Typed Projectile Points by Elevation

Introduction

A large number of precontact archaeological sites have

been recorded in Klickitat County, WA. Most are

surface lithic scatters known only from site inventory

records. Methods for dating these sites are restricted

mainly to the analysis of temporally sensitive projectile

points. Establishing site age is paramount for

examining changing land-use patterns over time.

Building on the work of Solimano et al. (2012), this

poster examines precontact land-use through the

spatial distribution of projectile points.

Expectations

The distribution of temporally diagnostic artifacts should

provide insight into precontact land-use patterns.

• Early and mid-Holocene projectile points, which

reflect a generalized resource acquisition strategy,

should be found in a wider range of environments.

• Later Holocene points, which reflect a more

logistically organized land-use strategy, will be found

in a narrower range of environments.

Results and Discussion

• Chi-squared analysis revealed no significant pattern to the spatial distribution of

projectile points.

• Two possible explanations:

• There is no difference in how the Study Area was used over time.

• Poor reporting of projectile point data skews the analysis.

• By using the compiled data set further statistical analysis (GIS based) may

highlight other patterns in point distribution.

Discussion

Some general impressions on land-use in the Study Area are possible, however:

• Early Holocene points are rare (one fluted, no Windust points).

• Cascade points are relatively rare (Three Cascade points all from the same

site).

• Middle Holocene points are relatively common (Mahkin and Cold Springs SN).

• The most intensive use might be between 4,000 and 2,000 years ago.

• There is limited evidence for use after about 2,000 years ago.

The single biggest problem with the data was the lack of proper recording of

projectile point data on site inventory forms. For about half the points, the original

site recorder did not type the point or report the information (scale drawing , usable

photograph, measurements) that would allow typing.

Acknowledgements

David Ellis, Michael Daniels, WillametteCRA, Dr. Kenneth Ames, and Portland State University’s Anthropology Department.

References

Ames, Kenneth M. 2000. Kennewick Man: Cultural Affiliation Report, Chapter 2: Review of the Archaeological Data. Report prepared for the National Park Service. http://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/kennewick/AMES.HTM.

Lohse, Ernst S. 1985. Rufus Woods Lake Projectile Point Chronology. In Summary Result, Chief Joseph Dam Cultural Resources Project, Washington, edited by S.K. Campbell, pp.317-364. University of Washington, Office of

Public Archaeology, Seattle.

Pettigrew, Richard M., William Hildebrandt and P. Mikkelsen. 1995. Projectile Point Typology. In Archaeological Investigations PGT-PG&E Pipeline Expansion Project, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California, Volume V:

Technical Studies, edited by M.J. Moratto, pp. 1-1 – 1-72. INFOTEC Research, Inc., Davis, California. Submitted to Pacific Gas Transmission Company, Portland, Oregon.

Solimano, Paul S., Kenneth M. Ames, Charles M. Hodges, Donald Shannon. 2012. Historic Context for Precontact Cultural Resources in Parts of Klickitat County, Washington Final Report. Report on File at Washington

Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation.

Estabrook, Carl B. and George F. Estabrook. 1989. Historical Methods 22:5-8.

Projectile Point Distribution in Klickitat County, Washington

Andy Pfandler, Matt Goodwin, Andrew J. Huff, Josh Moss, Daniel M. Gilmour, and Paul S. Solimano

Willamette Cultural Resources Associates, Ltd.

Data Set • Site form review showed 659 sites in the

study area; 76 (11 percent) reported a

total of 93 projectile points.

• Almost half of all points (n= 44, 47

percent) were not typed and reporters

did not provide enough info to type the

point.

• The remaining 49 points had types

reported or could be typed based on site

form information.

Elevation (m)

Approximate age (BP)

Total Pre

4,000

BP

4,000 to 0

BP

4,000 to

2,000 BP

2,500 to

1,500 BP

Post

2,000 BP

100 to 300 1 1

300 to 600 3 1 1 3 8

600 to 900 11 8 5 7 6 37

900 to 1,300 2 1 3

Total 16 10 6 8 9 49

Klickitat County

Study Area

Methods

• Outlined a study area based on data available, excluding areas below 100 m due

to data issues.

• Compiled projectile point data from site and isolate inventory forms. Data

collected included original recorder designation and site location.

• When possible, points were re-typed using Pettigrew et al. (1995) and Lohse

(1985) and type and age recorded.

• Multiple chi-square tests were performed using

temporally diagnostic points and elevation class.

ACTUS, a chi-square program designed specifically

to deal with both small samples and samples with

empty cells through simulation (Estabrook and

Estabrook 1989) was used for all chi-squares.

Points were grouped in various ways. For example,

points were grouped into fine-grained units as well

as into more coarse-grained temporal units (e.g. pre-

3,500 and post 3,500 BP).

Bars represent point age span.

Blue bars are style found in Study Area.

Numbers are the count of points in Study Area.

Gray bars are styles not found.

Graphic adapted from Ames 2000.