < .05.***Age determination rejected because of suspected freshwater reservoir effect, t-test signifi cant at p < .05.****Age determination rejected because of suspected problems with nutshell results.aAge determinations for ISGS-A3133 and Beta-382844 were obtained from the same maize cob fragment and therefore should be

combined under Case I prior to Case II testing ({Ward & Wilson 1978 #585180}). For ISGS-A3133, Si2 = 142 + 112 = 192; for Beta-

382344, Si2 = 302 + 112 = 322; pooled mean age for two age determinations = 646 ± 16 years B.P.; statistically the same, p < .05; t =

.018 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1).


.

for homogeneity. If the t-test found the set statisti-cally homogeneous, outlier elimination ceased, and a pooled mean and variance were calculated. If the set was not homogeneous, outlier elimination based on the pair-wise t-tests continued until homogeneity was achieved. This protocol constitutes a relatively simple but objective way to identify outliers in a set of age determinations believed on archaeological grounds to be approximately contemporaneous.

The protocol was successful at identifying outli-ers for all sets of site provenience age determinations found to be statistically different with the exception of the set for the house at the Wall Ridge site (13ML176). In this case, all but two of the seven age determinations were rejected by the pair-wise t-tests. Final results of the t-test procedure are provided in Table 3, and the 20 age determinations eliminated as outliers are identi-fi ed in Table 2.

Remaining Outliers: The Case for Old WoodA set of t-tests were performed to identify the

presence of any remaining age determinations that refl ect old-wood biases not eliminated by the previ-ous outlier rejection method. Table 4 summarizes the data available for seven site proveniences containing age determinations obtained from both long-lived wood charcoal samples and shorter-lived specimens such as seeds, cooking residues, or twigs. T-tests were then run between the two types of samples and the results listed in Table 4. For only one site provenience, House 4 at the Patterson site (25SY31), was the wood charcoal sample found to be statistically different from the pooled value for the short-lived materials. This age determination can be argued as refl ecting the bias of old wood and was therefore rejected.

For one site provenience in Table 4, House 3 at the Steed-Kisker site (23PL13), all of the short-lived samples used to obtain AMS age determinations were food residues from cooking pots. In the next section of this chapter, we discuss at the length the possible age offsets that can be applied to such 14C determina-tions due to the freshwater reservoir effect. Offsets can be comparable to those for old wood. Hence, the result that no statistical difference was found between the two types of samples for Steed-Kisker does not preclude that the age determinations for one or both of the wood charcoal samples do not exhibit an old-wood effect.

The fact that there is one age determination for which a statistical argument can be made for use of old wood strongly suggests that some of the age deter-minations previously rejected by the pair-wise t-tests may have been obtained on old wood. It also leaves open the question as to whether site proveniences with

age determinations that were all run on wood charcoal but still were found to be statistically homogenous might in fact represent sites where all of the 14C deter-minations were run on wood equally old. This could be the case where most or all samples were obtained from major architectural elements of a house such as interior supports or large wall posts. Builders could have reused posts or preferentially selected dead and hence “old” trees for posts, in which case, the posts could be considerably older than the current structure itself. The Lincoln I site (13ML119) may represent an example where both dates were obtained on equally old wall posts and hence were statistically homoge-nous but still may predate the house’s use.

As Cook and Comstock (2014) point out, the poten-tial for an old-wood issue to arise strongly depends on the aridity of the climate. The stretch of the Missouri Valley encompassing the Nebraska variant is approxi-mately climatically midway between the xeric condi-tions for the Hohokam dates investigated by Schiffer (1986), where wood survives for centuries, and the more hydric setting for the Fort Ancient dates reviewed by Cook and Comstock, where wood survives less than a decade. Therefore, we might expect some wood, depending on species, to last decades. In this light, our one potential old-wood offset of 132 ± 55 14C years (1σ range of 77–187 14C years), obtained for a wall post from House 4 at the Patterson site, seems feasible.

Remaining Outliers: The Case for the Freshwater Reservoir Effect

The freshwater reservoir effect can alter 14C ages when radiocarbon dating food residues. The freshwa-ter reservoir effect arises when fossil carbon contain-ing no 14C is incorporated into the residues. This can result from cooking aquatic organisms originating in water high in carbonates or bicarbonates, prepar-ing food in shell-tempered vessels, or cooking maize prepared by nixtamalization using lime (see Hart and Lovis 2014 for a recent review of the literature pertain-ing to the freshwater reservoir effect and in particular a review of Roper 2013). The negative temporal offsets for the freshwater reservoir effect due to fi sh and mol-lusks cooked in pots can be considerable (Fischer and Heinemeier 2003). The offset varies with the carbonate hardness of the water supporting the aquatic organ-ism and the species involved.

AMS radiocarbon results for the Nebraska vari-ant were obtained for seven samples of food residues from four site proveniences: the house at the Wall Ridge site (13ML176) (n = 1); the house at the Clover-dale site (23BN2) (n = 3); House 1 at the W. W. Young site (23PL4) (n = 1); and House 3 at the Steed-Kisker site (23PL13) (n = 2) (Table 1). For the Wall Ridge and


TABLE 3. STATISTICAL TESTS AND POOLED AGE DETERMINATIONS FOR NEBRASKA VARIANT PROVENIENCES WITH MULTIPLE DATES, INITIAL OUTLIERS REMOVED.



2 Si2T-Test Results

by Site and ProvenienceIowa:13ML126 house WIS-632 730 552 112 — 562 statistically the same, p < .05

WIS-716 840 602 112 612 t = .1.76 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 780 412



13ML176 house ISGS-A3132 760 202 112 122 262 statistically the same, p < .05ISGS-A3181 720 152 112 122 222 t = 1.38 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 737 172

Kansas:14DP13 house (?) ISGS-A1457 705 152 112 122 222 statistically the same, p < .05

ISGS-A1458 685 152 112 122 222 t = .41 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 695 162

14LV1082 house ISGS-5074 630 702 112 — 712 statistically the same, p < .05ISGS-5540 610 702 112 — 712 t = .040(χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 620 502

Missouri:23CL109 F5 UGa-1147 835 752 112 — 762 statistically the same, p < .05

AA41434 842 382 112 122 412 t = 7.01 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)ISGS-A1456 760 152 112 122 222

ISGS-A1459 835 152 112 122 222


23CL115 F3 AA41433 804 422 112 122 452 statistically the same, p < .05ISGS-A1455 800 152 112 122 222 t = .0064 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 801 202

23PL4 House 1 M-2346 660 1002 112 — 1012 statistically the same, p < .05M-2347 880 1102 112 — 1112 t = 3.09 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)ISGS-A1731 685 202 112 122 262

ISGS-A1732 685 202 112 122 262


23PL16 House 1 UGa-392 635 602 112 — 612 statistically the same, p < .05UGa-466 645 602 112 — 612 t = 1.71 (χ2 = 7.81, df = 3)AA41431 656 682 112 122 702

ISGS-A1730 660 202 112 122 262


23PL80 house ISGS-A1734 805 202 112 122 262 statistically the same, p < .05ISGS-A1735 790 202 112 122 262 t = .17 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 798 182

Nebraska:25RH1 house SI-617 620 1002 112 — 1012 statistically the same, p < .05

BGS 2301 641 402 112 — 412 t = 2.63 (χ2 = 5.99, df = 2)BGS 2302 548 402 112 — 412


25RH69 house Tx-8523 620 452 112 — 462 statistically the same, p < .05Tx-8525 610 452 112 — 462 t = .024 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 615 332

25SY31 House 1 Tx-8318 645 402 112 — 412 statistically the same, p < .05Tx-8319 720 452 112 — 462 t = 1.48 (χ2 = 3.84, df = 1) Pooled values 678 312


W. W. Young sites, AMS age determinations were also obtained for carbonized annuals (seeds), permitting statistical comparison. Age determinations obtained on wood charcoal were not considered for compari-son because of the possibility of an old-wood effect masking the freshwater reservoir effect and because all of the 14C ages for wood charcoal were obtained by radiometric dating and hence have errors too large to permit the statistical detection of the freshwater res-ervoir effect. Although the previous pair-wise t-tests had already led to rejection of the W. W. Young site age determination obtained on cooking residue, we are utilizing this result to help shed light on equivo-cal pair-wise t-tests of the age determinations from the Wall Ridge site. Test results on the two sets of pairs, one for the Wall Ridge site and the other for the W. W. Young site, are provided in Table 5. In both cases where annuals and residues were dated, the results obtained on the cooking residues are statistically older than those obtained on the carbonized annuals. The offsets of 74 ± 27 14C years for the Wall Ridge site and 105 ± 32 14C years for the W. W. Young site can be

achieved assuming (1) fi sh were cooked in the ceramic vessels yielding the residues, (2) the fossil carbon in the fi sh amounted to 10 percent for both offsets, and (3) raw fi sh in the cooking mixture amounted to 26 ± 8 percent and 35 ± 9 percent for two offsets, respectively (interpolating data from Hart and Lovis 2014:Table 3). Given the very high carbonate and bicarbonate levels in ground waters for this stretch of the Missouri River (National Cooperative Soil Survey 2012), fossil carbon levels of 10 percent should be easily achievable. The large number of remains from very small fi sh reported for the Wall Ridge site (Theler, personal communica-tion 2014) certainly suggest the boiling of fi sh. There-fore, we accept that the freshwater reservoir effect may play a role in these two residue dates. The age determination for the W. W. Young site has already been rejected by the pair-wise t-tests. On the basis of the strong possibility of a freshwater reservoir effect applying to the residue age determination for the Wall Ridge site, we believe that the 14C age determina-tion for this site (ISGS-A3181, Table 2) should also be rejected.

TABLE 4. DIFFERENCES FOR PROVENIENCE-PAIRED RADIOCARBON AGE DETERMINATIONS FOR WOOD CHARCOAL AND CARBONIZED ANNUALS AFTER REMOVAL OF OUTLIERS BASED ON PAIR-WISE T-TESTS.

Wood Charcoal Carbonized Annualsa

T-Test Results for Mean Ages of Wood Compared with Annualsb

Differencec

(Years)Site Provenience14C Age(B.P.) Si2

14C Age(B.P.) Si2

13ML145 house 700 562 755 572

770 612

Pooled values 732 412 755 572 statistically the same, t = .11 013ML175 near F2/F3 840 712 760 722

720 712 710 912

Pooled values 780 502 741 562 statistically the same, t = .27 023CL109 F5 835 762 760 222

835 222

842 412

Pooled values 835 762 803 152 statistically the same, t = .0082 023PL4 House 1 660 1012 685 262

685 262


720 1012 885 262


645 612 660 262

Pooled values 640 432 660 242 statistically the same, t = .16 025SY31 House 4 930 512 785 432

810 482

780 432

825 432

Pooled values 930 512 798 232 statistically different, t = 5.57 132 ± 55aAnnuals include seeds, cooking residues, and twigs.bp < .05; χ2 = 3.84, df = 1cZero unless statistically signifi cant different.


nutshell fragments of differing ages burned by pre-vious natural or anthropogenic fi res. Because of sus-picions raised by the t-test results and the rejection of the cooking-residue age determination (the only other date that statistically agreed with the remain-ing nutshell date), we are compelled to reject ISGS-A3132. Thus, all seven of the age determinations obtained from the Wall Ridge site are rejected. We strongly suspect that the one 14C age resulting from the pooling of the two AMS age determinations for the same corn cob under Case I (Ward and Wilson 1978) (see Table 2) does refl ect the true age of the site, but until additional dates for the site are obtained, this can not defi nitively be demonstrated.

Rejected ResultsOf the original 129 age determinations in Table 2,

a total of 27 were rejected. The rejected 14C ages rep-resent 21 percent of the pre-elimination values. We believe that the high rejection rate probably underes-timates the true rate of unacceptable 14C results in the original sample of 170 age determinations. In other words, over 34 of the starting sample of age determi-nations would likely be found to be unreliable if all sites had two or more 14C results to permit statistical testing. Even with more than one date, uniform sys-tematic errors due to old wood or counting equip-ment calibration can still conspire to make bogus ages appear acceptable. Only additional dates from the same contemporary site provenience can reduce this problem.14C Pooled Age Results

The pooled means and variances for all site prove-niences passing the fi nal statistical tests for temporal homogeneity are listed in Table 6. These pooled values were calibrated using Calib 7.0.2 based on the Intcal 13.14c calibration curve with 1- and 2-σ errors (Reimer et al. 2013; Stuiver and Reimer 1993). Summed proba-bility distributions were calculated from the calibrated results using Calib Rev 7.0.2.

Unfortunately, we have no age determinations on annuals for the two remaining site proveniences that have age determinations based on food residues—the house at the Cloverdale site (n = 3) and House 3 at the Steed-Kisker site (n = 2). Therefore, we are unable to statistically test these age determinations for the freshwater reservoir effect, but given the strong pos-sibility of a freshwater reservoir effect applying to the residues from the Wall Ridge and W. W. Young sites, the 14C results from these two additional sites must be considered with suspicion, a concern we share with Roper (2014:51). In the case of the Cloverdale site, all of the age determinations are from food residues. For the Steed-Kisker site, the small standard errors on the AMS ages for food residues result in weighted means when pooling values that almost entirely refl ect the ages obtained on the food resides. In other words, the dating of these two sites is completely dominated by 14C results obtained on residues. The sites will be considered later in the light that their 14C ages could exhibit substantial freshwater offsets.

The Case of the Wall Ridge SiteIf we reject the residue age determination for

the Wall Ridge site, only one date, ISGS-A3132, is left of the original two dates found to constitute a statistically homogenous ensemble (Table 2). The material for ISGS-A3132 and Beta-382843 consisted of dispersed nutshell fragments of the family Juglan-daceae obtained from the 230–240-cm level of Fea-ture 5, a bell-shaped storage pit. The original sample was divided equally into two parts and the parts submitted separately for AMS dating to Beta Ana-lytic Inc. and the Illinois State Geological Survey. The resulting age determinations (ISGS-A3132 and Beta-382843, Table 2) were found to be statistically differ-ent, with 90 14C years separating the two dates. The cause of this difference can only be surmised, but it is possible that the source of the burned nutshell was surface soil from near the lodge collected to fi ll the emptied storage pit and the soil may have contained

TABLE 5. DIFFERENCES FOR PROVENIENCE-PAIRED RADIOCARBON AGE DETERMINATIONS FOR CARBONIZED FOOD RESIDUES AND CARBONIZED ANNUALS.

Food Residues Carbonized Annualsa T-Test Results for Mean Ages of Residues Compared with

AnnualsbDifferencec

(Years)Site Provenience14C Age(B.P.) Si2

14C Age(B.P.) Si2

13ML176 house 720 222 646 162 statistically different, t = 7.40 74 ± 2723PL4 House 1 790 262 685 262

685 262

Pooled values 790 262 685 182 statistically different, t = 11.02 105 ± 32aAnnuals include seeds, cooking residues, and twigs.bp < .05; χ2 = 3.84, df = 1cZero unless statistically signifi cant different.


Figure 18. Summed probability distributions for the calibrated radiocarbon dates from the Nebraska variant sites in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska (Table 6): a, distribution for site proveniences with ≥ 2 pooled dates (n = 33 sites, 36 dates); b, distribution for site prove-niences with ≥ 3 pooled dates (n = 15 sites, 16 dates); c, distribution for site proveniences with ≥ 4 pooled dates (n = 6 sites, 6 dates). The distributions are shown relative to the Intcal 13.14c calibration curve (Reimer et al. 2013)

Calibrated Date Results

The summed probability distributions for all of the calibrated dates from Nebraska variant sites are shown in Figure 18. These distributions are based on the calibrated pooled means and variances of all sta-tistically acceptable age determinations provided in Table 6. The three sets of distributions in the fi gure dis-play a progressive decrease in temporal spread from Figure 18a though Figure 18c. This decrease largely refl ects a reduction in error resulting from averaging an increasing number of dates per site provenience.

TABLE 6. FINAL POOLED AGE DETERMINATIONS FOR

NEBRASKA VARIANT PROVENIENCES.

Site Provenience14C Age(B.P.) Si2 No.

Iowa:13ML119 house 1047 732 213ML126 house 780 412 213ML128 house 820 302 313ML129 house 802 332 313ML130 house 804 582 313ML132 house 337 412 213ML135 house 915 352 313ML139 house 842 402 213ML145 house 740 332 313ML155 house 698 362 213ML175 near F2/3 763 382 413ML429 house 560 302 2

Kansas:14DP13 house (?) 695 162 214LV380 Area 4 905 362 214LV1082 house 620 502 2

Missouri:23AN56 House 1 731 562 223BN2 house 876 142 323CL109 F5 804 142 423CL115 F3 801 202 223CL164 house 910 362 223PL4 House 1 689 182 423PL13 midden 895 782 2

House 3 892 182 423PL16 House 1 655 212 423PL80 house 798 182 2

Nebraska:25CC71 House 2 777 622 225CC96 house 576 802 225CC228 House 1 629 332 325HN88 House 1 859 322 225RH1 house 596 282 325RH69 house 615 332 225RH70 F1 1001 362 225SY31 House 1 678 312 2

House 3 754 222 5House 4 798 232 4

25SY45 House 1 660 302 3NSHS-2 673 802 2


Figure 19. Summed probability distributions for the calibrated radiocarbon dates from the Nebraska variant sites (Steed-Kisker phase sites with dates based on food residues omitted [23BN2 and 23PL13]): a, distribution for site proveniences with ≥ 2 pooled dates (n = 32 sites, 34 dates); b, distribution for site proveniences with ≥ 3 pooled dates (n = 13 sites, 14 dates); c, distribution for site proveniences with ≥ 4 pooled dates (n = 5 sites, 5 dates). The distributions are shown relative to the Intcal 13.14c calibration curve (Reimer et al. 2013).

Figure 20. Summed probability distributions for the calibrated radiocarbon dates from sites in Nebraska and Steed-Kisker phases of the Nebraska variant. The distri-butions are shown relative to the Intcal 13.14c calibra-tion curve (Reimer et al. 2013). Distributions are for site provenience with ≥ 2 pooled dates. Nebraska phase: n = 22 sites, 24 dates. Steed-Kisker phase (site proveniences with residues dates excluded): n = 11 sites, 11 dates. Steed-Kisker phase (site proveniences with residues dates included): n = 12 sites, 13 dates.

A.D. 1200 in all three distributions. In Figure 19b the entire portion of the probability within the 1σ error limits has moved to after A.D. 1200. In both Figure 19a and Figure 20a, a relatively low level of summed prob-ability at 2σ error level extending back in time to A.D. 1000 can be attributed to a combination of the repeated reversals in the calibration curve between A.D. 1000 and A.D. 1150, and residual cases of age determina-tions obtained from old wood. The latter can occur when only two age determinations are pooled and when both are obtained from equivalently old wood. Statistical testing alone will not reveal this situation.

Some reduction no doubt is also due to the decrease in the number of sites sampled.

Because of our previously expressed concern about the freshwater reservoir effect yielding 14C ages with unacceptably large offset for two Steed-Kisker phase sites, Cloverdale and Steed-Kisker, we have decided also to display the summed probability distribution for the Nebraska variant dates after removing the results for these two sites. The resulting summed probabil-ity distributions are shown in Figure 19. Comparing the distributions shown in Figures 18 and 19, there is a noted reduction in the summed probability prior to


posit a hypothetical scenario where, over an interval of time, house lodges were being constructed, used, and abandoned at a uniform rate. We believe this to be both the most parsimonious and, at the same time, realistic simulation assumption. Using the set of calendar dates for this series of lodges, one can produce, through “back tracing” of the calibration curve, a set of match-ing simulated age determinations. After calibrating the simulated age determinations and obtaining a summed probability distribution for the set, the distribution can be compared with the probability distribution of the actual dates. This process can be repeated using differ-ent time intervals until an interval is found where the simulated summed probability distribution most close-ly matches the distribution for the actual dates.

Following this procedure, we created numerous simulations using sets of 14C age determinations that were then calibrated and summed using Calib rev 7.0.2. For each simulation, the set of radiocarbon age determinations was obtained from the raw data for the IntCal13 radiocarbon calibration curve (www.radiocar-bon.org/IntCal13%20fi les/intcal13.14c). Age determi-nations corresponded to calendar dates at 5-year inter-vals, simulating house lodges constructed and used at 5-year intervals over the time duration for a particular simulation. The duration of the simulations was var-ied until the “best” fi t with the radiocarbon results was obtained. Figure 21 show the results for the simulations that most closely match actual radiocarbon data. Each of the three simulation probability distributions is com-pared with the 14C Nebraska variant summed probabil-ity distributions for the sets of dates—after the two site proveniences based on food residue dates have been removed. The simulation distributions paired with the actual distributions for ≥ 2 dates, ≥ 3 dates, and ≥ 4 dates were obtained by assigning 1σ errors to the simulation ages of 38 years, 27 years, and 22 years, respectively. These simulation error values were obtained by aver-aging the corresponding actual Si

2 errors for each of the three sets of age determinations obtained from Table 6. Identical occupation durations were assumed for each of the three “best” simulations.

One interesting aspect of the simulation results shown in Figure 21 is that the simulation distributions very precisely match the bimodality of the summed probability distributions for the actual 14C dates. This means that the strong peak in probability between A.D. 1300 and 1400 does not indicate that any of the actual sites date later than A.D. 1310, the last date in our simulation series—a series that produced precise-ly the same peak in probability. This peak is strictly an artifact of the reversals in the radiocarbon calibration curve. Therefore, in order to argue for a date later than A.D. 1310 for any of the dated sites, one would need

Figure 20 displays the separate summed probabil-ity distributions for the Glenwood and Steed-Kisker phases of the Nebraska variant. In this fi gure, only the results for site proveniences having two or more dates are shown. Probability distributions for site prove-niences having ≥ 3 dates and ≥ 4 dates are not shown, as we believe these two cases each contain too few dated sites to provide representative samples of both phases when subdivided by phase. Several observa-tions can be drawn from Figure 20. First, when com-paring the distribution for the Glenwood phase to the Steed-Kisker phase with residue dates excluded (top two distributions in Figure 20), it is apparent that the probability distributions cover the same time span and have approximately the same shape. The conclusion we reach is that there is no arguable temporal difference in the Glenwood phase and Steed-Kisker phase once the two Steed-Kisker phase site proveniences with highly suspicious 14C ages based on food residues are removed from the dataset. Second, if the two site proveniences with the food residue–dominated 14C ages are included, as in the bottom distribution of Figure 20, the overall range of the Glenwood and Steed-Kisker distributions remains nearly the same. There is, however, substan-tially more probability, at both the 1σ and 2σ error lev-els, in the Steed-Kisker distribution than the Glenwood distribution prior to A.D. 1200, and that higher level of probability extends back to A.D. 1050. One could conclude from this that the Steed-Kisker phase began as early as A.D. 1050. We believe that this is incorrect for the following reasons. First, there are pronounced reversals, often referred to as “wiggles,” in the radio-carbon calibration curve between A.D. 1050 and 1200. These reversals can cause considerable problems when attempting to obtain meaningful dates from the time period in which the reversals occur. In this case, a sample having a true calendar date of A.D. 1150 will produce a 14C age that, once calibrated, results in a sub-stantial portion of the probability distribution falling in the range of A.D. 1050 to 1100—a completely spurious result. Second, and more importantly, we think hinging the entire early chronology of the Steed-Kisker phase on two site proveniences having 14C ages based on resi-dues that could very well be decades too old due to the freshwater reservoir effect is not the better choice of an alternative hypothesis. We certainly would welcome additional 14C age results, preferably on annuals, from these two site proveniences to resolve the issue, but for the time being, we will continue to adhere to our con-clusion that the two phases are contemporaneous.

With our position on the contemporaneity of the two phases established, what occupation interval do the calibrated radiocarbon dates suggest for the Nebraska variant? One approach to this question is to


Figure 21. Simulation summed probability distribu-tions for uniform occupation duration of A.D. 1220–1310 compared with actual summed probability distributions for calibrated radiocarbon dates from the Nebraska vari-ant sites in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Two site proveniences with age distributions based on food residues (house at the Cloverdale site [23BN2] and House 3 at the Steed-Kisker site [23PL13]) have been removed prior to calibration. Actual radiocarbon distributions are reproduced from Figure 18.

Figure 22. Simulation summed probability distributions for uniform occupation duration of A.D. 1200–1310 com-pared with actual summed probability distributions for calibrated radiocarbon dates from the Nebraska variant sites in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Two site proveniences with age distributions based on food resi-dues (house at the Cloverdale site [23BN2] and House 3 at the Steed-Kisker site [23PL13]) have not been removed prior to calibration. Actual radiocarbon distributions are reproduced from Figure 17.

to devise an equally convincing house occupancy sce-nario over the uniform one we proposed here.

While a time range of A.D. 1220–1310 accounts for all of the dated sites in the Nebraska variant, it is not necessarily the duration of the variant. At most only 36 pooled dates from 33 sites are involved in producing the 14C summed probability distributions in Figure 21. Yet there may be over 500 total Nebraska variant sites of all types based on the recorded site numbers from Iowa presented earlier in this paper—at least 233 to higher estimates of 281 in the Glenwood locality of Iowa alone (Whittaker and Newman 2010:Table 2.2), with a projected upward range of 500–1000 (Billeck

1993:10). It is reasonable to assume that some of these sites must pre- and postdate the sample of sites so far radiocarbon dated.

Figure 22 provides the results of repeating the above simulation exercise using only the actual Nebraska variant age determination sets, including the two site results based on food residues. The best simulation results are now obtained by increasing the predicted age of occupation to A.D. 1200–1310, a 20-year-earlier beginning than resulting from the fi rst set of simulations. A close comparison of Figures 21 and 22 reveals that the fi ts between the real results


is based primarily on ceramic seriation and subsequent site ordination by radiocarbon dates much as Blakeslee and Caldwell (1979) did for the Nebraska variant. The Glenwood local sequence has been hotly debated (e.g., Anderson 1961; Billeck 1993; Brown 1967; Hotopp 1978b; Zimmerman 1977a). More recent research by one of us (Tiffany 2010) supported Anderson’s (1961) original proposition based on seriation and ceramic cross-dating of a sequence of site occupations.

The new chronology, and AMS dates from Wall Ridge, however, suggest that Anderson’s Kullbom phase is not late, but contemporaneous with Nebraska variant occupations in the Keg and Pony Creek drain-ages that make up the Glenwood locality. The presence of Steed-Kisker decorated pottery and red-slipped vessels from the Kullbom sites (collectively 13ML10) and the nearby Wall Ridge site (13ML176) (based on unpublished analysis by Tiffany) also points to con-temporaneity with other lodge sites in the Glenwood locality. In this regard, continued AMS dating of Glen-wood locality sites supports Billeck’s (1993) argument for more overlap, contemporaneity, or both, of lodge sites in the three watersheds of the Glenwood local sequence. If so, the ceramic variability thought to refl ect a chronological sequence by Anderson instead defi nes at least three groups of people spatially segregated in the Glenwood locality (Pony Creek, Keg Creek, Mis-souri Valley) comprising the Glenwood phase. Billeck’s defi nition of subphases based in part on the frequency of the Cahokia-style multi-notch point does not have much support based on our research. The Nebraska variant time span is now shorter than some researchers thought and bracketed differently—it begins later. Ear-lier work that relied on older radiocarbon calibrations and no AMS dates may not withstand scrutiny.

Final Thoughts

Cross-dating of Nebraska variant materials with well-understood sequences from numerous Oneota sites, the Cahokia World Heritage Site, Mill Creek sites, Steed-Kisker settlements, and the Arkansas Val-ley Caddoan sequence leads to a proposed new time duration of A.D. 1200–1350 for the Nebraska variant. Radiocarbon analysis of Nebraska variant dates pre-sented here supports this proposed time range.

To explore historical processes in the example from the Glenwood locality and within the wider Cen-tral Plains region, it will be necessary to develop bet-ter methods for greater chronological resolution with both absolute and relative chronologies. Earthlodge sites, mortuary facilities, and artifact scatters have potential to contribute to a refi nement and revision of

and those provided by the simulation are not as pre-cise for the distributions in Figure 22 as they are for those in Figure 21, particularly prior to A.D. 1200. While conducting the progressive set of simulations that led to the fi nal ones provided in Figures 21 and 22, we found that distributions that included the sus-pect residue dates were considerably more diffi cult to “fi t” than the corresponding distributions without the residue dates. This reinforced our belief that the radio-carbon results from the house at the Cloverdale site and House 3 at the Steed-Kisker site should be con-sidered skeptically until these two site proveniences, with their food-residue-based ages, can be reexamined through additional new 14C dating results.

This analysis of the radiocarbon dates from Nebraska variant sites indicates that the current radio-carbon chronology can be accounted for by a uni-formly continuous occupation span from A.D. 1200 to A.D. 1310, and more likely from A.D. 1220 to A.D. 1310. With the possibility of yet undated sites or bet-ter dated sites falling just before or just after the later range, we conclude the radiocarbon results strongly support our proposed variant time frame based on artifact cross-dating of A.D. 1200–1350.

Roper and Adair’s (2011, 2012) most recent run of AMS dates suggests that the majority of Central Plains tradition sites are contemporaneous with the Nebraska variant, making it diffi cult for the Nebraska variant to have derived from them. A few earlier dates in the twelfth century from some of the sites they dated, how-ever, keep open the possibility for the standard model to continue—that is, the origins of the Central Plains tradition on the southern Plains followed by a move-ment north and west from the Kansas City locality to the west and north into Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa. Beyond these exceptions (based on AMS dates only), all Central Plains tradition variants are contemporaneous.

Impact of the New Chronology

One impact, just noted, has to do with explain-ing the origins of the Central Plains tradition. Another is accounting for what became of the Central Plains tradition, since the tradition now ends at A.D. 1350, shortly after when most researchers believe the Initial Coalescent sites in Nebraska and South Dakota began (A.D. 1300). Conceivably, the Central Plains tradition “blended in” with the Coalescent tradition, but for all practical purposes the archaeological signature of the Central Plains tradition is lost in prehistory.

Another impact deals with internal developments, and the Glenwood phase is a good example. The sequence of occupations within the Glenwood locality


University of Wisconsin–Madison. In the early 1980s, Jim and Tiffany were sitting in a Mississippian sympo-sium at the annual meeting of the Society for Ameri-can Archaeology when Theler, who was just fi nishing his dissertation, leaned over and said “Joe, fi nd me a job.” Soon Jim was hired at the Iowa Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, where he briefl y directed the Highway Archaeology Program and occupied an offi ce adjacent to Lensink, who was completing his dissertation at the University of Iowa. During this time, Theler and Tif-fany paddled around western Iowa on various high-way-related projects including an infamous visit with the Pottawattamie County Engineer (!).

Perhaps that project was the last straw, for when the opportunity for teaching and research at the Uni-versity of Wisconsin–La Crosse came along, The-ler leapt at the chance. On the way out the door, he bestowed the last of his highway archaeology obliga-tions onto Lensink, who now assumed the position as the new Highway Archaeology Program Director (thanks for that F-518 project, Jim!).

Years pass. All three bump into one another at conferences. Theler and Tiffany work on a couple of jointly authored articles on western Iowa archaeology. Tiffany and Lensink do the same. Tiffany ambles out west to California, then to Iowa State University. One day Tiffany gets an email from Theler. “Jim Gallagh-er is retiring,” he says. “Apply for his job.” So, after many years, Theler and Tiffany once again team up as friends and this time as faculty members at the Univer-sity of Wisconsin–La Crosse. Tiffany was also Execu-tive Director of the Mississippi Valley Archaeology Center. Here, Theler was Tiffany’s fallback guy. He knew the players at the university and was an excel-lent listener when Tiffany needed to talk something through—business or personal. Oh yeah, Tiffany and Theler discussed a little archaeology, too.

And now, all three of us are working on two closely related monographs on the Glenwood culture of southwest Iowa. This report relates to our current research on the Glenwood phase and is also an expres-sion of the value we place on our long and wonder-ful association with Jim. There is not a colleague for whom we have more respect.

Appendix A: Derivation of the Error Factor for the “Sunspot Effect”

Ward and Wilson (1978) originally provided a value for Gi

2 of 702 years, which they presumably obtained from Clark (1975:257). Clark cites Baxter and Walton (1971) and Farmer and Baxter (1972). Both sources report a maximum peak-to-peak fl uctuation in residual Δ14C values of 30‰, or

the Nebraska variant local sequences, and by exten-sion, larger geographic expanses of the Central Plains.

We are now working on a grant-funded analysis of 18 Glenwood phase lodge sites excavated as part of the US-34 project in southwest Iowa in the late 1960s and early 1970s. These sites will provide data to test further this chronological model. The next step in dat-ing Glenwood lodges will involve obtaining, where possible, three to fi ve AMS dates per lodge—a reason-able data sample for averaging. These dates will be calibrated and analyzed using methods presented in this paper. Recent AMS dates from the Central Plains tradition will be included as well. AMS dates can be taken on short-lived carbonized residue from pottery or on charred seeds and nuts as Roper and Adair (2011) have done. These analytic averaging methods and car-bon sources can produce a much narrower standard of error (± 15 14C years or less) that is ideal to date houses that were also of short duration. Ceramics have played an important part in evaluating the Nebraska vari-ant settlement system of the Glenwood locality, and precise dating is essential here as elsewhere in the Central Plains tradition. AMS dating, however, is no panacea—the latter half of the Central Plains tradition and Nebraska variant dates to a ca. 100-year period of reversals in the radiocarbon calibration curve, caused either by the differential production of 14C or changes in the size of the atmospheric 12C reservoir. This peri-od between approximately A.D. 1300 and A.D. 1400 is particularly affected by calibration curve “wiggles.”

Acknowledgments

We thank Mary Adair, John Hedden, A. J. Timo-thy Jull, Donna Roper, Don Wyckoff, and anonymous reviewers for their comments and insights on various ideas presented in this article. We also thank Lynn Alex, John Doershuk, and Lauren Tiffany for reading the entire manuscript and providing editorial advice and suggestions. In addition to the various people cited in Table 1, we want to single out Mary Adair, Jim Feagins, John Ludwickson, and Donna Roper for their assistance in tracking down radiocarbon and site data information. We also thank Dan Horgen for his assistance in the preparation of Figure 1, and Angela Collins for preparation of Figure 4. The fi nal report is our responsibility.

A Personal Note

We both initially knew Jim Theler as one of the cadre of graduate students who followed us at the


More recent studies provide better estimates of Gi2

(Dutta 2002; Stuiver and Braziunas 1993). They use the same detailed 14C measurements obtained from annual rings of Douglas-fi r trees from the Olympic Peninsula and cover primarily the pre–nuclear bomb period from 1511 to 1950. Dutta’s (2002) analysis uses the single-year data published in Stuiver et al. (1998:Table 2), which includes some minor corrections to the same data used by Stuiver and Braziunas (1993). Both studies report comparable results.

Stuiver and Braziunas (1993) report a Δ14C average amplitude for the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century 11-year cycle of 1.40‰ (± 11.6 years). Unfortunately, the results are clouded by the fact that the study documents multiple peri-odicities in the 5.1–17-year range that are statistically signifi -cant, and the 10.4-year cycle corresponding to the sunspot cycle is not the most pronounced of these.

Dutta’s (2002) spectra of the de-trended Δ14C tree-ring results for the time span between 1651 and 1950 also indi-cates multiple periodicities, but the peak for cycles in the range of 11.4–9.8 years is the most prominent above the red-noise background limits (Dutta 2002:Figure 2a). The peak has an amplitude of ca. 1.4‰ (± 12 years). Thus, we conclude that for the time interval A.D. 1600–1950, a value for Gi

2 of 122 years is defensible.

For the period of A.D. 1000–1500, which is germane to this study, there are no conclusive average Δ14C results to date. Recent studies (Jull et al. 2014; Miyake et al. 2012, 2013) have utilized annual tree-ring dates beginning as early as A.D. 600 to focus on identifying single-year excursions in the Δ14C record. These abrupt fl uctuations may signal astronom-ical events such as gamma ray bursts or solar proton events. While the long tree-ring sequences, which cover the current research period, could be used to provide a sounder esti-mate of Gi

2, no such analysis has yet been conducted. While the data do reveal two events where Δ14C spikes—ca. 15‰ at A.D. 774–775 (Jull et al. 2014; Miyake et al. 2012) and ca. 12–14‰ at A.D. 993–994 (Miyake et al. 2013)—Usoskin and Kovaltsov (2012) argue that there are no other large devia-tions in the last three thousand years.

While we cannot as yet be certain that a value for Gi

2 = 122 years applies to our period of interest, we have no strong reason to doubt that such a value is approximately correct. A. J. Timothy Jull (personal communication 2014) of the National Science Foundation’s Arizona Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory has supported this position. There-fore, we have used a value of Gi

2 = 122 years in all calculations and statistical tests associated with combining dates.

References Cited

Adair, Mary J.2003 Great Plains Paleoethnobotany. In People and

Plants in Ancient Eastern North America, by Paul E. Minnis, pp. 258–346. Smithsonian Books, Washington D.C

a maximum error of ± 15‰. This implies a dating error of ± 120 years maximum (Δt = 8267 ln ((No−N)/N) = 122 years for (No−N)/N = 1.015) when applied to short-lived samples. Converting this result to a standard error (1σ ) yields ± 80 years (assuming a root-mean-square error for an approxi-mately sinusoidal distribution of the residuals), that is, Gi

2 = 802 (not the 702 as provided by Clark).

In the 1970s, there was considerable variation reported for the estimates of the annual fl uctuations attributable to the sunspot effect. Baxter and Farmer (1973) reported natu-ral 14C fl uctuations of 20‰ over the 11-year sunspot cycle, corresponding to a maximum error of ± 90 years. Damon et al. (1973), however, using a 15-year-long sequence of radio-carbon results from a Douglas fi r (A.D. 1940–1954), found a 3‰ peak-to-peak variation (error of ± 12 years). They argued that this compares favorably to the theoretical value of 3‰ obtained by Houtermans (1966). In a response to Damon et al., Baxter et al. (1973) reviewed a number of studies to conclude that reasonable estimates of annual 14C peak-to-peak variation are on the order of 10–30‰ (errors of ± 40 to ± 120 years).

Thus the 1970s research left the archaeologist with the diffi cult decision of which Δ14C value to use when combining radiocarbon age determinations under Case II when short-lived specimens are involved. An even greater dilemma is posed as to whether short-lived specimens such as seeds should be dated at all if the larger Δ14C estimates are cor-rect. A number of sources recommended that wood char-coal having 10 or more rings be favored over shorter-lived materials (Baxter and Walton 1971; Baxter and Farmer 1973; Farmer and Baxter 1972). As late as the 2000s, some archae-ologists (e.g., Kelly 2002:85) were relying on the values origi-nally provided by Ward and Wilson (1978) or even failing to include the error term when it was appropriate to do so (e.g., Shott 1992).

By the 1980s, higher precisions were obtained in 14C measurements to reduce the uncertainty in the size of the effect of the 11-year sunspot cycle. Using the organic con-tent of wines from A.D. 1909–1952, Burchuladze et al. (1980) arrived at a Δ14C average amplitude of 4.3 ± 1.1‰ during the 11-year cycle [± 35 years with an error of ± 9 years]. They conclude that the considerably higher Δ14C values obtained by some of the 1970s studies were likely due to lower preci-sion of the 14C measurements. Stuiver and Quay (1981) used a high-precision annual tree-ring record from 1820 to 1954 to report a Δ14C average amplitude for the 11-year sunspot cycle of ~1‰ (± 8 years)—barely discernable above the 1.5‰ (± 12 years) uncertainty of the measurements. Applying time-series analyses to 14C measurements for wine (1909–1952) and banded-coral (1712–1781), Mordeckai et al. (1985) found strong peaks at 10.4 years and 11.7 years, respectively, that have a peak-to-peak Δ14C over four times greater than the theoretical value reported by Damon et al. (1983) of 1.7‰ (± 7 years), or > 6.8‰ ( ± 28 years). By the end of the 1980s, it could be reasonably concluded that studies up to then had determined that the value of Gi

2 falls within the range of ca. 82–352 years for the time range A.D. 1700–1950.


Angelbeck and Terrell L. Martin, pp. 49–69. Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson City. Submitted to Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Angelbeck, William O., and Terrell L. Martin1999 The Crabtree Site: Archaeological Investigations

of Site 23CL164, Route 210, Clay County, Missouri. Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson City. Submitted to Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Baxter, Murdoch S., and John G. Farmer1973 Radiocarbon: Short-Term Variations. Earth and

Planetary Science Letters 20:295–299.Baxter, Murdoch S., John G. Farmer, and Alan Walton

1973 Comments on “On the Magnitude of the 11-Year Radiocarbon Cycle” by P. E. Damon, Austin Long and E. I. Wallick. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 20:307–310.

Baxter, Murdoch S., and Alan Walton1971 Fluctuations of Atmospheric Carbon-14

Concentrations during the Past Century. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 321(1544):105–127.

Bell, Earl H., and G. H. Gilmore1936 The Nehawka and Table Rock Foci of the

Nebraska Aspect. In Chapters in Nebraska Archaeology: Volume One, Numbers I–VI, by Earl H. Bell, pp. 301–356. University of Nebraska, Lincoln.

Bell, Robert E.1983 Refl ections on Southern and Central Plains

Prehistory. In Prairie Archaeology: Papers in Honor of David A. Baerreis, edited by Guy E. Gibbon, pp. 1–14. Publications in Anthropology No. 3. Department of Anthropology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Bell, Robert E. (editor)1984 Prehistory of Oklahoma. Academic Press, Orlando,

Florida.Bender, Margaret M., Reid A. Bryson, and David A. Baerreis

1970 University of Wisconsin Radiocarbon Dates VII. Radiocarbon 12:335–345.

1973 University of Wisconsin Radiocarbon Dates XI. Radiocarbon 15:611–623.

1976 University of Wisconsin Radiocarbon Dates XIII. Radiocarbon 18:121–139.

1978 University of Wisconsin Radiocarbon Dates XV. Radiocarbon 20:157–167.

Beta Analytic Inc.1992 Report of Radiocarbon Dating Analysis: Beta-

55494, 13ML360/3 and Beta-55495, 13ML361/72. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2009 Report of Radiocarbon Dating Analysis: Beta-267045, 13ML429A and Beta-267046, 13ML429B.

2010a Archaeobotanical Analysis. In Cultural Resources of the Loess Hills: A Focus Study to Determine National Signifi cance of Selected Archaeological Cultural Resources along the Loess Hills National Scenic Byway, edited by Melody K. Pope, Joseph A. Tiffany, Angela R. Collins, and Michael J. Perry, pp. 10-1–10-15. Contract Completion Report 1700. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010b E-mail of March 29, 2010, to Stephen C. Lensink, regarding radiocarbon laboratory reports for dates from Nebraska phase sites. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014a E-mail of April 8, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink, regarding 14DP13 radiocarbon dates ISGS-A1457 and ISGS-A1458. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014b E-mail of April 17, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink, regarding radiocarbon dates on domesticates and residues from Steed-Kisker, Nebraska, and Smoky Hill sites. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014c E-mail of April 21, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink, regarding site proveniences for AA4131, AA4132, ISGS-A1456, ISGS-11459, ISGS-A1460, ISGS-A1729, ISGS-A1730. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Ahler, Stanley A., and Dennis L. Toom (editors)1995 Archeology of the Medicine Crow Site Complex (39BF2),

Buffalo County, South Dakota. Reports of Investigations No. 51. Illinois State Museum, Springfi eld.

Aitken, Martin J.1990 Science-Based Dating in Archaeology. Longman

Archaeology Series. Longman, London.Alex, Lynn M.

2000 Iowa’s Archaeological Past. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Anderson, Adrian D.1961 The Glenwood Sequence: A Local Sequence for

a Series of Archeological Manifestations in Mills County, Iowa. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 10(3):1–101.

Anderson, Adrian D., and Barbara Anderson1960 Pottery Types of the Glenwood Foci. Journal of the

Iowa Archeological Society 9(4):12–39.Anderson, Adrian D., and Larry J. Zimmerman

1976 Settlement–Subsistence Variability in the Glenwood Locality, Southwestern Iowa. Plains Anthropologist 21:141–154.

Anderson, Duane C., and Joseph A. Tiffany1987 A Caddoan Trade Vessel from Northwestern

Iowa. Plains Anthropologist 32:93–96.Angelbeck, William O.

1999 Habitation Structure and Features. In The Crabtree Site: Archaeological Investigations of Site 23CL164, Route 210, Clay County, Missouri, by William O.


Bozell, John R., John Ludwickson, Amy Koch, and Mary J. Adair1999 Perspectives on the Late Prehistory of the South

Bend Locality. In Archeology of the Patterson Site: Native American Life in the Lower Platte Valley, A.D. 1000–1300, by John R. Bozell and John Ludwickson, pp. 101–142. Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.

Brown, James A.1984 Arkansas Valley Caddoan: The Spiro Phase. In

Prehistory of Oklahoma, edited by Robert E. Bell, pp. 241–264. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

1996 The Spiro Ceremonial Center: The Archaeology of Arkansas Valley Caddoan Culture in Eastern Oklahoma. 2 vols. Memoirs No. 29. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Brown, Lionel A.1966 Temporal and Spatial Order in the Central Plains.

Plains Anthropologist 11:294–301.1967 Pony Creek Archeology. Publications in Salvage

Archeology No. 5, Warren W. Caldwell, series editor. River Basin Surveys, Offi ce of Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Bruseth, James E., Diane E. Wilson, and Timothy K. Perttula1995 The Sanders Site: A Spiroan Entrepot in Texas?

Plains Anthropologist 40:223–236.Burchuladze, A. A., S. V. Pagava, P. Povinect, G. I.

Togonidze, and S. Usacev1980 Radiocarbon Variations with the 11-Year Solar

Cycle during the Last Century. Nature 287:320–322.Calabrese, F. A.

1969 The Doniphan Phase Origins: An Hypothesis Resulting from Archaeological Investigations in the Smithville Reservoir Area, Missouri, 1968. American Archaeology Division, University of Missouri, Columbia. Submitted to Midwest Region, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Carlson, Gayle F.2009 Archeology of the Duck Creek Site (25NH88), in

Nemaha County, Nebraska. Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln. Submitted to USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Carlson, Gayle F., and John R. Bozell2010 The Eagle Ridge Site and Early Eighteenth

Century Indian-European Relations in Eastern Nebraska. Central Plains Archeology 12:v–210, appendices.

Clark, R. Malcolm1975 A Calibration Curve for Radiocarbon Dates.

Antiquity 49:251–266.

Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014 Report of Radiocarbon Dating Analysis: Beta-382843 and Beta-382844, 13ML176. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Billeck, William T.1993 Time and Space in the Glenwood Locality: The

Nebraska Phase in Western Iowa. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia.

Blakeslee, Donald J.1982 Some Responses to Krause. Plains Anthropologist

27:83–90.1993 Modeling the Abandonment of the Central

Plains: Radiocarbon Dates and the Origin of the Initial Coalescent. In Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Western Prairies and Northern Plains. Papers in Honor of Robert A. Alex (1941–1988), edited by Joseph A. Tiffany, pp. 199–214. Memoir 27, Plains Anthropologist, Vol. 38, No. 145, Part 2. Plains Anthropological Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1994 Reassessment of Some Radiocarbon Dates from the Central Plains. Plains Anthropologist 39:203–210.

1999 Waconda Lake: Prehistoric Swidden-Foragers in the Central Plains. Central Plains Archeology 7:vii–170.

Blakeslee, Donald J., and Warren W. Caldwell1979 The Nebraska Phase: An Appraisal. Reprints in

Anthropology Vol. 18. J & L Reprint, Lincoln, Nebraska.Bleed, Peter, Amy Koch, and John Swigert

2008 The Archeology of Plattford, Sarpy County, Nebraska. Publications in Highway Archeology. Department of Anthropology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Submitted to Nebraska Department of Roads, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln, Project RS-21-2(2001). Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Boszhardt, Robert F.1994 Oneota Group Continuity at La Crosse: The Brice

Prairie, Pammel Creek, and Valley View Phases. The Wisconsin Archeologist 75:173–236.

2004 Blind Dates and Blind Faith: The Timeless Story of the “Emergent” Oneota McKern Phase. The Wisconsin Archeologist 85:3–30.

Bozell, John R., and John Ludwickson1994 Nebraska Phase Archeology in the South Bend Locality.

Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.

1999 Archeology of the Patterson Site: Native American Life in the Lower Platte Valley, A.D. 1000–1300. Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.


Thomas E. Emerson and R. Barry Lewis, pp. 164–182. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

1997 Cahokia and the Archaeology of Power. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Farmer, John G., and Murdoch S. Baxter1972 Short-Term Trends in Natural Radiocarbon. Paper

presented at the 8th International Conference on Radiocarbon Dating, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Finnegan, Michael1977 Osteological Analysis of Skeletal Remains from

the Chester Reeves Mound (23CL108), a Steed-Kisker Mississippian Population. In Cultural Resources Survey of Smithville Lake, Missouri. Volume I: Archeology, by Patricia J. O’Brien, pp. 111–163. Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work, Kansas State University, Manhattan. Submitted to Kansas City District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City, Missouri, Contract No. DACW41-76-C-0125. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Finney, Fred A.1993 Cahokia’s Northern Hinterland as Viewed from the

Fred Edwards Site in Southwestern Wisconsin: Intrasite and Regional Evidence for Productions, Consumption and Exchange. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. University Microfi lms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Fischer, Anders, and Jan Heinemeier2003 Freshwater Reservoir Effect in 14C Dates of Food

Residue on Pottery. Radiocarbon 45:449–466.Fishel, Richard L.

1999 Ceramic Assemblage. In Bison Hunters of the Western Prairies: Archaeological Investigations at the Dixon Site (13WD8), Woodbury County, Iowa, edited by Richard L. Fishel, pp. 63–77. Report 21. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Fortier, Andrew C., Thomas E. Emerson, and Dale L. McElrath2006 Calibrating and Reassessing American Bottom

Culture History. Southeastern Archaeology 25:170–211.Geochron Laboratories, Inc.

1970a Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age Determination: GX-2003, 13ML119 #A. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1970b Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age Determination: GX-2004, 13ML119 #B. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1970c Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age Determination: GX-2005, 13ML124 #A. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1970d Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age Determination: GX-2006, 13ML124 #B. Report on fi le,

Coleman, George H.1976 Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age

Determination: NWU-66 and NWU-67. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Cook, Robert A., and Aaron R. Comstock2014 Evaluating the Old Wood Problem in a Temperate

Climate: A Fort Ancient Case Study. American Antiquity 79:763–775.

Cordell, John L.2014a Submittal form to Beta Analytic Inc. for

radiocarbon sample F5-9A-1. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014b Submittal form to Beta Analytic Inc. for radiocarbon sample F8cobC-1. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014c Submittal form to Illinois State Geological Survey for radiocarbon sample 13ML176, Feature 5. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014d Submittal form to Illinois State Geological Survey for radiocarbon sample 13ML176, Feature 7. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014e Submittal form to Illinois State Geological Survey for radiocarbon sample 13ML176, Feature 8. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Crane, H. Richard, and James B. Griffi n1963 University of Michigan Radiocarbon Dates VIII.

Radiocarbon 5:228–253.1964 University of Michigan Radiocarbon Dates IX.

Radiocarbon 6:1–24.1966 University of Michigan Radiocarbon Dates XI.

Radiocarbon 8:256–285.1972 University of Michigan Radiocarbon Dates XIV.

Radiocarbon 14:155–194.Damon, Paul E., Austin Long, and E. I. Wallick

1973 On the Magnitude of the 11-Year Radiocarbon Cycle. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 20:300–306.

Damon, Paul E., Robert S. Sternberg, and C. J. Radnell1983 Modeling of Atmospheric Radiocarbon Fluctuations

for the Past Three Centuries. Radiocarbon 25:249–258.Drass, Richard R.

1999 Redefi ning Plains Village Complexes in Oklahoma: The Paoli Phase and the Redbed Plains Variant. Plains Anthropologist 44:121–140.

Dutta, Koushik2002 Coherence of Tropospheric 14CO2 with El Niño/

Southern Oscillation. Geophysical Research Letters 29:48-1–48-4.

Emerson, Thomas E.1991 The Apple River Mississippian Culture of

Northwestern Illinois. In Cahokia and the Hinterlands: Middle Mississippian Cultures of the Midwest, edited by


1997 Middle Mississippian Peoples. In Wisconsin Archaeology, edited by Robert A. Birmingham, Carol I. Mason, and James B. Stoltman. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78:202–222.

Green, William, and Roland L. Rodell1994 The Mississippian Presence and Cahokia

Interaction at Trempealeau, Wisconsin. American Antiquity 59:334–359.

Gunnerson, James H.1952 Some Nebraska Culture Pottery Types. Plains

Archeological Conference News Letter 5(3):39–49.Hall, Robert L.

1962a The Archeology of Carcajou Point: With an Interpreta-tion of the Development of Oneota Culture in Wisconsin. Volume I. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

1962b The Archeology of Carcajou Point: With an Interpreta-tion of the Development of Oneota Culture in Wisconsin. Volume 2. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

1967 The Mississippian Heartland and Its Plains Relationship. Plains Anthropologist 12:175–183.

1991 Cahokia Identity and Interaction Models of Cahokia Mississippian. In Cahokia and the Hinterlands: Middle Mississippian Cultures of the Midwest, edited by Thomas E. Emerson and R. Barry Lewis, pp. 3–34. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Hart, John P., and William A. Lovis2014 A Re-Evaluation of the Reliability of AMS Date

on Pottery Food Residues from the Late Prehistoric Central Plains of North America: Comment on Roper (2013). Radiocarbon 56:341–353.

Hatfi eld, Ronald E. 2014 E-mail of March 17, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink,

regarding Beta Analytic, Inc. radiocarbon laboratory reports for dates from Nebraska phase sites. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Heavin, Candice G.1970 Two Nebraska Culture Storage Pits from Doniphan

County, Kansas. Plains Anthropologist 15:54–62.Hedden, John G., and Daniel G. Horgen

2012 Steed Kisker-Nebraska Phase Cultural Relationships in the Glenwood Locality: The Mississippian View from Western Iowa. Paper presented at the 77th Society for American Archaeology, Memphis, Tennessee. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Henning, Dale R.1961 Oneota Ceramics in Iowa. Journal of the Iowa

Archeological Society 11(2):1–47.1967 Mississippian Infl uences on the Eastern Plains

Border: An Evaluation. Plains Anthropologist 12:184–194.

1970 Development and Interrelationships of Oneota Culture in the Lower Missouri River Valley. The Missouri Archaeologist 32(1):1–180.

Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1970e Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age Determination: GX-2007, 13ML121 #A. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1970f Report of Analytical Work, Radiocarbon Age Determination: GX-2008, 13ML121 #B. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Gibbon, Guy E.1972 Cultural Dynamics and the Development of the

Oneota Life-Way in Wisconsin. American Antiquity 37:166–185.

Gilder, Robert F.1907 Archeology of the Ponca Creek District, Eastern

Nebraska. American Anthropologist 9:702–719.Gradwohl, David M.

1967 Prehistoric Villages in Eastern Nebraska. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. University Microfi lms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

1969 Prehistoric Villages in Eastern Nebraska. Publications in Anthropology No. 4. Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.

Grantham, Larry D.2012 Data Recovery Excavation at the Cobb Site (23AN56):

A Nebraska Phase Site in Andrew County, Missouri. Historic Preservation Section, Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson City. Submitted to U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Greatorex, Linda J.1997 Steed-Kisker and Nebraska Ceramics: A New

Interpretation. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas.

Green, William1989 Notes on phone call to Raymond Steventon

regarding radiocarbon dates for 13ML176, Lab No. WIS-2076. Notes on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1990 Introduction. In Glenwood Culture Paleoenvironment and Diet: Analysis of Plant and Animal Remains from the Wall Ridge Earthlodge (13ML176), Mills County, Iowa, edited by William Green, pp. 1–7. Research Papers Vol. 15, No. 6. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1992 Submittal forms to Center for Climatic Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison for radiocarbon samples for 13ML176-92-1 [Lab Nos. WIS-2294 and WIS-2295]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.


Illinois State Museum1983 Catalog of botanical remains from 14DP13, the

Squaw Creek Site, in Cutler-Blake Collection at the Illinois State Museum, donated by J. M. “Mett” Shippee. Manuscript on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Ives, John C.1955 Glenwood Ceramics. Journal of the Iowa

Archeological Society 4(3 and 4):2–32.1962 Mill Creek Pottery. Journal of the Iowa Archeological

Society 11(3):1–59.Josephs, Richard L.

2011 A Petrographic Analysis of Glenwood Locality Ceramics, Mills County, Iowa. Central Plains Archeology 13:59–78.

Jull, A. J. Timothy, Irina P. Panyushkina, Todd E. Lange, Vladimir V. Kukarskih, Vladimir S. Myglan, Kelley J. Clark, Matthew W. Salzer, George S. Burr, and Steven W. Leavitt2014 Excursions in the 14C at A.D. 774–775 in Tree Rings

from Russia and America. Geophysical Research Letters 41:1–7.

Kelly, John M.2002 Delineating the Spatial and Temporal

Boundaries of Late Woodland Collared Wares from Wisconsin and Illinois. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee.

Keyes, Charles R.1949 Four Iowa Archeologies with Plains Affi liations.

In Proceedings of the Fifth Plains Conference for Archeology, Lincoln, Nebraska, edited by John L. Champe, pp. 96–97. Note Book No. 1. Laboratory of Anthropology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln.

1951 Prehistoric Indians of Iowa. The Palimpsest 32:281–343.

Kigoshi, Kunihiko1968 Letter report of results of radiocarbon assays from

Gakushuin University: GaK-1672, 14DP10; GaK-1673, 14DP10; GaK-1674, 25FT35; GaK-1675, 25FT35; and GaK-1676, 25FT35. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Kigoshi, Kunihiko, and Hiromi Kobayashi1966 Gakushuin Natural Radiocarbon Measurements V.

Radiocarbon 8:54–73.Kigoshi, Kunihiko, Der-Hwang Lin, and Kunihiko Endo

1964 Gakushuin Natural Radiocarbon Measurements III. Radiocarbon 6:197–207.

Kneberg, Madeline D.1959 Engraved Shell Gorgets and Their Associations.

Tennessee Archaeologist 15(1):1–39.Krause, Richard A.

1969 Correlation of Phases in Central Plains Prehistory. In Two House Sites in the Central Plains: An Experiment in Archaeology, edited by W. Raymond Wood, pp.

1998 Managing Oneota. The Wisconsin Archeologist 79:122–130.

2007 Continuity and Change in the Eastern Plains, A.D. 800–1700: An Examination of Exchange Patterns. In Plains Village Archaeology: Bison-Hunting Farmers in the Central and Northern Plains, edited by Stanley A. Ahler and Marvin Kay, pp. 67–82. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Hildebrand, Brian 2014 E-mail of March 28, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink,

regarding radiocarbon dates from the Wisconsin Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Wisconsin–Madison for samples WIS-2309–WIS-2311 and WIS-2343–WIS-2344. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Hilgeman, Sherri L.2000 Pottery and Chronology at Angel. University of

Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Hill, A. T., and Paul Cooper

1937 The Archeological Campaign of 1937. Nebraska History 18:243–353.

Hotopp, John A.1978a Glenwood: A Contemporary View. In The Central

Plains Tradition: Internal Development and External Relationships, edited by Donald J. Blakeslee, pp. 109–133. Report 11. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1978b A Reconsideration of Settlement Patterns, Structures, and Temporal Placement of the Central Plains Tradition in Iowa. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Education, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1978c Letter of April 7, 1978, to Harold W. Krueger, regarding six radiocarbon dates from Nebraska phase, Mills County, Iowa. Letter on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Houtermans, Jan1966 On the Quantiative Relationships between

Geophysical Parameters and the Natural C14 Inventory. Zeitschrift für Physik 193:1–12.

Illinois State Geological Survey1995a Radiocarbon Date Comment Form: ISGS-3144,

13ML175 # 508. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1995b Radiocarbon Date Comment Form: ISGS-3145, 13ML175 #457. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1995c Radiocarbon Date Comment Form: ISGS-3147, 13ML175 Feature #3. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1995d Radiocarbon Date Comment Form: ISGS-3148, 13ML175 #310. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.


Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, edited by Brad Logan, pp. 118–130. Project Report Series No. 98. Museum of Anthropology, University of Kansas, Lawrence. Submitted to Fort Leavenworth & U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2004 Archaeological Investigations at the Evans Locality, Stranger Creek Valley, Northeastern Kansas—2003. Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Kansas State University, Manhattan. Submitted to Historic Preservation Offi ce, Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2005 Archaeological Investigations at the Evans Locality, Stranger Creek Valley, Northeastern Kansas—2004. Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Kansas State University, Manhattan. Submitted to Historic Preservation Offi ce, Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010 Frontier Life: Late Prehistoric Adaptations of the Kansas City Locality. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 35:229–270.

2011 West Side Story: Kansas City Hopewell and Steed-Kisker from a Trans-Missouri Perspective. The Missouri Archaeologist 72:115–160.

Long, Austin, and James E. Mielke1966 Smithsonian Institution Radiocarbon

Measurements III. Radiocarbon 8:413–422.Long, Austin, and Bruce E. Rippeteau

1974 Testing Contemporaneity and Averaging Radiocarbon Dates. American Antiquity 39:205–215.

Ludwickson, John 2014 E-mail of March 26, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink,

regarding Nebraska Wesleyan Dates NWU-66 and NWU-67. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Ludwickson, John, and John R. Bozell1994 New Perspectives on the Late Prehistory of the

South Bend Locality. In Nebraska Phase Archeology in the South Bend Locality, by John R. Bozell and John Ludwickson, pp. 141–163. Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.

Ludwickson, John, John R. Bozell, and Gayle F. Carlson1999 House Ruins, Features, Stratigraphy and

Chronology. In Archeology of the Patterson Site: Native American Life in the Lower Platte Valley, A.D. 1000–1300, by John R. Bozell and John Ludwickson, pp. 13–28. Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.

Ludwickson, John, James N. Gundersen, and Craig M. Johnson1993 Select Exotic Artifacts from Cattle Oiler (39ST224):

A Middle Missouri Tradition Site in Central South Dakota. In Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Western Prairies and Northern Plains. Papers in Honor of Robert

82–96. Memoir 6, Plains Anthropologist, Vol. 14, No. 44, Part 2. Plains Anthropological Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Laird, Allison1985 A Guide to Native American Artifacts Exhibited

in Iowa Hall, Museum of Natural History, The University of Iowa. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology–Museum Studies, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Lehmer, Donald J.1971 Introduction to Middle Missouri Archeology.

Anthropological Papers 1. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.

Lensink, Stephen C.1993 A Reanalysis of Eastern Initial Middle Missouri

Radiocarbon Dates and the Implications for the Timing of Long-Distance Trade with Middle Mississippian Centers. Paper presented at the 1993 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Archaeological Conference, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1997 Beginning of the Middle Missouri Tradition: New Data on Climate and Chronology. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Plains Conference, Boulder, Colorado. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2005 This Old Earthlodge Village: How Long Were Sites of the Middle Missouri Tradition Occupied? In Plains Earthlodges: Ethnographic and Archaeological Perspectives, edited by Donna C. Roper and Elizabeth P. Pauls, pp. 133–156. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

2010 Radiocarbon Dating. In Cultural Resources of the Loess Hills: A Focus Study to Determine National Signifi cance of Selected Archaeological Cultural Resources along the Loess Hills National Scenic Byway, edited by Melody K. Pope, Joseph A. Tiffany, Angela R. Collins, and Michael J. Perry, pp. 7-1–7-3. Contract Completion Report 1700. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Lensink, Stephen C., and Joseph A. Tiffany (editors)2005 The Cowan Site: A Great Oasis Community in

Northwest Iowa. Report 22. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Logan, Brad1990 Radiocarbon Dates from Cedar Creek Sites.

In Archaeological Investigations in the Plains Village Frontier, Northeastern Kansas, edited by Brad Logan, pp. 153–155. Project Report Series No. 70. Museum of Anthropology, University of Kansas, Lawrence. Submitted to Historic Preservation Offi ce, Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1998 Excavation of the DB Site. In Prehistoric Settlement of the Lower Missouri Uplands: The View from DB Ridge,


Miyake, Fusa, Kimiaki Masuda, and Toshio Nakamura2012 A Signature of Cosmic Ray Increase in AD 774–

775 from Tree Rings in Japan. Nature 486:240–242.2013 Another Rapid Event in the Carbon-14 Content of

Tree Rings. Nature Communications 4(1478):1–5.Morgan, David F., and Richard R. Drass

2004 Salvage Excavations at The Jewett Site: A Washita River Phase Village in South-Central Oklahoma. Oklahoma Archeology: Journal of the Oklahoma Anthropological Society 52(2):9–56.

Morrow, Toby A.1995 Phase III Excavations at 13ML118 and 13ML175,

Mills County, Iowa. Contract Completion Report 469. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

National Cooperative Soil Survey2012 North Central Region Soil Survey Conference,

Lincoln, Nebraska, June 4–7, 2012, Field Tour. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture and University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Nelson, Trisha2006a Archeological Investigations at the Rulo Southeast

Sites: Late Pre-Contact Occupation along the Missouri River, Richardson County, Nebraska. Nebraska Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln. Submitted to Nebraska Department of Roads, Lincoln. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2006b Physical Setting and Investigation Strategy. In Archeological Investigations at the Rulo Southeast Sites: Late Pre-Contact Occupation along the Missouri River, Richardson County, Nebraska, by Trisha Nelson, pp. 25–52. Nebraska Highway Archeology Program, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln. Submitted to Nebraska Department of Roads, Lincoln. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Neuman, Robert W.1989 A Note on Southeastern Ceremonial Complex

Artifacts from the Central Great Plains. In The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex: Artifacts and Analysis, The Cottonlandia Conference, edited by Patricia Galloway, pp. 122–124. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Noakes, John E., and Betty L. Brandau1976 University of Georgia Radiocarbon Dates V.

Radiocarbon 18:362–370.O’Brien, Michael J., and W. Raymond Wood

1998 The Prehistory of Missouri. University of Missouri Press, Columbia.

O’Brien, Patricia J.1977 Cultural Resources Survey of Smithville Lake,

Missouri. Volume I: Archeology. Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work, Kansas

A. Alex (1941–1988), edited by Joseph A. Tiffany, pp. 151–168. Memoir 27, Plains Anthropologist, Vol. 38, No. 145, Part 2. Plains Anthropological Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Magaritz, Mordeckai, Israel Carmi, and Ziv Sirkes1985 Amplitude of Sunspot-Dependent Radiocarbon

Variations: Data from Corals and Wine. Radiocarbon 27:111–115.

Mandel, Rolfe D.2009a Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination:

Sample RDM-14DP13-1. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2009b Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-14DP13-2. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

McHugh, William P., George D. Gardner, and Jack Donahue1982 Before Smith’s Mill: Archaeological and Geological

Investigations in the Little Platte River Valley, Western Missouri. Volume I: Text. GAI Consultants, Monroeville, Pennsylvania. Submitted to Kansas City District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City, Missouri. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

McJunkin, David1993 Letter report of results of radiocarbon assays

from Center for Climatic Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Lab Nos. WIS-2294 and WIS-2295. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

McKusick, Marshall B. 1970 Letter of September 16, 1970, to Geochron

Laboratories, Inc., regarding transmittal for six radiocarbon samples from sites 13ML119, 13ML121, and 13ML124. Letter on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

McNerney, Michael J.1987 The Effi gy Complex of the Nebraska Phase and

the Problem of Nebraska Phase–Mississippian Relationships. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 34:23–50.

Middleton, Jessica L.2003 A Nebraska Phase Occupation at the Leary Site.

The Kansas Anthropologist 24:35–44.Milner, George R., Thomas E. Emerson, Mark W. Mehrer,

Joyce A. Williams, and Duane Esarey1984 Mississippian and Oneota Periods. In American

Bottom Archaeology: A Summary of the FAI-270 Project Contribution to the Culture History of the Mississippi River Valley, edited by Charles J. Bareis and James W. Porter, pp. 158–186. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Missouri Basin Project, Smithsonian Institution1962 Missouri Basin Chronology Program: Statement

4. Missouri Basin Project. Missouri Basin Project, Smithsonian Institution, Lincoln, Nebraska.


XXVII. Radiocarbon 34:141–154.Proudfi t, S. V.

1881 Antiquities of the Missouri Bluffs. The American Antiquarian and Oriental Journal 3:271–280.

Ramsey, Christopher B.2009 Dealing with Outliers and Offsets in Radiocarbon

Dating. Radiocarbon 51:1023–1045.Reimer, Paula J., Edouard Bard, Alex Bayliss, J. Warren

Beck, Paul G. Blackwell, Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Caitlin E. Buck, Hai Cheng, R. Lawrence Edwards, Michael Friedrich, Pieter M. Grootes, Thomas P. Guilderson, Hafl idi Hafl idason, Irka Hajdas, Christine Hatte, Timothy J. Heaton, Dirk L. Hoffmann, Alan G. Hogg, Konrad A. Hughen, K. Felix Kaiser, Bernd Kromer, Sturt W. Manning, Mu Niu, Ron W. Reimer, David A. Richards, E. Marian Scott, John R. Southon, Richard A. Staff, Christian S. M. Turney, and Johannes van der Plicht2013 Intcal13 and Marine13 Radiocarbon Age

Calibration Curves 0–50,000 Years Cal BP. Radiocarbon 55:1869–1887.

Ritterbush, Lauren W.2002 Leary Site Revisited: Oneota and Central Plains

Tradition Occupation along the Lower Missouri. Plains Anthropologist 47:251–264.

Roper, Donna C.2006 The Central Plains Tradition. In Kansas Archaeology,

edited by Robert J. Hoard and William E. Banks, pp. 105–132. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence.

2013 Evaluating the Reliability of AMS Dates on Food Residue on Pottery from the Late Prehistoric Central Plains of North America. Radiocarbon 51:151–162.

2014 Assessing the Radiocarbon Age Determinations Dataset and Revising the Chronology for the Central Plains Tradition. Central Plains Archeology 14:17–63.

Roper, Donna C., and Mary J. Adair2011 Interpreting AMS Radiocarbon Age

Determinations from Selected Central Plains Tradition Sites. Plains Anthropologist 56:3–22.

2012 Additional AMS Radiocarbon Age Determinations for the Central Plains Tradition. Plains Anthropologist 57:31–38.

Roper, Donna C., Richard L. Josephs, and Margaret E. Beck2010 Determining Provenance of Shell-Tempered

Pottery from the Central Plains Using Petrography and Oxidation Analysis. American Antiquity 75:134–157.

Schambach, Frank F.1993 Some New Interpretations of Spiroan Culture

History. In Archaeology of Eastern North America: Papers in Honor of Stephen Williams, edited by James B. Stoltman, pp. 187–230. Archaeological Report No. 25. Mississippi Department of Archives and History, Jackson.

Schiffer, Michael B.1986 Radiocarbon Dating and the “Old Wood”

Problem: The Case of the Hohokam Chronology.

State University, Manhattan. Submitted to Kansas City District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City, Missouri, Contract No. DACW41-76-C-0125. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1978 Steed-Kisker and Mississippian Infl uences on the Central Plains. In The Central Plains Tradition: Internal Development and External Relationships, edited by Donald J. Blakeslee, pp. 67–80. Report 11. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1993 Steed-Kisker: The Western Periphery of the Mississippian Tradition. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 18:61–96.

Pepperl, Robert E.2006 Archaeological Resources of the Metro Omaha

Management Unit Cass, Dodge, Douglas, Sarpy, Saunders, and Washington Counties, Nebraska. National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form. Robert E. Pepperl, [s.n.]. Submitted to State Historic Preservation Offi ce, Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Perry, Michael J.2006 Phase II Excavations at 13ML637 and 13ML640

Primary Roads Project BRF-978-1(5)--38-65, Mills County, Iowa. Project Completion Report Vol. 29, No. 3. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Peterson, Cynthia L., Melody K. Pope, Michael J. Perry, John G. Hedden, James L. Theler, and Mary J. Adair2010 Archaeological Resources of the Central Plains

Tradition in the Loess Hills Region of Iowa. National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City and University of Kansas, Lawrence. Submitted to State Historic Preservation Offi ce, State Historical Society of Iowa, Des Moines. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Phillips, Philip1970 Archaeological Survey in the Lower Yazoo Basin,

Mississippi, 1949–1955. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University Vol. 60, pt. 1. Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Pope, Melody K., Joseph A. Tiffany, Angela R. Collins, and Michael J. Perry (editors)2010 Cultural Resources of the Loess Hills: A Focus

Study to Determine National Signifi cance of Selected Archaeological Cultural Resources along the Loess Hills National Scenic Byway. Contract Completion Report 1700. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Prior, Christine A., and Lori F. Phelps1992 University of Wisconsin Radiocarbon Dates


Holocene 3:289–305.Stuiver, Minze, and Henry A. Polach

1977 Discussion: Reporting of 14C Data. Radiocarbon 19:355–363.

Stuiver, Minze, and Paul D. Quay1981 Atmospheric 14C Changes Resulting from Fossil

Fuel CO2 Release and Cosmic Ray Flux Variability. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 53:349–362.

Stuiver, Minze, and Paula J. Reimer1993 Extended 14C Data Base and Revised CALIB 3.0

14C Age Calibration Program. Radiocarbon 35:215–230.Stuiver, Minze, Paula J. Reimer, and Thomas F. Braziunas

1998 High-Precision Radiocarbon Age Calibration for Terrestrial and Marine Samples. Radiocarbon 40:1127–1151.

Suhm, Dee Ann, and Edward B. Jelks (editors)1962 Handbook of Texas Archeology: Type Descriptions.

Initial Series of Descriptions. Texas Archeological Society Special Publication No. 1. Texas Memorial Museum Bulletin No. 4. Texas Archeological Society and Texas Memorial Museum, Austin.

Sullivan, Lynne P.2001 Dates for Shell Gorgets and the Southeastern Ceremonial

Complex in the Chickamauga Basin of Southeastern Tennessee. Research Notes No. 19. Frank H. McClung Museum, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Theler, James L.2010 Animals Remains to Assess Human Subsistence,

Environments, and the Biogeography: Wall Ridge (13ML176) and Other Loess Hills Nebraska Phase Glenwood Archaeological Sites. In Cultural Resources of the Loess Hills: A Focus Study to Determine National Signifi cance of Selected Archaeological Cultural Resources along the Loess Hills National Scenic Byway, edited by Melody K. Pope, Joseph A. Tiffany, Angela R. Collins, and Michael J. Perry, pp. 11-1–11-27. Contract Completion Report 1700. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Theler, James L., and Robert F. Boszhardt2003 Twelve Millennia: Archaeology of the Upper

Mississippi Valley. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Tiffany, Joseph A.1979 An Overview of Oneota Sites in Southeastern

Iowa: A Perspective from the Ceramic Analysis of the Schmeiser Site, 13DM101, Des Moines County, Iowa. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 86:89–101.

1982 Hartley Fort Ceramics. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 89:133–150. Cedar Falls, Iowa.

1991 Models of Mississippian Culture History in the Western Prairie Peninsula: A Perspective from Iowa. In Cahokia and the Hinterlands: Middle Mississippian Cultures of the Midwest, edited by Thomas E. Emerson and R. Barry Lewis, pp. 183–192. University of

Journal of Archaeological Science 13:13–30.Scott, Frederick W.

1995 Tradeware in the Central Plains Tradition: Steed-Kisker Presence, Infl uence, and Joining of the Central Plains Tradition. The Kansas Anthropologist 16:46–68.

Shaw, Robert D.1974 The Houston Site (25Btl), a Nebraska Phase Site

from Burt County, Nebraska. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.

Shippee, J. Mett 1959 Letter of October 4, 1959, to Leonard W.

Blake, regarding transmittal of archaeobotanical materials from the site 14PD13 and discussion of archaeological context. Letter on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1960 A Mississippian House from Western Missouri. American Antiquity 26:281–283.

1972 Archaeological Remains in the Kansas City Area: The Mississippian Occupation. Research Series No. 9. College of Arts and Science, University of Missouri and Missouri Archaeological Society, Columbia.

Shott, Michael J.1992 Radiocarbon Dating as a Probabilistic Technique:

The Childers Site and Late Woodland Occupation in the Ohio Valley. American Antiquity 57:202–230.

Spaulding, Albert C.1956 The Arzberger Site: Hughes County, South Dakota.

Occasional Contributions No. 16. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

1958 The Signifi cance of Differences between Radiocarbon Dates. American Antiquity 23:309–311.

Steinacher, Terry L., and Gayle F. Carlson1998 The Central Plains Tradition. In Archaeology of

the Great Plains, edited by W. Raymond Wood, pp. 235–268. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

Sterns, Fred H.1915 The Archeology of Eastern Nebraska, with Special

Reference to the Culture of the Rectangular Earth Lodge. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Steventon, Raymond L., and John E. Kutzbach1990 University of Wisconsin Radiocarbon Dates XXVI.

Radiocarbon 32:209–228.Strong, William Duncan

1935 An Introduction to Nebraska Archeology. Lord Baltimore Press, Baltimore.

Stuckenrath, Robert, and James E. Mielke1972 Smithsonian Institution Radiocarbon

Measurements VIII. Radiocarbon 14:401–412.Stuiver, Minze, and Thomas F. Braziunas

1993 Sun, Ocean, Climate and Atmospheric 14CO2: An Evaluation of Causal and Spectral Relationships. The


Louis, Missouri. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Toom, Dennis L.1992a Climate and Sedentism in the Middle Missouri

Subarea of the Plains. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder. University Microfi lms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

1992b Early Village Formation in the Middle Missouri Subarea of the Plains. In Long-Term Subsistence Change in Prehistoric North America, edited by Dale R. Croes, Rebecca A. Hawkins, and Barry L. Isaac, pp. 131–191. Research in Economic Anthropology Supplement 6. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut.

Usoskin, Ilya G., and Gennady A. Kovaltsov 2012 Occurrence of Extreme Solar Particle Events:

Assessment from Historical Proxy Data. The Astrophysical Journal 757(93):1–6.

Walters, Gary R.1984 Phase III Mitigation of Archaeological Site

23AN56, Andrew County, Missouri: Interim Report. Environmental Research Center of Missouri, Jefferson City, Missouri. Copy on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Wang, Hong2010a Results of Analysis: ISGS-A1445, Sample RDM-

23CL115-1 [In “Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-23CL115-1”]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010b Results of Analysis: ISGS-A1456, Sample RDM-23CL109-2 [In “Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-23CL109-2”]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010c Results of Analysis: ISGS-A1457, Sample RDM-14DP13-1 [In “Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-14DP25-1”]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010d Results of Analysis: ISGS-A1458, Sample RDM-14DP13-2 [In “Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-14DP25-2”]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010e Results of Analysis: ISGS-A1459, Sample RDM-23CL109-1 [In “Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-23CL109-1”]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2010f Results of Analysis: ISGS-A1460, Sample RDM-23BN2-1 [In “Request for Radiocarbon Age Determination: Sample RDM-23BN2-1”]. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Illinois Press, Urbana.1997 Ceramics from the Kelley Site: Perspectives on

the Oneota Tradition in Southeast Iowa. Plains Anthropologist 42:205–236.

1998 Southeast Iowa Oneota: A Review. The Wisconsin Archeologist 79:147–164.

2003 Mississippian Connections with Mill Creek and Cambria. Plains Anthropologist 48:21–34.

2007a Examining the Origins of the Middle Missouri Tradition. In Plains Village Archaeology: Bison-Hunting Farmers in the Central and Northern Plains, edited by Stanley A. Ahler and Marvin Kay, pp. 3–14. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

2007b The Swanson Site Reexamined: The Middle Missouri Tradition in Central South Dakota. Special Publication No. 12. South Dakota Archaeological Society, Vermillion.

2010 New Perspectives on Prehistoric Ceramics from the Glenwood Culture of the Loess Hills of Southwest Iowa. In Cultural Resources of the Loess Hills: A Focus Study to Determine National Signifi cance of Selected Archaeological Cultural Resources along the Loess Hills National Scenic Byway, edited by Melody K. Pope, Joseph A. Tiffany, Angela R. Collins, and Michael J. Perry, pp. 8-1–8-33. Contract Completion Report 1700. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2012 Pottery from the Wall Ridge Site. Manuscript on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Tiffany, Joseph A., and Kimberly J. Adams1998 Ceramics from the Phipps site (13CK21): A Mill

Creek Culture Site in Northwest Iowa. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 45:19–48.

Tiffany, Joseph A., and Lynn M. Alex2001 Great Oasis Archaeology: New Perspectives from the

Decamp and West Des Moines Burial Sites in Central Iowa. Memoir 33, Plains Anthropologist, Vol. 46, No. 178, Part 2. Plains Anthropological Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Tiffany, Joseph A., Lynn M. Alex, and Mark L. Anderson1998 Comments on “The Archeology of Two Great

Oasis Sites in the Perry Creek Valley, Northwest Iowa,” by J. J. Reid and Stephanie M. Whittlesey. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 45:95–100.

Tiffany, Joseph A., Austin A. Buhta, L. Adrien Hannus, and Jason M. Kruse2011 New Insights into the Anoka Phase: Initial Results

from Work at the Lynch (25BD1), Anoka (25BD2/201), Hostert (25BD16), and Mohr (25BD139) Sites, Boyd County, Nebraska. Central Plains Archeology 13:1–34.

Tiffany, Joseph A., and Stephen C. Lensink2010 Dating the Origins of the Central Plains Tradition.

Poster paper presented at the 75th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, St.


National Scenic Byway, edited by Melody K. Pope, Joseph A. Tiffany, Angela R. Collins, and Michael J. Perry, pp. 2-1–2-197. Contract Completion Report 1700. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Will, George F.1930 The Mandan Lodge at Bismarck. North Dakota

Historical Quarterly 5:38–48.Willey, Gordon R., and Philip Phillips

1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Williams, Stephen, and John M. Goggin1956 The Long Nosed God Mask in Eastern United

States. The Missouri Archaeologist 18(3):7–72.Wilson, Gilbert L.

1934 The Hidatsa Earthlodge. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History Vol. 33, Pt. 5. American Museum of Natural History, New York.

Wilson, S. R., and G. K. Ward1981 Evaluation and Clustering of Radiocarbon

Age Determinations: Procedures and Paradigms. Archaeometry 23:19–39.

Winans, Melissa C. 2010 E-mail of March 31, 2010, to Stephen C. Lensink,

regarding Texas Natural Science Center radiocarbon laboratory reports for dates from Nebraska phase sites. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Wood, W. Raymond1962 A Stylistic and Historical Analysis of Shoulder

Patterns on Plains Indian Pottery. American Antiquity 28:25–40.

1969a Conclusions. In Two House Sites in the Central Plains: An Experiment in Archaeology, edited by W. Raymond Wood, pp. 109–111. Memoir 6, Plains Anthropologist, Vol. 14, No. 44, Part 2. Plains Anthropological Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1969b The Nuzum Site, 14DP10: Site Description. In Two House Sites in the Central Plains: An Experiment in Archaeology, edited by W. Raymond Wood, pp. 63–68. Memoir 6, Plains Anthropologist, Vol. 14, No. 44, Part 2. Plains Anthropological Society, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Zimmerman, Larry J.1977a The Glenwood Local Sequence: A Re-examination.

Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 24:62–83.1977b Prehistoric Locational Behavior: A Computer

Simulation. Report 10. Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014a AMS 14C assays for Cordell: ISGS-A3132 and ISGS-A3133, 13ML176. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

2014b AMS 14C assays for Cordell: ISGS-A3181, 13ML176. Report on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Ward, G. K., and S. R. Wilson1978 Procedures for Comparing and Combining

Radiocarbon Age Determinations: A Critique. Archaeometry 20:19–31.

Watt, DeeAnn 2014 E-mail of April 3, 2014, to Stephen C. Lensink,

regarding Mett Shippe botanical collection for 14DP13 at Illinois State Museum. E-mail on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Wedel, Waldo R.1959 An Introduction to Kansas Archaeology. Smithsonian

Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 174. U.S. Government Printing Offi ce, Washington, D.C.

1961 Prehistoric Man on the Great Plains. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

2001 Plains Village Tradition: Central. In Plains, edited by Raymond J. DeMallie, pp. 173–185. Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 13, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Wedel, Waldo R., and Marvin F. Kivett1956 Additional Data on the Woodruff Ossuary,

Kansas. American Antiquity 21:414–416.Wedel, Waldo R., and Richard A. Krause

2001 History of Archeological Research. In Plains, edited by Raymond J. DeMallie, pp. 14–22. Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 13, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Weitzner, Bella1979 Notes on the Hidatsa Indians Based on Data Recorded

by the Late Gilbert L. Wilson. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History Vol. 56, Pt. 2. American Museum of Natural History, New York.

Whittaker, William E.2014 Submittal form to Beta Analytic Inc. for radiocar-

bon sample 13ML429A. Form on fi le, Offi ce of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Whittaker, William E., and Adam Newman2010 Recent Archaeological Investigations of the Loess

Hills. In Cultural Resources of the Loess Hills: A Focus Study to Determine National Signifi cance of Selected Archaeological Cultural Resources along the Loess Hills


Documents

THE WISCONSIN ARCHEOLOGIST