Contributions to

Circumpolar Anthropology 7

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

2008

enter

^^tudies

Bryan C. Hood

Towards an Archaeologt)

of the Main K^gion^ Labrador

BRYAN C. HOOD

EDITED BY WILLIAM W. FITZHUGH

Published by the

Arctic Studies Center

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C.
© 2008 Arctic Studies Center, National IVluseum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN: 10: 0-9816142-0-5

ISBN 1 3: 978-0-9816142-0-5

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Hood, Bryan C, 1 955- Towards an archaeology of the Nain Region, Labrador / Bryan C. Hood ; edited by William W. Fitzhugh.

p. cm. — (Contributions to circumpolar anthropology ; v. 7) Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN-13: 978-0-9816142-0-5 (pbk. : alk. paper)

ISBN-10: 0-9816142-0-5 (pbk. : alk. paper)

1. Indians of North America— Newfoundland and Labrador— Nain Region—Antiquities. 2. Eskimos— Newfoundland

and Labrador— Nain Region—Antiquities. 3. Inuit— Newfoundland and Labrador— Nain Region—Antiquities. 4. Nain Region (N.L.)— Antiquities. 5. Excavations (Archaeology)— Newfoundland and Labrador— Nain Region. 6. Ethnoarchaeology— Newfoundland and Labrador—Nain Region. 7. Environmental archaeology— Newfoundland and Labrador— Nain Region. 8. Material culture— Newfoundland and Labrador—Nain Region— History. 9. Historic buildings —Newfoundland and Labrador—Nain Region. 10. Land settlement patterns— Newfoundland and Labrador—Nain Region —History. I. Fitzhugh, William W., 1 943- II. Arctic Studies Center (National IVluseum of Natural History) III. Title.

E78.N72H66 2008

971 .8004'97-dc22

200801 2674

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, Z39.48-1 992.

Technical Editor: Cara Seitchek Layout and Typography: Jody Billert / Design Literate, Inc. Production editor: Abigail McDermott

Printed by United Book Press, Inc., Baltimore, MD

This publication is Volume 7 in the Arctic Studies Center series. Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology, produced by the

Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.

THIS SERIES IS MADE POSSIBLE IN PART BY THE JAMES W. VANSTONE (1 925-2001) ENDOWMENT. ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR

THIS VOLUME HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR ARCHAEOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF TROMS0, NORWAY.

Front Cover: Duncan Strong at Nukasusutok Island, August 1928. W. D. Strong collection © Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives. Negative No. 99-10592.

Back Cover: Bryan Hood at Nukasusutok-5, Area 3, in 1980 (Photo: Morten Meldgaard).
f Jan 7 "2009

j

contents ^^^-^rari^.^

Pre fa ce i TABLE OF CONTENTS

iv FOREWORD

vi PREFACE

vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ix List of Figures

xlli List of Tables chapter 1

1 INTRODUCTION

The Goals of this Text A Brief History of Archaeological Research in the Main Region and Adjacent Areas

Outline of Central and Northern Labrador Culture-History

C h a p t e r 2 1 3 ENVIRONMENT OF THE NAIN REGION

Overview of the Nain Region

Bedrock Geology of the Nain Region

Paleoenvironmental Change

Recent Seasonal Resource Use in the Nain Region

Nukasusutok Island Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run chapter 5 23 THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

The Maritime Archaic: Longhouse Models and Spatial Muddles

The Functional and Social Dimensions of Maritime Archaic Dw/ellings

Expanding the View: Other Archaeological Contexts

Ethnography: Social Space and Meaning

Methodological Strategy for the Spatial Analysis of Maritime

Archaic Sites Paleoeskimos: Axial Features and Bilateral Organization

Methodological Strategy for the Analysis of Paleoeskimo Spatial

Patterns Notes on the Quantitative Methods.

Conclusion: Behavioral Space and Signifying Practices cha pter 4- 53 NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND: OVERVIEW AND SURVEYED SITES Nukasusutok-1 (HcCh-4)

Nukasusutok-2 (HcCh-5)

Nukasusutok-4 (HcCh-6)

Nukasusutok-6 (HcCh-8)

Nukasusutok-9 (HcCh-1 1) Nukasusutok-1 (HcCh-12)

Nukasusutok-1 1 (HcCh-1 3) Nukasusutok-1 3 (HcCh-1 5) Nukasusutok-14 (HcCh-16)

Mount Pickle Harbour-1 (HcCh-17)
cha pter ^

61 NUKASUSUTOK-5; DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW

The Site and its Environs

Archaeological Activities and Field Methods

Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 chapter 6 77 NUKASUSUTOK-5; AREA 2 SPATIAL ANALYSIS

Limitations and Complications

Preliminary Overview

Area 2A

Area 2B

Area 2C

C h a p t e r 7 139 NUKASUSUTOK-5: AREAS 1 AND 3 Area 1 Area 3 chapter S 157 NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE

Definitions Area 1 Area 2A

Area 2B

Area 2C

Area 3 The Nukasusutok-5 Assemblage in a Comparative Perspective

chapter 9 1 77 NUKASUSUTOK-5: INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Inter-Area Comparisons

Conclusions

cha pter 1

1 89 NUKASUSUTOK-1 2: EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES

Structure 1

Structure 2

Structure 3

Structure 4 Test Pits 1-3

Test Pits 4 and 5 Surface Collections

Overall Assemblage Characteristics and Technological Organization

Chronology

Structural Comparisons

Settlement Pattern and Seasonality
chapter 11 213 POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND

Post-Contact Inuit Society and Settlement Patterns in Labrador

An Ethnohistoric Sketch of the Nukasusutok Settlement

The Archaeology of Nukasusutok-7 (HcCi-8)

The Archaeology of Nukasusutok-8 and W. D. Strong's Grave Collection Conclusion: Big-Men, Big-Women and Negotiating the 18^'^ Century

European World System

chapter 12 245 WEBB BAY/PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS

Port Manvers Run-1 (HfCj-5)

Double Island Cove-1, L-1 (HeCj-1) Sunset Point (HeCj-8)

Attu's Bight-1 (HeCk-4)

Webb Point (HeCk-6)

chapter 1 ^ 273 ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY

Overview

Excavation and Collection Methods

L-1 Excavation

L-5 Excavation

L-7 Excavation

L-9 Test Excavation

Other Loci

Inter-Locus Comparisons

Conclusions

C h a p t e r 1 -f 319 THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR

Culture-Historical Background

Working at Theoretical Boundaries: "Landscape " as a Platform for Dialogue?

Partial Readings: Navigating the Boundaries

Ecological Space

Constructed Social and Ideological Landscapes

Back to the Archaeological Context

Paleoenviron mental Considerations

A Note on Other Cultural Variables Navigation 1 : An Ecological Narrative Navigation 2: A Social and Ideological Landscape Narrative Conclusion

Chapter 1^ 347 CONCLUDING REMARKS

351 REFERENCES CITED

363 INDEX
foreword

BY WILLIAM W. FITZHUGH

In 1969 while in the second field season of my PhD

work in Hamilton Inlet, Geoff Conrad, Peter Wells, and I

flew 200 miles north to survey two locations at the forest-tundra boundary in northern Quebec-Labrador. One

of these locations was on the George River, where

Dillon Wallace, Mina Hubbard, and W. B. Cabot had

described Naskapi (today's Innu) camped in the early

1900s to intercept the annual caribou migration in August and September at Indian House Lake (Hutte de

la Sauvage) near the Labrador border in northeastern

Quebec. Here we found many historic Innu camps at the

northern edge of the forest. This country was harsh and

its scoured surface still bore the scars of continental ice

sheets. For the Innu who lived here, starvation was

always just a breath away, for if the 'deer' migration

changed the Innu were often too weak to re-locate.

After a few days we flew east to the comparative

paradise of Village Bay, where Port Manvers Run joins

the Labrador Sea at the southeast side of the Kiglapait

Mountains. To the north lay the Qkak archipelago; to

the south the island archipelago east of Nain, then the northernmost town in Labrador, settled by Moravian

missionaries in 1771. As we waded ashore in the blisteringly cold water, the contrast with the interior barrens was stark indeed. It wasn't that the land was so different, for it had the same stunted spruce trees and tangled alder thickets, the same patches of wind-blown

sand and winter-killed tree stumps. What was different was the wealth of resources provided by the ocean. The

bountiful Labrador coast waters made the barrens seem

like the most desolate place on earth. If you had a

Iv

choice - and in the competitive world of early Labrador

history, one often did not - you would choose the coast, and if you know how to hunt sea mammals and navigate a treacherous coastline, it could sustain larger and more sedentary communities.

Our brief visit to Village Bay and Thalia Point demonstrated great archaeological potential, with finds

of Inuit camps dating to the past 5-600 years, the first

Pre-Dorset and Dorset sites to be found in Labrador,

and scattered traces of yet-to-be defined early Indian

cultures. The region was well-described in detailed

annual reports of the Moravians in the 18-1 9th C. and some ethnographic work had been done by geologist

E.P. Wheeler, whose student, Stearns (Tony) Morse, and

Peter Johnson had studied its geology and geomorphology. Wheeler and Morse were still working in the Nain

area when we arrived, as was Terje Brantenberg, a

social anthropologist. My brief excursion to Thalia Point

convinced me that Nain, which lay just south of the

coastal tree-line, was more central to the question of

Indian-Eskimo boundary dynamics than Hamilton Inlet, where I had been working on this problem sincel968.

Beginning in 1 973 I acquired a boat and started making excursions to Nain from Hamilton Inlet, and in 1975 1 began to focus exclusively on this area. In 1 977-

78 I undertook a large survey of the coast north of

Nain, as far as Killinek and Port Burwell at the northern

tip of Labrador. By this time Bryan Hood had become

part of the field team, and when we returned to continue work in Nain in the early 1 980s, Bryan began his own

project at a large Maritime Archaic site at Nukasusutok

5. In later years he researched other sites at Nukasusutok and explored the inner fjords north of

FOREWORD
Main. Hood's work more than complements our earlier

studies; he has advanced it in important ways, making

the first detailed published test of the Maritime Archaic longhouse model, exploring Maritime ArchaicPaleoeskimo contacts, and expanding knowledge of

Dorset settlement patterns. This volume is the first

detailed description of Nain culture history to be published, spans a period of 6000 years, and includes a

large number of sites from different environmental

zones, from outer coast to interior bays and fjords.

Hood's analytical study of settlement data using k- means and other methods is a model approach to the

study of settlement information and the first such study

to appear for any arctic or subarctic region. Description

of Duncan Strong's finds from the early historic Inuit

village at Nukasusutok, housed at the R.S. Peabody

Foundation in Andover, Massachusetts, brings his

study up toward the present day. While not a complete

scenario of the early history of Nain it is a fine start at

creating an accessible published literature on the

archaeology of northern Labrador.

I thank Bryan for his long and continuing dedication to the peoples and cultures of Nain, and for his

meticulous description and analysis of hard-won field

data. It gives me great pleasure to publish this work

through the Arctic Studies Center as the first of several

future monographs on Smithsonian-related Labrador

research. We dedicate this volume to the people of Nain

in gratitude for the support and encouragement they

have provided our collective efforts for many years.

Heading home to Nam over the sea ice east of Strathcona Run, April 1996. (Photo. B. Hood)

FOREWORD V
reface

The research described herein was undertaken in two

phases separated by twelve years. The first phase transpired on Nul<asusutol< Island in 1979 and 1980 as

fieldworl< directed towards an M.A. degree at Trent

University (Hood 1981). During subsequent years I

pursued my Ph.D. at the University of IVlassachusetts,

Amherst. That research was directed primarily

towards north Norwegian Stone Age archaeology, but

a prominent underlying theme was that comparison

between Norway and Labrador could provide useful

insight concerning hunter-gatherer complexity. Having

eventually acquired a teaching position at Memorial

University of Newfoundland, I returned to Nukasusutok in 1992 and 1993 to reevaluate the previous work. I also expanded my geographical scope to

include a modest program in the Webb Bay and Port Manvers Run area from 1992 to 1994.

This temporal split presented some problems

when it was time to proceed with the final analysis of

the material from the Nukasusutok-5 site. There was

always the nagging question as to whether or not the

observations made by naive eyes in 1979 could reliably be compared with those made on the basis of more experience in 1992. Should inconsistencies in

observations between the two periods be attributed to

inexperienced omissions in 1979 rather than to real

behavioral differences? There were also some differ- ences in recording techniques between the two

research phases which had an impact on the methods

chosen for the final analyses. For example, in 1979-

1980 debitage was collected in 1 m^ units while 50

cm^ units were used in 1 992-1 993. Or, in 1 979-80 utilized flakes and bipolar cores were not point plotted

vi

systematically in the field, so many of them were only

provenienced within 1 m^ units. Thus, the distribution

patterns of these types could not be studied at the

level of detail I would prefer today. These and other problems were annoying and frustrating, but hardly

fatal. Although hitches remain they are not sufficient

to subvert the main conclusions reached herein.

Despite the intensity of fieldwork in Labrador during the 1970s and 1980s, very little has been published beyond preliminary reports and some doctoral

dissertations. This situation imposes significant limitations on the extent to which the material presented

here can be used to elucidate broader culture-historical problems. Consequently, this volume will not offer

a new synthesis of Labrador archaeology, although one is badly needed. The task of integration lies with

others. Instead, the main purpose of the volume is to

provide a detailed descriptive report that will be useful

to other researchers. Of course, there is more to it

than that; the material is also used to direct attention towards broader methodological and conceptual

issues. The unifying theme for several of the chapters

is the social structuration of space, which is treated at

two different scales. The first scale is site structure, for

which a set of methodological strategies is outlined. The second scale is regional and inter-regional, which

is played out in general discussions of settlement patterns and theorization of the Pre-Dorset/Maritime

Archaic social boundary relationship. In both cases the

discussions feed on the tensions between processual

and post-processual archaeologies. Thus the worm's

eye view opens onto the wider world.

Bryan Hood
acknowledgments

This text has been many years in the making and has

involved perambulations on both sides of the Atlantic

such that the assistance of a rather wide range of people and institutions must be acknowledged.

During the 1979-80 field seasons financial support was received from the Arctic Institute of North

America, the Committee for Research and Department

of Anthropology, Trent University, and the Historic

Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador. The 1992-1994 field seasons were supported by grants from Memorial University (VicePresident's Research Grant and internal SSHRC funds),

the Institute of Social and Economic Research and the

Historic Resources Division of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Much of the cataloguing

and lab work performed by students was supported by

the Memorial University MUCEP program. The

Archaeology Unit, Memorial University, kindly kept me

employed from 1990-1995.

Over the years, many people participated in this

research in one capacity or another. In 1979 I was

accompanied in the field by Jack Contin and Charles

Curtis and in 1980 by William Fitzhugh, Eric Loring,

Stephen Loring, Morten Meldgaard and Douglas

Sutton. From 1992 to 1994 Edward Flowers of Nain

served as my field assistant, joined in 1994 by Elias Henoche, also of Nain. Also joining the crew on a memorable survey/hunting trip to Hebron in 1997

were Kitti Flowers, Chesley Ittulak and Sam Kalleo. Lab

assistance in cataloguing and related matters was provided by Marcus Anderson, Patricia Barefoot,

Stephanie Barry, Marie-Claire Coyer, Randolph Lawlor,

Sandy Ste. Croix and Robin Tuck.

Specialized analytical assistance was performed

by Rodolfe Fecteau ( University of Western Ontario;

charcoal species identification), Dosia Layendecker

(Smithsonian; charcoal species identification), Brian

Ritchie (Trent University, soils analysis), Michael Deal

(Memorial University, botanical identification) and Ann

Rick (Canadian Museum of Nature, zoological analysis). Most of the lithic artifact photos were taken by

John Bourne (Photo Services, Memorial University).

Once upon a time (1981, precisely), a preliminary

look at the Maritime Archaic material reported here was presented as an M.A. thesis at Trent University

(Hood 1 981 ). I would like to thank the members of my

thesis committee, Morgan Tamplin and the late

Richard Johnston, for their guidance in thesis preparation and Romas Vastokas and Paul Healy for assistance

in acquiring funding from Trent sources. A special thanks is due to William Fitzhugh

(Smithsonian). His invitation to participate in the

Torngat Archaeological Project in 1978 was the stepping stone to everything that has happened since. He

also suggested the work on Nukasusutok-5, provided

subsistence and logistical support in 1980 and served

as an outside committee member for the M.A. thesis.

In recent years he has provided valuable commentary

on my attempts to theorize the Maritime Archaic.

I also appreciate the efforts of the staff of the

Cultural Heritage Division, province of Newfoundland

and Labrador, and the Newfoundland Museum, for

authorizing research and export permits, providing

valuable information from site records, and sending me copies of unpublished manuscripts. Specifically:

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii
Martha Drake, Ken Reynolds, Delphina Mercer,

Stephen Hull, Elaine Anton and Kevin McAleese.

My access to W. D. Strong's collection at the

Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips

Academy, Andover, Massachusetts, was kindly

arranged by Malinda Blustain. The material and photographs are used by permission of the Peabody

Museum. I would also like to thank the staff of the

National Anthropological Archives at the Smithsonian

Institution for making available Strong's field notes and photographs. Some of Strong's photos are used

here with permission of the Smithsonian Institution. Over the past several years the financial and

infrastructural support of the University of Troms0,

Norway, has been instrumental in bringing this work

to completion. Additionally, without tutoring in the

basics of AutoCad from Tor Mikalsen, I would never

have managed to produce the maps and floor plans

herein. Anne Tommervag and Geir Davidsen provided

pointers on digital photo retouching.

I would also like to thank the manuscript peer

reviewers for pointing out various errors and omissions and for suggesting improvements. The remaining blemishes are my own fault.

Last but not least, much gratitude must be

extended to the Labradorians who assisted in implementing the fieldwork and invited me into their homes. In 1979 Henry Webb of Nain provided boat

transportation to and from Nukasusutok and Sue Webb provided radio communications. Winston White was most gracious in supplying accommodation during our sojourns in Goose Bay and provided us with some memorable mid-summer rest and recreation at

his summer home at Kauk in 1979 and 1980. Gary

Baikie of the Torngasok Cultural Center (Nain), in his

capacity as the community liason for archaeological

matters, approved the 1992-94 fieldwork and provided assistance with logistics in 1992. Joe Webb and

Dennis Wyatt provided boat transportation to our field

sites in 1992. Edward Flowers kindly contributed the

use of his boat and his father's motor in 1993 and

Cus Flowers provided us with transportation out to Webb Bay in 1994. Thanks to Christine Denniston for

providing accommodation in Nain in 1992 and 1993.

A special thanks to the Flowers family for taking me into their home, and to Gus and Edward for giving me the opportunity to travel with them on summer

hunting trips and an especially memorable winter trip

to Nutak in April 1993. Not to mention other forays

since then. Without their support my ignorance would

have been much worse and I might truly have gone

isumaitsik...

Motoring up Port Manvers Run with Edward Flowers, 1993. (Photo: B. Hood)

viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
fiVures

1 Map of Labrador with places mentioned in the text. xvi 2 Culture-history chart for central and northern Labrador. 6

3 Map of the Nain region. 12 4 RADARSAT synthetic aperture radar satellite photo of the Nain district. 14

5 Relative sea level curves for Nain and inner Voisey's Bay. 16

6 Binford's external/internal hearth models. 24

7 Recent Innu camp structure. 26

8 Innu summer tent site, 1 980. 27

9 Maritime Archaic longhouse, Aillik 2. 28

10 Maritime Archaic longhouse, Aillik 2, excavated into a cobble beach. 29

11 Maritime Archaic longhouses from Nulliak Cove 1 . 31 12 Pre-contact Recent Indian dwelling features. 35

13 Late Dorset and Russian Upper Paleolithic longhouses. 38

14 Spatial organization of a Nenets summer camp. 41

1 5 Early Paleoeskimo axial features. 45

16 Archaeological sites on Nukasusutok Island. 52 17 Tools from surveyed Maritime Archaic sites on Nukasusutok Island. 55 18 Nukasusutok-2; Structure 2. 56

19 Dorset tools from Mount Pickle Harbour-1 . 59 20 Nukasusutok-5 in its landscape. 60

21 Nukasusutok-5 main beach terrace. 62

22 Nukasusutok-5 excavation layout. 64

23 Area 2 subareas. 64

24 Area 2A soil profile. 64

2 5 Area 2 features. 66

26 Area 2A bipod photo. 67

27 Area 2A hearth-1 . 67

28 Area 2A hearth-5. 69

29 Area 2B under excavation. 69

30 Area 2C overview looking north. 70

31 Area 2C hearth-9. 70

32 Area 2C hearth-1 2. 71 33 Area 2: total flake distribution in relation to features. 76

34 Area 2A: inferred flake lobes in relation to features. 79

35 Area 2A: rock distribution in relation to inferred flake lobes. 79

36 Area 2A: flake lobes superimposed on vertical bipod photo. 80

37 Area 2: /c-means cluster analysis. 82 38 Area 2: quadrat groupings used in the analyses. 83 39 Area 2; distribution of quartz flakes. 84 40 Area 2; distribution of Ramah chert flakes. 85

41 Area 2A: south lobe, lower level: distribution of Ramah chert flakes. 86

42 Area 2: distribution of patinated Ramah chert flakes. 86

43 Area 2 distribution of gray Mugford and black chert flakes. 87

44 Area 2 distribution of slate flakes. 89

45 Area 2A: correspondence analysis plot of flake raw materials by quadrat, coded by analytical model units. 92 46 Area 2A: correspondence analysis plot of tool classes by analytical model units. 92 47 Area 2: distribution of block cores by quadrat. 93 48 Area 2: distribution of bipolar cores by quadrat. 93 49 Area 2: distribution of utilized flakes by quadrat. ^ 94

50 Area 2: distribution of bifacial points. 95

51 Area 2: distribution of biface preforms. 96

52 Area 2: distribution of bifaces. 97

FIGURES ix
53 Area 2: distribution of flake points. 98

54 Area 2: distribution of endscrapers. 99

55 Area 2: distribution of slate tools. 100

56 Area 2: distribution of unmodified slate plates and blanks. 103

57 Area 2: distribution of ground slate flakes and ground tool fragments. 104

58 Area 2: distribution of miscellaneous tools. 105

59 Area 2A: twelve-cluster /c-means solution. 106

60 Area 2A: correspondence analysis plot of tool classes by fc-means cluster, based on the overall Area 2 nine-cluster solution. 107

61 Area 2; distribution of red ocher and bone fragments. 107

62 Area 2: size distribution of tools and quartz flakes. 108

63 Area 2: distribution of Ramah chert biface-thinning flakes. 109

64 Area 2A; dwelling module interpretation. Ill 65 Area 2A: rectangular structure interpretation. 112

66 Area 2B; features and total flake distribution. 123

67 Area 2B: five-cluster fc-means solution. 123

68 Area 2C: features and total flake distribution. 129 69 Area 2C: modified four-cluster fc-means solution. 130

70 Area 2C: dwelling interpretations. 135

71 Area 1 : features and total flake distribution. 138

72 Area 1 ; distribution of quartz flakes. 141 73 Area 1 : distribution of Ramah chert flakes. 141 74 Area 1 : distribution of black chert and gray slate flakes. 142

75 Area 1 : distribution of utilized flakes, bipolar cores, block cores, and bifaces. 142

76 Area 3: level 1 features. 143

77 Area 3: soil profile. 143

78 Area 3: overview. Feature 1 excavated. 144

79 Area 3: vertical bipod photo. Feature 1 excavated. 144

80 Area 3; Feature 1 . 145

81 Area 3: Feature 1 vertical bipod photo. 145

82 Area 3: level 2 features. 146

83 Area 3: Feature 2. 146

84 Area 3: Feature 3. 148

85 Area 3; Feature 3 sectioned, showing rock cluster beneath the red ocher layer. 148

86 Area 3: distribution of quartz flakes. 150

87 Area 3: distribution of Ramah chert flakes. 152 88 Area 3; distribution of slate flakes. 153 89 Area 3: quadrat groupings used in the analyses. 154

90 Area 3: tool distribution and fc-means cluster analysis. 154

91 Area 3: distribution of utilized flakes. 154

92 Area 3: distribution of block cores. 154

93 Area 3: distribution of bipolar cores. 155

94 Area 3; distribution of slate tools. 155

95 Area 3: distribution of ground slate flakes. 155

96 Area 3: distribution of other tool classes. 155

97 Area 3: distribution of Ramah chert biface-thinning flakes. 155

98 Nukasusutok-5: stemmed bifacial points. 156

99 Nukasusutok-5: bifacial points and bifaces. 158

100 Nukasusutok-5; biface fragments and flake points. 158

101 Nukasusutok-5; bifaces and preforms. 161 102 Nukasusutok-5; bifaces and preforms. 161 103 Nukasusutok-5; endscrapers, flake knives, gravers, and linear flakes. 162

104 Nukasusutok-5; stemmed flakes and flake knives. 162

105 Nukasusutok-5; bipolar cores and disc core. 163

106 Nukasusutok-5; bipolar core analysis variables and attributes. 164

107 Nukasusutok-5; Area 2A bipolar core size distribution. 165

108 Nukasusutok-5; slate and schist tools. 166

109 Nukasusutok-5; ground slate tools. 166

1 10 Nukasusutok-5; quartz biface and cores. 167

111 Nukasusutok-5; slate and schist implements. 167

112 Nukasusutok-5; slate plates and blanks. 170

113 Nukasusutok-5; schist tablets. 170

114 Nukasusutok-5; fragment of bone pendant, Area 2B. 171 115 Nukasusutok-5; Area 3 flaked implements. 171 116 Nukasusutok-5; Area 3 slate implements. 174

1 1 7 Correspondence analysis plot of tool classes and Nukasusutok-5 subareas. 1 76

1 18 Stacked column graph of Nukasusutok-5 flake raw materials by subarea. 179

119 Quartz flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5. ~ 181

X FIGURES
120 Ramah chert flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5. 181

121 Fine-grained chert flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5. 181

1 22 Slate flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5. 1 84 123 Nukasusutok-1 2: overview towards the southwest. 188

124 Nukasusutok-1 2; site map. 190

125 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 1 . 191 126 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 1 , view towards the north. 191 127 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2. 192 128 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2, view towards the southwest. 193

1 29 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool distribution and fc-means cluster analysis. 1 93 130 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 flake distribution. 195

131 Nukasusutok-1 2: implements from Structure 2. 197

132 Nukasusutok l 2: soapstone vessel from Structure 2. 198

133 Nukasusutok l 2: soapstone vessel fragments from Structure 2. 198

134 Nukasusutok l 2: implements from Structures 3 and 4. 199

135 Nukasusutok-1 2: implements from test-pits, surface, and Structure 201 136 Nukasusutok l 2: implements from test-pits. 202

137 Nukasusutok l 2: Ramah chert flake size distribution. 207

1 38 Nain region Dorset site Ramah chert flake size distributions by frequency, using Nagle's (1 984) categories. 208

1 39 Nain region Dorset site Ramah chert flake size distributions by weight, using Nagle's (1 984) categories. 209

140 Nain region Dorset site distribution. 212

1 41 Kinship relations of households at the Nukasusutok settlement, winter 1 776-1 777. 222

142 Nukasusutok-8 site map. 226

143 Nukasusutok-8: overview towards the southwest, August 1 928. 227

1 44 Nukasusutok-8: House 5 overview towards the southwest, August 1 928 227

145 Nukasusutok-8: House 5 excavation towards the west, August 1928 228

146 Nukasusutok-S: House 5, 1992 midden test pit collection. 229

147 Nukasusutok Island: probably Crave 2, August 1 928. 230

148 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting and transportation implements. 231 149 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting implements. 232

1 50 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting, transportation, and household implements. 232

1 51 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting and household implements. 233

1 52 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting and household implements. 233

1 53 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: fishing and household implements. 234

1 54 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: wooden implements. 234

1 55 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection wooden box component. 234

1 56 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: soapstone lamps. 235

1 57 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: soapstone vessel rim fragments. 235

1 58 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection. copper/brass decorative items. 236

1 59 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: decorative items. 236

160 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: bone decorative items. 236

161 W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: lithic implements. 237

162 A 1 773 drawing of Caubvick by Nathaniel Dance. 238

163 Webb Bay and inner Port Manvers Run with sites mentioned in the text. 244

164 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: view towards the northwest. 246

165 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: rock features. 247

166 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: total flake distribution. 247

167 Port Manvers Run-1, S-2/3: tool distribution and /(-means clusters. 248

168 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: tool distribution by quadrat. 248

169 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: tool raw material distributions. 250

170 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: flake raw material distributions. 251

171 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: flake size distributions. 253

172 Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: tools. 254

173 Double Island Cove-1 , Structure 1 . 255

174 Double Island Cove-1 , Structure 1 : tool distribution. 256

175 Double Island Cove-1 , Structure 1 : flake distribution. 256

1 76 Double Island Cove-1 , Structure 1 : flake distribution by quadrat. 257

177 Double Island Cove-1 , Structure 2: tool distribution. 258

178 Double Island Cove-1 , Structure 2: flake distribution. 258

1 79 Tools from Double Island Cove, Sunset Point and Webb Point. 259

1 80 Attu's Bight overview towards the southwest. 260

181 Attu's Bight site map. 260

182 Attu's Bight L-3/6: view towards the east. 262

183 Attu's Bight L-3/6: excavation with flake distribution. 263

1 84 Attu's Bight L-3/6: excavation at the edge of the in situ deposit. 264

185 Attu's Bight L-3/6: profile. 264

186 Attu's Bight L-3/6: tool distribution. 266

FIGURES xi
187 Attu's Bight L-3/6: flake distribution. 266

188 Attu's Bight L-3/6: Ramah chert flake size distribution. 267

189 Attu's Bight L-3/6: distribution of Ramah chert biface-thinning flakes. 268

1 90 Attu's Bight tools. 269

1 91 Attu's Bight tools. 269

1 92 Attu's Point overview towards the northeast. 274

193 Attu's Point site map. 275

1 94 Attu's Point L-1 : rock feature and total flake distribution. 276

1 95 Attu's Point L-1 : overview towards the east. 276

196 Attu's Point L- 1 : tool distribution with /(-means clusters. 277

197 Attu's Point L-1 : tool raw material distribution. 278

198 Attu's Point L-1: flake raw material distributions. 279

1 99 Attu's Point L-1 : flake raw materials by quadrat. 281 200 Attu's Point L-1 tools. 284

201 Attu's Point L-1 tools. 284

202 Attu's Point L-1 tools. 284

203 Attu's Point L-5: features and total flake distribution. 285

204 Attu's Point L-5: possible axial structure, view towards the southwest. 285

205 Attu's Point L-5: tool distribution and /c-means clusters. 286

206 Attu's Point L-5: no provenience tools by quadrat. 289

207 Attu's Point L-5: tool raw material distribution. 290

208 Attu's Point L-5: flake raw material distributions. 291 209 Attu's Point L-5: flake raw material distributions by quadrat. 293

210 Attu's Point L-5 tools. 294

21 1 Attu's Pomt L-5 tools. 295

212 Attu's Point L-7: axial structure, view towards the northeast. 297

213 Attu's Point L-7: box-hearth with thermoliths. 297

214 Attu's Point L-7: box-hearth, thermoliths removed. 297

21 5 Attu's Point L-7: axial structure and total flake distribution. 298

216 Attu's Pomt L-7: tool distribution and fc-means clusters. 299

21 7 Attu's Point L-7: tool raw material distribution. 300

218 Attu's Point L-7: flake raw material distributions. 301 219 Attu's Point L-7: flake raw material distributions by quadrat. . 303 220 Attu's Point L-7 tools. 304

221 Attu's Point L-9: axial structure. 305

222 Attu's Point L-9 tools. 306

223 Attu's Point surface collected tools. 306

224 Attu's Point surface collected tools. 307

225 Attu's Point surface collected tools. 308

226 Attu's Point Mugford chert flake size distribution. 313 227 Attu's Point: slate flake size distribution. 313

228 Distribution of Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset settlement in Labrador: the macro-territorial model. 321 229 Distribution of Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset settlement in the Nain region. 331 230 Calibrated radiocarbon date probability distributions for Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset sites in the Nain region. 333

231 Distribution of Pre-Dorset sites in the Okak Region. 335 232 Distribution of Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset sites in the Hebron Fjord, Sagiek Bay and Ramah Bay regions. 336

233 Pollen percentages for alder (AInus) and spruce (Picea) in the Nain region from 6800-2500 calB.P.. 339

234 CISP2 ice core bidecadal oxygen isotope (dl80) data from 5800- 2500 calB.P., with logarithmic smoothing. 339

xii TABLES
tables

1 List of archaeological sites registered on Nukasusutok Island. 54

2 Nukasusutok-6 flake raw materials. 57

3 Nukasusutok-1 3 flake raw material frequencies. 58

4 Radiocarbon dates from Nukasusutok-5: Area 2 and main beach. 72

5 Area 2A flake raw material frequencies by model units. 88

6 Area 2A flake raw material weights by model units. 90

7 Area 2A tool classes by model units. 91 8 Area 2A tool raw material frequencies by model units. 101

9 Area 2A tool raw material weights by model units. 101 10 Area 2A tool classes, quadrats grouped by /(-means cluster. 102

1 1 Area 2A tool raw material frequencies by fe-means cluster. 1 02

12 Area 2A tool classes by hypothesized rectangular structure. 114

1 3 Area 2A tool raw material frequencies and weights (in grams) by hypothesized rectangular structure. 1 1 5 14 Area 2A flake raw material frequencies and weights (in grams) by hypothesized rectangular structure. 1 16

1 5 Area 2A total lithic raw material weights (tools and flakes) by model units. 1 1 7

1 6 Summary of the quartz and Ramah chert reduction systems at Area 2A. 1 1 8 17 Area 2B tool classes by model units. 121

1 8 Area 2B tool raw material frequencies by model units. 1 22

19 Area 2B tool classes by /(-means cluster. 122 20 Area 28 tool raw material frequencies by /(-means cluster. 124

21 Area 28 flake raw material frequencies by model units. 1 26

22 Area 28 total lithic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 1 27

23 Summary of the quartz and Ramah chert reduction systems at Area 28. 1 28 24 Area 2C tool classes by /(-means cluster and subarea. 1 31 25 Area 2C tool raw material frequencies and weights by cluster and subarea. 1 32 26 Area 2C flake raw material frequencies and weights by subarea. 1 33 27 Area 2C flake raw material frequencies by hearth feature. 1 33 28 Area 2C total lithic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 1 34 29 Summary of the quartz and Ramah chert reduction systems at Area 2C. 1 36 30 Area 1 flake raw materials by frequency and weight. 140

31 Area 1 tool class frequencies. 140

32 Area 3 flake raw material frequencies by feature. 147

33 Area 3 tool class frequencies by feature. 147

34 Area 3 tool raw material frequencies by feature. 149

35 Area 3 total lithic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 1 51 36 Summary of the quartz and Ramah chert reduction systems at Area 1 51 37 Radiocarbon dates from Area 3. 151 38 Inter-area percentage comparison of tool classes. 178

39 Inter-area percentage comparison of tool raw materials. 178 40 Inter-area percentage comparison of flake raw materials. 1 79

41 Variation In elements of quartz technology at Nukasusutok-5. 180

42 Variation in elements of Ramah chert technology at Nukasusutok-5. 1 82 43 Variation in elements of fine-grained chert technology at Nukasusutok-5. 1 82 44 Variation in elements of slate technology at Nukasusutok-5. 185 45 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool classes in relation to the bilateral axial feature model. 194 46 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool classes by front/back divisions. 194 47 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool classes by /(-means cluster. 195 48 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool and flake raw material frequencies. 196 49 Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool and flake raw material weights. 196

50 Nukasusutok-1 2: Test pits 1 -3 tool class frequencies. 200

51 Nukasusutok-1 2: Test pits 1-3 tool and flake raw materials by frequency. 201

52 Nukasusutok l 2; Test pits 1 -3 tool and flake raw materials by weight. 201

53 Comparison of Main region Dorset lithic assemblages. 206

TABLES xiii
54 Ramah chert tool flake ratios for Dorset sites In the Nam area. 207

55 Distribution of biface-thlnning flakes at Nukasusutok-1 2. 207

56 Radiocarbon dates from Nukasusutok l 2. 208

57 Demographic data for the Nukasusutok settlement from Moravian sources. 220

58 Fauna from the House 5 midden at Nukasusutok-8. 229

59 Hunting-fishing tools from the Strong collection. 231 60 Household tools from the Strong collection. 234

61 Decorative Items from the Strong collection. 237

62 Miscellaneous organic materials from the Strong collection. 239

63 Port Manvers Run-1 tool classes by /c-means cluster. 249

64 Port Manvers Run-1 tool raw material frequencies by /c-means cluster. 249

65 Port Manvers Run-l flake raw material frequencies. 252

66 Port Manvers Run-1 total llthic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 252 67 Double Island Cove-1 , L-1 , S-1 : flake raw material frequencies. 257

68 Attu's Bight L 3/6 tool class frequencies. 265

69 Attu's Bight L-3/6 flake raw material frequencies. 265

70 Attu's Bight L-3/6 total llthic raw material weights (flakes and tools). 267

71 Attu's Point L-1 : tool classes by /(-means cluster. 275

72 Attu's Point L-1 : tool classes by bilateral position. 277

73 Attu's Point L-l tool classes by north-south (front-back) position. 277

74 Attu's Point L-1 tool raw material frequencies by bilateral position. 278

75 Attu's Point L-1 : tool raw material frequencies by north-south (front- back) position. 280

76 Attu's Point L-1 tool raw material frequencies by /(-means cluster. 282

77 Attu's Point L-1 . flake raw material frequencies by east-west bilateral position. 282

78 Attu's Point L-1: flake raw material frequencies by north-south (front-back) position. 283

79 Attu's Point L-1: total llthic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 283

80 Attu's Point L-5: tool classes by /(-means cluster. 287

81 Attu's Point L-5: tool classes by general spatial position. 288

82 Attu's Point L-5: tool raw material frequencies by general spatial position. 288

83 Attu's Point L-5 tool raw material frequencies by /(-means cluster. 289

84 Attu's Point L-5: flake raw material frequencies by analytical quadrant. 290

85 Attu's Point L-5: total llthic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 292

86 Attu's Point L-7: tool classes by /(-means cluster. .. 298

87 Attu's Point L-7: tool classes by structural position. 299

88 Attu's Point L-7: tool raw material frequencies by structural position. 300

89 Attu's Point L-7: flake raw material frequencies by structural position. 302 90 Attu's Point L-7 total lithic raw material weights (tools and flakes). 302

91 Attu's Point comparison of tool classes by excavated loci and other collections. 31 92 Attu's Point: comparison of tool raw material frequencies by excavated loci and other collections. 3 1 93 Attu's Point: comparison of flake raw material frequencies by excavated loci. 31 1 94 Attu's Point: comparison of total llthic raw material weights by excavated loci. 31 1 95 Radiocarbon dates for Pre-Dorset and Late Maritime Archaic sites in the Nain Region. 334

xiv TABLES
Nain. July 1978. (Photo: B.Hood)

XV
// Map of Labrador with places mentioned in the text.

xvi CHAPTER 1
Introduction

The Nain region is home to the currently northernmost

permanent settlement in Labrador (Figure 1 ). Although

the settlement itself was established in 1771 by the

Moravian missionaries, occupation of the island-studded coast extends back at least 7000 years. The region

contains a rich archaeological record of Inuit, Pre-lnuit

(Paleoeskimo), Innu and pre-contact Indian occupations, as well as post-contact European activity.

Concerted archaeological research began in the area

during the early 1970s and it could probably be said

that the region is now the most thoroughly investigated portion of Labrador. Relatively little of this archaeological research has been published to date other than

as preliminary reports, so the present volume is an

attempt to provide more substantial documentation of

several localities pertaining to a variety of time periods

and cultural contexts.

The Goals of this Text

This book is entitled "Towards an Archaeology of the

Nain Region" and not "The Archaeology of the Nain

Region" because it is not intended to be a synthetic

culture-historical work. Its primary purpose is to bring

together the results of several years of research in two

portions of the Nain area: Nukasusutok Island and

Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run. Since most of the archaeological data from the Nain region have been collected

by others, it is to them that the task of synthesis

belongs. The goals of this monograph are both broader and narrower than a culture-historical account.

Broader, because the text endeavors to articulate some

of the archaeological material with theoretical and

methodological issues of wider significance. Narrower,

because detailed descriptive reports are presented on

a limited range of material that will constitute primary

documentation for use in a future integration. This

case study approach has the consequence that certain

cultural periods are omitted (Intermediate and Late

Pre-Contact Indian). Another consequence is that the

chapter sequencing is not by chronological or cultural

period but by geographical sub-region (Nukasusutok

Island, Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run).

The theoretical theme that runs throughout the book is the social structuration of space. By this is meant the view that space is not a passive adaptive

stage, but an affordance that is actively constructed

through social practice, becoming a meaningful landscape imbued with social and ideological significance.

This socially constructed affordance acts back upon

the practice of human agents, presenting them with an

array of constraints and opportunities for action and

plays a generative role in the formation of individual

and social identities. Material ecological properties and

social action are thus enfolded in each other (for related but not necessarily isomorphic views see Giddens

1979, 1984; Hood 1988; Ingold 1996, 2000; Tilley

1 994). In this volume the structuration of space is discussed on two scales: the spatial configuration of individual settlements and the organization of regional

and supra-regional landscapes.

INTRODUCTION 1
As far as the spatial organization of individual settlements is concerned, the focus is the role of

dwellings in the structuration of social life; dwellings

as material components of social practice. More specifically, Maritime Archaic and Paleoeskimo dwellings are

considered here. Previous discussions of the Maritime

Archaic have drawn somewhat divergent social inferences from dwelling structures (Fitzhugh 1981, 1984,

1985a; Hood 1993, 1995), but the methodological

basis for these inferences has never been spelled out

explicitly. There have been discussions of methodologies for analyzing Paleoeskimo dwellings (e.g., Dekin

1976; Jensen 1996; McChee 1979; Stapert and

Johanson 1996), but in many other cases spatial distributions are illustrated but not analyzed. Consequently,

the main concern in Chapter 3 will be to formulate a

strategy to connect some of our interpretive conventions with the data by means of fairly explicit analytical arguments. Some would call this middle-range theory (Binford 1980), but here it is simply considered as

methodological strategy. An explicit discussion of methodology is necessary because "interpretive

archaeology" (which is linked with some of the views

mentioned above) has often presented narratives that

lack adequate justification of their claims to have recognized a meaningful pattern in the archaeological

record. Such interpretations constitute weak assertions

or advocacy statements rather than analytical argu- ments and are thus subject to accusations that they

present a "past as wished for" (Renfrew 1 989:36). They

leap to interpret cultural context, but often fail to engage the archaeological record as an archaeological

phenomenon.

The methodological strategy outlined in Chapter 3

is applied to some, but not all of the material dis- cussed herein. It is most systematically applied in

analyses of the two sites with the best data bases: an

Early-Middle Maritime Archaic site, Nukasusutok-5

(Chapters 5, 6 and 7), and a Pre-Dorset site, Attu's

Point (Chapter 1 3). More limited in scope are the analyses of an Early/Middle Dorset locality, Nukasusutok 1 2

(Chapter 10) and the Pre-Dorset site Port Manvers Run1 (Chapter 12). Other chapters are more descriptive in

character, providing brief overviews of the smaller or

less well-investigated sites on Nukasusutok Island

(Chapter 4) and in the Webb Bay Port-Manvers Run area

(Chapter 12). The discussion of regional landscape organization

is taken up primarily in Chapter 14, which considers

the problem of Pre-Dorset/Maritime Archaic social boundary relations. This chapter is also a reflection upon how a specific problem in subarctic archaeology

resonates with implications for the broader debates

between the competing archaeological ontologies of humans as adaptive beings in nature versus humans as

cultural beings constructing their own worlds of significance. The problem of working in the area of tension

between these "paradigms" is highlighted. Regional

and supra-regional spatial relations are also briefly

touched upon in Chapter 1 1, which outlines data concerning the 1 S*-*^ and early 1 9*^*^ century Inuit occupation of Nukasusutok Island. The primary goal of the

chapter is to present an overview of collections made

in 1 928 by William Duncan Strong and relate them to

the ethnohistorically documented Inuit settlement. In

the process, some fascinating yet highly fragmentary

glimpses can be had of Inuit life during a time of marked changes in settlement and society during the

contact period. These changes played out on both the

local and supra-regional spatial scales, and were linked

with the global expansion of the European capitalist

World System.

The remainder of this introductory chapter provides a background to the descriptive and analytical

components to follow. First up is a brief overview of

archaeological research history in northern Labrador

that focuses on what is most relevant for contextualizing the issues dealt with in the present volume. The

aim is to show how the present work grew out of the

existing tradition and how some of the questions handled here were formulated within this tradition. This

overview is followed by a short outline of north-central

2 CHAPTER 1
Labrador culture-history to provide the reader with a framework into which the empirical fragments of this volume can be inserted. Thereafter, Chapter 2

describes the environmental context of the Nain

region.

A Brief History of Archaeological Research in the Nain Region and Adjacent Areas

The first professional archaeological fieldwork in the

Nain region was undertaken by William Duncan Strong

in conjunction with the Rawson-MacMillan Subarctic

Expedition of 1927-28. Strong conducted ethnographic research among the Davis Inlet and Barren Ground

Innu (Naskapi) (Leacock and Rothschild 1994;

VanStone 1985) and undertook archaeological surveys

along the central coast between Hopedale and Nain.

Three archaeological sites near Hopedale produced

distinctive artifacts that led Strong to postulate the

existence of an "Old Stone Culture" for Labrador

(Strong 1930). He concluded that this "Old Stone

Culture" was an early Indian complex from which

Eskimo culture developed. In the course of his work

Strong also investigated prehistoric and historic Inult

sites, including those on Nukasusutok Island, but this

material was never published except for osteologlcal

material taken from graves (Stewart 1939). In 1933

and 1 934, Junius B. Bird (1 945) investigated early contact period Inult houses in the Hopedale area. Many

years later, ethnohistorian J. Garth Taylor (1966) visited the Nukasusutok settlement as part of his survey of

18'^^ century Labrador Inult settlements in the Nain

and Okak regionsUntil the late 1960s there existed only a sketchy

outline of Labrador prehistory based on Elmer Harp's

(1963) work in the Strait of Belle Isle, in which he

defined the "Boreal Archaic." William Fitzhugh's

research In the Hamilton Inlet region between 1968

and 1 972 (Fitzhugh 1972, 1975, 1976, 1978) provided the first culture-history for central Labrador.

Fitzhugh also conducted surveys at Thalia Point north

of Nain in 1 971 and 1 973, which revealed the first evidence for Pre-Dorset In the Nain region (Fitzhugh

1 976:1 03). Between 1 967-1 969, James Tuck excavated the important cemetery at Port au Choix,

Newfoundland, which led him to define the Maritime

Archaic Tradition (Tuck 1971, 1976a). Tuck then undertook a project at Sagiek Bay in northern Labrador

from 1969-71, an important result of which was evi- dence for the temporal and geographical overlap of

Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset. Tuck (1 975:1 95-1 96)

speculated on the possibility of technological

exchanges between the two cultures. From 1 973 to 1 975 the scale of Fitzhugh's efforts expanded considerably. In 1973 Fitzhugh (1973) conducted a survey of the central coast from Hamilton

Inlet to Nain. The Nain area was the center of surveys and excavations from 1974-1976, punctuated by the

excavation of a Maritime Archaic cemetery at Rattlers

Bight In Hamilton Inlet in 1 975 and additional surveys

of the central coast (Fitzhugh 1976). Related to

Fitzhugh's work was Richard Jordan's investigation of

contact period Inult houses at Hamilton Inlet in 1973

and 1 975 (R. Jordan 1974, 1978), which focused on

socio-economic changes from the 1 7^^ to 1 9^'^ centuries. Jordan's work provided an archaeological context for J. Garth Taylor's (1974) ethnohistoric research on the 1 8*^*^ century communal house period.

Additionally, Steven Cox conducted surveys and excavations In the Okak region In 1974 and 1 975. Cox's

(1 977) work continued the theme of settlement pattern

analysis begun by Fitzhugh at Hamilton Inlet and made

important contributions to Maritime Archaic, PreDorset and Dorset culture-history.

Elsewhere, in 1973 and 1974 Robert McGhee and

James Tuck (1975) built upon Harp's earlier surveys

along the Strait of Belle Isle and pushed the occupation

history of the region back to at least 8500 B.P. (Renouf

1977). Their work also provided evidence of early

Maritime Archaic mortuary ceremonialism at 7500 B.P. (McGhee and Tuck 1 975: Tuck and McGhee 1 975; Tuck

1975). From 1973 to 1977, Gilles Samson followed up

Geoffrey Conrad's initial reconnaissance at Indian

INTRODUCTION 3
House Lake in the Quebec-Labrador interior with further surveys, excavations and paleoenvironmental

research. Although settlement seems to have been

sporadic until the Innu occupation of the historic period, Samson (1978) discovered several sites attributable to the Maritime Archaic Tradition.

By the late 1 970s, Smithsonian fieldwork had pro- duced a solid outline of central and north-central coast

culture-history (e.g., Cox 1978; Fitzhugh 1977,

1978a,b; R.Jordan 1978; Nagle 1978). In 1977 and

1978 the Smithsonian Torngat Archaeological Project

extended research northwards along the Torngat

Mountain coast all the way to Killinek and the Button

Islands (Fitzhugh 1980). Major concentrations of

Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset settlement were identified in the more southerly section of the project area

near Hebron Fiord. It was on the 1978 season of the

Torngat project that the author was initiated into

Labrador archaeology, acquiring a particular taste for

the Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset. The author

returned to Labrador in 1979 to undertake a small

scale excavation on a Maritime Archaic site in the Nain

area, which was continued in 1980 (Hood 1981).

In 1980 Fitzhugh began the first of several seasons of fieldwork devoted primarily to further study of

the Maritime Archaic. An important focus of this work

was the development of Maritime Archaic dwelling

structures from small single-family boulder-pits to

multi-family longhouses (Fitzhugh 1981, 1984, 1985a,

1985b, 1986). The question of Maritime Archaic/PreDorset cultural boundaries was also explored

(Fitzhugh 1 984). During the 1 980s a number of other

Smithsonian-related researchers were active in

Labrador. Stephen Loring undertook surveys of the

inner bays and islands of the Davis Inlet and Nain

regions, focussing on late pre-contact Innu archaeology (Loring 1983, 1985, 1989, 1992), while Susan

Kaplan continued her research on historic Labrador

Inuit settlement and socio-economic change, which

included investigations of a Thule component on

Iglosiatik Island southeast of Nain (Kaplan 1983).

Galium Thomson conducted several years of surveys and excavations at Sagiek Bay in the Torngat region

(Thomson 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1986, 1989),

uncovering further evidence of Maritime Archaic and

Pre-Dorset occupation, as well as data pertaining to

other cultures and periods, particularly Late Dorset. Cox (1 988) investigated an important Pre-Dorset locale

at Nuasornak Island in the Okak region.

Compared with earlier periods, during the late

1 980s and early 1 990s northern Labrador archaeology was relatively quiescent. Kaplan continued with investigations of historic Inuit occupation in the Nain and

Okak regions, and Loring conducted excavations of

contact period Inuit material at the Nain Moravian mission and in the Torngats (Loring 1 998) as well as working with the Innu at interior locations. The author

undertook small scale investigations in the Nain area from 1992-1994, which constitute the basis for some

of the chapters in this volume.

The nature of Labrador archaeology changed dramatically in 1995 with the first phase of environmental

impact studies associated with the Voisey's Bay nickel

find. An intensive survey of the mining concession area between Voisey's Bay and Anaktalak Bay was undertaken in 1996 (Hood and Baikie 1998a; Labreche et al.

1997) and exploratory drilling sites all over the Nain

area and in other parts of Labrador were investigated

by contract archaeologists. Mitigation-related field- work has been sporadic in the Nain area in recent

years, but Loring has continued with fieldwork directed towards pre-contact and Innu sites in the interior

(Loring 2001) and historic Inuit material in the Makkovik region, while Kaplan has continued her work

with Inuit occupation at Okak. In 1997 the author

undertook survey work in the Hebron and Napartok

Bay regions aimed at supplementing data on Maritime

Archaic/Pre-Dorset social boundaries (Hood 1998a).

The research tradition outlined here has emphasized a number of themes that provide a context for

the discussions in this volume. Of primary importance

is Fitzhugh's (1984, 1985a) work on the Maritime

4 CHAPTER 1
Archaic, including dwelling site organization and social

inferences from temporal changes in dwelling structures, mortuary ceremonialism and Ramah chert procurement and exchange. The spatial analyses of the

Early-Middle Maritime Archaic site Nukasusutok-5 presented in Chapter 6 are formulated in light of these

discussions of social organization. A second theme in

the research tradition is Fitzhugh's (1984) and Tuck's

(1975) interpretations of Maritime Archaic and PreDorset social boundary relationships, which reflects

the concern for Indian/lnuit contacts that has been a

constant leitmotif since the genesis of discourse on

northern archaeology and anthropology (Fitzhugh

1987; Hood 1998b). The discussion of Maritime

Archaic/Pre-Dorset boundary relations in Chapter 14 is

an elaboration on that established theme.

Another primary structuring element in Labrador

archaeology has been the focus on cultural adaptations, as seen through settlement patterns and the

lense of Steward's (1955) cultural ecology (Fitzhugh

1972) and biogeographic theory (Fitzhugh 1997).

During the early- to mid-1970s a series of hypotheses was proposed which related changes in Indian and

Paleoeskimo/lnuit population distributions to environmental change (e.g., Fitzhugh 1972, 1977). Although

accumulating research eventually suggested the postulated links between culture change and environmental

change were too simplistic (Fitzhugh and Lamb 1985),

much of northern archaeology continues to pursue a

rather reductionist ecological program (Hood 1998b).

Consequently, one of the strands woven into this vol- ume is a desire to place greater emphasis on internal

social process and agency, while at the same time situating social strategies within the natural world. Thus,

a portion of Chapter 1 4 uses the Pre-Dorset/ Maritime

Archaic boundary issue to reflect upon the possibilities

of an ecology of social practice.

The next section is an overview of northern

Labrador culture-history that provides a framework for

positioning the data and interpretations presented in

the following chapters. There has been no systematic

updated overview of Labrador culture-history since a

series of papers published in 1978 {Arctic

Anthropology) and 1980 (Arctic), so that 2 5 year old framework must still be used as a point of reference.

But since the goal of this volume is primarily analysis

and interpretation rather than revamping the culturehistory, this basic framework is adequate for the task

at hand.

Outline of Central and Northern Labrador

Culture-History

Figure 2 presents an outline of central and northern

Labrador culture-history. Following the tradition with

such charts, there is a basic division between Innu/precontact Indian and Inuit/Paleoeskimo cultures as well

as a distinction between the central coast (Hamilton

Inlet) and north coast sequences. The textual overview

is weighted towards the north coast and some of the problems discussed in this volume. It is divided into

separate Innu/pre-contact Indian and Inuit/Pre-lnuit

("Eskimo") sequences.

Innu/Pre-Contact Indian Sequence

Maritime Archaic

Whether considered as late Paleo-lndian or Early

Archaic, populations ancestral to the Maritime Archaic

probably colonized southern Labrador by ca. 8500

B.P.. Their assemblages are marked by triangular

points of quartz and quartzite, small quartz scrapers and bipolar cores (McGhee and Tuck 1975; Renouf

1977). The archaeological record of the Labrador side

of the Strait of Belle Isle shows a subsequent continuous development through the Middle and Late Archaic,

as seen in a shift from nipple-based points to forms

with well-defined stems (McChee and Tuck 1 975). The

distinctive mortuary ceremonialism that is one of the

defining characteristics of the Maritime Archaic first

appears at the L'Anse Amour burial mound, dated ca. 7500 B.P. (McGhee and Tuck 1 975). By 7500-7000 B.P.,

Early Maritime Archaic populations were present on

the central coast of Labrador at Hamilton Inlet

INTRODUCTION 5
BP

Hamilton Inlet

North Coast

Interior Coast

Innu Inuit

1000 —

2000 -

3000 -

4000

5000

6000

7000 -

c

(0c

TO T5

E

C

Point Revenge Complex

Northwest River Phase

David Michelin Complex

Road Component

Charles Complex

Brinex Complex

Little Lake

Component

Daniel Rattle

Complex

- 1000

Late

2000

Groswater

Saunders

Complex

- 3000

Rattler's Bight Phase Pre-Dorset

o

'03 szo

<

E

CD

Black Island Complex

Sandy Cove

Complex Nukasusutok-5

Naksak

Complex

Hound Pond-4

BP

4000

— 5000

- 6000

7000

2/ Culture-history chart for central and northern Labrador.

6 CHAPTER 1
(Fitzhugh 1978a:69) and in the Nain region at

Ballybrack-1 0, where two burial mounds resembling

those at L'Anse Amour were excavated (Fitzhugh

1978a:82, 86-87). Ballybrack Mound-2 was dated

7065±70 B.P.. The Early to Middle Maritime Archaic in the Nain

and Okak regions was grouped within a vaguely

defined Naksak Complex (Fitzhugh 1978a:72) which

extended from 7000-5000 B.P.. The earliest components contain nipple-based points, lanceolate bi-pointed bifaces, triangular points and side-notched bifaces

of Ramah chert, quartz and quartzite, endscrapers of Mugford chert, a ground slate component of celts,

adzes and gouges, with occasional ulus and projectile

points, and a high frequency of bipolar cores {pieces

escjuillees). Lithic raw materials are dominated by

quartz, although this is mostly used for flake production through bipolar percussion, but there are also

varying quantities of Ramah chert, Mugford cherts,

slate and quartzite (Fitzhugh 1978a:72). Sites of the

partly overlapping Sandy Cove Complex (6000-4500

B.P.) at Hamilton Inlet exhibit similarities in stemmed

points and in the predominance of quartz debitage

and bipolar cores, but they lack endscrapers. Moderate

frequencies of Ramah chert in the Nain area sites indicate regular excursions to the chert sources at Ramah

Bay 300 km to the north, but the paucity of Ramah

chert at Hamilton Inlet suggests that supply lines were

mostly restricted to the north at this time. A raised beach sequence at Aillik, near Makkovik,

in combination with several other localities, produced

evidence of temporal changes in the form of Maritime

Archaic dwelling structures (Fitzhugh 1984). Prior to 6000 B.P., dwellings consisted of small boulder pithouses, 3.0-3.5 m in diameter, and rectangular surface

tent rings partitioned into two to five segments by rock

dividers. Fitzhugh (2002:7) reports a radiocarbon date

of 6870±1 80 B.P. for a 1 m long, four segment structure at Aillik, and a date of 6400±1 1 B.P. from an 8 m

long, five segment structure from the same beach

level. During the course of the sixth millennium B.P.

there was a development towards larger rectangular

structures 9-16 m long divided into three or four seg- ments (Fitzhugh 1 984, 1 985a). The pit-houses and rectangular structures may represent spring and fall sites

(Fitzhugh 1 985a:88), but the settlement pattern of the

Early-Middle Maritime Archaic is by no means clear. The general model has been one of outer coastal settlement from spring to fall and inner bay settlement in

fall and winter (Fitzhugh 1 978a;83-84), but the limited work in the inner bays and near interior has not pro- duced evidence for probable winter sites, although new Maritime Archaic localities have been identified

(Labreche et al. 1997; Loring 2001).

The period between 5000-4200 B.P. is perhaps the most poorly known part of the northern Labrador

Maritime Archaic sequence. Components dated to this

time have been identified in the Nain and Okak regions

(Cox 1 977:1 84-1 94; Fitzhugh 1 978a:77), with the general impression that they exhibit stylistic development

towards later Rattlers Bight Phase tool forms. At Hamilton Inlet there is an intrusion of southern

Labrador-affiliated Maritime Archaic material between

4500-4200 B.P.— the Black Island Complex (Fitzhugh

1975, 1 978a:69-70)— marked by side-notched projectile points and rhyolitic chert raw materials. Linear distributions of hearths at Okak-2 and Black lsland-2 suggest the use of longhouse tent dwellings ranging from

30-50 m long (Fitzhugh 1981:17-18).

The Late Maritime Archaic Rattlers Bight Phase

(4200-3500 B.P.) is the most thoroughly investigated

part of the Maritime Archaic time sequence, mainly

through excavations of large habitation sites at

Hamilton Inlet (Fitzhugh 1 972, 1975, 1 978a) and at

Nulliak Cove north of Hebron Fjord (Fitzhugh 1981,

1984, 1985a). At Rattlers Bight in Hamilton Inlet a

small cemetery consisting of nine red ocher burials had grave goods that included chunks and tools of Ramah chert, soapstone implements, ground slate

tools, mica sheets and copper. Differences in the distribution of grave goods between the burials led

Fitzhugh (1978a:85, 2002) to suggest some degree of

INTRODUCTION 7
status differentiation. At Nulliak Cove, two of four

boulder-constructed burial mounds were excavated. Mound 1 contained ca. 90 artifacts in a red ocher-lined

pit, including Ramah chert points and bifaces, slate

celts and mica sheets, while Mound 2 contained fewer

grave goods: a Ramah chert point, a copper pendant,

mica and a walrus tusk (Fitzhugh 1981:12, 2002).

From the same period, the Port au Choix cemetery on

the west coast of Newfoundland contained the remains

of 100 individuals (Tuck 1976). During this phase the

Labrador flaked stone technology was almost totally composed of Ramah chert. The occurrence of Ramah

chert in contemporary sites along the U.S. east coast,

as well as the presence in Labrador Maritime Archaic

sites of non-local materials such as soapstone, mica

and copper, indicates the operation of widespread

exchange systems.

The apparent increase in the size of Maritime

Archaic dwellings noted after 5000 B.P. reached its

peak in the Rattlers Bight Phase, with longhouse features ranging in size from 15-100 m long. In most

cases these have been inferred from linear distributions of hearths and lithic materials representing the

remains of surface tent structures, but in one exemplary case at Aillik (Makkovik) a 28 m long structure divided into seven internal segments was excavated into a

cobble beach (Fitzhugh 1981, 1984, 1985a). If the marked segments and hearth-centered lithic distributions can be interpreted as individual family living

floors, then these longhouses may have housed 50-

100 individuals (Fitzhugh 1984:20). At Nulliak Cove,

north of Hebron Fjord, there are traces of 27 such

structures, suggesting the site was a repeatedly used

staging area for expeditions to the Ramah chert quarries (Fitzhugh 1 985b:49-50). Seen as a whole, the evi- dence for large co-residential groups, mortuary distinctions and exchange systems has suggested some

form of social "complexity" had developed during the

Late Maritime Archaic, although it is by no means clear how that complexity should be characterized (Fitzhugh

1981, 1985a, 2002, 2006; Hood 1993, 1995).

The disappearance of the northern Labrador

Maritime Archaic from the archaeological record after 3500 B.P. remains one of the most vexing problems in

Labrador prehistory. This occurred after a several hundred year co-existence with the Pre-Dorset Paleoeskimo people, who colonized Labrador ca. 4000

B.P.. About the time the Maritime Archaic disappeared

another Indian sequence began: a series of

Intermediate Indian complexes.

Intermediate Indians The Intermediate Indian period of Labrador began ca. 3500 B.P. and continued until 1500 B.P. at Hamilton

Inlet, but only until 2800 B.P. on the north-central

coast (Fitzhugh 1 972; Nagle 1 978). The Hamilton Inlet sequence is marked by a discontinuous series of six

archaeological units. Most of these assemblages are dominated by interior cherts and quartzites which,

together with implement styles, suggest affiliation

with interior-based cultural traditions. On the northcentral coast another archaeological unit has been

defined: the Saunders Complex (3500-2800 B.P.). This complex has stylistic similarities with the Brinex and

Charles Complexes at Hamilton Inlet, but contains considerable quantities of chert from the Cape Mugford

region north of Okak Bay. Sites consist of cobble

hearths and lithic scatters and occur mostly in inner

bay and inner island contexts. Traces of the Saunders

Complex have been found as far north as Hebron Fjord

(Hood 1 998a; Nagle 1 978). This coastal activity opens

up the possibilities for interactions with Late PreDorset peoples. After the disappearance of the

Saunders Complex there is, as yet, no archaeological

evidence for Indian occupation of the north-central

coast until the Late Pre-Contact Period.

Late Pre-Contact Indians The Late Pre-Contact Indian occupation of central and

northern Labrador has been divided into two archaeological units. The Daniel Rattle Complex (1800-1000

B.P.) differs from the earlier Intermediate Indian com8 CHAPTER 1
plexes in its near exclusive use of Ramah chert for

stone tools. Its settlement pattern is broadly similar to

the preceding Saunders Complex, with most sites situated in inner bay and inner island locations, but there

are also sites on exposed headlands suggestive of

greater use of marine resources. No sites have been

found north of the Nain area. Traces of large tent

structures resembling the ethnographically documented Innu shaputuan have been identified; these were

multi-family longhouses that could be used for ritual

purposes. Given the contemporary presence of Middle

Dorset occupation in the Nain region and the rest of

northern Labrador, the heavy use of Ramah chert by

Daniel Rattle groups raises questions concerning the

role of Dorset peoples in chert acquisition (Loring

1992:329-342).

The Point Revenge Complex (1 000-400 B.P.) devel- oped out of the Daniel Rattle Complex and must represent an ancestral Innu population. Settlement sites are

found as far north as Nain, while trace occurrences of

Point Revenge material are found as far north as Sagiek

Bay. Settlement remains include a large tent ring

(Fitzhugh 1978b), hearths and concentrations of

crushed calcined bone. Like Daniel Rattle, Point Revenge sites are also marked by near-exclusive use of Ramah chert, so questions of cultural interaction with

Late Dorset and Thule populations are pertinent

(Loring 1992:343-408).

Inuit/Pre-lnuit Sequence

Pre-Dorset The Pre-Dorset colonization of northern Labrador ca. 4000 B.P. (Fitzhugh (2002:142, 145; 2006) marks the

first arrival of Paleoeskimo people in northern

Labrador. They brought with them an Arctic Small Tool

Tradition technology composed of microblades, burins and harpoon delivery systems that differed radically

from their Maritime Archaic contemporaries. Their

choice of lithic materials was heavily weighted towards

the fine-grained cherts found in the Cape Mugford

region north of Okak, although varying amounts of

Ramah chert and slate were also employed. Early Pre- Dorset materials are mostly found in northern

Labrador as far south as the Nain area; the southern- most site is situated at Windy Tickle north of Hopedale

(Fitzhugh 1977:21). Late Pre-Dorset sites (3500-2800

B.P.) are relatively few, but this may be partly a visibility problem resulting from limited typological change

over time and few radiocarbon dates (Cox 1978,

1988). By 3000-2800 B.P. there are clear indications

that Pre-Dorset began developing in situ into what is termed the Croswater Phase.

Pre-Dorset settlement patterns are assumed to be

similar to those of the Maritime Archaic, involving

spring-fall occupation of outer coastal areas and fallwinter use of the inner bay areas. But as with the

Maritime Archaic there are no convincing candidates

for inner bay winter sites. Compared with the Late

Maritime Archaic multi-family longhouse settlements,

Pre-Dorset sites are small, consisting of 1-3 tent

dwellings. In some cases Pre-Dorset sites consist only

of lithic scatters, in other cases traces of a hearth or

tent ring may be present. Several well-preserved axial

structures with box-hearths and heating rocks have

been identified.

Pre-Dorset and Maritime Archaic populations overlapped between 4000-3500 B.P.. The social boundary

relationship between the two cultures is one of the

important questions of Labrador archaeology and may

be an significant factor in the eventual disappearance

of the Maritime Archaic. Similar boundary questions

might be raised regarding Pre-Dorset and the

Intermediate Indian Saunders Complex.

Croswater Phase

By 2800 B.P. the stylistic changes in Late Pre-Dorset

are sufficient to mark the emergence of the Croswater

Phase. Microblades increase in frequency, distinctive

side-notched flat-based harpoon endblades appear, as does an array of side-notched bifaces, while burins are now side-notched and facially ground. Lithic materials

consist of a combination of radiolarian cherts from the

INTRODUCTION 9
Newfoundland west coast and Ramah chert. Groswater

settlement is concentrated in Newfoundland, southern

Labrador and the central Labrador coast north to

Postville. Relatively few Groswater localities have been

registered on the north coast of Labrador. Settlement

patterns are characterized as similar to Pre-Dorset,

with spring-fall occupation of the outer coast and fallwinter sites in the inner bays. In this case, however,

there is at least one good candidate for an inner bay

winter site, at Postville on Kaipokok Bay (Loring and

Cox 1986). Groswater dwellings consist of slab pave- ments with box-hearths (Cox 1978; Fitzhugh 1972;

Loring and Cox 1986). Labrador Groswater has been

dated as late as 2200 B.P..

Dorset About 2500 B.P., populations similar to central Arctic

Early Dorset colonized northern Labrador, moving as

far south as the Nain-Okak regions. Early Dorset differed substantially from Groswater, with whom they

overlapped for a few hundred years. The Early Dorset (2500-2000 B.P.) tool assemblage included tip-fluted

harpoon endblades, nephrite burin-like tools, soapstone vessels and near-exclusive use of Ramah chert

for flaked tools. They also utilized semi-subterranean

winter houses (Cox 1978). Relatively few Early Dorset

sites have been registered; the major localities are

located at Okak and Seven Islands Bay in the northern

Torngat Mountain region (Fitzhugh 1 980). It is not certain whether Early Dorset developed locally into the

Middle Dorset phase (2000-1400 B.P.), but the large

number of Middle Dorset sites constitute the most

extensive Dorset occupation of the Labrador coast.

Traces between Nain and Hamilton Inlet are limited,

but several sites are known along the coast south of

Hamilton Inlet (Stopp 1 997). This was also a period of major Dorset activity on the island of Newfoundland

(Renouf 1 993). Middle Dorset settlement patterns were

anchored at winter semi-subterranean house sites,

often in outer island locations within several kilometers of the landfast ice-edge. Some of these sites seem

to have been based on fall-early winter sealing, with

mid-winter to early spring movement to camps closer

to the ice-edge, while others contain significant components of walrus that suggest occupation in mid-winter and spring (Cox and Spiess 1980). Cox and Spiess

(1980) suggested that Middle Dorset lacked breathing

hole sealing techniques. Spring-fall settlement, associated with tent ring dwellings, was spread over outer and inner coastal islands in the Nain and Okak areas. The degree to which the inner bays and fjords were

used seems to vary regionally, although this may be an

artifact of survey coverage. Middle Dorset sites are virtually absent from the inner bays of the Nain region

and are sparse on the inner islands. At Okak sites are

also lacking in the inner bays but they are common on

the inner islands. There is little evidence of Dorset

activity in the inner reaches of Sagiek Bay (Thomson

1986), but sod houses are known from inner fjord

locations at Nachvak and Hebron (Cox and Spiess

1980; Fitzhugh 1980; Hood 1998a). Analysis of the

distribution patterns of Ramah chert, soapstone, and

Newfoundland cherts indicates the operation of exchange networks and population movement along

the Labrador coast (Nagle 1984).

Late Dorset (1400-800 B.P.) occupation of

Labrador was less extensive than during the Middle

Dorset Period, being limited to the Nain region and

northwards. There were shifts in tool types and settle- ment characteristics that raise questions about cultural continuity with Middle Dorset. Semi-subterranean

houses were shallower and lacked middens, suggesting use limited to fall and early winter, with mid-winter

to spring use of snow houses (Cox 1978; Fitzhugh

1980). The presence of Ramah chert-using Late PreContact Indian groups along the central coast and in

the Nain-Okak areas during both the Middle and Late

Dorset periods means that questions of social boundaries and interaction need to be considered.

10 CHAPTER 1
Thule/lnuit

The earliest dates attributed to the Thule colonization

of Labrador range between 800-600 B.P. (AD 1000-

1 400; Fitzhugh 1 994), but the tendency of Thule to reoccupy Late Dorset house sites raises problems of dating context. At present it seems best to regard the earliest dates as uncertain and the Thule arrival in

Labrador as dating sometime after AD 1250-1300.

Given the dating problems it is uncertain whether early

Thule peoples would have encountered Late Dorset

populations in northern Labrador. The Thule culture

brought to Labrador a very different organizational

system than that found in Dorset, marked by bowhead

whale hunting and the expanded transport possibilities of dog sleds and large boats (umiaks). During the

earliest period of Thule/lnuit occupation (AD 1 300-

1 600), their winter settlements were marked by round

houses constructed of stone, wood, whalebone and

sod, with entrance passages, cold traps and rear sleeping platforms. Sometimes houses shared a common

entrance passage. Snow houses were also used during

the winter and in the spring, and tent dwellings and

stone-walled shelters from spring to fall. Lack of bone

preservation in the middens limits the range of inferences that can be drawn concerning subsistence-settlement patterns, but sea mammal exploitation was

probably central. Tools of organic materials are also

poorly preserved, but the lithic material is marked by

drilled slate harpoon endblades, ulus, nephrite tools, and soapstone vessels (Kaplan 1983:216-230). Early

Contact Period Thule is represented in the Nain region

by sod houses at the lglosiatik-1 site, some with traces

of metal, that apparently date to the early 16'^'^ century (Fitzhugh 1994:258; Kaplan 1983:216, 455-462).

R. Jordan (1977, 1978) and Jordan and Kaplan

(1980) maintained that the 17"^*^ century Inuit settle- ment in Hamilton Inlet represented the southernmost

permanent Inuit occupation and that Inuit activity in

southern Labrador during the 1 6*^^ -1 8'^'^ centuries was

limited to seasonal trading with Europeans and the

raiding of their establishments. But documentary information and archaeological data suggest the Inuit presence in southern Labrador was a more substantial

year-round occupation that began in the mid-1 500s,

concomitant with expanding European fishing and

whaling (Basque, French, English, Portugese and

Spanish) and lasted until the mid-1 700s, when the

increasing scale of European activity may have led to a

contraction of Inuit occupancy towards Hamilton Inlet

(Auger 1 991 ; Martijn and Clermont 1 980; Stopp 2002).

The 1 7^^ century Inuit settlement of the north-central

coast was marked by houses similar to Thule forms

and the continued use of lithic tools, except at

Hamilton Inlet where slate and nephrite were replaced

by metal. European goods, possibly Basque and Dutch, were common at Hamilton Inlet and Hopedale, but

generally rare further north (Kaplan 1 983:230-235).

During the 18*^*^ century a series of changes

occurred, with a shift towards larger multi-family communal houses in northern Labrador and increasing

replacement of traditional material culture with

European goods. These goods were obtained from

French traders at Chateau Bay and Hamilton Inlet and

then later from English traders in the Cape Charles

region and the Moravian missionary centers that were

established in north-central Labrador in the years after

1771. The multi-family households were sometimes

led by "big-man" traders, middlemen in the baleen

trade with the Europeans (R. Jordan 1978; Jordan and

Kaplan 1980; Kaplan 1983, 1985; Taylor 1974).

Christianization of most of the north-central coast

Inuit occurred by the second decade of the 1 9*^*^ century, which resulted in a seasonal centralization of settle- ment at the missions and a shift to single-family housing. But non-Christian Inuit continued to dominate

northernmost Labrador until the gradual establish- ment of more northerly missions in 1830 and thereafter (Loring 1 998).

INTRODUCTION

Environment of tne Nain Reeion

Labrador is a land of sharp contrasts. Its coast is an

almost 1 200 km long ecotone in which arctic and subarctic environments are juxtaposed. The cold south- ward flowing Labrador Current carries pack ice along

the coast and contributes to the formation of extensive

landfast ice during the winter. A narrow coastal strip of

tundra vegetation extends all the way from Killinek in

the north to the Strait of Belle Isle in the south. In contrast, the vast interior is covered with boreal forest,

bogs and innumerable lakes. The present northern

limit of trees is located at Napartok Bay, 1 30 km north

of Nain (Figure 1 ; Elliott and Short 1 979).

Paralleling this environmental contrast is a cultural juxtaposition. Broadly speaking, during the postcontact period, Inuit people have been associated primarily with the coastal tundra zone, although they

have used the interior seasonally. Innu ("Naskapi") people have focused their land use on the subarctic interior and the inner bays and islands of the coastal zone. The shifting relationship between these ecological and

cultural boundaries is a central theme in Labrador

archaeology.

This chapter begins with a geographical overview

of the Nain region, then moves on to outline its bedrock and Quaternary geology. After a brief synopsis of paleoenvironmental changes evident in pollen

core data, a summary of historic land-use in the Nain

region is presented. This is followed by more specific

descriptions of two areas; Nukasusutok Island and

Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run.

OVERVIEW OF THE NAIN REGION

The town of Nain is presently the northernmost permanent community in Labrador. The surrounding coastal

region (Figure 3) is an archipelago of over two hundred

islands that range in size from the smallest of skerries

to the massive bulk of 140 km long South Aulatsivik

Island. The higher elevations on these islands mostly

range from 250-500 m, although Mt. Thoresby at the

north end of South Aulatsivik Island rises to ca. 900 m.

Passages between the islands vary from wide expanses of deep water to narrow, shoal, tidal "rattles." The

region can be categorized into three major ecological

zones: outer islands, inner islands and bays, and the

interior plateau. The outer island fringe is composed

of numerous windswept islands with predominantly

tundra vegetation. The inner island belt consists of

several large and numerous small islands which bear

scrub birch and willow vegetation and stands of black

spruce in sheltered areas. The spruce-forested inner

bays cut into the edge of the interior plateau and several river valleys extend inland from the bays, providing transportation routes into the interior. The most

important of these are the Fraser River, west of Nain,

and the Kogaluk River {Emish-shipu is the Innu toponym) to the southwest of Nain in the Voisey's Bay

region. Most of the interior plateau ranges in elevation from 250-350 m and has a predominantly tundra vegetation. The Kiglapait Mountains constitute a border

with the Okak region to the north; these peaks range

over 800 m.

ENVIRONMNENT 13
|?i..-1995 Canadian Space Agency

1996 Agence spatiale canadienne'

4/ RADARSAT synthetic aperture radar satellite photo of the Main district. Taken March 20, 1 996. Open water areas in black; gray line marks the edge of the landfast ice (sina): white arrow indicates Nukasusutok Island. Photo supplied by the Canadian Ice Service, © Canadian Space Agency

Climatically, the north coast of Labrador is affected by both continental and maritime air masses. During

the summer westerly winds may bring warm dry weather from the interior; during the winter they are usually

the purveyors of cold and predominantly clear conditions. Easterly winds bring cold weather in summer, relatively warm conditions in winter and carry most of the

precipitation in both seasons (Tanner 1 944:302-308).

The January temperature at Hopedale (the closest longterm meteorological station to Nain) averages -16.4 C

and the August average is 10.6 C. Total precipitation

amounts to 822 mm annually and the average winter

snowfall is 445 cm (Environment Canada 2002).

Tanner (1944:289) described summers on the

Labrador coast as "characterized by exceedingly unstable

weather" because of the constant shift between warm continental and cold maritime conditions. Although this was certainly the case during the 1979

fieldwork, during the 1990s

there have been extended periods of warm dry conditions.

Late in August and into September northeasterly gales

occur frequently. Snow may

begin to fall in mid-September.

One of the most important

environmental factors for humans along the Labrador

coast is ice distribution. There

are two different types of ice:

pack ice and landfast ice. Pack

ice drifts southward along the

Labrador Current. The position

of the pack ice is dependent on

wind conditions; westerlies disperse the ice, pushing it out to

sea, but easterlies push it

against the coastline and the landfast ice. Pack ice generally disappears by early to mid-July, although with

consistent onshore winds it can persist into August.

Besides being a navigational hazard, pack ice is important because seals, walrus and polar bears usually follow its movements.

Landfast ice is attached to the landmass of the

bays and islands and extends seaward after freeze-up.

In Nain the average freeze-up occurs by December 10,

while an early freeze-up could occur in late November.

Ice that is safe for human travel by dog sled or snowmobile may extend 40 to 50 km east from Nain,

depending on the presence of islands which facilitate

14 CHAPTER 2
anchoring. At the outer edge of the landfast ice there may be open water, known as the sina, in which sea mammals may be hunted from the ice edge or with

kayaks. Frequently, however, the pack ice may drift up

against the landfast ice and eliminate these open water

areas. The position of the sina varies annually and

monthly; Figure 4 is a RADARSAT synthetic aperture

radar satellite photo that shows the contact zone between the landfast and pack ice on March 20, 1996.

Strong currents in tidal "rattles" maintain polynyas,

open areas within the landfast ice. In the Main area

such regular open water areas can be found near the

eastern ends of Strathcona and Harmony Runs, the

"Second Rattle" on Port Manvers Run, near Tabor Island and the narrows at Tikkoatokak Bay. More variable

openings occur in other areas. The satellite photo

shows that the area between Nukasusutok Island, Humby's Island and Iglosiatik Island had relatively thin

Ice in March. The ice in this area tends to thin out

quickly in the spring sun and develop early openings

because of ocean swells. Break-up of the landfast ice

generally occurs in mid-June, but pack ice can block

navigation well after this date. In both 1 992 and 1 993

it was almost August before the first coastal freight

boat could make its way up the coast to Nain.

Bedrock Geology of the Nain Region

The earliest rocks of the northern Labrador coast are

the gneisses of the Archean Nain Province (> 2.5 Ca).

In the Nain region, these outcrop primarily in a band

between Okak and Webb Bay. Otherwise, most of the

rocks that make up the Nain archipelago are part of

the Middle Proterozoic Nain Plutonic Suite (1 .6-1 .0 Ca), which consists mostly of anorthosite, troctolite, diorite and granite (Ryan 1990; Ryan et al. 1995). This bedrock geology does not provide a great deal of raw

material that would be sought after by stone knappers.

Vein quartz is abundant throughout the region and was used frequently in the Early-Middle periods of the

Maritime Archaic. A particularly large quartz vein

occurs on one of the Red Islands, east of Paul Island. A

prehistorically quarried quartz crystal outcrop, possibly used by Pre-Dorset, is located on "No Name Island"

just east of Nukasusutok Island (Fitzhugh 1 981 :30).

Aside from those mentioned above, virtually all

the lithic materials required for prehistoric technology

had to be acquired from outside the Nain region.

Ramah chert, used extensively by the Maritime

Archaic, Dorset and Pre-lnnu peoples, is derived from

the Ramah Croup, which outcrops between Ramah Bay

and Nachvak Fiord, ca. 300 km north of Nain (Cramly

1978; Lazenby 1980). Mugford chert, used extensively

by Pre-Dorset, but also by Early/Middle Maritime

Archaic and Intermediate Indian peoples, is found in

the Mugford Croup, 1 50 km north of Nain between

Okak and Napartok Bay (Cramly 1978; Lazenby 1980).

Slates were used for ground tools by the Maritime

Archaic, the Thule/lnuit and occasionally by Dorset

peoples. Specific slate sources have not been identified, but it is likely that many slates were derived from

the Mugford Croup.

Soapstone sources in central and northern

Labrador have been documented from an archaeological perspective by Nagle (1 984) and from an economic

geology perspective by Meyer and Montague (1993,

1994, 1995). No soapstone sources are currently

known in the Nain area. The place name Soapstone

Tickle, between the Red Islands, hints at a possible

source, but the location is not known to local carvers.

Otherwise, the nearest sources of soapstone are either 100 km north of Nain in the Okak region or 80 km to

the south at Freestone Harbour near Utshimassits

(Davis Inlet).

Paleoenvironmental Change

The post-glacial marine emergence chronology of the

Nain area is based largely on radiocarbon dated

archaeological sites on raised beaches (Fitzhugh 1977,

Clark and Fitzhugh 1990, 1992). The oldest radiocar- bon date in the area is 7800±130 B.P. (reservoir corrected 7760±65 B.P.) on a geological sample of marine

shells from 36 m on South Aulatsivik Island (Johnson

ENVIRONMNENT 15
1 985:75; Clark and Fitzhugh 1990:301). The earliest

archaeological radiocarbon date is 7065±70 B.P. from

the Early Maritime Archaic Ballybrack-1 site, located

at 41 m on South Aulatsivik Island (Fitzhugh 1978:85;

Clark and Fitzhugh 1990:301). When these dates and

elevations are linked with later dates from archaeological sites as well as a marine limit determination of

71 m, the estimated uplift curve suggests a date of ca. 8500 B.P. for the marine limit and the deglaciation of

the outer coast of the Nain archipelago (Clark and

Fitzhugh 1990:302).

There have been suggestions that uplift rates differ between the outer coast and the inner bays.

According to Clark and Fitzhugh (1992:200) for

Hamilton Inlet and Johnson (1 985:74) for the Torngat

Mountain region, the inner bay marine limit is younger

and lower. In the Nain area, Johnson (1969:1 10) identified the marine limit at Webb Bay as lying at 41 m,

substantially lower than the 71 m determined ca. 22 km to the east on South Aulatsivik Island. More recent

investigations along Reid Brook between inner Voisey's

Bay and inner Anaktalak Bay— south and 1 5 km west

of Johnson's research area— place the marine limit at 93±2 m and provide a radiocarbon date of 7580±70

B.P. (7485±45 B.P., reservoir corrected) for marine

shell at 50 m (Bell 1997). Johnson's marine limit must

therefore be incorrect and the proposed differences in

outer/inner coast uplift regimes are contradicted by

the new data from Voisey's Bay.

Figure 5 depicts the relative sea level curve presented by Clark and Fitzhugh (1990) together with

Bell's (1 997) suggested curve for Voisey's Bay. The latter should be treated with caution since it is a simple

exponential projection based on the local marine limit,

the single radiocarbon date and undated marine terrace elevations. Nonetheless, the Voisey's Bay curve

suggests greater uplift in the inland area, which would

be expected from an ice sheet that was thicker inland

and thinning towards the coast. The archaeological

100

01 23456789 10 BP (1000)

5/ Relative sea level curves for Nain and inner Voisey's Bay

(after Clark and Fitzhugh 1990 and Bell 1997). Sites marked: Nukasusutok-5, Area 2 (N5A2), Nukasusutok-5, Area 3 (N5A3). Attu's Bight (AB), Attu's Point (AP) and

Nukasusutok 12 (N12).

Study area at Webb Bay probably lies somewhere

between these uplift profiles. Some of the archaeological sites discussed in the text are marked on the diagram; their positioning will be discussed later.

During the 1970s, interest in the relationship

between climate change and culture change (e.g.,

Fitzhugh 1972, 1977a) was pursued through the collection of pollen data from several locations in northern and central Labrador. As part of this program, one

core was taken from Nain Pond (Short 1978), but it

proved problematic because of reversed datings in the

stratigraphic sequence. Similarities with cores taken in

the Okak area, however, permitted reasonable extrapolations. Cores were also taken in 1939 by Wenner

(1947), but these are of limited utility since they predate the use of radiocarbon dating. Generally, the

pollen data indicate the area was deglaciated by

10,500 B.P. and that by 9000 B.P. the ice front stood

cf. Tanner's (1 944:245) determination of the marine limit at 83 m on Sandy Island, 20 km east of South Aulatsivik Island.

16 CHAPTER 2
on the interior plateau, at least 1 00 km from the coast. The post-glacial period was marked by tundra vegetation until a transition to shrub tundra with a strong

birch and alder component ca. 6700-6500 B.P.. After 4500 B.P., an open spruce woodland was present.

Climatic cooling is indicated after 3500 B.P. (Short

1978:32).

Initial efforts at dendrochronology in the Nain

area began in the early 1970s, but the information

only extended back to 1 769 (H.E. Wright, International

Dendrochronologicai Data Base, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2003). Additional

data are currently being collected, but the work is still

at a preliminary stage. The other source of climaterelated information is the oxygen isotope data from

the Greenland ice cores. These data provide much

higher chronological resolution than the pollen cores,

but their high frequency variations can be difficult to

interpret and attempts to correlate them with coarsely

dated archaeological entities are problematic. In

Chapter 14, ice core and pollen data are combined to

discuss environmental changes relevant to understanding shifts in Maritime Archaic settlement and the

social boundary problems subsequent to Pre-Dorset

colonization.

Recent Seasonal Resource Use in the Nain

Region

Brice-Bennett (1977) outlines the seasonal variations in Nain region fauna and the concomitant patterning of human activities during the 20^'^ century.

The following discussion is based on her account as

well as Taylor (1974), with supplemental information

derived from local informants and personal observation. The coastal resources are discussed first, followed by inner bay/interior species.

In early spring Canada geese and various migratory duck species return north and are hunted in early to

mid-May. Later in the spring and the early summer,

eggs are collected from duck and gull nesting areas.

After break-up in mid-June, the migratory harp seal

moves north from its whelpmg grounds off Newfoundland following schools of capelin. Large

numbers can be netted or shot as they enter the bays

traveling in herds. Although most of the harps summer

off west Greenland they can occasionally be found in

Labrador waters during the summer. The ringed seal is

present year round in the Nain area, although ecological studies by Boles et al. (1980:54) suggest that during the summer some may migrate from the central

coast to locations north of Okak. Harbor and grey seals

haul out on seaward islands in the spring and break-up

is said to be a good time for hunting bearded seals.

During the open water season seals are most frequently encountered in the outer island areas, but many

move up the bays with high tide.

Fishing was the major summer activity in the Nain

area until the recent downturn in fish stocks. Arctic

char begin their seaward runs from the rivers in early

June and spend the summer among the islands until

mid-August, when they return upriver to spawn. Salmon are fished in late July and August and cod in August and September. Minke and white whales are

seen occasionally. Bowhead whales once frequented

the Labrador coast, although they were rarely hunted

by 18'^'^ century Inuit in the Nain area, possibly

because poor bathymetric conditions reduced the likelihood of their entering the bays (Taylor 1 988: 1 25).

In the fall, Canada geese are pursued beginning

the last week of August. Their main southward move- ment occurs in mid-September and few remain after

October 25. Ducks and various sea birds are also

exploited. In September, ringed, young bearded, grey and harbour seals move into the bays to feed. BriceBennett (1977:144) notes that the beginning of the

harp seal southern migration varies from late September or October to late November or December.

The later the commencement of the migration the more likely it is that the harps will stay seaward to

avoid the already frozen coastal areas. Late and

early 1 9'^'^ century Inuit settlements tended to be located in good locations for fall harp sealing (Taylor

ENVIRONMNENT 17
1974:51) and numerous references in the Moravian

Periodical Accounts make clear the importance of the

fall seal hunt for storing up supplies for the winter. When ice formation begins in the bays, most of

the seals that had previously been feeding there shift

seaward. Those that are trapped in the bays after

freeze-up are hunted basking on the ice, through their

breathing holes or in patches of open water. During

the winter, ringed seals are found in open water at the

sina and at breathing holes. March is the worst month

for sealing because pack ice jams against the landfast

ice and eliminates the leads of open water. Come

April, ringed seals may be encountered basking on the

ice beside their breathing holes or at the sima.

Walrus are rare today in the Nain region, but they

formerly appeared at the sina in February and March.

Polar bears move south with the pack ice, inhabiting

the sina and coastal headlands from March until May.

If the pack ice lingers until later in the summer, both

polar bears and walrus may be found occasionally near

the outer islands, although the bears sometimes wander as far up the bays as Tikkoatokak.

Caribou is the main resource exploited by humans

in the inner bays and on the interior plateau. Although

they may be hunted at any time of the year, their hides

are best for clothing in September and October. BriceBennett (1 977:1 58-1 59) notes the winter core areas for

interior caribou herds, the nearest concentrations to

Nain being in the Kiglapait Mountains, near Kingurutik

Lake and between Tasisuak Lake and Anaktalik Brook. The geographical range of caribou varies over time.

Prior to the mid-1960s, caribou primarily frequented

the interior plateau, requiring lengthy hunting trips

inland (Brice-Bennett 1 977:1 55). For example, in 1 780

Moravian missionary William Turner accompanied Inuit

caribou hunters on two trips up the Fraser River valley

and onto the plateau, up to 80 km inland from Nain

(Taylor 1 969). At this time, prior to the Inuit accessing

firearms, the Inuit brought kayaks inland on their late summer hunt (August-September) and travelled with dog sleds on a winter hunt (February). Meat might be

cached for emergency use later in the winter. In more

recent years, large caribou herds have moved out towards the coast, crossing over the sea ice to the

outer islands. Most of these animals return inland

before break-up, but some are trapped on the islands

for the summer. Caribou are also encountered sporadically in the inner bays between spring and fall.

Other animal species found in the interior or along

the inner bays include: black bear, fox, wolf, arctic

hare, wolverine, otter, mink, muskrat and lynx. Black

bears, hare and fox can also be found on some of the

larger coastal islands. During the winter, wolves may

move over the sea ice to the islands in pursuit of caribou. The economically significant terrestrial birds are

rock and spruce ptarmigan, which today are hunted in

April/May when there is a heavy snow cover and it is

still possible to travel over the sea ice.

Nukasusutok Island

Nukasusutok Island (NaKasetjutok in the current

orthography) is located about 30 km southeast of

Nain. According to Wheeler (1953:62-63), the island's

Inuktitut name means "the place where the brothers

quarreled." That name may be illuminated by ethnohistoric information suggesting that during the 1 gth century brothers rarely shared households because of

conflicts over authority within multi-family communal

houses (Taylor 1 974:82).

The island (Figures 3, 16) is approximately 10 km

in length (east-west). It is indented on the north and

the south by two bays; the southern bay is commonly

known as Wyatt Harbour. According to geologist E. P.

Wheeler II (cited in Morse 1 971 :94), Commander A.B.

N. Wyatt of the British Navy survey ship Challenger (see

Wyatt 1 934) attested to the fine anchoring qualities of

these embayments by maintaining— doubtless with a

degree of exaggeration— that the entire British Navy

could be accommodated here. Less expansive, Morse

(1971:95) noted that Wyatt Harbour is among the

finest on the coast of Labrador. These bays effectively

divide the island at its mid-point into two somewhat

18 CHAPTER 2
physiographically different portions. The western end

of Nukasusutok is 3 km in width, contains the highest

point on the island (298 m) and is generally rugged

and mountainous. The eastern end is a thin northeast

trending arm that ranges from 0.3 to 1 .3 km in width.

This extremity is less rugged than the western tip of

the island, has more flat low-lying areas, and elevations do not exceed ca. 152 m. At both ends of the

island most of the shoreline plunges precipitously

down to the sea.

Geologically, Nukasusutok Island is part of the

Middle Proterozoic Nain Plutonic Suite and is underlain

by gneiss, anorthosites, intrusive troctolites, diorites

and monzonites (Davies 1974; Ryan 1990; Ryan et al.

1995). A combination of faulting, intrusions and

weathering has produced a topography of rounded

hills punctuated in places by parallel-walled "passes."

The only lithic material on the island that was of possible utility to prehistoric peoples is vein quartz, which

outcrops in several places on the island. The vegetation of Nukasusutok is primarily that of

a tundra community with plant species such as lichen,

willow, dwarf birch, alder, Labrador tea, crowberry,

blueberry, cranberry, cloudberry and various grasses.

Although the exposed eastern arm of the island is

strictly a tundra environment, certain well sheltered

areas on the western end maintain substantial groves

of black spruce. Spruce trees at the head of Wyatt

Harbour have attained heights in the neighborhood of

3.0 to 4.5 m. The raison d'etre of any human occupation of Nukasusutok would be exploitation of the sea mammals, aquatic birds and fish found within the island's catchment area. Good spring sealing may be had to the

southeast between Satok and Humby's Island. During

the summer, seals are common in the "Bridges" passage to the west, off the east side of Kikkertavak Island and among the small islands immediately to the east

of Nukasusutok. Numerous aquatic birds may be had

in the area during the open water season: black and

eider ducks, teals, scoters, black guillemots, loons and

gulls. The small islands to the east of Nukasusutok are

a particularly good area for these waterfowl. Geese are

seasonal visitors and may be encountered in the larger ponds on Nukasusutok. Ptarmigan also occur there.

Arctic char, tom cod and occasionally salmon may be

caught in the waters surrounding Nukasusutok. Minke

whales sometimes move into Wyatt Harbour to feed.

In contrast to the diverse and abundant marine

fauna, Nukasusutok exhibits a paucity of terrestrial game. The arctic hare is a resident of the barren hills and several Inuit stone traps testify to the presence of

fox. Caribou are known to frequent the island on rare

occasions (such as 5-6 animals in 1992), crossing over

the sea ice during the winter and becoming stranded

after break-up. Several black bears were resident at the

western end of the island in 1992.

Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run

Webb Bay is located 2 5 km north of the town of Nain

(Figures 3 and 1 59). It is named after the settler family Webb, that maintains cabins at the head of the bay,

but it is also known by the Inuktitut name Udjuktok,

place of bearded seals (Wheeler 1953:94-95).

Extending 1 5 km east-west by 3-7 km wide, Webb Bay

is separated from the outer coast by South Aulatsivik

Island, the largest island in the Nain archipelago.

Access by boat is either from the south through the

"First Rattle" at the tip of the Itilialuk Peninsula, or from

the north via Port Manvers Run. The latter is a fjord-like

passage that swings around the western side of South

Aulatsivik and enters the sea at Thalia Point

(Tikigdtsuk). The Run is significant as a transportation

route because it constitutes an "inner passage" that

can be used by boat travelers to avoid the exposed

outer coast to the east of South Aulatsivik Island.

During the winter, hunters can travel northwards to Okak by snowmobile or dogsled, either by going to the

head of Webb Bay and following the Webb Brook Valley

into Tasiuyak Bay, or by moving north up Port Manvers Run and then crossing the plateau behind the Kiglapait

Mountains and thence down into Tasiuyak.

ENVIRONMNENT 19
As far as game resources are concerned, Webb Bay

is considered to be a "core area" for hunting ringed

seals (Brice-Bennett 1 977:1 25), particularly in the

spring. During the summer seals tend to be scarce, but

ringed and harbor seals may be shot occasionally, particularly off the point at the southern entrance to Port Manvers Run. The most important location for sealing

along Port Manvers Run is the "Second Rattle," a narrowing of the Run which has such a strong tidal current

that it remains an ice free polynya throughout the winter. This is also a "core area" for harbor seals (BriceBennett 1977:125). The narrow "tickle" between Igloo

Island and the north shore of Webb Bay sometimes

does not freeze over until February, providing extended open water sealing possibilities, and it may be a good sealing location in spring and fall. The aforementioned winter travel routes can be

used to access either the Kiglapait Mountain caribou

herd to the north, or the Kinguritik herd to the west.

Caribou may frequent the Webb Bay/Port Manvers area

throughout the year, although they can be hard to find

during the summer when they tend to be up the stream

valleys and at relatively high elevations. In mid-April

1994 a small caribou herd was present in the interior

valleys of South Aulatsivik Island. In late April tracks

indicated a recent westward movement of this herd

across Port Manvers Run and back towards the interior, presumably a shift towards spring calving areas.

Black bears are also very common in the region,

inhabiting forested areas near streams and wandering

up to fairly high elevations on the mountains. Polar

bears move through Port Manvers Run during the winter and may be found there occasionally in the summer, especially in the northern portion from the Second Rattle to Thalia Point. Wolves and arctic hare

also occur in the area, as well as porcupine and otter. Webb Bay Is a good location for wildfowl in the

spring and fall, particularly geese and ducks (black and

harlequin). Webb Brook at the head of the bay is an

important salmon and char spawning stream (BriceBennett 1 977:133), but summer fishing can be variable

In the bay. In 1992-94 the summer fishing was poor,

while in early summer 2002 there was good char fishing near the southern entrance to Port Manvers Run. The bedrock at the western end of Webb Bay is Archean gneiss, while most of the remainder of the Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run area consists of

anorthosites of the Middle Proterozolc Main Plutonic

Suite. At the north end of the Run, extending north towards Okak, is the Kiglapait layered intrusion, a gabbroic body also dating to the Middle Proterozolc (Ryan

1 990; Ryan et al. 1 995). The only rock type of use to

prehistoric peoples would have been vein quartz,

which outcrops sporadically throughout the area.

Scattered observations concerning the glacial

geology of the Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run region were made by Vaino Tanner (1 944) and his associates,

but the only detailed study is that of Peter Johnson

(1969). Johnson studied the extensive glacio-fluvial

and glaclo-marlne sand and gravel terraces on the

north side of Webb Bay and Identified six phases in

their formation. Early phases Involved the wasting of

Ice into separate units centered on Webb Bay and

Attu's Brook, then the development of a series of ice- dammed lakes and kame terraces at progressively

lower elevations with runoff towards the east. A large

marginal lake then formed from ice meltwater and

runoff from the deglaciated highlands, contributing to

subglaclal drainage down Port Manvers Run. According

to Johnson, the Ice then withdrew sufficiently such that

the eustatically rising sea cut a terrace at 41 m, which

he considered to be the local marine limit. As noted

previously, however, more recent data from Voisey's

Bay (Bell 1997) suggest Johnson's 41 m marine limit Is

incorrect. If we situate Webb Bay between the Voisey's

Bay and Nain uplift curves shown in Figure 5, then a

terrace cut at 40 m would date ca. 7000 B.P.

20 CHAPTER 2
Scenes from a bygone era: trapboats in Nam Harbour, 1978. (Photo: B. Hood)

ENVIRONMNENT
"Wet-Site excavation," Nukasusutok-5, Area 2C, 1980, with Doug Sutton and Morten Meldgaard (right). (Photo: B. Hood)

CHAPTER 3
eorij and Method

in the Analtjsis of Social Space

One of the central themes of this text is the analysis of

social space. In this chapter the theme is addressed at

the scale of site structure and individual features. First up is a general discussion of the status of spatial analysis in archaeology, which focuses on some of the main

trends relevant to the set of problems outlined here.

Current interpretations of Maritime Archaic social relations and dwelling space are then outlined and their

explicit or implicit theoretical and methodological

approaches are assessed. Given these considerations,

a methodological strategy for the analysis of Maritime

Archaic dwelling spaces is presented. A similar treat- ment of Paleoeskimo material follows.

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

Spatial analysis of archaeological sites became an

important theme in the late 1 960s as part of the New

Archaeology's program of finding appropriate methods for addressing conceptual problems. Much of the

initial impetus was related to studies of functional variation within and between sites, which involved identifying functionally distinct tool kits. Simple quantitative

techniques based on grid counts and point data were borrowed from geography and ecology, such as nearest neighbor analysis and tool type correlation studies

(e.g., Hodder and Orton 1976). It became evident,

however, that archaeological data were not a direct

reflection of behavior and that the attempt to identify

tool kits through correlation studies was problematic

(Speth and Johnson 1976). Recognizing the complex

relationship between what Schiffer (1972) termed the

archaeological and systemic contexts, attention turned

to documenting the formation processes of the archaeological record. Much of this involved ethnoarchaeological studies of site structure (e.g., Yellen 1977;

Binford 1 978, 1 983), which sought to identify "translation rules" for inferring systemic context from archaeological context. At the same time, a more varied

range of quantitative methods was developed for recognizing patterns in complex spatial data, such as k- means cluster analysis, unconstrained clustering, cor- respondence analysis etc. (e.g., Blankholm 1991; Carr

1984; Hietala 1984; Kintigh and Ammerman 1982).

Subsequent work investigated site structure in terms

of formation history, considering specific problems

such as the effects of site maintenance behavior on

patterning (Binford 1983, 1987; O'Connell 1987). As

noted by Wandsnider (1 996), monitoring such processes may require dropping traditional analytical entities

such as artifact types in favor of novel units of analysis that are more relevant to formation processes, such

as size-sorting indices employed as indicators of site

maintenance behavior (Wandsnider 1996:353-359), or

refitting studies used to reveal the micro-behaviorial

level of site structure (Cziesia 1 989, 1 990).

Whatever the methodological sophistication of

spatial analysis, the central problem is the inferential

process of connecting the observable archaeological

context with the unobservable past cultural system.

Ethnoarchaeological studies have been crucial for

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 23
"Me.n'6" Out^side:- He/\r.th Model1 O 1 2 3-45

6/ Binford's external/internal hearth models. (6a) external hearth model (from Binford 1 983: 1 53).

6b/ internal hearth model. Palanga's house (from Binford 1983:177). Reproduced by permission.

understanding the relationship between archaeological

traces of behavior and the organizational variables

generating those traces (Binford 1987). The most frequently cited ethnoarchaeological work on huntergatherer site structure is that of Binford (1978a, b,

1983, 1987). From the late 1970s through the 1980s

Binford focused on human body mechanics as a universal constraint that would produce consistent spatial

patterns. The most well known example is the socalled "hearth-centered" model (Binford 1978b, 1983).

According to Binford, the positioning of individuals around an outdoor hearth results in a characteristic

pattern of a "drop zone" containing small items in the

vicinity of the hearth and the seated individuals and a

"toss zone" in front of the hearth and behind the

hearth-users, where larger items are discarded (Figure

6a). Hearths inside dwelling structures do not exhibit

this pattern since they are subjected to regular maintenance procedures of gathering debris and dumping it

outside the dwelling (Figure 6b). The methods used for

developing and presenting these models were largely

qualitative and visual, with the goal of defining general spatial patterns that could be regarded as behavioral

configurations. Nonetheless, Binford (1981:286)

emphasized that spatial data should be collected at as

detailed a level as possible, since we do not yet know

enough about spatial structures to justify coarsergrained recording.

Binford used the hearth-centered model to provide

an alternative interpretation of the French Paleolithic

site Pincevent. According to Binford (1983:147-148),

Leroi-Courhan and Brezillion (1972) imposed certain

unevaluated assumptions when they concluded that

the spatial patterning of debris associated with hearths

indicated the presence of several tent structures.

Instead, Binford (1 983:158-159) suggested the patterns derived from a rotation of seating positions

around outdoor hearths. Debate continues as to how

the spatial organization of Pincevent and other Upper

Paleolithic sites should be interpreted (e.g., Audouze

1 987; Carr 1 991 ; Enloe et al. 1 994; Julien et al. 1 987;

Koetje 1987, 1994; Simek 1984). Meanwhile, some

researchers attempted to develop methodological

tools for the analysis of hearth-centered distributions

(Stapert 1989), while others discussed additional site

formation considerations that complicate Binford's

hearth-centered model (e.g., O'Connell 1987;

Stevenson 1991).

24 CHAPTER 3
One of the problems with Binford's studies is that

they mostly attribute spatial patterning in sites to "etic"

behavioral factors such as body mechanics or practical

"maintenance" strategies that determine disposal decisions. Although processualists eventually paid more

attention to social factors such as the role of sharing,

kinship and cooperative labor in the spacing of

dw/ellings (e.g., Binford 1991; Cargett and Hayden

1 991 ; Whitelaw 1 991 , 1 994), there was no concern for

the symbolic dimension of site structure. Symbolic

meaning was taken up in Hodder's (1982, 1987) ethnoarchaeological research in east Africa, which

explored the structuring effect of social relations, such

as gender, and the symbolic aspects of discard related

to concepts of dirt and purity (see D. Gordon [1980]

for an earlier eastern subarctic example). In subsequent post-processual studies, dwelling structures were seen as both the medium and outcome of social

structuration processes, simultaneously channeling

the physical movements of individuals and serving as

symbolic metaphors encoding aspects of ideology

(e.g., Hodder 1990:44-70; Parker-Pearson and

Richards 1994; Yates 1989). Recent research takes a phenomenological rather than structuralist approach

to constructed space, theorizing how "the body" subjectively experiences movement through dwellings and

other aspects of the inhabited environment (Tilley

1994, 1999:40-49).

The upshot of this discussion is that there are two

main methodological approaches to spatial analysis

(although these are not mutually exclusive). The first approach is model-centered (Carr 1991). This generally involves linking the observed archaeological context

with an ethnoarchaeological model that provides

insight into the unobserved past behavioral context. The model employed could be either an "etic" behavioral model or an "emic" socio-ideological model. The

question of evaluating a model's correspondence with

the spatial data is a central problem. There is a constant danger that model-centered approaches will assume what they set out to prove, and that fitting the

model to the data will result in an uncritical accommodation argument (Binford 1981:284-285) in which the model becomes an unevaluated interpretative convention or a rhetorical device used to construct a past-as- wished for. From the neo-positivist perspective,

although data are recognized as constructed through a

theoretical lens it is believed that independent middlerange methods can be applied to provide a measure of goodness of fit (Bmford 1981:21-30, 1982). The

hermeneutic perspective, on the other hand, sees method as inseparable from theory, such that evaluating goodness of fit is a negotiation process marked by

fluidity and a lack of firm foundations for determining

the plausibility of arguments. While data can in some

sense "confront" theory, emphasis is placed on

enhancing interpretive coherence and reducing inconsistencies (Hodder 1999:39, 60-62). Nonetheless,

there seems to be agreement that some kinds of

methodological strategies are necessary to provide

challenges to interpretative models and to prevent

arguments from becoming self-serving tautologies.

These strategies may involve contrasting arguments

developed from different paradigmatic positions,

applying different types of methods (quantitative and

qualitative) with different assumptions to the same

data set, and considering several different types of

contextual information and different scales of analysis

(e.g., Binford 1987:503; Blankholm 1991; Carr 1991; Hodder 1999:130-131). In this process, quantitative

analysis can be used as a pattern recognition exercise aimed at exposing possible anomalies between models

and data, a tool for resisting premature accommodations. Such flexible methodological strategies might be

considered part of a critical realist epistemology (Sayer

1 992, 2000).

The other approach to spatial analysis can be

termed empirical pattern recognition. Instead of taking its point of departure in a conceptual model, this approach uses exploratory quantitative methods to

identify statistically meaningful associations in spatial

data. These patterns may then be interpreted post hoc

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 25
wood

cutting

conical I I ri . scaffold

slioreline

tent 1

Recent Innu spring

camp, Labrador

(a)

A duck wings hung on tree

tent 2

square scaffold

lil and hearth

hearth

Recent Innu summer tent B stove

debris concentration

1 m scale

(b)

7/ Recent Innu camp structure, (a) Innu spring camp, Labrador, (b) schematic diagram of a recent Innu summer tent feature, Labrador.

in relation to a model. The assumption is that statistical techniques can provide results that are independent of model premises, such that unanticipated patterns might be recognized (Carr 1 991 :226). While this

property has some virtue, the important objection is

that no statistical tool provides guidelines as to how

the resulting patterns should be interpreted in terms

of behavior. So, while a technique may provide a means of revealing patterning that is inherent in the

data itself rather than an artifact of model conventions,

the interpretations of the patterning are ultimately

model dependent. There is also the danger that the

elegance of a technique, such as the popular /c-means

cluster analysis (Kintigh and Ammerman 1982; Simek

1984), may promote its use as a cookbook solution.

This general discussion has implications for the methodology used in the spatial analysis of habitation

areas undertaken in this text. The methodological

strategy employed here involves the recursive use of models and empirical pattern recognition studies. Theory is used to frame models of Maritime Archaic

and Paleoeskimo dwelling space, while the methods

serve two roles: (1) evaluating the goodness of fit between models and data— their degree of accommodation or "coherence," and (2) as exploratory tools for

partitioning complex data sets so as to expose unanticipated aspects of variation— anomalies between

models and data that could require re-evaluation of the model assumptions. Methodological discussions for

the Maritime Archaic and Paleoeskimo cases are presented separately, since each cultural context presents

its own specific problems of analysis.

The Maritime Archaic: Longhouse Models and

Spatial Muddles

During the 1970s, excavations at Maritime Archaic

habitation sites in central and northern Labrador failed

to identify distinct traces of dwelling structures.

Hearths were sometimes arranged in a linear fashion

along raised beach terraces (e.g.. Rattlers Bight and

Black Island Cove, Fitzhugh 1975, 1978a; Okak-2, Cox

1 977), but these and other features (Hood 1 981 ) were

generally interpreted as the remains of individual family tent structures. Although the Maritime Archaic

seemed "different" from the historically known Innu,

the viewing lense for perceiving and interpreting these

spatial patterns was traditional subarctic ethnography.

This ethnographic model generated assumptions of

nuclear family organizational units with modest tent

structures as dwellings. For example, modern Innu spring-summer camps leave remains such as those

sketched in Figure 7. Individual tents may be spaced at

varying distances, dependent on both terrain and

social relationships, and may be associated with exter26 CHAPTER 3
8/ Innu summer tent site, 1980. Small stakes mark stove location, door immediately to the right. Exterior midden between

tent site and scaffold. Photo: W. Fitzhugh.

nal features such as hearths, wooden scaffolds, skinstretching frames, wood chopping areas and the symbolic placement of animal bones in adjacent trees.

Dwelling remains may consist of small, single family

tent floors with a central stove, along with trash distributions centered on the doorway and exterior area

immediately outside the tent (Figures 7 and 8). Larger

tents are also used, however.

During the 1978 season of the Smithsonian

Institution's Torngat Archaeological Project, probable

Maritime Archaic rectangular structures were noted

briefly at Aillik, near Makkovik on the central coast,

while several linear structures up to 100 m long and

associated with Late Maritime Archaic artifacts were

identified at Nulliak Cove, north of Hebron Fjord

(Fitzhugh 1980). The break-through came in 1980,

when Smithsonian investigations at Aillik revealed the

clearly defined remains of a "longhouse" embedded in

a cobble beach. The feature measured in at 28 m long,

4 m wide, and was segmented into seven compartments with raised rock dividers. It was associated with

several external conical cache pits (Figures 9 and 10). The longhouse was actually the latest in a sequence of

structures that began on a higher and earlier raised

beach. There appeared to be an "evolutionary" devel- opment over time from small, single-family pit-houses

and rectangular structures towards progressively larger segmented rectangular structures, culminating in

the longhouse. (Fitzhugh 2006).

This remarkably clear longhouse and the sequence of earlier structures became a paradigm or

interpretative model that could be used to make sense

of the previously excavated hearth rows, the linear features at Nulliak Cove and other ambiguous spatial distributions. The "longhouse model" revolutionized

Maritime Archaic archaeology, revealing how the

ethnographically derived expectations had hindered

recognition of the pattern. The model made visible what was previously hidden and helped make sense

out of spatial muddles. We cannot do without it.

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 27
0°0q

O (3

% ° °oo« Ooo" /

CACHE PITS o \

TROUGH °° °Oo

"o"" O ^? =00 o° =^ ^ o °°

oOoO

METERS ° °°l AILLIK-2 °°oo°

9/ Maritime Archaic longlnouse, Aillik-2 (after Fitzhugh 1984 33).

Nonetheless, the model also poses certain dangers

when applied as a handy template to data that are considerably more ambiguous than the "classic" feature at

Aillik. At the descriptive or pattern recognition level,

accurate delineation of dwelling size and configuration

could be compromised by naive application of the

longhouse template. There may be a temptation to

interpret any linear distribution as a longhouse, particularly distributions encountered on surveys and not

subjected to substantive analysis. Such pattern recognition errors snowball on the inferential level when correlations of structure size and social composition are

based on faulty description. Consequently, we have the

ingredients for potentially deceptive accommodation

arguments in which the longhouse model becomes a

taken-for-granted interpretative convention. So, when

dealing with ambiguous spatial data we have to balance carefully between using the longhouse model as

a necessary guide to pattern recognition and employing methodological strategies to prevent unjustified

reproduction of the model and to expose unanticipated patterning.

The Functional and Social Dimensions of

Maritime Archaic Dwellings

There appear to be at least three different forms of

Maritime Archaic dwellings: (1) small pit-houses of ca.

3.0-3.5 m in diameter (either circular or oval double- room features, Fitzhugh 2006), (2) rectangular surface

structures, and (3) "longhouses." The latter may be

either surface structures or slightly excavated into cobble beaches. The current chronology, based on a combination of radiocarbon dating and elevation above

sea-level, has pit-houses predating 6000 B.P..

Rectangular surface structures are also found prior to 6000 B.P.; these measure ca. 8-1 2 m in length and are

partitioned into two to five segments by rock dividers

(Fitzhugh 1984, 1985a, 1985b:62, 1986:56, 2006). Between 6000-5500 B.P., rectangular surface structures at Aillik and in the Nain area range from 9-16 m

long and contain two to four internal segments

(Fitzhugh 1984:10, 13). A three-segment structure at

Aillik West-1 is dated 5210±270 B.P. (Fitzhugh

1984:8). Between 5000-4200 B.P., a 30-40 m line of

hearths at Okak-2 (Cox 1 977:1 84-1 85) has been interpreted as a longhouse (Fitzhugh 1981:18), while at

Black lsland-2, in Hamilton Inlet, 12 evenly spaced

hearths suggest a 50 m long structure with 1 2-1 3 seg- ments (Fitzhugh 1975:122-125, 1981:17, 1984:13).

Longhouse development reached its peak during the

Rattlers Bight Phase (4200-3500 B.P.), with a 70 m linear arrangement of hearths at Rattlers Bight in

Hamilton Inlet, 27 surface longhouses ranging in

length from 15-100 m at Nulliak Cove near Hebron,

28 CHAPTER 3
and the classic 28 m long seven segment semi-subterranean structure at Aillik (Fitzhugh 1981:18, 1984,

1986:56, 1 985a:88-89). The time of appearance of the

first longhouses is unclear, but likely occurs between

5000 4500 B.P.. One possible conclusion to be drawn

from this sequence is that longhouses developed by

"accretion" (Fitzhugh, personal communication).

Beginning with the basal units of single compartment

THEORY AND IVIETHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 29
pit-houses and two segment rectangular dwellings,

additional compartments were simply added on in a

geometric progression, as clones of the basal units. The question, however, is what constitutes a

"longhouse" ? What is the archaeological signature of

such a feature and how does it differ from a "rectangular structure" and a linear arrangement of completely

independent tents or outdoor hearths? First of all,

"rectangular structure" seems to designate surface

features that exhibit tent-ring-like rock borders and

internal stone segment dividers. The term "longhouse"

is ambiguous since it denotes a feature that is also

rectangular, but longer— with an unspecified

minimum length threshold— and which may or may

not display the aforementioned architectural features

of rectangular structures. Additionally, the term longhouse may be a misleading metaphor since it denotes

certain ethnographically well-known dwellings (e.g.,

Iroquoian) that are not applicable to the Labrador case.

Rather than being continuous architectural constructions. Maritime Archaic longhouses probably consisted

of a linear series of linked individual tents. In the case

of the 28 m long structure at Aillik there is clearly an

architectural unity defined by its semi-subterranean

excavation into a cobble beach, but this may simply

have been the foundation for several closely packed

tent dwellings. In cases that lack obvious architectural components, such as the surface features at Nulliak,

the longhouse is an inference based on several lines of

evidence, not all of which may be present or of equal

quality in a given case: a linear series of regularly

spaced hearths, a bounded linear distribution of lithic

material (3.5-4.0 m wide), segment divider rocks and

traces of wall border rocks.

It is impossible to be more precise about the

nature of the spatial patterning associated with rectangular structures and longhouses because no detailed

distribution maps have been published. Partial plans of longhouses from Nulliak Cove and Rattlers Bight

(Fitzhugh 1981: Figures 7 and 10, 1985a:96-97) indicate fairly regularly spaced (3-4 m) clusters of charcoal

and fire-cracked rock (not always mutually associated)

running down the center of the structures (Figure 1 1 a).

In some cases, though, charcoal concentrations also

occur close to the presumed walls. Tool and debitage

distributions are described as being hearth-centered

(Fitzhugh 1981:17-18, 1985a:98, 1985b:49), but the

details of this spatial configuration are not specified. A

schematic diagram of a longhouse from Nulliak Cove

shows lithic distributions that are not always associated with possible hearths (Figure lib; Fitzhugh

1985a:97). Some of the lithic concentrations are spatially independent, but most of them are joined along one side of the structure, suggesting an overlapping

arc configuration or "ribbons" connecting separate

concentrations. These examples should at least raise some questions as to how we might distinguish longhouses from lines of independent tents or outdoor

hearths.

In sum, our knowledge of Maritime Archaic

dwelling structures is constrained by ill-defined terms and piecemeal information. The term "longhouse" originated as an ad hoc category (Barsalou 1 983) formulated to make sense of linear spatial distributions. Although useful for that initial purpose, the category

needs to evolve further because considerable ambiguity results from its status as a conceptual combination

in which archaeological attributes are mapped onto

analog models from other contexts. It should also be

pointed out that in addition to pit-houses, rectangular

structures and longhouses, there are other types of

Maritime Archaic features on the landscape that might

be dwelling-related, such as isolated rock pavements

(Fitzhugh 1978: Figure 14 illustrates one from Big

Island, Sagiek Bay; the author has observed similar features on Uigortiek Island in the Nain region). Reducing

ambiguity and error in our inferences will require a

systematic study of Maritime Archaic features that doc- uments their range of variation and provides firmer criteria for distinguishing dwelling types with and without traces of architecture.

30 CHAPTER 3
/ // Maritime Archaic ionglnouses from Nullial< Cove-1 . (a) Structure 15, (b) Structure 1 1 (after Fitziiugin 1985a 97; repro- duced by permission, Arctic Anthropology, University of Wisconsin Press).

If we restrict ourselves to the established dwelling

features, the question is: to what extent are these different types or sizes of structures part of an evolutionary development over time versus functional or seasonal variants? In the pre-6000 B.P. period, the coexistence of pit-houses and rectangular surface structures

suggests they may be seasonal variants, with pit-houses used in colder periods (Fitzhugh 1 985a:89). If that was the case, however, the outer coast locations of the

pit-houses do not correspond well with the postulated

interior-maritime settlement pattern, in which fall-winter settlement is posited for the inner bays or near

interior (Fitzhugh 1978:83-84). However, pit-houses

might have been used on the coast in the colder spring

or fall periods while exploiting migrating harp seal

herds, and rectangular structures during the summer.

Alternatively, the lack of pit-houses after 6000 B.P. might be explained by a shift of winter settlement from

the outer coast to the near-interior (Fitzhugh

1985a:88). Questions could also be raised concerning

the contrast between the virtually semi-subterranean

longhouse feature at Aillik and the surface longhouses

at Nulliak Cove. Is this a seasonal difference, or is the

Aillik feature merely a situational variant used on rocky

cobble beaches?

We have very little information concerning how

Maritime Archaic dwellings were constructed. Few

details have been published, aside from hints of postholes at the Aillik longhouse (Fitzhugh 1984:33). The

assumption is that the rectangular surface structures

were tent dwellings and that the longhouses represent

a series of individual tent structures placed adjacent to

each other. The pit-houses and longhouses excavated

into cobble beaches may also have been roofed in this

manner; there is no evidence that they were covered

with sod.

Estimates of the duration of dwelling occupations

is problematic in the absence of preserved bone material. Fitzhugh (1985a:98) suggests the Nulliak Cove

longhouses were used for short periods of days or weeks on the basis of low rates of debris accumulation

inside the structures and the absence of middens. This

short occupation is related to Nulliak Cove's role as a

repeatedly-used staging area for trips to the Ramah

Bay chert sources, part of an "expeditionary" model of

chert procurement involving pronounced long-distance

seasonal mobility (Fitzhugh 1985b:50). On the other

hand, longhouses used as seasonal base camps within

a local settlement system may have been occupied

longer, resulting in greater accumulation as seen in

the "sheet midden" deposits at Rattlers Bight (Fitzhugh

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 31
1981:18, 1985b;49). Consequently, we might expect

seasonal, functional, and geographical differences in

the nature of longhouses and their duration of occupation. In the absence of bone material these differences

might be reflected in the types of features and lithic assemblages present, the ratio of primary versus sec- ondary refuse (Schiffer 1987:58-72) and the degree to

which peripheral areas of the sites exhibit build-ups of

external activity areas (Binford 1983:190). Of course,

these variables are complicated by other factors such

as group size and composition and culturally codified

disposal practices.

The social significance of longhouses has been

discussed from somewhat different directions.

Although reliance on subarctic Innu ethnography as an

analogy source led to difficulties in recognizing the

longhouse pattern in the first place, Fitzhugh (1981,

1984, 1985a) turns to this analogy again when interpreting social space in longhouses, but it should be emphasized that he has not presented a full and

explicit account of his position. He characterizes

Maritime Archaic society in line with ethnographic

interpretations of subarctic Algonkian society as egalitarian, with emphasis on individual families and the

personal autonomy of individuals (Fitzhugh

1 985a:l 04-1 05). Nonetheless, when seen in terms of

the temporal development from small pit-houses to

longhouses, there appears to have been an increase in

co-residential group size over time, from single family

units (or small groups of two or three families, if clusters of two or three pit-houses indicate contemporary

use), towards large multi-family co-residential longhouses consisting of 50-100 individuals (Fitzhugh

1 984:20). Additionally, variation in mortuary treatment may indicate some degree of status distinction in

Maritime Archaic society (Fitzhugh 1 978:85, 1 981 :32). A consequence of this social model is that when

analyzing architecturally distinct Maritime Archaic

dwelling features, Fitzhugh emphasizes the signifi- cance of the individual segments or compartments of

the structures, which he considers to be individual

family living floors. In the case of the more ambiguous linear distributions of hearths and iithics, he

views hearth-centered distributions as indicative of

individual family living floors (Fitzhugh 1984:18,

1985a:98). The individual family floor areas can be

thought of as structural "modules" (Binford

1 983:1 47). A pit- house then consists of a single such

module while a longhouse is a linear accretion of

multiple modules. In earlier published papers,

Fitzhugh (1984:8-9, 1985a:96) argued that the regular spacing of hearths and debris distributions related to longhouse segments is strongly repetitive, indicating the dwelling compartments were used simultaneously. More recently, however, Fitzhugh (2006:

12-13) suggests that perhaps not all longhouse

modules were contemporary. The central segments

of longhouses tend to have greater accumulations of

debris than the peripheral segments, suggestive of

longer occupation. Dwellings may have been organized around a stable central unit, with additional seg- ments being added or subtracted on an "accordion"

basis in relation to the arrival and departure of families. In this reading, the overall configuration of a longhouse is largely determined by repetitive

"microscale" patterns at the module level. Modular organization plays a conceptual and

methodological role in how spatial patterning in

dwellings is linked to possible social distinctions in

Maritime Archaic societies. Fitzhugh (1985a:98)

views Maritime Archaic social organization as "generally egalitarian" because the contents of longhouse

segments are repetitive in terms of household activities and material culture. Nonetheless, there are indications that some artifact production and discard,

particularly that involving Ramah chert, slate and

soapstone, may be concentrated in particular parts of

a longhouse. The possibility that these segments

were communal work areas is dismissed, since the

content and configuration of these areas is similar to

the other segments. In any event, the implication is

that relative social equality/distinction might be

32 CHAPTER 3
investigated through the degree of module redundancy or variability (Fitzhugh 1 984: 1 1 ). Modular organization is one analytical framework we can use in analyzing Maritime Archaic dwellings

but, as indicated, it is also linked to ethnographically

derived premises about individual family-focused

social organization as well as the assumption that the

overall configuration of a longhouse results from

repeated replication of microscale processes at the modular level. As an alternative, the continuous linear

pattern may be generated by macroscale processes

which unite several modular units into a spatial logic

partly determined by the meaning of the dwelling as a

whole. This unifying spatial logic may be social and

ideological rather than simply a functional conse- quence of dwelling geometry— the cloning of individual family modules. Structural linearity may be an

organizational principle in which the practical ordering

of domestic space in the course of daily life is a vehicle for actively structuring social relations, as well as

being a symbolic representation of those relations. The unifying linear principle could indicate an emphasis on connected space, a merging of private

and public space that expresses a corporate social

logic rather than a logic of familial segmentation.

Elsewhere, the author suggested that;

The spatial logic of the longhouse, consisting

of an extremely contrived linear ordering of

individual social units, conveyed a tension

within Maritime Archaic society between the autonomy of individual household units and

the collective organization of emergent corporate groups. Maritime Archaic seasonal

mobility might have entailed tendencies

towards group fission, flexible autonomous

social units and temporary settlements. Household autonomy was spatially encoded

in the segmentation of longhouses into multiple compartments representing individual household floors. These individual social

modules were incorporated into a larger collective unit by the overall structure of the

dwelling. The longhouse structure physically

created a corporate unit and gave that unit a temporary (seasonal) material existence

through the organization of domestic space.

Furthermore, the longhouse helped establish

an ideological fiction of collectivity in a social

world which otherwise tended towards seasonal fragmentation. I suggest that this pattern signifies the emergence of situational

rather than permanent corporate principles

and expresses flux in Maritime Archaic complexity processes (Hood 1995:95).

The methodological consequence of such a social model is that spatial analysis must be multiscalar. At

the microscale level the focus is on patterning within

individual modules. At the mesoscale level the patterns

that cross-cut or unite modules are considered. At the

macroscale, patterns at the level of the dwelling as a whole are investigated.

One of the main practical problems in developing

accurate descriptions of Maritime Archaic dwelling

structures is delimiting them in size. This is particularly the case for ambiguous linear distributions without

clear architectural demarcation. Longhouse interpretation may be complicated by overlapping between non- contemporary structures and the resulting palimpsest

accumulations. Without systematic radiocarbon dating

of hearths, combined with refitting studies, we have no

firm grounds for assuming that longhouse segments

constitute a contemporaneous unity. This methodological problem has broader interpretative significance in

that lacking good control over segment contemporaneity we have no grounds for accurate dwelling size estimates, thus no grounds for inferring the demographic

and social composition of a settlement or for postulating symbolic order and meaning.

The foregoing discussion focused on identifiable

dwelling structures, but it is obviously not the case

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 33
that all patterns at Maritime Archaic sites are the consequence of activities conducted within the confines of

dwellings. To avoid unwarranted accommodation argu- ments we need alternative models for identifying distribution patterns unrelated to dwelling structures.

Binford's (1 983:1 56-1 59;165-1 70) well-known distinction between patterns connected with indoor and outdoor hearths and his discussion of "extensive" activity

areas is one point of departure.

Expanding the View: Other Archaeological

Contexts

Longhouses are an unusual dwelling form among

ethnographically known hunter-gatherers. North

American subarctic ethnography contains examples of

large communal structures (see below), but none of

these had linear dimensions approaching those of Late

Maritime Archaic dwellings and there is little documentation of their spatial patterning. Otherwise, longhouses are better represented in the ethnography of sedentary agricultural societies such as the Iroquoians. Since

the latter analogy is problematic for northern huntergatherers, it may be useful to take a comparative

archaeological view and consider the spatial patterning

associated with longhouse-like features in the eastern

subarctic, arctic and elsewhere. What spatial patterns

result when people are enclosed in linear structures?

This will hardly be comprehensive, but will attempt to

develop a sense of the variability in spatial patterning.

Beginning close to Labrador, an interesting example is Seguin's (1995) work on sites dating 700-1000

B.P. in the James Bay region of northern Quebec.

Seguin applied Binford's hearth-centered model and

Cree ethnography to the interpretation of hearth-centered distributions lacking evidence of structural

remains. Archaeologically, she distinguished between

external hearths, small structures with single central

hearths and longhouses with two or multiple hearths.

Her brief consideration of the ethnographic material

suggested there are regional variations among Cree groups in the positioning of activities and persons vis

a vis hearths. In the Mistassini area, men's and

women's activities are conducted on the same side of

the hearth, while in the Chisasibi area they are conducted on opposite sides. The longhouse structure

posited for site GdFc-2 (Figure 12a; Seguin 1995:44)

consisted of four hearths placed in a ca. 9 m long line,

spaced at ca. 1 m intervals; lithic concentrations were

found on opposite sides of two hearths and on one

side of the other two. Seguin interpreted this distribution as a ca. 1 3 m long, 5.5 m wide longhouse, with

the lithic concentrations representing activities conducted between the hearths and the dwelling walls.

In contrast, Loring (1 992:245, 250-260) described

a probable longhouse (shaputuan) dated 1800-1500

B.P. at Daniel Rattle-1, Area IV, near Davis Inlet on the

Labrador coast. There was no trace of walls; the feature consisted of a 4.5 m long, 1 .0 m wide, raised linear hearth with two smaller cobble hearths slightly distant at both ends. The central hearth was tightly

packed with calcined bone fragments, bone ash, thermally-altered Ramah chert flakes and heat-shattered

biface fragments, and fire-cracked rocks. Lithic tools and flakes occurred in a major concentration extending 3.5 m outwards on one of the long sides of the

hearth feature, with a two diffuse clusters on the opposite side and minor concentrations associated with the

small end-hearths.

Returning to Quebec, at site CbFd-9 (Figure 12b)

Seguin (1995:43) identified two features (B and E) as

external hearths, although the excavated area was too

small to identify possible drop/toss zones. Six other

hearths (A, C, D, F-H) were placed in a 30 m long line,

spaced at intervals of 4.4 to 6.6 m. Lithic remains

were concentrated within 1 .0 to 1.5 m of the hearth

centers, in five cases on opposite sides of the hearths,

in one case as two clusters on the same side. Each

hearth is interpreted as the focus of a separate tent

structure, but little justification is given for this conclusion. Hearths C, D and F are closely positioned and are

aligned on the same axis, hearths C and H lie slightly

apart from the first group and are aligned on a slight34 CHAPTER 3
1 2/ Pre-contact Recent Indian dwelling features, (a) longhouse, CdFc-2, Riviere Laforge, Quebec (after Seguin 1995:44).

(b) individual tent structures, CbFd-D, Riviere Laforge, Quebec (after Seguin 1995:43). (c) tent dwelling, Kamarsuk Area II, Labrador (after Loring 1992:266, 270). Figures a and b reproduced by permission, I'Association des archeologues du Quebec.

ly different axis, and hearth A is out of alignment with

the C-D-F group. It is unclear why the C-D-F and C-H

groups could not be considered longhouses; the only

difference appears to be that their lithic concentrations

are oriented towards what would be the middle of a

longhouse rather than lying between the hearths and

the walls. This would seem to be a weak criterion given

the ethnographic observations on variability in the

placement of activities around hearths. Indeed, with

Fitzhugh's longhouse model in mind, one might even

consider the possibility of a larger structure, given a

refit between hearth areas A and F. Nonetheless,

Seguin's material is very relevant to the Maritime

Archaic longhouse discussion, since it provides some

concrete archaeological examples of alternatives in

spatial patterning and it attempts to apply an ethnoarchaeologically-derived behavioral model.

Seguin's individual structure interpretation can be compared with Loring's (1992:266-276) discussion of

a Late Prehistoric dwelling from Kamarsuk Area II,

north of Davis Inlet, Labrador (Figure 1 2c). The feature was a slightly semi-subterranean oval tent structure,

4 by 5 m in size, with a raised central cobble hearth. The hearth contained calcined bone fragments and

thermally altered Ramah chert. There was a pro- nounced concentration of debitage on one side of the

hearth, but relatively little on the opposite side, suggesting the latter was used as a sleeping area. A sec- ond concentration of Ramah chert debitage at one end

of the structure and extending outside suggested a doorway midden. This spatial pattern is broadly similar to that identified by Seguin and bears a strong

resemblance to Binford's "archetype" model for hearthcentered patterns expected in enclosed and maintained spaces (i.e., Palanga's House, Figure 6b). A distinctly different pattern was found at the late

Point Revenge Complex Winter Cove-4 site (ca. 500

B.P.) in Hamilton Inlet, Labrador (Fitzhugh 1 978b). This

feature was a 4 by 8 m oval tent ring with a single central internal hearth and nine external hearths. Some of

the external hearths were almost superimposed by the

tent ring such that, in contrast to Fitzhugh's interpretation, they may represent earlier activity. Very little

lithic material was found inside the tent ring; only a

small concentration adjacent to the well-constructed

hearth and along the southeastern wall of the feature.

This seems consistent with Binford's inside-hearth

model. Most of the lithics were concentrated around

the external hearths, which were less substantial cobblestone clusters. The tools and flakes mostly lay adjacent to the hearths (akin to drop zones), but in one

case there was a wide scatter of debitage extending

out at least 3 m from a hearth, evidently a "non-maintained" zone. Fitzhugh (1 978b:l 58-1 59) suggested the

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 35
structure represents a warm weather occupation by a

multi-family group.

Returning to the spatial structure of longhouses,

another archaeological case of such features can be

found in Late Dorset Paleoeskimo society (ca. 500-

1 000/1 200 AD). These features range from 1 to 45 m

in length, 5-7 m wide, and sometimes incorporate

stone walls up to 1 meter in height. The central corridors may lack distinctive hearths, although there may

be traces of a central "passage" with rock constructions and burned fat. The walls sometimes contain

small niches with traces of burned fat and possible

domestic activities. In some cases, lines of external

hearths and caches run parallel to the structures

(Appelt and Cullov 1998:148-149, 1999;24-35;

Damkjar 2000; McChee 1971; Plumet 1985;

Schledermann 1 990:202-251 ). Investigators agree that

these structures represent the communal ritual activities of multi-family groups, probably conducted during

the summer, but they disagree on whether the structures were roofed tent dwellings or whether the walls were merely symbolic. Plumet (1985:228-229, 366-

367, 371) argues that the spatial logic was of individual family floor spaces along the walls, with a linear

central communal area that was a symbolic spatial

transformation of the axial structure principle used in

smaller Dorset sod-house dwellings.

Perhaps the clearest example of longhouse spatial

patterning is found in a 15.5 m long feature at the

David site in northwest Greenland (Appelt and Cullov

1999:36-40; Figure 13a), where a series of separate

lithic concentrations were closely linked to a central passage feature. Some of the concentrations lay adjacent to stone-slab pits of unknown function. Four of

these clusters were regularly spaced along the east

side of the passage (ca. 7 m between center points);

the clusters were all somewhat oval and of broadly

similar dimensions (4-6 m long, 3-4 m wide). On the

west side of the passage were two linear distributions

of similar dimensions (5-6 m long, 2 m wide) and a

small flake concentration at one end of the passage.

There were also four small clusters of tools lying outside the main concentrations. Thus, there were slight

differences in depositional patterns on either side of

the passage such that the configuration was somewhat

asymmetric. The eastern wall contained traces of at

least six regularly spaced (1.5 m) slabs with burned fat

suggestive of hearth areas. It may be significant that

the largest debris concentrations occurred on this side

of the structure.

Schledermann's (1 990:209-21 1 , 239, 245) spatial

distribution data from Ellesmere Island exhibit generally similar tendencies. At the Longhouse site, partial

excavation of a 45 m long feature suggested a pattern

of paired lithic/bone clusters on opposite sides of the

central area. The clusters were of similar size (mostly

2.0 by 1 .0-1 .5 m) and fairly evenly spaced along each

side (mostly 2.0-2.5 m between their center points).

Although there were sporadic traces of charcoal and

burned bone there were no distinct hearths. The pattern in the 14.5 m long structure at the Cove site suggests seven clusters of variable dimensions on each

side of the passage. The clusters along the southern

half of the structure seem semi-regularly spaced (1 .5-

2.7 m between center points) and have higher find

densities than those on the northern side of the structure. Although those on the northern side are also regularly spaced (1.5 m between center points), they are

arranged in two groups separated by 4.5 m of low density: four at the western end of the structure, two at

the eastern end. Again, there is a hint of slight asymmetry in cluster placement and deposition, as at the

David site feature. A slightly different pattern was found in Late

Dorset House B at the UNC-1 1 site in the Ungava

region (Plumet 1985:105-134, 209-231, hors texte 9 and 1 0). The feature was ca. 36 m long and 5 m wide

(Figure 13b). The central axis of the structure had a

slightly raised ridge containing stone-lined boxes and

pits with traces of burned fat and red ocher. In the wall

area there were several niches consisting of flat slabs

and burned fat that were spaced at 2-3 m intervals. A

36 CHAPTER 3
schematic summary indicates the lithic distribution was primarily concentrated in the southern end of the

structure. Debris occurred along the walls as near-continuous distributions, with hints of separate but overlapping clusters spaced about two meters apart, evidently associated with the wall niches. Seven smaller

clusters (mostly 1.5-2.0 m in diameter) occurred closer to the center, adjacent to the box and pit features. The spatial patterning in these structures is reasonably consistent, with small, relatively discrete,

sometimes regularly spaced, debris clusters along

both sides of the central axis of the features. These

clusters are associated with rock constructions and

traces of burning. Possible hearth niches in the walls at

the David site and UNC-1 1 seem to be associated with

larger and denser debris accumulations. Hence,

although we lack evidence for "classic " hearth-centered

distributions there are strong indications that the distributions are feature-related, probably to

cooking/heating/ illumination areas with oil lamps. A

slight exception to the pattern of relatively discrete

debris clusters is UNC-1 1, where there was greater

accumulation of material adjacent to the walls and

overlap between niche-related distributions. It should

be kept in mind, however, that although these featurecentered distributions seem similar to those associated with domestic hearths, the spatial organization of

Late Dorset longhouses was likely structured by special ritual practices.

A final archaeological example comes from farther

afield: the well-known, although not well understood,

"longhouse" structures from the Russian Upper

Paleolithic site Kostenki (Crigor'ev 1967; Klein 1969:114-117, 170-177). The three structures

described by Klein had similar features: lines of 9-10

hearths, mostly spaced ca. 1.5-2.0 m apart.

Distributions of the associated artifactual materials

suggested one dwelling 35 m in length by 1 0-1 5 m in

width, a second 35 m in length by 5 m in width, and a

third 23 m in length by 5 m in width. Cache pits with mammoth bone and smaller circular structures that

might have been house-pits were also present. These

features, and the complex sites of which they are a

part, present similar analytical problems, and then some, to the Maritime Archaic longhouses that lack

clear architectural features. Crigor'ev (1993:58-59)

notes that delineation of the dwelling boundaries is

arbitrary line-drawing through density distributions,

but the lithic distributions from Kostenki I, Horizon 1

(Crigor'ev 1 967:345; Klem 1 969:1 1 7) at least provide

a sense of the spatial structure at the site (Figure 1 3c). Taking into account that some excavation units were

destroyed, the most dense flake concentrations were

located primarily within a 1 -3 m distance of the central

hearths, although towards the southern end of the pro- posed dwelling the debitage extended up to 4 meters

distant. The concentrations were all on the eastern

side of the dwelling, with the exception of two small

clusters on western side of the hearth line. The southern portion of the dwelling had a near continuous distribution of flakes paralleling four of the hearths and

there may have been a separate concentration in the

middle near two hearths, as well as a separate concentration paralleling the three northernmost hearths. If,

for the sake of argument, we accept Crigor'ev's

dwelling boundary, it would appear that the longhouse

dwelling was surrounded by storage pits and there

might have been some external lithic reduction or dumping of waste from inside the dwelling.

It is interesting to compare the spatial patterns of

the archaeological longhouses described above. There

are obvious parallels between Seguin's northern

Quebec longhouse, the Late Dorset structures and the

Kostenki situation— clusters of debris on either side of

central hearths (or central "features" in the case of Late

Dorset)— although the Kostenki pattern is one of less

discrete clusters with much more overlap between

what may or may not have been individual hearth-centered distributions. The more continuous distributions

at Kostenki are similar to the wall-related concentrations in the Ungava Late Dorset longhouse. Each of

these cases varies somewhat in the position of relativeTHEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 37
I'-

David Site Thule District ^ stone wall

hearth

j I lithic concentration

^2 tool outlier — 2m scale

(a)

UNG-11

Ungava Bay

J house wall

hearth Q rock feature

1 lithic concentration — 2m scale

(b)

0' o

(!)(£]

(c)

Kostenki I Russia

inferred wall ^ hearth

[~~]

lithic concentration

2m scale

/5/ /.afe Dorset and Russian Upper Paleolithic longhouses. (a) Late Dorset longhouse, David site, Thule district, Greenland

(after Appelt et al. 1 999 36-40). (b) Late Dorset longhouse, UNC I 1 , Ungava, Quebec (after Plumet 1985: hors texte 9, 10); reproduced by permission of author), (c) Upper Paleolithic longhouse, Kostenki I, Russia (after Crigor'iev 1967:345: repro- duced by permission. Current Anthropology, University of Chicago Press).

ly empty or maintained space: in the Quebec Late PreContact case it is near the walls, in the Late Dorset longhouses it may occur in the center, near the walls,

or at one end of the structures, while at Kostenki it

consists of most of one entire side of the structure.

In sum, these archaeological examples exhibit similar

micro-scale patterns involving feature-centered distributions that probably result from commonalities in body mechanics. But they also suggest that featurecentered distributions were organized into macro-level

configurations through different kinds of social practices or cultural logics. In the case of Maritime Archaic

longhouses we might anticipate that micro-level feature-centered distributions will be similar to those in

the behavioral models, but that their integration into

the dwelling as a whole will be culturally idiosyncratic.

We should now briefly consider some ethnographic

examples that illustrate the mutual structuring of spatial practice and cultural logic.

Ethnography: Social Space and Meaning

The preceding discussion of archaeological spatial

patterning identified some micro-level behavioral consistencies, but the interpretive scope of these observations is limited: "We are left with a bunch of pieces,

but cannot explain why they are assembled the way

they are" (Whitelaw 1994:219). The integration of

micro-patterns into macro-configurations is structured

by differing social and cultural logics that were hinted

at but not illuminated in the preceding discussion. The

behavioral dimensions of dwelling space will now be

related to social and ideological aspects of spatial

organization using ethnographic analogies, beginning

with social organization linkages then shifting towards

the symbolic.

The strongly behavioral ethnoarchaeological studies of spatial patterns have been supplemented by

greater attention to the role of social organization in community patterning. To a great extent this has

focused on the degree to which dwelling proximity in

settlement layouts correlates with social relationships

such as kinship, sharing and labor cooperation (e.g.,

Binford 1991; Gargett and Hayden 1991; Whitelaw

1991; Yellen 1977). Whitelaw's (1991) cross-cultural

study of hunter-gatherer community space concluded

that there are clear linkages between spatial and social

proximity, and that increases in social scale result in more organization or patterning of community structure. In situations involving cooperation in labour or

resource sharing, close spacing of habitations facilitates interaction, but also the monitoring of behavior

and possessions (Whitelaw 1991:168), which plays

into the regulation of cooperation and sharing.

Whitelaw (1 991 : 1 65) notes that linear spatial arrange38 CHAPTER 3
merits are primarily found in arctic and subarctic

regions; strangely, he relates this to dispersal of social

units along shorelines and claims that "...because linear arrangements allow only one or two neighbors,

they do not particularly emphasize the coherence of a

group." Such a conclusion is thin, to say the least, and

it seems absurd to suggest that linear arrangements

such as Maritime Archaic longhouses contribute little

to group coherence. Although cross-cultural generalizations can point to general patterns to be investigated, they are not very context sensitive and in a case

such as hunter-gatherer longhouses, which are very

rare in the ethnographic record, they completely fail

us. It is necessary, therefore, to explore specific contextual studies in order to arrive at a more dynamic

view of spatial patterning.

Archaeological treatment of the meaningful

dimensions of space has built on the seminal work of

Bourdieu (1979) and Levi-Strauss (1963) on dwelling

organization, combined with Ciddens' (1984) structuration theory, the work of diverse human geographers and influences from phenomenology. At the risk

of oversimplifying, the common thread is that space is

organized in accordance with symbolic principles, but

spatial meanings are invoked, reproduced or changed

through human practice (Parker Pearson and Richards

1994:5). Meaningful space is constructed through

social action and, in turn, that construction acts back

upon social action: meaning-laden space is both a

product and precedent of agency. This holds for the

small scale of dwelling sites as well as for large scale

landscapes (Tilley 1994). The following is a nice sum- mary statement of this view, as applied to the organization of housing space:

The house and the body are intimately linked. The house is an extension of the person; like

an extra skin, carapace or second layer of

clothes, it serves as much to reveal and display as it does to hide and protect. House,

body and mind are in continuous interaction,

the physical structure, furnishing, social conventions and mental images of the house at once enabling, moulding, informing and constraining the activities and ideas which unfold

within its bounds. A ready-made environment

is fashioned by a previous generation and

lived in long before it becomes an object of

thought, the house is a prime agent of socialization (Carsten and Hugh-Jones 1995:2).

A focus on the interplay of mind, architecture and

action leads to consideration of the metaphorical role

played by housing as a material representation of social

structure and ideology, either as a mirror or transformation. Seen from the structuralist tradition, components

of houses can represent social divisions and hierarchies, while the dwelling as a whole can give the appearance of unity to opposing principles (Carsten and HughJones 1995:8, 12) or encode cosmological metaphors.

As emphasized above, however, these are not static

abstract structures but codes and materials that are

produced and reproduced through daily practice.

An example of this perspective is Yates' (1989)

structuralist analysis of social space in Sami tents. Gender was structured by divisions into male (back)

and female (front) space, while the generations (parents and young children, versus older children) were

distinguished laterally. In both cases the central hearth

served as the fulcrum of the spatial differentiation. These socio-spatial divisions were paralleled by conceptual divisions based on Sami cosmology, such that

a series of binary oppositions were played out within

the horizontal dwelling space: male/female,

back/front, north/south, winter/summer, sacred/profane, clean/unclean, death/life, hunting/milking, hunting blood/menstrual blood. The hearth was the crucial

center that mediated these oppositions. Furthermore,

the vertical space of the tent was divided into levels

associated with divisions of the heavens, with different

spiritual personages associated with each level.

Consequently, the tent was a locus in which gender

THEORY AND IV1ETH0D IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 39
and other structures were produced and reproduced in

daily practices.

Siberian Nenets tent interiors and camp lay-outs

are also structured by gender divisions and rules for movement (Golovnev and Osherenko 1999:32-39;

Haakanson 2000:82-89). Tent doors normally face

east. Within the tent the central hearth is the anchor

point for an invisible symbolic siyangi line that extends

westwards across the floor and continues outside the

tent in the opposite direction from the entrance. Movement of all people within the tent is restricted to

the front and sides of the hearth because it is not permitted to cross the siyangi line behind the hearth.

Outside the tent, adult women are not permitted to

cross the siyangi line when they are within sight of the camp. This means that women cannot move behind

the tents and must instead depart and return from the

front entrances by following the same path. Women's

work areas are therefore in front of the tents. Although

the movement of adult men is restricted within the tent

it is not restricted outside; the men's work area is

behind the tent where the siyangi line projects westwards. These symbolic orientation and movement regulation principles have consequences for the lay-out of

multi-tent camps (Figure 14). The tents must be set up

in a line along a north-south axis in order to maintain

the principle that women cannot cross the multiple

siyangi lines that extend from the western (back) sides

of the dwellings (Haakanson 2000:219). The spacing

between the tents is related to the nature and closeness of personal relationships (Haakanson 2000:221).

It is interesting to compare this rule-structured linearity of individual dwellings with the linear organization

of Maritime Archaic longhouses. Tanner (1979:73-107) discusses the symbolic

dimensions of space among the Mistassini Cree. For much of the year the Cree use single-family tent

dwellings. When they are used at winter aggregation

sites, Tanner (1979:83) notes they are arranged in a

line. He suggests that a location on one end of the line

will be chosen by the hunting group leader. Single-family dwellings display a consistent pattern of internal

organization. A central hearth is placed back from the doorway and a living area is positioned at the back of

the dwelling behind the hearth and opposite the door.

Each individual has their own place at the rear of the

dwelling, while the front of the dwelling is communal

space. The tent space is also divided by gender, with one side associated with women, the other with men.

Within the gender divisions there are further spatial

positionings in relation to marital status and age. Household items and foods are also ordered in relation

to the gender division. The meat of large animals

(moose, caribou, bear) is stored on the male side,

while that of smaller animals (beaver, etc.) is stored on

the women's side and each gender attends to the proper ritual treatment and disposal of the bones.

This basic pattern recurs when the Cree move to

winter communal dwellings, which are shared by several families. Divisions of male and female space are

maintained, with the proviso that adjacent families

cannot place members of the same gender adjacent to

each other. The hunting party leader selects a position

near the doorway. Tanner (1979:86-87) notes that

"...the move to a communal dwelling brings about a

minimal alteration in the use of domestic space by the

individual commensal group, and the relative autono- my of each group is preserved. " This is consistent with

Fitzhugh's (1985a) interpretations of Maritime Archaic

longhouses. It should be noted, however, that unlike

other frequently cited ethnographic cases (e.g.,

Bourdieu 1970; Carsten and Hugh-Jones 1995; Yates

1989), the organization of Cree interior space is not

structured by geographic or cosmological symbolism

(Tanner 1 979:87).

The eastern subarctic ethnographic record contains sporadic references to large dwellings that could

be called "longhouses." Among the Labrador Innu and

the Quebec Cree a large multi-hearth tent (Innu:

shaputuan) was associated with the makushan cari- bou feast (Henriksen 1 973:35-39; Tanner 1979:162-

1 69, 1 80). Among the Ojibway, bark longhouses were

40 CHAPTER 3
women's path East

corral

women's path

siyangi line

siyangi line siyangi line

siyangi line

siyangi line

firewood

• hearth women's work area

I I sled

men's work area

14/ Spatial organization of a Nenets summer camp (after i-laal<anson 2000:87; reproduced by permission of autlnor).

used by the Midewiwin ritual societies (Landes

1968:133; Steinbring 1 981:252). An Interesting (but

not very well documented) example of symbolic spatial structures in the eastern subarctic is depicted in

an eighteenth century painting by Major George Seton

of a ritual feature constructed by the Cree (illustrated

in McGhee 1996:176). The feature is an enclosure

constructed of tightly-packed, shoulder-high branches

embedded In the ground; judging by the size of the

Cree figures, it must have been at least 25 m long and

5 m wide. At each end of the feature Is an opening

framed by arched tree branches while the central portion of the interior contains one or two hearths, a wooden post embedded upright in the ground and

three presumably dead animals. The Cree (approximately 55 people are depicted within and around the

feature) are mostly seated along the Interior walls.

The feature seems to be a ritual transformation of a shaputuan structure. The foregoing discussion points to several dimensions of variation beyond the strictly behavioral that may contribute to spatial patterning in dwellings. The

problem for many will be: so what? These social and

Ideological dimensions are so culturally specific that

they cannot be Inferred reliably from archaeological

data. But although signifying practices cannot be

inferred reliably, they are obviously an important

source of spatial structure that cannot be ignored. We

can at least engage In contextual studies of spatial

patterning that are open to such Interpretive issues.

With all the foregoing considerations in mind,

methodological strategies for exploring different dimensions of spatial patterning In Maritime Archaic

and Paleoesklmo sites will now be drafted.

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 41
Methodological Strategy for the Spatial

Analysis of Maritime Archaic Sites As emphasized above, a multi-scalar approach is

required if we are to link social interpretations with

patterning in Maritime Archaic dwellings. Three levels

are discussed: micro-, meso- and macro-scales. In each

case model-based interpretation and pattern recognition studies are played off against each other. The

operation of site formation processes must also be

considered.

Inside vs Outside Patterns The first step in analyzing ambiguous distributions

lacking clear architectural features is to distinguish

between patterns likely to have been produced within

dwelling structures versus those indicative of outdoor

activities. According to Binford (1983:156-158, 176-

184), distributions characteristic of dwelling interiors may exhibit the following characteristics: the outer

border of the distribution is sharply constrained

(indicative of a tent wall), hearths are carefully constructed to avoid uncontrolled burning and dispersal

of ash and coals, no drop-toss zones are associated

with hearths due to repeated maintenance activity, and

outdoor dumps may accumulate as a consequence of maintenance procedures (Figure 6b). Maintenance

activities may result in size-sorting of artifactual

remains with a tendency towards smaller items remaining inside dwellings and larger items being transferred

to external dumps (O'Connell 1987). While these suggestions seem to be a reasonable baseline, there are

different ways of organizing internal space and the

degree of maintenance activity may vary with the

length of occupation.

Outdoor activities may be less spatially bounded

than indoor activities: indeed some activities are conducted outdoors because of a need for unconstrained

space or because the activities would be too messy or

disruptive to be conducted within a dwelling (Binford

1983:170). Binford's (1978, 1983:153-156) model of

activities conducted around outdoor hearths postulates the presence of distinct depositional zones related to the features (Figure 6a). Drop zones should occur

in an arc close to the hearths and contain small items

that fell beside the hearth-users. On the opposite side

of the hearth might be a forward toss zone where larger objects were thrown, while behind the hearth-users

is a backward toss zone for larger items. The general

configuration thus includes a size-sorting of objects.

Additionally, the outer edge of the hearth-centered distribution will exhibit a gradual fall-off rather than clear

bounding. Broadly similar patterns may be associated

with other features related to "extensive" activity areas,

such as butchering locales and cooking pits (Binford

1 983: 1 65-1 70). Another characteristic of outside distributions may be a relative lack of maintenance activity, which may result in mostly primary rather than sec- ondary refuse. Nonetheless, a variety of formation

processes may contribute to the "smearing" of these

patterns, resulting in considerable ambiguity

(Stevenson 1 991 ).

Micro-scale Analysis

Initially, micro-scale analysis is directed towards the

identification of relatively discrete behavioral units

defined empirically through pattern recognition studies involving tool and debitage distributions and their

relationships with features. Identification may involve

visual inspection of point plots and density contours,

or the use of quantitative techniques such as /c-means

cluster analysis and correspondence analysis. The contents of /(-means clusters can be compared using contingency table analysis. The distribution patterns

should be interpreted in terms of their status as pri- mary/secondary refuse and be related to body

mechanics and daily practices. These micro-scale patterns can then be coordinated to identify possible

behavioral modules, at which point the ethnoarchaeological models for feature-centered distributions can

be applied. These behavioral modules then become

social-analytical units for defining possible family floor

spaces or longhouse segments.

42 CHAPTER 3
Meso-scale Analysis

Meso-scale analysis is directed towards phenomena

which link modules together, both behaviorally and

socially. Continuous linear distributions of primary

refuse are probably the best indicators of supra-module behavioral patterning, since they are most lil<ely to

be the product of in situ social action. Cross-module

distributions of secondary refuse would be more

ambiguous, as secondary refuse is indicative of maintenance behavior rather than in situ social action. For

example, continuous distributions of small-sized debitage might be a better meso-scale indicator than firecracked rock, since the latter is more likely to be secondary refuse. Cross-module links might also be identified through refitting analyses or more general technological organization studies aimed at mapping the

staging of lithic reduction in different parts of a

dwelling. Other characteristics, such as rock constructions and even the orientation of empty spaces, may

also play a role in identifying meso-scale patterning.

Macro-scale Analysis

Macro-scale analysis is concerned with the overall form

of the dwelling: how its structural logic channels practice, its role as both a material precedent for and product of social action, and how the dwelling form may

represent conceptual structures. These questions may

be addressed qualitatively by identifying patterns of

symmetry, order, repetition and relationships between

communal and private space. Quantitatively, the focus

is on comparing the contents of individual modules to

identify patterns of repetition or variability that may be

related to social similarities or differences. These patterns can be assessed using simple contingency table comparisons of module content, or in the case of larger structures, correspondence analysis.

Although these three analytical levels have been

presented in a sequence from micro-analysis to macroanalysis, this does not imply that one must begin with

the former and end with the latter. Indeed, as will be

shown in Chapter 6, it may be useful to begin with an

assessment of overall structural patterns at the macrolevel before turning to micro-level analysis.

Consequently, the analytical process requires a multiscalar circularity that might be considered "hermeneutic" (Hodder 1999).

Formation Processes

The analytical strategy discussed above would be

incomplete without discussion of relevant site formation processes. To some extent these will be specific to

individual localities, but several general observations

can be made. Natural formation processes are the best

understood. The properties of the sediment matrix in

which the cultural material is deposited is a major factor complicating spatial relationships. The Maritime

Archaic selection of sandy beaches raises problems

because sand is an unstable surface subject to deflation and redeposition. Such instability may result in

considerable vertical movement, possibly size-sorting

of artifacts, and the destruction of certain features.

Stable gravel surfaces may present fewer problems,

but on cobble beaches there may be a pronounced

trickle-down effect of smaller objects between the

rocks. Horizontal movement related to occupation

activity is more likely to "smear" distributions in sand

deposits than in gravel or cobble sediments. Aeolian

processes in sandy sediments may also displace artifacts horizontally. Other natural formation processes

of relevance to the study area include tree-falls and

frost action, both of which may cause vertical and horizontal shifts in artifacts and obliterate features.

As far as cultural formation processes are concerned, most ethnoarchaeological research has

focused on the implications of site maintenance for

generating different patterns of primary and secondary

refuse accumulation. Maintenance behavior is expected within dwellings, but the degree of implementation

may vary with the length of occupation. Preventive maintenance (Binford 1 983:1 77) would involve periodic clearing of primary refuse from dwelling floors and

deposition of the waste outside or in less-used porTHEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 43
tions of the dwelling. This behavior may be recognizable in dump formation and size-sorting of artifactual

material (Binford 1983:177; O'Connell 1987).

However, refuse disposal patterns may also be affected by symbolic rules for the preferential deposition of

certain items. At frequently re-occupied sites, such as

the tombolo beaches used during the Early-Middle

Maritime Archaic, there is a high likelihood of

palimpsest deposits. Additionally, there might be

repeated cannibalization of earlier dwelling structures

for construction materials, although this might be difficult to identify in ambiguous spatial distributions.

Paleoeskimos: Axial Features and Bilateral

Organization

A large collection of papers in the journal Etudes/

Inuit/Studies (LeBlanc and Nagy 2003) provides a good

overview of the range of variation in Paleoeskimo

architecture. Paleoeskimo dwellings consisted of four

principle types: (1) tent structures, often associated

with central hearths, which occur in both Early and Late Paleoeskimo contexts, (2) semi-subterranean houses,

found only in Dorset, (3) longhouses, also found only

in Dorset (although Susan Rowley mentions a three- roomed "longhouse-like" Pre-Dorset feature^ cited in Ramsden and Murray 1995:106; also Rowley and

Rowley 1997:274), and 4) snowhouses, for which

archaeological traces are absent or enigmatic. The

present discussion is oriented primarily towards tent

structures, since these are the focus of the analyses to

follow, but semi-subterranean features are mentioned

to the extent that they display features in common

with the tent dwellings. Longhouses were discussed

previously in the Maritime Archaic section.

Early Paleoeskimo tent dwellings display a variety

of morphological characteristics. They may be

ephemeral, consisting of little more than a cluster of

rocks and associated lithics and bone, but in other

cases they are more distinct features consisting of a

box-hearth with or without a surrounding tent ring.

The most discussed dwelling form is the mid-passage

or axial feature, which is best known from the High

Arctic, Greenland, Labrador and Ungava. These features consist of a central box-hearth, sometimes

packed with cooking/heating stones, from which double lines of rock dividers extend outwards to separate

a structure into two halves. They may or may not

include an encompassing tent ring (e.g.. Figure 1 5a).

In Greenland there are also finds of what have been

termed "platform dwellings," consisting of box-hearths

associated with rock pavements (Olsen 1 998). These

structural variations have been treated largely in terms

of seasonal differences, with some researchers arguing

that the more substantial features with hearths and

tent rings represent winter dwellings while the more

ephemeral features indicate summer dwellings or winter snowhouses (Cox 1978:98; Maxwell 1985:98; cf.,

Savelle 1984). Analyzing Pre-Dorset structures from

Prince of Wales Island, Ramsden and Murray (1995)

suggested that faunal associations imply the opposite

inference: substantial features were used during the summer while ephemeral features represent winter

dwellings. Knuth (1 967:43) concluded from his work in

northern Greenland that it was impossible to distinguish summer/winter dwellings; the housing tradition was by nature insubstantial and highly transportable.

A recent integration of Knuth's data underlines the difficulties of seasonal interpretation (Gronnow and

Jensen 2003:337).

Less attention has been paid to Dorset tent

dwellings. In some cases these also incorporate an

axial feature principle, sometimes with slab pavements

and soapstone vessel support rocks, and they may or may not be encompassed by tent rings (e.g., R.Jordan

1980:611; Lemoine et al. 2003; Sutherland 2003;

Chapter 9 in this volume). Such features were presumably used from spring to fall.

Detailed studies of the spatial patterning associated with Paleoeskimo structures have been limited.

Researchers often publish floor plans of structures

with their associated artifacts, but these are generally

presented as site documentation, with little attention

44 CHAPTER 3
15/ Early Paleoeskimo axial features, (a) Peary Land, North Greenland (after Knuth 1967 plate 7; reproduced by permission

of EHESS/CNRS), (b) bilateral model analytical subdivisions.

to behavioral or social analysis. The first attempt to

address spatial analysis problems was that of Dekin

(1976), who used simple quantitative methods in what

he termed "elliptical analysis" to explore spatial patterning at the Pre-Dorset Closure site on south Baffin

Island. Dekin addressed several questions: (1) the general nature of the locality (dwelling, outdoor), (2) the

nature of the dwelling (tent, snow house, etc.), (3) the shape and configuration of the tent, (4) the entrance

location, and (5) internal activity organization. These

questions were constructed with the help of general

ethnographic expectations and then presented as

hypotheses to be tested. His method consisted of constructing two ellipses around the distribution, one representing the hypothesized outer edge of a tent, the

other a possible internal tent skirt. The ellipses were

then divided into four quadrants that were used as

analytical units for the exploration of internal activity

variation. Dekin suggested the internal spatial pattern

might indicate a division of labor by sex. He concluded that the ellipse-quadrant principle, which began as

an analytical technique, fit well enough with the PreDorset data that it could be used as a general model

for Pre-Dorset activity partitioning.

Although valuable as a first attempt at explicit

spatial analysis, the method is highly model dependent. The use of four quadrants as analytical units is

rather coarse-grained, since each quadrant consists of

a ca. 4 m^ block. Consequently, more subtle patterns

on a smaller scale are overlooked and distributions

that overlap quadrants risk analytical amputation. With

these simple quantitative comparisons one would not

expect to be able to "see" much variation other than

that anticipated by the model. More fine-grained pattern recognition techniques might permit a fuller

exploration of the spatial structure and they would be

less model dependent.

Besides Dekin's effort, perhaps the most explicit

attempt to develop a methodology for the analysis of Paleoeskimo structures is that of Stapert and

Johansen's (1996) application of "ring and sector"

analysis and refitting to the early Dorset site

Ikkarlussuup Tima in Disko Bay, Greenland. The site

consisted of two tent rings and what was interpreted

as a sod house. Ring and sector analysis was first developed for analysing hearth-centered distributions on European Upper Paleolithic sites. The technique

plots histograms of item frequencies within concenTHEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 45
trie rings at various intervals (50 cm seemed optimal)

extending out from hearth features. The method was

linked explicitly with Binford's hearth-centered models in that outdoor hearths were expected to produce

unimodal ring distributions of debris reflective of

gradual fall-off, while debris distributions associated

with hearths inside dwellings would produce multi- modal distributions reflective of wall effects. The

rings could also be divided into horizontal sectors to

detect variations in object frequencies that might

depart from the "wall effect" and thereby indicate

dwelling entrances. While innovative, the technique

tends to assume what it sets out to prove— it is very model dependent. Since it is based on quadrat

counts, such coarse resolution may hamper critical

evaluation of model expectations. Furthermore,

inconsistencies between the ring and sector analysis

and the refitting results in the study were downplayed as an "optical illusion" resulting from the use

of different data types (Stapert and Johansen

1996:64-65). One might conclude, however, that

refitting provided more robust results.

Following on the heels of Dekin's analysis was

McChee's (1979:52-55) discussion of the spatial

organization of Independence I dwelling features at

the Cold site on Devon Island. McChee divided these

features into quadrants, with the central point on a

hearth or presumed hearth area, thus creating

front/back and left/right analytical units. Combining

the artifactual material from several features at the

site, he used a chi-square test to conclude that, overall, there were no significant differences between

front/back, but that there were significant differences between left/right. He attributed the lateral differences to men's tool kits (right side: burins, burin

spalls, hunting weapons) vs women's tool kits (left

side: microblades, needles). McChee (1 979:255)

extended this inference by suggesting that nondwelling sites ("camps" and "work stations") which

tend to have high percentages of possibly male tools may indicate primarily male activities.

A serious methodological problem with McChee's

analysis is that he lumped the material from several

different dwelling features into a single contingency

table in order to avoid small sample size problems.

This procedure masks the scope of variation to the

degree that the meaningfulness of the lumped sample must be questioned. Another problem is McChee's use

of the same coarse quadrat technique as Dekin, which

renders the analysis insensitive to finer-grained spatial

patterning, some of which is clearly evident in the Cold

site floor plans. Finally, the assumptions regarding

gender specific tools are problematic, although they

are useful for drawing out possible dimensions of

social variation.

Jensen's (1994, 1996) discussion of Paleoeskimo

sites in the Skjoldungen District of southeast

Creenland presented a spatial analysis of a Dorset

locality that also considered site formation factors

such as distinctions between primary and secondary

refuse. Lithic raw materials proved to be particularly

useful for the analysis, since each raw material type

seemed to have its own depositional history Oensen

1996:156). Different types of raw materials tended to

be found on either side of the axial feature, which

Jensen suggested may indicate a division of space by

gender. Analysis of the circulation and deposition of

lithic raw materials was developed further by

Desrosiers and Rahmani (2003), who used the chame

operatoire method to link lithic reduction sequences to

spatial patterning at a Middle Dorset site in Nunavik,

northern Quebec . A recent unpublished thesis by Mikalsen (2001)

focused on spatial analysis of two Saqqaq sites from

Disko Bay, west Creenland. One locality consisted of a

single tent ring structure while the other contained five

features: one distinct axial feature, a "platform" structure, two hearths and a possible cache. The analysis

employed two approaches: simple cross-tabulations

were used to evaluate bilateral left/right, front/back

patterning, while /c-means cluster analysis was used to

search for other aspects of patterning. There was a

46 CHAPTER 3
tendency for burins, points and knives to be deposited

separately from microblades and scrapers, although

the distinction was not strictly bilateral. This pattern was interpreted as indicating functional and possibly

gender differences in the use of space. At one of the

sites, flakes of chalcedony and crystal quartz seemed

to have more restricted spatial distributions than the

predominant killiaq. The cluster analyses seemed most

useful for Identifying specific activity or depositional

areas, while the cross-tabulations based on the bilateral model revealed patterns in the raw material distribution that were not so evident in the cluster analyses.

While many researchers view the apparent bilateral structure of Paleoeskimo axial feature dwellings as

reflecting a division of labor and space by gender, others have suggested the dualism may indicate a partitioning of space between two co-residential families.

This is unlikely for most Early Paleoeskimo structures. On the one hand, they seem too small for two families. On the other hand, two families arranged on opposite

sides of a mid-passage should result in functionally

redundant tool assemblages on each side, but in some

cases there are functional differences in tools that

depart from these expectations and seem more consistent with a gender interpretation (Jensen 1996). The

co-residential family hypothesis seems more appropriate for Dorset; Harp (1 976:1 32) suggested that Dorset

semi-subterranean dwellings housed joint household

units. A Late Dorset structure at Okak-3 in Labrador was rather large (7-8 m by 6 m) and had an axial feature with three hearths (Cox 1 978: 111); the large floor

area and multiple hearths are suggestive of a joint

household. Some Labrador Dorset tent rings are large

(6 by 3.25 m) and bisected by a central rock alignment,

leading R. Jordan (1980:612) to propose they were

used by two families. It seems beyond doubt that Late

Dorset longhouses were used by multiple households,

although the precise nature of that use is unclear. The possible symbolic meanings of the axial feature have also been considered. Knuth (1983:8-12)

observed that Pearyland Independence I and

Independence II axial features were oriented consistently towards water. He noted that the two halves of

the dwelling structures bisected by an axial feature

could be referred to by Creenlandic terms as: avangna,

("the side on your right when you sit in the tent facing

the water") and kujatd, the left side. A consistent conceptual division was implied, but the point was not developed further. Knuth simply suggested that: "The

hearth passage of the Independence culture seems to

be a kind of universal furniture unit serving as lamp,

heating installation, cooking stove, kitchen cupboard,

firewood box, and clothes chest" (Knuth 1983:12;

Jensen [1 996:1 56] makes a similar observation).

Plumet (1 989:323-324) developed the idea of the

axial feature and bilateral symmetry as a central conceptual theme in Paleoeskimo dwelling organization

for over 3000 years. He suggested a metaphor of the

axial feature as the "backbone" of the dwelling, uniting a family group within individual structures. With a

spatial transformation of the small tent axial principle

into the central axis of the Dorset longhouse, a series

of individual family floor areas were united into a band

unit. Furthermore, Plumet drew a comparison with the

depictions of bilateral symmetry in Dorset art, in which

animal anatomy is often depicted in "x-ray" style in

terms of a backbone with ribs extending outwards.

Following Knuth (1967a:48, 1967b:199), Plumet compared the axial concept with the Sami fireplace and

tent structure, and their symbolic associations. Thus,

through the back door (so to speak), we come to the

relevance of Yates' (1989) structuralist interpretation

of the Sami tent as an analogy for the analysis of

Paleoeskimo axial structures. Odgaard (2001:164, 2003:369-370) associated

the axial feature with circumpolar shamanistic ideas of

the hearth as a gateway to other worlds, such as

mythological "clan rivers." She also suggested that

hearths and axial features were physical markers that

socialized the arctic landscape and served as conduits

for cultural memory, symbolically relating human

groups to the land.

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 47
A final suggestion for possible symbolic meaning

of the axial feature originated from a photograph

shown at a 1999 Arctic archaeology meeting in Copenhagen. The photo, taken by Knud Rasmussen in

southern Greenland, showed a child's play-model of a

kayak made from rocks. There was a prominent central box made of flat slabs, representing the cockpit, while

rocks extended outwards in opposite directions to

indicate the bow and stern. The construction bore an

interesting resemblance to an axial feature.

Methodological Strategy for the Analysis of

Paleoeskimo Spatial Patterns

Most of the Paleoeskimo analyses undertaken

herein will be conducted at the micro-scale level since

the volume deals with probable tent dwellings rather

than semi-subterranean houses or longhouses.

Individual dwellings can probably be considered as

behavioral modules, but if some structures contained

joint families on opposite sides of an axial feature the opposed floor areas might be considered as individual

behavioral modules. The kinds of patterns discussed

on the multi-modular macro-scale for the Maritime

Archaic longhouse— symmetry, repetition etc.— will

thus be treated on the single module level for most of

the Paleoeskimo structures. The discussion here will

be somewhat briefer than for the Maritime Archaic,

since some of the general observations made for that

case apply here as well. The model-based analysis takes its point of departure in a theme discussed repeatedly by researchers:

bilateral organization centered on the hearth and axial

feature. To what extent can patterns in tool types and

raw materials on either side of and within the axial feature be indicative of joint family composition, gender

differences or symbolic organization? Two families

inhabiting different sides of the same dwelling may

produce redundant deposits of tool types on each side

of an axial feature, at least insofar as they are engaged

in similar productive and maintenance activities.

Division of the bilateral dwelling space by gender may

produce different and complementary distributions of

tool types on either side of an axial feature. One might assume, following McGhee (1979) that tool types such

as burins, burin spalls and hunting weapons could be

associated with men's activities, while women's activities could be represented by microblades and scrapers. Linkages of particular lithic tools with gender is,

unfortunately, rather problematic (cf., Gero 1991), but

the interpretation might be more robust if a consistent

pattern was repeated across multiple dwelling structures. Expectations for symbolic patterning are difficult to specify in advance, except insofar as the previously mentioned social and gender structuring of

dwellings is embedded in the symbolic practices of

daily life. One possibility is consistent bilateral patterning in the deposition of lithic raw material types. While

this might simply reflect the practicalities of positioning reduction activities, repeated patterns of spatial

contrasts in raw material types across many dwellings

could be attributable to the symbolic meanings

attached to different materials.

Methodologically, the bilateral model can be

explored using simple contingency tables. The analytical units for dwelling space can be categorized as the

axial feature and two lateral sides, or front and back

zones (Figure 1 5b). An important limitation on such

analyses is that tool frequencies are often so low that

significance tests are impractical, thus conclusions

remain impressionistic and highly vulnerable to sampling error. Reliance on the bilateral model limits interpretive scope, however, by locking us into preconceived analytical units. The broad spatial divisions

used may not be sensitive to smaller scale patterns

which may be significant for understanding behavioral

and formational questions. Site plans often exhibit

small clusters of tools and debitage that might represent discrete depositional and behavioral processes. These clusters must be understood at the microscale

level and then integrated into the modular analysis.

Lithic clusters could be considered using the hearthcentered model, but the presence of an axial feature

48 CHAPTER 3
may inhibit free rotation of bodies around the hearth,

resulting in a distinctly bilateral distribution pattern

rather than the expected arc-like distribution. Also, we

sometimes assume that distinct hearths and axial features were used inside dwellings, but this need not

have been the case where tent anchoring rocks are

absent. Thus the inside-outside hearth question

should be addressed in those cases where structural

evidence is lacking.

The behavioral-formationa! agenda requires different analytical tools than the bilateral model approach;

pattern recognition techniques that are less dependent

on preconceived analytical units. As was the case for

the Maritime Archaic strategy, /(-means cluster analysis

can be used as a model-independent pattern recognition technique for tool distributions. Because it is not

particularly constrained by sample size, the method

seems fairly well suited for Paleoeskimo sites, which

typically consist of relatively small numbers of tools

spread over fairly compact areas. Clustering techniques will be employed to recognize micro-level item

groupings that may be useful for identifying behavior

such as discrete drop or dump zones. The contents of

the resulting clusters can then be compared using contingency table analysis. Point-plotted tools and debitage will be used to consider distribution boundary

questions related to the inside-outside hearth problem

(i.e., the wall effect). Additionally, point-plotted debitage will be used directly to analyze spatial variation

in lithic raw materials, as well as to identify the appropriate quadrat groupings for contingency table analysis of raw materials. Where possible, tool refits can be

used to point to behavioral connections within and

outside of dwelling structures. The use of size-sorting

to distinguish primary/secondary refuse is of minimal

utility for Paleoeskimo material given the consistently

small size of the tools and debitage.

Formation Processes

Most of the formation processes discussed for the

Maritime Archaic are also relevant for Pre-Dorset. A

slight contrast is the tendency for Pre-Dorset sites to

be located on gravel beaches rather than sand. These more stable surfaces might be characterized by less

horizontal smearing and less likelihood of palimpsest

deposits caused by deflation and redeposition.

Dwelling structure cannibalization and recycling of

construction materials is to some extent recognizable

from disturbance of the expected patterns of formalized box-hearths and axial features that are sometimes

present on Pre-Dorset sites.

Notes on the Quantitative Methods

Given that a wide array of quantitative techniques is

readily available for spatial analysis, a few words

should be said regarding the choice of techniques

used here. Besides the obvious requirement that the

techniques should provide information on patterning

relevant to the models being evaluated, the techniques must be appropriate to the data collection format. At

the Maritime Archaic site Nukasusutok-5, much of the

provenience data for two abundant tool classes, utilized flakes and bipolar cores, is limited to quadrat frequencies. This situation necessitates reliance on

quadrat-based analytical methods. Another requirement—partly self-imposed rather than conceptually

grounded—was that the techniques should be methodologically transparent and empirically rich. That is,

they should be relatively simple mathematically and

easy for most readers to grasp, involve minimal statistical transformation of the data and provide a description of the patterning that would enhance the empirical detail rather than cloak it with mathematical

abstraction. The two main techniques used here meet

these demands: /c-means cluster analysis and contin- gency table analysis. A third technique, multivariate correspondence analysis, is less easy to grasp mathematically, but as a data reduction technique it provides

graphic output that can be useful for understanding

the underlying dimensions of variation in complex

data sets. A fourth technique involving a size-sorting

index is more problematic and is used experimentally.

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 49
/<-means cluster analysis (Kintigh and Ammerman

1 982) is employed frequently for the analysis of point

distributions. The technique uses measured distances

(Euclidean) between item types to define circular clusters of cultural material. The clusters are formed by

subdividing the total data set such that intra-cluster

variance is minimized while inter-cluster distance is maximized using the sum squared error (SSE). Cluster

centroids indicate the mean x and y values of the items

assigned to the cluster. There is a degree of subjectivity in determining how many clusters constitute the

best statistical solution. Inflection points on graphic

plots of the %SSE plotted against the number of clusters provide some "objective" indication of the number

of clusters in the best solution. Ultimately, however, it

is our understanding of site context, which is embedded in our model-related preconceptions, that screens

the possible solutions and guides the final decision. An

important shortcoming is that /c-means has the built-in

requirement of circular clusters. Refuse distributions

are, of course, rather more irregular in shape, but the

technique appears to provide fairly robust results

(Blankholm 1 991 :75). Since /(-means analysis does not

include a statistical technique for comparing the contents of the clusters, this function is fulfilled by contingency tables. Correspondence analysis (Greenacre 1993) is a

multivariate data reduction technique used for identifying patterning in categorical data, in this case the

contents of site quadrats. It is based on a chi-square

distance measure applied to a table of units (quadrats)

and variables (tool types, flake raw materials, etc.) and

can be regarded as: "...a method for decomposing the

overall Chi-square statistic. ..by identifying a small number of dimensions in which the deviations from

the expected values can be represented" (StatSoft Inc.

2002). In practice this involves projection of perpendicular axes through the observed frequency profiles

such that deviations from the expected profiles are expressed as geometric distances. Each axis accounts

for a different part of the total variation. In a robust

solution the first two axes should explain most of the

variation. The most important output is a bivariate plot

of units and variables in which their distances from the

origin express their deviations from their expected

profiles. Units positioned closely in the plot share similar relative frequencies of variables. But the physical

distances between unit and variable points in the plots

cannot be interpreted directly because of the way statistical distances are computed; units can be compared

with units and variables with variables, but their spacing relative to each other cannot be given a simple

geometric reading. A general principle, however, is

that each axis of the plot orders the points from one

end to the other such that points at opposite ends of

an axis display contrasting properties. Correspondence analysis is well-suited for quadrat-distributed

data as long as item frequencies are sufficient relative

to the number of units and variables, but only the

Maritime Archaic site Nukasusutok-5 had a large

enough sample and excavated area to justify application of the technique and then only to a limited degree.

In many situations simple contingency table comparisons of grouped quadrats are sufficient to

reveal important dimensions of spatial patterns. This

is perhaps the simplest, most methodologically transparent and empirically descriptive analytical technique in the existing arsenal. Its main drawback is

that it requires cutting spatial distributions into categories and assumptions must be made as to which

categories are relevant or justifiable. In the analyses

to follow, spatial categories are defined in terms of

model-derived units, by model-independent /(-means

clustering results and occasionally by visual assess- ment of the distributions. Where item frequencies

warrant, the chi-square significance test is used to

check for non-random relationships. Where item frequencies are so high that chi-square inevitably would

produce a statistically significant result, as in the

case of debitage frequencies from the Maritime

Archaic site Nukasusutok-5, the test is omitted and

the observed and expected frequencies are compared

50 CHAPTER 3
Inuit fish camp at Comfort Cove, Snyder Bay. (Photo: W. Fitzhugh 1983)

to identify which table cells deviate most from

expected values.

Given the role of size-sorting patterns in the site

formation studies outlined above, Wandsnider

(1 996:353-354) formulated a size-sorting index (SSI)

that can be used to monitor spatial variations in object

size. The SSI summarizes the representation of small and large items in a quadrat, with high negative values

indicating a dominance of large items, high positive

values a dominance of small items, and values near

indicating a mixture of sizes. There are some obvious

drawbacks to this index. First, the cut-off point for

small versus large items is subjective. Second, the

index does not make much sense for the Pre-Dorset

lithic assemblages since they are composed almost

entirely of rather small items. Even in assemblages

with somewhat wider size-ranges a limited number of

items in the large category can be overwhelmed by

"noise" from an abundant small category. Third, the

utility of the index may be limited by the total number

of items used. Debitage assemblages might provide

enough material for meaningful spatial comparisons,

but in assemblages with few tools the index might be

highly susceptible to random effects and it may be difficult to compare widely distributed excavation units

with low item frequencies. Given all these considerations, the index was only applied to the large quartz

debitage assemblage from the Maritime Archaic site

Nukasusutok-5.

Conclusion: Behavioral Space and Signifying

Practices

IVlost of the discussion to be presented in other chapters of this volume is couched in terms of identifying

the behavioral dimensions that might account for

observed spatial patterns. Some of these behavioral dimensions involve the unintended consequences of body mechanics while others involve intentional

THEORY AND METHOD IN THE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL SPACE 51
actions related to site maintenance considerations. These are dimensions for which ethnoarchaeological

middle-range theory building has provided a reasonably robust interpretive framework. The approaches to

the social dimensions of space that were outlined previously mostly fit within the structuralist tradition in

which pre-existing cultural schemas are construed as

generating material culture patterns. This is a cultural

constructionist position in which a frame of meaning is imposed on practice and on nature. Meaning is not

strictly pre-programmed, however, it is activated through practice. Practice draws upon cognitive

schemas but it also responds to precedent practices

and the need for situational improvisation. Although

constructionist approaches are useful counterpoints to myopic behaviorism they fail to capture the "work in

progress" nature of social action as signifying practice

(cf. Ingold 1 993: 1 62). The social structuration of space

is an ongoing and always incomplete work and individual components or sites are only partial sedimentations of processes that stretch over variable scales of

space and time. Spatial patterns therefore may be ambiguous with respect to both function and meaning.

Nonetheless, it is hoped that the methodological

strategies outlined above will help reduce ambiguity

and lead to useful proposals regarding the behavioral and social dimensions of Maritime Archaic and

Paleoeskimo dwelling space.

52 CHAPTER 3
Nulcasusutok Island:

Overview and SurvcucA Sites

The first archaeological fieldwork undertaken on Nukasusutok Island was in 1928 when William Duncan

Strong excavated Inuit communal houses at the site now designated as Nukasusutok-8 and collected from

graves at several locations on the western end of the

island, including Nukasusutok-7. J. Garth Taylor revisited Nukasusutok-8 during his 1966 field study of

Labrador Inuit settlements (Taylor 1966). In 1 973, Warren Hofstra, associated with the Smithsonian

Institution, conducted a brief survey of the island and

recorded Nukasusutok-1 to 7 and Nukasusutok-9.

William Fitzhugh's Smithsonian crew returned in 1975

and 1976 to conduct further surveys, test Nukasusutok-5 and excavate the Late Pre-Dorset structures at Nukasusutok-2.

In 1979 and 1980 the author conducted several

investigations on the island. The Maritime Archaic site

Nukasusutok-5 was excavated in both years and the

Dorset locality Nukasusutok-1 2 was excavated in

1980. Surveys were carried out in both years in order

to revisit previously recorded sites and identify new

ones. Nukasusutok-9 (HcCh-1 1) was the only site that was not relocated. The area surveyed in 1979 was

restricted to the central portion of the island between

Nukasusutok 8 and 10, the eastern end of the island

near Mount Pickle Harbour was surveyed in 1980.

Additional excavations were conducted by the author

at Nukasusutok-5 in 1992 and 1993 and Nukasusutok8 was test-pitted in 1993. In 1997 contract surveys

related to mineral exploration were undertaken by

Gerald Penney (1997), who identified previously

unrecorded features at Nukasusutok-7 on the southwest corner of the island. These features were revisited by the author in 2004.

Table 1 lists the archaeological sites that have

been registered on Nukasusutok Island and their approximate locations are depicted in Figure 16.

Precise point locations are withheld at the request of

the provincial Culture Heritage Division. A total of 14

sites has been recorded, of which eight components

are attributable to the Maritime Archaic, five to the

Labrador Inuit, two to Dorset and one to Late PreDorset. This chapter provides brief descriptions of the minor surveyed sites, most of which are Maritime

Archaic flake scatters. Four sites will be described in

separate chapters: the excavated localities of Nukasusutok-5 (Maritime Archaic), Nukasusutok-1

2

(Early/Middle Dorset), and W. D. Strong's and the

author's activities at Nukasusutok-7 and 8. One significant site will not be considered in detail:

Nukasusutok-2. This important Late Pre-Dorset locality

is described by Fitzhugh (2002), so only a brief sum- mary is provided as follows.

Nukasusutok-1 (HcCh-4)

This locality includes a small Maritime Archaic occupation and two large Inuit fox traps. The Maritime

Archaic component is located on a flat gravel ridge on

the south side of a rock outcrop and has clear views to

the northeast and southwest. To the north the topogNUKASUSUTOK ISLAND: OVERVIEW AND SURVEYED SITES 53
Table 1. List of Archaeological Sites Registered on Nukasusutok Island.

Borden No. Cu Itur6 Sit6 Typ6

Ni J k;i ^ii J jtok1

HcCh-4 M;iritimp Arrh;^ir" Iniiit lithir <ir;ittpr' fn y t"r;i n*;

Nijk;^<iij<^iJtnk-?'^ HcCh-5 y i,^ 1 fp;^t"M rp Hva/p 1 1 i nn

Nijk^^i]^iitok-4 HcCh-6 M^irittmp IViai ILIIII^ 1Arrhpiir \ 1 K.\ \\X\\^ lithir <ir;^ t"t"p

r

Nijki^<iij^iJtnk-S HcCh-7 Maritime Archaic h;ihit;^tinn <iitp

Ni]k;^<sij<;iJtnk-fi HcCh-8 Mpiritimp Arrhptir lithir <^rpittp x

Niik,^<iii<;iJtnk-7 HcCi-8 Inuit^oH hnii<ip tpnt rinn<; nr;^\/p^

Nuka.susutok.-8 HcCh-1 1 nu it rommiinpil <snH hnii^p^ nr-^vp^

Nijk?i*;ij<;iJtnk-Q HcCh-1 1 Maritimp Arrhpiir^?^ lithir <^r;^ ttp

r

N II k;^ j^iijtnk- 1 HcCh-1 2 Mpiritimp Arrh^^ir lithir c;r;^ ttp

r

Nukasusutok-1 1 HcCh-1 3 Inuit tent rings

Nukasusutok-1 2 HcCh-14 Early/Middle Dorset axial feature dwellings

Nukasusutok-1 3 HcCh-1 5 Maritime Archaic lithic scatter

Nukasusutok-1 4 HcCh-16 Maritime Archaic; Inuit lithic scatter; pinnacles

Mount Pickle Harbour-1 HcCh-1 7 Early Dorset lithic scatter Nukasusutok-3 was combined with Nukasusutok-2

raphy drops quite steeply down to the North Harbour

while in all other directions the site is bordered by

lower marshy areas. No elevation above sea level was

taken, but according to the topographic map it must

lie at roughly 65 m asl. The site was first reported in 1973 by Hofstra, who surface collected a single

ground slate flake. The cultural material observed in 1979 was scattered sparsely across a deflated area

about 8 m by 8 m in size. A biface blank of Ramah

chert was surface collected. Flakes of quartz, Ramah

chert, slate and black chert were noted on the surface. The lithic raw materials and high elevation suggest a Maritime Archaic Naksak Complex affiliation. The biface blank (Figure 1 7:c) is large (1 33 mm long),

asymmetric in form, with partial flaking of the dorsal

surface (mostly on the margins), and a largely unre- touched flat ventral surface with cortex. The unusually

high elevation suggests the locality was probably used

when the shoreline was lower, perhaps as low as 30 m

asl., for which a date of ca. 6800 B.P. would be expected, although an even later date is possible.

The two Inuit fox traps are positioned on top of a

rock outcrop. They are constructed of large rocks and

boulders and contain sliding door openings.

Nukasusutok-2 (HcCh-5)

This important Late Pre-Dorset locality was visited by

the Smithsonian Institution in 1975 and two axial feature dwellings were excavated in 1 976 (Cox 1 978:1 01

;

Fitzhugh 1976:1 35). The site is located on a broad

gravel beach at roughly 60-65 m asl., about 30 m

northwest of the Maritime Archaic site Nukasusutok10, which is situated higher up on the crest of the

beach sequence. The material has recently been published by Fitzhugh (2002); the following site description summarizes his report. The two axial feature dwellings lay virtually sideby-side, only 14 m apart. Both were oval, bi-lobed in

form, with their axial features oriented towards the

north (seaward). Most of the tent anchor rocks at

Structure 1 had been removed and piled on top of the

axial feature, but Structure 2 was intact, with a sur54 CHAPTER 4
/ 7/ Tools from surveyed Maritime Archaic Sites on Nukasusutok Island, a: bipolar core, Nukasusutok-4:

b: stemmed point, Nukasusutok-4: c: asymmetric biface

blank, Nukasusutok-I , d: miniature celt, Nukasusutok-1 3, e: celt fragment, Nukasusutok-6: f: bipolar core, Nukasusutok-I 4.

rounding ring of anclioring rocks (Figure 18). Both

structures were ca. 4 m front-to-back along their axial

features and ca. 5 m wide. In both cases the axial features consisted of three main components placed in a

front-to-back sequence: (1) an enclosed box-hearth of

vertical flat slabs containing "boiling stones," (2) a

slab-lined hearth depression for heating the stones, and (3) a semi-open hearth bordered by inclined rock

slabs and containing burned fat, interpreted as a lamp/cooking hearth. Both structures also had small wing pavements extending from one side of the axial

feature at the rear of the dwelling.

Small lithic assemblages were associated with

each dwelling. Structure 1 had only 7 tools, all inside

the structure. Structure 2 had 61 tools and 282 flakes, most of which were located outside the front of the

dwelling. Those lithics deposited inside the structure were primarily associated with the axial feature and

hearths; few were found in the lateral compartments.

Tool types included: burins (ground and unground, some with waisted hafting constrictions), burin spalls,

bifaces (two side-notched), an endscraper, microblades, microblade cores of crystal quartz, celts and utilized flakes. The most remarkable characteristic of the assemblage was the 10 celts associated with Structure

2, an unusually large number for an outer coast PreDorset site. The ground and waisted burin forms and sidenotched bifaces are Late Pre-Dorset types. The axial

feature dwellings are similar to the Independence II

structures described by Knuth (1968). A single radiocarbon date run on burned fat procured from the

hearth in Structure-1 was assayed at 331 5 ± 85 B.P., or 3055 ± 85 B.P. with C-1 2/1 3 correction. Cox (1978:98) suggested the more substantial

Pre-Dorset axial feature structures, such as those at

Nukasusutok-2, may be fall or winter dwellings (cf., Ramsden and Murray 1 995). Fitzhugh (2002:1 53-1 55)

concluded that Nukasusutok-2 might have been a winter settlement used from October to December, based on several characteristics of the site: (1) its unusually

high elevation and great distance from the contemporary shoreline, (2) the solid and carefully planned construction of the dwellings as well as the presence of

fire-cracked rock and burned fat, (3) the abundance of

celts, presumably used for chopping firewood and

frozen meat, and (4) the lack of lithics in the lateral compartments may indicate the presence of bedding.

On the other hand, Fitzhugh (2002:1 55) also noted

several features that might militate against a lengthy

winter occupation: a small lithic assemblage indicative

of minimal accumulation, a lack of storage caches, and

predominantly outdoor lithic reduction activities. A

NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND: OVERVIEW AND SURVEYED SITES 55
] 8/ Nukasusutok-2 Structure

summary of Pre-Dorset settlement patterns emphasized the general assumption that winter settlement was located in the inner bays or interior, in light of

which Nukasusutok-2 is a singular anomaly (Fitzhugh

2002:1 55-1 56).

Nukasusutok-4 (HcCh-6)

Recorded by Hofstra in 1973, this Maritime Archaic

site was revisited in 1979. It is located at the western end of a long tombolo beach near the center of the

island and is probably ca. 70 m asl., near the marine

limit. Exceptional views may be had northeastwards

down North Harbour and across Wyatt Harbour to the

south. The eastern portion of the beach surface is

extremely rocky while the western end is vegetated

with crowberry, lichen and small groves of spruce

trees. Several small gravel-cobble blow-outs in the center of the beach were probably the source of the tools

collected by Hofstra: a large Ramah chert biface midsection, a quartz biface tip, two quartz bipolar cores,

five utilized flakes (two slate, three quartz) and one

ground slate flake. The 1979 surface collection consisted of the basal fragment of a Ramah chert point

with a relatively compact stem (Figure 1 7:b) which seems stylistically earlier than those from the

Nukasusutok-5 components believed to date 5600-

5300 B.P. (Chapter 8). A small test excavation of 7 m^ was placed in the

central portion of the beach and a 1 m^ test pit was

located 32 m to the south near the edge of the beach. The in situ deposits consisted of a thin (4-5 cm) mantle of vegetation and humus underlain by an intermixture of cobbles and brown sand. A small charcoal sample was procured in the central excavated area from a

possible hearth associated with a faint red ocher stain,

but the sample was insufficient for conventional radiocarbon dating. The only implements recovered from

the excavated units were a Ramah chert biface fragment, a utilized flake of the same raw material and a

quartz bipolar core (Figure 1 7:a). The small debitage

collection, totalling 103 flakes, was composed of 73.5% quartz, 19.6% Ramah chert and 6.9% "others"

56 CHAPTER 4
(the latter including slate, gray quartzite and an

igneous material). The paucity of cultural material indicates this site was a small temporary camp, with the

wide separation of the surface scatters suggesting several discrete occupation loci. About 100 m east of the excavation was a low

rock mound situated 20 m back from the northern terrace edge. The mound lay on top of a sand-gravel

beach and was oval, 3.50-3.75 m by 4.0-4.5 m in size

and ca. 0.50 m high. It was bordered by seven large

boulders and filled in with loosely packed 40-60 cm

and larger boulders, heavily encrusted with black

lichen. Since the feature resembled a Maritime Archaic

burial mound it was photographed vertically with a

bipod, after which the upper mantle of rocks was

removed. This revealed a "box" formed by five very

large boulders embedded in the beach with smaller

rocks placed within. After additional bipod photography more rocks were removed from the box until

sandy gravel was encountered and excavation continued through silt and rocks, terminating at 1.25 m

below the surface since no trace of cultural material was found. It is uncertain whether this was a cultural

feature.

Nukasusutok-6 (HcCh-8)

Nukasusutok-6 was recorded by Hofstra in 1973 and was revisited in 1979. It is located on the western side

of Wyatt Harbour at the opening of an east-west trending pass and lies on a partially deflated raised beach at

ca. 30 m asl., which can be maximum dated to ca. 6800

B.P.. The topographic location of the site suggests the

terrace was inhabited when the pass was a narrow

marine passage that separated what is now a peninsula from the mainland. This constriction may have been

a good spot for sealing or fishing, but the sparse cultural remains indicate the site was only used briefly. The cultural materials occurred in three small

localities that extended along the terrace front for about 25 m. Each locality was a debitage scatter of

6-8 m^ in size. Flake raw material data were collected

at each locus by counting the items found within a 1 m

diameter sampling circle at the center of each distribution (Table 2). Quartz constituted 91-96% of the flakes

sampled, slate 4-15%. Slate varieties present included

green, red, mauve and gray-banded materials. Only one Ramah chert flake was observed, but being outside the

sampling units it was not included in the table counts.

Table 2. Nukasusutok-6 Flake Raw Materials

L-1 L-2 L-3 N %

N % N % N % TOTAL

Quartz 71(95.9) 50(84.7) 6(92.4) 182(91.5)

Slate 3 (4.1) 9(15.3) 5 (7.6) 17 (8.5) TOTAL 74 59 66 199

Hofstra's 1973 surface collection included a celt fragment, two quartz utilized flakes and two quartz bipolar cores. The only tool was found in 1 979 was a badly

weathered miniature celt bit made of yellow-green

slate (Figure 1 7:e), which is comparable to those from

the Maritime Archaic Naksak Complex.

Nukasusutok-9 (HcCh-1 1) Nukasusutok-9 was registered by Hofstra in 1 973 but it was not possible to relocate it in 1979. According to

the scanty site records it was located at the western end

of the pass that separates the Wyatt Harbour Peninsula

from the mainland. The only materials collected from

the site were two utilized flakes of Ramah chert.

Nukasusutok-10 (HcCh-12)

Nukasusutok-l is a Maritime Archaic occupation

located on a raised gravel-boulder beach on the eastern arm of the island, ca. 75 m asl., near the marine

limit. It is situated slightly above and about 30 m

southeast of the Late Pre-Dorset structures at

Nukasusutok-2. The best view from the locality is

across the North Harbour. The site was discovered during the 1976 Smithsonian excavations at NukasusutokNUKASUSUTOK ISLAND: OVERVIEW AND SURVEYED SITES 57
2. A revisit in 1979 indicated that surface traces of

Maritime Archaic activity were limited to two small concentrations of quartz debitage and numerous large

chunks of quartz scattered intermittently among the

boulders along the crest of the beach. Few Ramah chert

flakes were observed. A large vein of quartz, 18 m

long, 1 m wide, was exposed on the side of the hill to

the northeast. This, and the large quantity of shattered

quartz, suggested that one of the functions of

Nukasusutok-1 might have been as a quarry site.

Smithsonian surface collections included a small oval

quartz biface and two biface fragments of Ramah

chert. No tools were found during thel979 visit.

Fitzhugh (personal communication) suggested there

might be a Maritime Archaic boulder structure at the

crest of the raised beach, but observations in 1 979 and

a brief visit in 1992 failed to identify any structural

remains. The high elevation and the quartz-dominated

lithic material suggest an early Naksak Complex affiliation.

Nukasusutok-1 1 (HcCh-13)

This site consists of Inuit tent rings located at the tip

of the peninsula that forms the western boundary of

North Harbour.

Nukasusutok-1 3 (HcCh-1 5) Nukasusutok-1 3 is a small Maritime Archaic site located on the south side of the island, ca. 1 km east of

Wyatt Harbour, on a 65 m asl. raised beach that may

have been a tombolo beach at the time of occupation.

A good view of the sea is available to the south.

Cultural materials consisted of a dense oval concentration of quartz debitage ca. 3 m in diameter with other

flakes scattered about more diffusely for a total exposed area of 20 m^. Two meters west of the quartz

concentration was a 4 by 3 m oval alignment of cobbles that may have been a structural feature. A 1 m^

test pit was excavated into a vegetated area adjacent

to the quartz concentration, but only two quartz flakes were encountered. Two 1 m diameter circular sampling

units were used to generate raw material counts for

the lithic scatter. Table 3 shows that 96 % of the material was quartz and 3 % Ramah chert. Outside the sample units two red quartzite flakes were also observed.

Tables. Nukasusutok-1

3

Flake Raw Material Frequencies

L-1 L-2 TOTAL

N % N % N %

Quartz 210 (96.3) 14 (100.0) 224 (96.6)

Ramah Chert 8 (3.7) 8 (3.4) TOTAL 218 14 232

The only tool recovered from the site was a virtually

complete miniature celt of green slate (Figure 1 7:d), which was found on the surface 2 m south of the test

pit. The lateral edges of the implement are bifacially

flaked and grinding is concentrated at the bit,

although it also extends over three-quarters of the

tool. This form is typical of the Naksak Complex. The

high elevation of 65 m suggests the site is fairly early

in the Maritime Archaic sequence, but the locality was

probably occupied when sea level was substantially

lower than the beach terrace.

Nukasusutok-14 (HcCh-16)

This small Maritime Archaic locality is situated on a

bare gravel tombolo beach near the middle of the

island, 1 km west of Mount Pickle Harbor. No precise

elevation was taken, but the site probably lies at 30-35

m asl. It consists of a 5 m diameter scatter of quartz

debitage at the easternmost end of the raised beach. A Ramah chert bipolar core (Figure 1 7:f) and a slate

flake were surface collected. No Ramah chert flakes were observed on the surface.

Mount Pickle Harbour-1 (HcCh-17)

The 1980 survey registered a Dorset site on a terrace

overlooking the small harbour on the eastern end of Nukasusutok Island. A surface collection of 24 tools was procured. Four Ramah chert flakes and four

58 CHAPTER 4
« A I f a b c d e

19/ Dorset Tools from Mount Pickle Harbour- 1. a, b: triangular endblades; c: endblade on microblade; d, e: distally retouched microblades; f: ground schist; g-i: microblades.

nephrite flakes (one ground) were also collected. The

tool classes are described below.

Tool Descriptions

Triangular Endblades (n=3) All three triangular endblades are made of Ramah chert. Two are proximal

fragments. One of these, which may be unfinished, has

a straight, bifacially-thinned base (Figure 19:a). The

other is small (12.8 mm wide) with a straight-edged

indentation at the base that produces small spurs at

each corner (Figure 1 9:b). The third specimen is a bifacially flaked distal fragment; its plano-convex crosssection and width suggest it was made on a microblade (Figure 1 9:c).

Tip-Fluting Spalls (n=4) All four tip-fluting spalls are made of Ramah chert. Two are complete or nearly complete, one is a proximal fragment, another a medial

fragment. All are primary spall removals.

Microblades (n=l 3) Twelve of the 13 microblades are made of Ramah chert, one is made of crystal quartz;

examples are illustrated in Figure 1 9:g-i. Four are proximal fragments, five are medial fragments and three are

distal elements. For the five specimens from which reliable measurements can be obtained, width ranges from

7.9-11.3 mm. Six specimens exhibit traces of utilization, while two are deliberately retouched. The

retouched specimens are both distal fragments and

both have been modified to create pointed tips. One

example has one lateral edge retouched mostly on the

dorsal side with less retouch ventrally, while the other

lateral edge is mostly retouched ventrally (Figure 1 9:d). The other implement has slight ventral retouch on both

edges, limited to the tip (Figure 19:e). It is unclear

whether these are finished products or whether they

were intended to be retouched points on microblades

similar to Figure 1 9:c.

Utilized Flakes (n=3) All three utilized flakes are made

of Ramah chert.

Ground Schist (n=l) A small bar of ground schist is

illustrated in Figure 19:f.

Discussion

This small surface collection does not provide a solid

basis for dating, but certain characteristics can be

pointed out. The relatively straight-based endblades,

together with the tip-fluting spalls, suggest an Early

Dorset or early Middle Dorset date. The retouched

point on a microblade (and possibly the distally

retouched microblades) may also indicate a relatively

early Dorset phase.

NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND OVERVIEW AND SURVEYED SITES 59
20/ Nukasusutok-5 in its landscape. View to the west.

60 CHAPTER 5
NulcasusutoL-^:

Descriptive Overview

Nukasusutok-5 (HcCh-7) was discovered in 1973 by Warren Hofstra (associated with the Smithsonian

Institution). The site was test-pitted in 1 975 by William

Fitzhugh (1 976:1 32-1 33, 1 978:77) and additional surface collections were made in 1976. These surveys

indicated the site was large, extending for at least 1 00

m along a tombolo beach, with rich deposits of tools,

debitage and charcoal. A hard soil deposit observed in one of the test pits was initially thought to be fat-consolidated sand (Fitzhugh 1978:66). Radiocarbon dates

of 5575±90 B.P. and 4645±65 B.P. suggested the site

pertained to the Middle Maritime Archaic period,

although the spread of the dates implied the presence

of more than one component. All of these factors indicated the site was a prime candidate for more intensive

investigation, so the author undertook excavations

there in 1 979 and 1 980 (Hood 1 981 ). During the early

1980s, Fitzhugh built up a more detailed picture of

Maritime Archaic dwelling structures. By the early

1 990s, when the author began to re-evaluate his previous work, it was evident that some of the conclusions

regarding spatial patterning were faulty.

Consequently, in 1992 and 1993 additional excavations were implemented in order to clarify the spatial

patterning at the site. This report combines the results

of all field seasons and supercedes all previous interpretations.

Discussion of Nukasusutok-5 extends over five

chapters. The primary function of this chapter is to

provide a general background for the spatial analyses

to follow. It begins with an overview of the site and its

physical surroundings, moves on to an outline of the

excavation layout and methods, then presents a

description of the excavation results from the central

subarea of the site, focusing on the features identified.

Spatial patterning at the central subareas is discussed

in Chapter 6, while description and analysis of the

other subareas is found in Chapter 7. A description of

the tool assemblages is provided in Chapter 8. Finally,

Chapter 9 compares the subareas and draws general

conclusions regarding the significance of Nukasusutok-5 for the study of the Early/Middle

Maritime Archaic.

The Site and its Environs

Nukasusutok-5 is positioned in an extremely well-protected location deep inside Wyatt Harbour (Figure 16).

Situated on raised beach terraces 28-31 m asl. (Figure

20), the site is surrounded by hills to the east, west and north that provide fair protection from the prevailing westerly wind, but northeasterly gales are liable to sweep the beach ridge since their force is only partially deflected. The southwest side of the raised beach

drops steeply down to Wyatt Harbour, while the northeast slope is of moderate gradient. A paleoshoreline

projected along the lowest occupied elevation of 28 m

produces a tombolo beach that would provide access

to the sea from both sides of the site. This tombolo

beach would have been an attractive settlement space

with shorelines even lower than 28 m because its gradNUKASUSUTOK 5 DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 61
21/ Nukasusutok-5 main beach terrace. Area 1 in foreground, Area 2 in center. View to the north.

ual northeast slope would continue to provide good

boat landing possibilities.

The beach upon which the main part of site is

located is about 120 m long, trending northwestsoutheast, and ranges from 30-40 m wide across its

crest (Figures 21 and 22). The northwestern end terminates at the base of a 1 50 m high hill and the

southeastern end is bordered by a lower knoll, the summit of which is perhaps 1 5-20 m higher than the beach surface. The central and southeastern portions

of the beach are dominated by lichen vegetation

while the northwestern end is endowed with thicker

growth, including dwarf birch and dwarf spruce. Towards the central and western parts of the steep

slope along the south side of the beach, moister conditions and a somewhat sheltered location in the lee

of the beach ridge have facilitated the growth of fairly dense clusters of dwarf spruce and a number of

full-sized spruce trees. On the crest of the raised beach (31 m asl.), several boulders are exposed on

the central surface of the beach and a few tongues of

bedrock are visible at the terrace edge. A small blowout, covering about 50 m^, is located near the southeastern end of the beach and is the only indication of

serious erosion at the site. Otherwise, the deposits

are undisturbed.

A small vein of quartz runs along the face of the

northern hill, not far from its summit. Brief inspection

of this geological feature did not reveal any obvious

signs of quarrying activity, but it is possible that some of the quartz used by the inhabitants of Nukasusutok-5 was procured here. Quartz outcrops

are also found at other places on the island, notably

beside Nukasustok-1 (Chapter 4).

Archaeological Activities and Field Methods

1975 Smithsonian Institution Survey A total of 37 artifacts was surface collected during the Smithsonian surveys of 1973 and 1 975, most presumably originating

in the blow-out at the southeastern end of the raised

beach. Among these artifacts were: four bifacial

points, three flake points, one micropoint, two bifaces,

62 CHAPTER 5
three endscrapers, four flake knives, 25 utilized flakes

and one bipolar core.

Three 1 test pits were excavated during the

1 975 survey. Test Pit A was situated in the central portion of the beach and came down directly on a hearth

that lay in "greasy" black sand mixed with charcoal and

red ocher. Recovered from the unit were a biface tip,

bipolar cores, utilized flakes and 1 61 flakes of quartz,

Ramah chert, slate and Mugford chert. A charcoal sample from the hearth was dated to 5575±90 B.P. (Sl2626). Test Pit B was located 19 m northwest of "A"

and contained a quartz biface tip, utilized flakes and

1 30 flakes of quartz, Ramah chert, slate, and Mugford

chert. Black sand at the base of the deposits, 20 cm

below ground surface, was interpreted as burned fat.

Test Pit C was located 32 m northwest of "B" near the

northwestern end of the beach. It contained a flake

knife of Ramah chert and two utilized flakes, along

with 5 unretouched flakes. The most remarkable feature of this test unit was a cemented soil horizon

encountered 23-30 cm below the surface, which continued down to 55 cm where it terminated on sterile

beach gravel. This horizon was interpreted as fat-consolidated sand. The cemented zone contained charcoal

and flakes only in its upper 5-7 cm. A charcoal sample

from the cemented horizon was dated to 4645±65 B.P.

(SI-2527).

1979-80 Excavations The 1979 fieldwork addressed

four main problems: (1) clarification of the divergent

radiocarbon dates, (2) evaluating whether the cemented soil horizon was a cultural deposit of fatconsolidated sand, (3) the collection of intra-site

activity patterning data, and (4) elucidation of the

relationship between the Naksak, Sandy Cove and

Rattlers Bight Complexes. A brief return to the site in 1980 aimed to resolve questions generated by the

previous year's fieldwork: (1) were there two habitation structures, (2) was there a second, later, component in the central portion of the site, and (3) were a

set of red ocher feature burials?

After the initial mapping procedures were completed a grid was installed on the site using a baseline

running the length of the tombolo beach. Over the two

field seasons, three-person crews excavated a total of

ca. 1 24 m^ in three separate subareas (Figure 22): the edge of the blow-out at the eastern end of the site

(Area 1), the center of the beach (Area 2) and the

south-facing beach slope (Area 3). An open-area excavation was conducted using 2 by 2 m fields subdivided into 1 m^ quadrats as the basic working and

recording units. In 1979, formal tools, utilized flakes and ground slate flakes were recorded in situ. Flake

distribution patterns were recorded on floor plans by a

combination of direct measurement and "eyeballing,"

and the debitage was collected by 1 m^ quadrats. The

excavation proceeded using arbitrary vertical levels

ranging from 5-1 5 cm. Vertical depths were taken from

the ground surface by line level. Virtually all of the

excavation back-dirt was sifted through a 6.4 mm (1/4

inch) screen. In 1980 the excavation at Area 2 was

extended, but because of poor weather conditions and

limited time, debitage was not recorded in situ and

very little back-dirt was screened. Fortunately, only a

small area was excavated and the finds were much

sparser than in the central part of Area 2. After these two field seasons it was concluded that: 1) Area 2 had

evidence for two tent rings with external hearth areas,

2) the red ocher features at Area 3 were unlikely to

have been burials, and 3) the supposed fat-consolidated sand was an extremely well developed iron pan (Hood 1981).

/ 992-93 Excavations In 1 991 -92 a re-evaluation of the

original data in light of accumulated information on

Maritime Archaic dwelling structures indicated that the

previous interpretation positing two tent rings was

incorrect. Instead, it seemed possible that some kind

of rectangular structure was present. A report from

Fitzhugh's brief visit to the site in 1985 (Smithsonian

site record files) speculated on the presence of a longhouse structure running down the center of the beach.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 63
22/ Nukasusutok-5 excavation layout.

y//A///JV//^//Y'^A'^^y!(//^//A N

I I Area2A ^ Area 2B

[v] Area2C

25/ /^reo 2 subareas.

44x70y

Y/2l Vegetation/peat

I I Gray leached sand

Brown sand

[ ;| Dark brown mottled sand

Wk\ Yellow sand

24/ Area 2A soil profile.

Consequently, the goal of the 1992-93 fieldwork was to

extend the original Area 2 excavation towards the northwest

and southeast to evaluate the

possibility that the spatial patterns reflected the presence of a

longhouse.

The field methods

employed in 1992-93 were

slightly different than those

used in 1979-80. Debitage was

collected in 50 cm^ quadrats

and the vertical depths of all

retouched artifacts, rocks and

other features were determined

with an engineer's level. As in

1 979, the flake distribution patterns were recorded through a

combination of direct measure- ment and "eyeballing" and all

back-dirt was screened through

6.4 mm mesh. In 1992 the

excavation consisted of a rectangular field of 24 m^ (Area

2B) which formed a northwest- ward extension of the original

Area 2 excavation, while the 1993 effort opened up 27 m^

(Area 2C) to the southeast of

Area 2. In each year the work was accomplished by a two person crew.

Descriptions of the features, pedology, formation

processes and dating of Area 2

are preconditions for making

sense of the spatial patterns.

Because the Area 2 spatial

analysis in Chapter 6 is long

and complex, the text is divided

64 CHAPTER 5
into manageable units by using most of the present

chapter to describe the archaeological context of Area

2. Since the analyses of Areas 1 and 3 are more limited in scope, these subareas are only mentioned briefly

here for the sake of general orientation; details can be

found in Chapter 7.

Area 1

Area 1 was defined as the central and eastern portions

of the blow-out located at the southeastern end of the tombolo beach, ca. 31 m asl. (Figures 21 and 22).

Clusters of rocks exposed in the blow-out suggested

the presence of five or six hearths. In 1 979 a T-shaped

excavation field totalling 16 m^ was positioned at the

edge of the blow-out. Since the excavation did not produce much in the way of tools or additional features,

attention was shifted to the central part of the beach.

Area 2

Area 2 was positioned near the center of the tombolo

beach, 25 m west of Area 1 and at a similar elevation

of 31 m asl. (Figures 21 and 22). A total of ca. 1 24 m^

was excavated over four field seasons. The largest single excavation was in 1979, when ca. 54 m^, was

opened. The 1979 work constitutes most of what is

defined as Area 2A (Figure 23). In 1 980 an additional

16.5 m^ was excavated southwards; this includes the

northern portion of Area 2C. In 1992, 26 m^ was

excavated north of the original excavation; this subarea is referred to as Area 2B. The 1 993 excavation of 27 m^ expanded south of the 1980 limit, extending

subarea 2C. The results of the 1992-1993 fieldwork revealed

that these two extensions differed from the central

area excavated in 1 979-1 980 in that both Areas 2B and

2C exhibited thinner deposits, fewer features, and less

artifactual material. Additionally, Area 2B contained

deposits of fire-cracked rock quite unlike anything in

Areas 2A and 2C. Furthermore, the radiocarbon dates

(see below) indicated chronological differences; Area 2A ca. 5300-5700 B.P. and Areas 2B and 2C both ca.

6000 B.P.. It was apparent that different settlement

phases were represented at Area 2, not a continuous

longhouse structure.

Stratigraphy

A representative soil profile for Area 2A is shown in

Figure 24. In the central portion of the excavation the

vegetation and humus zone (Ifh horizon) ranged from

about 3 to 1 2 cm in thickness with its deepest deposits

found above sub-surface depressions. The base of this

horizon was generally a thin layer of greasy black

humified peat. Cultural material was found occasionally among the roots of the undecomposed vegetation

but was more frequent in the humified peat. A thin,

discontinuous leaching zone (Ae horizon) was found in most of the excavated units. This gray sand layer was

thickest and most prominent above sub-surface

depressions and it contained moderate quantities of

cultural material. Next in the profile was a dark brown

sand, which contained most of the cultural material. Its

distinct dark coloring is mostly the result of humic acid and sesquioxide translocation downwards from the

leached horizon. The depth of this deposit varied considerably. It was quite thin near the northwestern end

of Area 2A (79y line), ranging from 4-8 cm thick, but

at the southeastern end, in the vicinity of several

hearths (44x 70-73y), it ranged from 20-25 cm thick. Among the boulders along the northern periphery of

the excavation the dark brown sand graded into a very

black sand, which overlay the basal beach deposit.

Beneath the dark brown sand was a layer of culturally

sterile yellow sand that graded into a surface of rounded beach cobbles and gravel. This sterile horizon com- menced 8 cm below surface level at the northwestern

end of Area 2A, 14-16 cm below the surface at the

eastern end, and 25-30 cm below the surface in one of

the hearth areas (44x70-73y). In sum, the initial

Maritime Archaic occupation at Area 2A probably

occurred on a sand layer overlying a gravel-cobble surface. Areas 2B and 2C exhibited thinner sand deposits

and markedly less development of a dark B horizon.

NUKASUSUTOK-5. DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 65
During the 1979 excavation at Area 2A there seemed to be a predominantly sterile layer (9-14 cm

below surface) between two different cultural levels

near 46x69y. The upper level tended to have a higher

frequency of Ramah chert flakes. In the first analysis of

the site, several upper levels of adjacent excavation

units for which a later component seemed possible were separated analytically and termed "Occupation 2."

At the time, the grounds for this distinction were ambiguous and the present re-analysis does not clarify the matter. A later component cannot be ruled out,

but the apparent superposition could also be the result

of wind redeposition. In the spatial analysis (Chapter 6)

the debitage patterning in this area is interpreted

as being derived primarily from the 5300-5700 B.P.

occupation.

Features

Four classes of features were identified at Area 2: rock

constructed surface hearths, pit-hearths, irregular

depressions and fire-cracked rock concentrations.

There was also a large flat boulder in the middle of

Area 2A which, despite being a natural feature, seems

significant for the spatial organization of the site and

thus worthy of brief consideration here. The three subareas are treated separately; each feature is described

along with its relevant contextual information. Feature

locations and configurations can be found in Figure

25, while Figure 26 shows a vertical bipod photo of

part of Area 2A.

Area 2A

The Area 2A features occurred in two groups. At the

northern end of the subarea were hearths 1 , 2, 6, 7, 8 and possible hearths 18 and 19, along with depressions 1 to 3. Towards the south were hearths 3a, 3b,

4, 5 and possible hearth 16. In the middle was the

large boulder. These feature groups will be described

from north to south.

Hearth 1 (Figure 27) was situated 25 cm north of

the central boulder and was composed of eight rounded and flat cobbles and a large, slightly inclined, flat

slab. Faint traces of red ocher and a small amount of

charcoal were found among the rocks.

Hearth 2 was located at the north end of

Smithsonian Test Pit A. It consisted of a 75 cm wide

flower petal-like arrangement of large and small flat

slabs. This feature had been exposed to the wind since

66 CHAPTER 5
26/ Area 2A bipod photo.

27/ Area 2A hearth- 1.

1 975, so if any charcoal or red ocher had been present, it was gone by 1 979. Adjacent to the hearth were

an unstemmed flake point of Ramah chert, a Ramah

chert biface preform, a stemmed flake of Ramah chert,

two biface fragments of Ramah chert, a flake knife of

black chert and a schist tablet.

Hearth 6 was 75 cm in diameter and consisted of

a 1 5 cm deep pit surrounded on three sides by four

large rocks, with a small flat slab wedged between two

of the rocks on the southern edge of the pit. The pit was stained with red ocher and filled with a great deal

of charcoal. A crude flake point

of Ramah chert, a utilized flake

of Ramah chert and large numbers of Ramah chert, quartz and

slate flakes were contained

within the pit fill. Nearby the

feature were a flake knife of Ramah chert and a schist tablet.

Hearth 7 was positioned in

the southwest corner of Smithsonian Test Pit A.

According to their field notes,

the hearth was 50-75 cm in

diameter and was composed of numerous small flat slabs and a

single inclined flat slab, accompanied by red ocher and charcoal fill. A Ramah chert biface

fragment, two utilized Ramah

chert flakes and a Ramah chert

bipolar core were found in

direct association. Charcoal

from this hearth was radiocar- bon dated to 5575±90 B.P. (Sl2526).

Hearth 8 was the eastern- most component of what was

interpreted as a series of three

interlocking pits. The pits were

first identified as shallow

depressions filled with humified peat that stood out

clearly from the surrounding dark brown sand matrix. The hearth was a pit, 85 cm long, 35 cm wide, 25 cm

deep, with a roughly bowl-shaped cross-section.

Several small cobbles were positioned along the rim of

the pit and a large rock lay at its base near the southwestern end. The pit fill of dark brown sand was virtually indistinguishable from the surrounding matrix

except for red ocher and a large amount of charcoal.

Charcoal from the hearth was dated 5305±175 B.P.

(UGa-3160). Artifacts found within the pit included a

NUKASUSUTOK-5: DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 67
fragment of a ground slate tool, a Ramah chert micropoint, a slate point tip and a Ramah chert utilized

flake. The hearth basin also contained a large number

of small Ramah chert retouch flakes.

Depressions 1 and 2 formed a linear series with

Hearth 8, but it was difficult to define precisely their

boundaries and thus specify the temporal relationship

of the features by cross-cutting. Depression 1 was 50 cm in width, roughly 1 cm deep and was bordered by,

and contained, several small cobbles. It did not contain

charcoal or red ocher. Artifacts found within the pit

were a utilized flake of Ramah chert and a ground slate

flake. Depression 2 was approximately 1 m long, 75 cm wide, about 10 cm deep, with an irregular bi-lobed

shape. No charcoal or red ocher was present. Artifacts

from the feature included a black chert endscraper and

part of an asymmetric biface of Ramah chert, which

joined with another fragment found just outside the

pit. The irregular nature of these depressions as well

as their lack of charcoal and red ocher suggests they

were of natural origin, perhaps related to wind deflation or tree-throw disturbance.

Near the western edge of the excavation was

depression 3, a shallow irregular feature, 1.4 m long,

90 cm wide and 7 cm deep. It contained several cobbles, a few flecks of charcoal, but no red ocher. A small number of flakes (30-40) were found within its boundaries and two small bipolar cores were located nearby.

Given its amorphous shape and relative lack of charcoal and lithic material this feature is most likely a vestige of deflation or tree-throw activity.

During re-analysis of the site two features were

identified as possible hearths. Near the northwestern

edge of Area 2A was a circular cluster of rocks, ca. 60 cm in diameter, which included a flat slab but lacked

charcoal. This feature was designated as possible

hearth 1 8. Just north of depressions 1 and 2 was a 35 cm by 25 cm oval stain of red ocher mixed with flecks

of charcoal. Cross-sectioning indicated the feature was bowl-shaped and 6 cm deep. It contained only a few flakes. Given vague similarities with the central pit

identified in Area 2B, the feature was designated possible hearth 1 9. The boulder at the center of Area 2A was a large

flat-topped rock, 1 .25 m long, 75 cm wide and 50 cm

high. As discussed in the spatial analysis (Chapter 6),

this natural feature seems to have served as a central

fulcrum in structuring the arrangement of two possible

dwelling modules on the beach. Its surface was

inspected carefully for signs of cultural modification,

but none were identified.

Hearths 3a and 3b were probably two separate

features, but since their degree of interlocking was

unclear in the field they were designated as components 3a and 3b of a single feature. Hearth 3a was a

pit, 0.5 m in diameter, capped on its surface with several cobbles and excavated to a depth of 7 cm to the

top of the sterile yellow sand. Charcoal was found at

the base of the pit and three small red ocher stains

ringed the periphery of the pit bottom. Also at the base

of the pit were three artifacts: a black chert endscraper, a side-notched biface of Ramah chert and a

utilized flake of Ramah chert. The surface of hearth 3b,

which measured 0.75 m in diameter, was a rough

semi-circle of rocks that surrounded a 1 cm deep

charcoal-filled pit. Several cobbles and flat slabs capped the pit surface and a stain of red ocher was

present on the northern edge. At the surface of the

feature were a biface preform of Ramah chert, a bipolar core of Ramah chert, an endscraper of black chert and a schist tablet.

Hearth 4 was ca. 75 cm in diameter and consisted of an oval ring of cobbles surrounding a thin scatter of charcoal. No pit was apparent and no red ocher was found within or adjacent to the feature. Artifacts

in proximity to the feature included a biface tip of Ramah chert, a quartz block core, a Ramah chert utilized flake and a ground slate flake.

Hearth 5 (Figure 28) was marked by an oval

alignment of cobbles and consisted of an oval pit 40 cm in diameter and 1 5 cm deep. The pit contained a

large quantity of charcoal as well as red ocher, which

68 CHAPTER 5
28/ Area 2A hearth-5.

29/ Area 2B under excavation. Fire-cracked rocl< concentrations in foreground and on

northern edge of excavation.

was more granular than the powdery textured material found in the other features. A single rounded

cobble was placed at the base of the pit. Charcoal

from the feature was dated 5670 ±175 B.P.

(UCa-3 1 61 ). Only one artifact was found in the vicinity of the hearth: a utilized flake of Ramah chert.

Depression 4 lay south of hearth 4 and was an

irregular arc roughly 2 m long, ranging between 20- 60 cm wide and several centimeters deep. Although it

contained some rocks there were relatively few

flakes. Its irregular form and

lack of cultural material suggests it may have been of natural rather than cultural origin.

Depression 5, adjacent to

hearth 5, was 60 by 40 cm in

size and contained small rocks and a considerable quantity of Ramah chert flakes along one

edge. Although a cultural origin cannot be ruled out, its

position in the upper portion of

the sediment and its similarity

to depression 4 suggest a natural disturbance.

During re-analysis of the

site, a possible hearth (no. 16) was inferred from a rock feature

1 m northeast of hearth 4. This

feature, 80 by 50 cm in extent,

consisted of a petal-like

arrangement of four flat slabs

along with several other rocks,

but no charcoal association was

reported.

Area 2B

Fire-cracked rock concentrations were the most distinctive

characteristic of Area 2B, covering almost 35% of the excavation surface (Figures 25 and 29). The rock occurred in

thin (<5 cm) "carpets," the most extensive of which

occurred along the northwestern edge of the excavation (83-84y), 1 .8 m northwest of the central pit feature and 1 .2 m southeast of the pit (77-79y units). The

configuration of these carpets strongly suggests they

extend into the unexcavated areas beyond Area 2B. Two smaller concentrations lay immediately adjacent

to the western and eastern sides of the central pit. The

concentration to the east partly superimposed the

NUKASUSUTOK-5: DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 69
30/ Area 2C overview looking North. Area 2A in background.

3]/ Area 2C heanh-9.

edge of the feature, so it must post-date the infilling

of the pit.

In the center of Area 2B was a large pit. The

boundaries of this feature were difficult to discern

within the dark and, at the time of excavation, water- soaked soil matrix. It consisted of an oval basin, 1 .25 m long, 0.90 m wide and 5 cm deep. A few small flat

rock slabs were found in its northwestern section and

a small cluster of rocks lay in its southeastern portion.

Red ocher stains were present on the western edge and

within the feature. Tiny charcoal flecks were found

throughout the pit, but were

mostly concentrated on the

western side. A total of 46 tiny

burned bone fragments were

also present in the northwestern portion of the feature.

Flakes of quartz, Ramah chert, Mugford chert and slate were

found within the basin. Artifacts found within or adjacent to the

pit included a quartz block core,

utilized flakes and ground slate

flakes. Charcoal from the pit

returned a radiocarbon date of 6100±120 B.P. (Beta-581 73).

Hearth 1 1 was positioned

60-80 cm west of the central

pit. It consisted of a cluster of

rocks associated with small

patches of charcoal; some

flecks of red ocher were present

a short distance from the feature. The dispersed nature of

the rocks suggested the feature was disturbed. Charcoal from

the hearth area was dated

6040±90 B.P. (Beta-57124). A

concentration of black chert

flakes lay 25 cm southwest of

the feature's largest component

rock. Nearby artifacts included a quartz block core,

utilized flakes, a bifacial point base of quartz, a biface fragment of Ramah chert and ground slate flakes.

Both the radiocarbon dates and the behavioral

patterning suggest that Area 2B represents an occupation phase separate from Area 2A. Nonetheless, an

important point to consider is the degree of overlap

between the southwestern edge of Area 2B and the

Area 2A occupation, since a tongue of fire-cracked

rock extends over the 50x line into Area 2A. This issue

will be considered in more detail in Chapter 6, but suf70 CHAPTER 5
32/ Area 2C hearth- 1 2.

fice it to say that while there is

a high likelihood of a

palimpsest deposit in the 49-

50x area, there are reasonable

grounds to use the 50x line as a

practical boundary between the

two occupations.

Area 2C

As will be established in

Chapter 6, south of the south- ernmost hearths at Area 2A

there was a radical decrease in

the density of lithic material

that continued until a concentration of lithics was encountered in the southeastern

corner of Area 2C. This pattern, along with a radiocar- bon date, suggests that Area 2C is an occupation

phase separate from Area 2A. Six hearth features were

present at Area 2C and these will be described in

sequence from north to south (Figures 25 and 30).

Hearth 9 (Figure 31) stood out as the most unique

and well constructed (or perhaps best preserved) hearth

feature at the site. It was roughly circular, 1.0 m in

diameter, consisting of an interior floor with several flat

stones that was surrounded on three sides by flat slabs,

the tops of which were inclined inwards towards the

center of the feature. These inclined slabs were backed

by cobbles. The placement of the rocks suggests the

inclined flat slabs may have been wedged upright to form a three-sided hearth box open to the north. Very

little charcoal was found within the feature, but a thick

stain was situated just east of its open side. This charcoal deposit may have resulted from intentional

removal of the hearth contents. The vicinity of hearth 9 was virtually devoid of tools and debitage. A utilized

flake of black chert was found in the hearth interior and

a large schist tablet lay to the east of the feature. The feature designated hearth 1 had two components. On the east side was a small pit, 40 cm in diameter, 1 5 cm deep, the base of which contained a small

pocket of charcoal beneath a flat cobble. It was similar

in form to hearth 5. No cultural materials were associated with this feature. Ca. 60 cm to the west was an

elongated pit, 1 .2 m long, 40 cm wide and 1 5 cm deep;

a large rock was positioned at its northwestern end

and a couple of smaller rocks were present in the

southeastern end. The pit fill contained small pieces of

charcoal, two small spots of red ocher and a utilized

flake of Ramah chert. Charcoal from this feature was

dated 6050±80 B.P. (Beta-71 475).

Hearth 12 (Figure 32) consisted of a slightly dispersed group of rocks, including two large flat slabs and several smaller fire-cracked rocks. Associated with

the feature was a small concentration of burned bone

fragments (n=294) and some very sparse charcoal

flecks. Roughly 80 cm to the east of the cluster were

several small clumps of red ocher.

Hearth 1 3 should be treated as rather questionable, consisting of little more than a cluster of six

rocks. Yet its association with a few flakes and its placement relative to the other features strongly suggested a hearth function.

Hearth 14 was composed of an arc-shaped midden-like deposit between, and extending out from, two large rocks. This unusual deposit was 1 .3 m long

and 0.6 m wide and consisted of "greasy" red-brown

NUKA5USUTOK-5: DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 71
mottled sand (the reddish coloration caused by a combination of iron translocation through the soil,

fire oxidation, and red ocher stains). The deposit contained faint charcoal flecks, small pockets of burned

bone (n=651), and small particles of red ocher.

Several small fire-cracked rocks were also present,

slightly to the east of the feature. A large quantity of

flakes was associated with hearth 14. Burned Ramah

chert flakes were particularly frequent between and

immediately adjacent to the two rocks at the center

of the feature. A charcoal sample from the feature was dated 1 570±80 B.P. (Beta-71 474). About 1 .0-1 .2 m north of hearth 1 4 was an outlier patch of charcoal,

70 cm by 1 5-20 cm in size, adjacent to a small cluster of rocks. It was unclear whether this was related

to hearth 14 or whether it represented an earlier,

disturbed feature.

Hearth 1 5 was partly exposed at the southern

limit of the excavation, 1 m southeast of hearth 1 4. In

a cleft between two rocks was a red ocher and charcoal smear on top of a small flat slab. A small cluster of firecracked rocks lay immediately adjacent to the northeast. A few other nearby rocks may have belonged to

the feature. Within the hearth were quartz and Ramah

chert flakes, while several quartz block cores, utilized

flakes and ground slate flakes lay nearby.

Summary: Area 2 Chronology and

Feature Variation

Chronology Table 4 lists the seven radiocarbon dates from Area 2 and one from Test Pit C at the extreme

northwestern end of the same beach level. The date of

1 570±80 B.P. from hearth 14 at Area 2C is problematic. It should probably be rejected because it seems too

Table 4: Radiocarbon Dates from Nukasusutok-5: Area 2 and Main Beach

Calibrated with OxCal 3.10 (Bronk-Ramsey 2005)

Feature Date B.P. Calibrated BC Lab No. Material Comment

TP-A/hearth 7 (2A) 5575±90 4500-4330 SI-2526 unidentified charcoal

Hearth 5 (2A) 5670±1 75 4710-4340 UGa-3161 unidentified charcoal

Hearth 8 (2A) 5305±1 75 4330-3960 UCa-3160 unidentified charcoal

Hearth 1 1 (28) 6040±90 5060-4790 Beta-571 24 unidentified charcoal

Pit (2B) 6100±120 5210-4850 Beta-581 73 unidentified charcoal

Hearth 10 (2C) 6050±80 5060-4830 Beta-71 475 unidentified charcoal

1 3c adjusted: -28.1

Hearth 14 (2C) 1 570±80 Beta-71 474 unidentified charcoalunacceptably late; low

density "different" material

TP-C (north terrace) 4645±65 3520-3350 SI-2527 unidentified charcoal

possibly too young;

iron pan formation may

result in accumulation

of younger humic acids

72 CHAPTER 5
recent for the associated lithic material. Also, the

radiocarbon laboratory reported the charcoal sample

consisted of low density wood different in appearance

from the other samples. On the other hand, there is

always the possibility that the sample might date a

Late Prehistoric Indian or Dorset component, although

there is no evidence for this in the lithic material. Taken at face value, the remaining dates from

Area 2 suggest the presence of two occupation phases. Phase 1, dated ca. 6000 B.P., occurs in Areas 2B

and 2C. These two subareas were separated by a distance of over 10 m and although there were some

similarities in associated features (i.e., hearth-pit

complexes, see below), there are marked behavioral

differences (discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6).

Phase 2, with dates ranging from ca. 5700-5300 B.P.

(note the large standard deviations for two of the

dates), is limited to Area 2A. This occupation lies between the two earlier components, so it is reasonable to ask if the Phase 2 occupation was superimposed on the earlier Phase 1 occupation. As will be

discussed in Chapter 8, there are no obvious aspects

of the tool typology that would indicate superposition, but Chapter 6 identifies a small area of probable

overlap between the northern end of Area 2A and

Area 2B: fire-cracked rock deposits along the 49-50x

lines. Chapter 6 argues that the spatial patterning of

lithics and hearths at Area 2A exhibits certain consistencies suggestive of two "behavioral modules", one

on either side of the large central rock, but the number of hearths associated with each module raises

questions about possible re-occupation. So far, a phase post-dating ca. 5300 B.P. has not been identified clearly at Area 2. As noted previously, during the 1979 excavation a flake scatter was observed at a

higher level than the main Area 2A occupation,

although it was not possible to elaborate upon this in

the subsequent analysis. There are also later radio- carbon dates from other contexts at the site: 4645±65 B.P. from Test Pit C at the northwestern end

of the site terrace and 5090±95 B.P. from Area 3 (see

Chapter 7). Consequently, the likelihood of a third

occupation phase at Area 2 should be kept in mind.

Looking more critically at the radiocarbon dates,

three possible sources of error can be suggested. The

first is inter-laboratory variation. All of the 6OOO-1- B.P.

dates were run by Beta Analytic, while the later dates were provided by the Smithsonian and the University of

Georgia. A second possible source of error is the old wood factor; none of the charcoal dated 5000-1- B.P. was identified to species so it is possible that it could

have been derived from old driftwood. The third source

of error is soil chemistry. As discussed in Chapter 7, Area 3 and the western end of the main beach terrace were subject to extreme podzolization processes leading to the formation of an impressive iron pan. These

pedological processes may contribute to the accumulation of younger humic acids that may effect radiocar- bon dates (cf., Lascelles et al. 2000). Although Area 2

did not exhibit iron pan formation there was very

strong podzolization, especially at Area 2A where the

sand sediments were considerably deeper than Areas

2B and 2C. If so, it is possible the radiocarbon dates from Area 2A are too young and that the subarea may

actually date closer to 2B and 2C (6000 B.P.).

Shoreline dating does not provide much assistance in assessing the radiocarbon dates. The displacement curve for the Nain region (Figure 5) indicates that

the 31 m asl. beach terrace upon which Area 2 is situated could have emerged by ca. 7000 B.P.. The curve

also suggests that if a 6000 B.P. occupation, such as

Areas 2B and 2C, was located near its contemporary

shoreline it should lie at ca. 20 m asl., while a 5500

B.P. occupation, such as Area 2A, should lie ca. 1 5 m

asl. Consequently, assuming the displacement curve is

accurate, it is likely that both the Area 2 occupation

phases were located a considerable distance above

their contemporary shorelines, 10 m in the case of

Areas 2B and 2C, 1 5 m in the case of Area 2A. Other

Nain area Maritime Archaic localities dated ca. 6000

B.P. lie between 26-22 m asl., suggesting a general

tendency for sites to be placed well above their conNUKASUSUTOK-5: DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW 73
temporary shorelines. This placement is likely related

to the practical advantages of using tombolo beaches: two-sided access for boat landing, large settle- ment surfaces and excellent views. A final chronological element can be mentioned.

Although none of the charcoal samples submitted

for radiocarbon dating were identified as to wood

type, a series of charcoal samples from both the

northern and southern parts of Area 2A as well as from near hearth 10 at Area 2C were identified by

Dosia Laeyendecker of the Smithsonian Institution.

All these samples contained alder/birch (probably

mostly alder) and willow; coniferous wood was

absent. The lack of coniferous wood suggests these

occupations pre-date 4500-4200 B.P., when spruce woodland became established in the area (Short

1978:32).

Feature Variation

At this point, a brief summary of the Area 2 features

is in order. Their range of formal and functional variation will be evaluated to foreshadow their significance for the spatial analysis and interpretation to

be presented in Chapter 6. Two major hearth types were found at Area 2:

surface hearths associated with rock clusters

(hearths 1 , 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 1 1 , 1 2, 1 3, 1 4 and possibly

1 5) and shallow pit-hearths with surface rock clusters and at least one or two rocks within the pit

basins (hearths 3a, 3b, 5, 8). Both types were generally associated with flat rock slabs and red ocher was

often, though not always, present. Among the surface hearths, hearth 9 stood out as unique in its

robust construction with a paved floor and inclined

slabs, although this impression may simply be a

result of better preservation than the other features.

Nonetheless, some functional difference may be signaled by the box-like form.

At Area 28 a large pit lay adjacent to hearth 1 1 . A similar arrangement was found at Area 2C, with an elongated pit lying between hearths 9 and 10. This

could indicate a paired pit/hearth functional unit, although the contemporaneity of the features cannot

be determined. Area 2A's hearths 2 and 8 might also

be seen in this light, since the latter has a pit-like

form, although it is considerably smaller than the aforementioned pit features.

At Area 2A the hearths were clustered in two

groups on opposite sides of the large central rock. The possibility that these groupings represent separate activity modules will be taken up in the next

chapter, where the features are contextualized with

their associated lithic distributions. The large quantity of fire-cracked rock at Area

2B stands out from the other two subareas. This statement should perhaps be qualified, since insufficient attention may have been paid to the presence

of fire-cracked rock during the 1 979-80 fieldwork at Area 2A. Nonetheless, a significant qualitative differ- ence between these two subareas is a reasonable

assumption. Area 2B is unquestionably different from Area 2C; in the latter subarea, fire-cracked rock

occurs only as small scatters associated with three of

the hearths. The spatial pattern of the rock distribution at Area 2B is also distinctive: a roughly concentric ring around a central pit/hearth complex. The

next chapter discusses the possible behavioral linkages between these features.

Area 3 Area 3 lay 38 m west of Area 2, slightly downslope

on a narrow terrace lying at 28 m asl. (Figure 22). The locality was discovered in 1979 during shovel

testing aimed at determining the boundaries of the

site. As luck would have it, a shovel-test penetrated

the center of an impressively thick and bright red ocher deposit. An area of 28 m^ was opened, revealing four features, two consisting of remarkable oval

concentrations of red ocher and rocks and two more

consisting of rock clusters, one with a restricted red

ocher deposit, the other with a charcoal patch. At

first, these features were believed to be burials, but

74 CHAPTER 5
Wyatt Harbor, view to the southeast over Nukasusutok-5 site (Photo W. Fitzhugh 1975)

subsurface investigation did not confirm this. Shovel

tests conducted elsewhere along the terrace provided negative results except in one area 4.5 m south- west of the main excavation. A 1 by 3 m unit was opened there, but very little cultural material was

encountered. A detailed analysis of Area 3 is presented in Chapter 7.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: DESCRIPTIVE OVERVIEW
76 CHAPTER 5
Nukasusuto

Spatial Analysis

Chapter 3 outlined interpretations of Maritime Archaic

social relations and their behavioral consequences and

discussed methodological strategies for linking these

behavioral consequences with spatial patterning in the

archaeological record. This discussion constitutes a

platform for the analysis of spatial patterning at Area

2 that will be undertaken here.

Limitations and Complications

In choosing the most appropriate analytical methods it was necessary to recognize the limitations of the Area

2 data. The first problem was the quality of the provenience data. For the 1 979 excavation a significant proportion of the utilized flakes, bipolar cores and block

cores were only provenienced within 1 m^ units, so

these tool classes could only be handled by quadrat

analysis. The other classes could be presented in both

point-plotted and quadrat form. Regarding the debitage analysis, there were good "eyeball" plots of flakes

by major raw material types for all excavation seasons

except 1 980. Weather conditions were so poor in 1 980

that flakes were simply collected by quadrats.

Fortunately, the area excavated was small (1 2 m^) and

the quantity of debitage very low, so the plotted flake

distributions from adjacent units could still be used for

a meaningful visual analysis. Indeed, the debitage

point patterns provide some of the strongest support

for the interpretations presented herein. The quantitative analyses of debitage raw materials were conducted with quadrats. Area 2A and part of 2C, excavated in

1979-80, were analysed using 1 quadrats. Area 2B and most of 2C, excavated in 1992 and 1993, were

analysed using 50 cm^ quadrats.

Another potential limitation is the effect of site

formation processes. The first issue involves the analytical implications of having at least three occupation

phases at the site as a whole and at least two phases

at Area 2, dated ca. 6000 B.P. and 5500 B.P.. To what

degree can we be assured that any patterns we observe

are not simply the result of a messy palimpsest accumulation? Chapter 5 pointed out that the radiocarbon

dating of the features at Area 2 suggests the two occupation periods are spatially separated. Furthermore,

the discussion of debitage distributions to be presented in this chapter will demonstrate that while a small

area of overlap probably exists between Areas 2A and

2B, this does not significantly compromise the analytical results.

Harder to evaluate is the possibility of a later component overlying the southern portion of Area 2A. As

noted in Chapter 5, this possibility was indicated by

the presence in several units of Ramah chert flakes

close to the surface, separated from the main occupation horizon by a thin sterile zone. Given the lack of

consistent stratigraphic control in these units it was

impossible to make a clear distinction of this upper

level material in order to check the effects of its

removal on the spatial patterning.

The other problem is the cumulative effect of various natural formation processes on the deposit, parNUKASUSUTOK-5 SPATIAL ANALYSIS 77
ticularly when combined with the multiple-component

issue. One phenomena is vertical movement in the

sand deposits of objects of different density. At Area 2

quartz flal<es and chunks sometimes lay deeper than Ramah chert or other flakes. But probably the more

important disturbance factor was wind deflation and

redeposition of the sand sediments, a process visible

today in the blow-out between Areas 1 and 2. As noted

in Chapter 5, some of the irregular peat-filled depressions observed at Area 2 might be the result of deflation. This process may produce a mixed deposit of cultural material from different occupation levels at the bottom of a blow-out. Wind action may also displace

cultural material along a horizontal plane. Another

potential disturbance factor is tree-throws, which

might uproot and mix cultural material from separate

levels and result in short lateral movements of material. Presently there are no trees at Area 2, but they grow

further west on the terrace and their distribution might

have been more extensive previously.

Preliminary Overview

The spatial analysis begins with a presentation of the

overall feature, debitage and tool distributions, since

these provide the essential framework upon which the subsequent analyses and interpretations build. The

main goals are to identify the boundaries of the three

analytical subareas and to establish preliminary behavioral interpretations that will provide direction for the

analyses.

Flake and Feature Distributions

As noted in Chapter 5, the three subareas can be distinguished chronologically, with centrally positioned

Area 2A dated 5600-5300 B.P. sandwiched between

Areas 2B and 2C, both dated 6000-61 00 B.P.. A plot of

the distribution pattern of all flakes at Area 2, irrespective of raw material type, also reinforces the impression that the three subareas can be treated as separate

analytical units (Figure 33). The low flake frequency

between Areas 2A and 2C suggests there is minimal

likelihood of significant spatial overlap and palimpsest

problems. On the other hand, the units between Areas 2A and 2B (48-50x) contained a fairly high frequency

of flakes. Spatial overlap is likely here, since the high

frequency of Ramah chert in the border area is more

akin to the flake raw material frequencies in 28 than

the northern portion of 2A and because there is a

slight extension of the Area 28 fire-cracked rock "carpets" into the border area, especially in 49x78-79y.

Nonetheless, the amount of overlap is not extensive. The flake distribution patterns at Area 2A display two double linear or perhaps horseshoe-like configurations (Figure 34)— hereafter referred to as "lobes"— one on each side of a large flat-topped rock. Parts of

these configurations display sharp boundaries^, perhaps indicative of a limiting factor. The eastern boundary of the southernmost lobe is diffuse, although there

is an identifiable shift in the density of the points. This

is the area in which there might be a later occupation

and thus a palimpsest effect (units 45-47x70-73y), a

possibility which is discussed further below. The north lobe is comprised of two parallel northsouth trending distributions, each ca. 4 m long, 1-1.2 m wide, which are separated by a near-empty "corridor" 60-80 cm wide. There appears to be a narrow 50-

60 cm opening at the northern end of the lobe. The

southern end is linked by a sparse distribution of

flakes and terminates at the edge of the large central

rock. The flake concentration marking the slightly projecting northeastern corner of the lobe might be a con- sequence of overlap with Area 2B, since fire-cracked

rock extends into this area (49x78y).

Five hearths are contained within the north lobe.

Hearth 2 is positioned in the corridor near the middle

of the lobe and is flanked on either side by hearths 6 and 8, which lie slightly within the linear flake distributions. Hearth 7 is situated on the inner edge of the

Note that the seemingly sharp boundary at 44x 72-71 y is artificial; in 1980 flakes were not plotted in this area.

78 CHAPTER 6
50x84y

47x83y

C Lobe boundary

5°""* m Hearth

\Z] Fire-cracked rock

44K79y

43x75y

1 2

3b

12 14 o ail

®

13

34/ Area 2A: inferred flake lobes in relation to features.

50x7 1y

47x69y

44x79y

35/ Area 2A: rock distribution in relation to inferred flake lobes.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 79
36/ Area 2A: flake lobes superimposed on vertical bipod photo.

flake distribution and beside the corridor while hearth

1 is located close to the eastern edge of the lobe. A

cluster of rocks that might be a hearth (H-1 8) lies just

outside the north lobe in 48x79y. As described in

Chapter 5, the hearths exhibited varying forms, perhaps indicative of functional differences. Hearths 1, 2 and 7 were surface cobble and slab hearths, hearth 6 was a pit surrounded by large rocks, while hearth 8 was an elongated pit. The south lobe also consists of two parallel linear

flake distributions, the eastern one 3.7 m long by 0.75-

1 .0 m wide, the western one 3.7 m long by 1 .2 m wide,

which are separated by a corridor 0.70-1.0 m wide.

The northern end of the lobe is entirely open while the

southern end has a narrow 60 cm opening between

two hearths. The northern end of the eastern linear

distribution terminates 70 cm southeast of the large

flat central rock. Depending on where the boundaries

of the flake distribution are drawn, the northern end of

the western linear distribution terminates 50-80 cm

south of the limit of the north lobe. This configuration

creates an area of low flake density (2.0 by 1.5 m in

size) between the central rock and the south lobe. The south lobe contains four definite hearths, of which three are located near the southern end. Hearth 3b is positioned in the middle of the corridor and is

flanked on both sides by

hearths 3a and 5, which lie at

the inner edges of the linear

flake distributions. Hearth 4 lies

slightly within the corridor and

on the edge of the open space between the south lobe and the

central rock. Additionally, a

rock cluster in 46x73y might

have been a hearth (H-1 6),

given its association with a red

ocher patch and its position relative to the flake distribution. If

so, the hearth locations at the

south lobe would be more similar to those at the north lobe. As at the north lobe, the

varying forms of the hearths suggest functional differences. Hearths 3a and 5 were circular pits, hearth 3b

an elongated pit and hearth 4 as well as possible

hearth 16 were surface cobble/slab features. The pattern becomes more complex when overlaid with the rock distribution (Figures 35 and 36).

Rocks occurring within the lobes are generally hearthrelated. Most of the flat slabs are spatially associated

with hearths, suggesting they were connected with

hearth construction and cooking/heating practices.

Other small rocks are scattered around the lobes; some of these were probably displaced or discarded

from hearths while others may simply be part of the

sediment matrix. The northeast tip of the north lobe shows a minor cluster of rather small rocks; these

might be outliers of the fire-cracked rock concentration at Area 2B. Most of the other rocks occur in the area between

the lobes, concentrated on the western and eastern

sides of the large central rock. The western side contains a diffuse scatter of over two dozen rocks, most of

which are moderately large and rounded in form, but a number of flat slabs are also present. Some of the

large rocks are positioned directly against the northwestern tip of the south lobe (the vertical photo in

80 CHAPTER 6
Figure 36 shows this more clearly than the drawings).

On the eastern side of the large central rock is a distinctive group of moderately large rocks, including

quite a few flat slabs, that extends eastwards from the

central rock. Some of the larger rocks directly border

the northeastern tip of the south lobe while a few lie

within 50 cm of the southeastern edge of the north

lobe. The western and eastern rock alignments therefore seem structurally similar in their positioning

against the ends of the lobes and their extension

across the gaps between the two lobes.

At the northern end of the north lobe there is a

small cluster of rocks just outside and west of the gap

in the flake distribution. Although these may be the

remains of a hearth (H-1 8), they might also have been

ejected from the activity space within the north lobe.

Nearby is a small pit containing charcoal and red ocher

that might have been a hearth (H-1 9). Just east of the

north lobe there is a small concentration of probable

fire-cracked rocks nestled between four boulders

(49x76y); their association with either the north lobe

or Area 2B is unclear. Other fire-cracked rocks were

scattered here and there at Area 2A, but they were not

recorded systematically. It seems clear, however, that

there were no major concentrations as at Area 2B. The preceding description of the spatial patterning can now be integrated into a preliminary interpretation. There are two debitage lobes, each 4 m long by

3 m wide, on either side of a central rock. The overall

pattern does not resemble that of the drop/toss-zone

distinctions of the external hearth model. Each lobe

contains five hearths that are spaced similarly, as well

as a triple hearth alignment, in both cases located

towards the end of the lobe furthest from the central

rock. Rock clusters occur on both the eastern and

western sides of the central rock in the between-lobe

space. These spatial configurations suggest the lobes

share a marked degree of organizational symmetry.

Consequently, there are reasonable grounds to consider the lobes as possible dwelling-related behavioral modules that can be treated as distinct analytical units.

Area 2B is distinguished by its pattern of firecracked rock carpets surrounding a pit and a disturbed

hearth. This quasi-concentric feature-centered distribution bears a general resemblance to the drop/toss zone model, with flakes mostly occurring in what

might be a drop zone close to the central features and

fire-cracked rock lying in a surrounding toss-zone-like

ring. In contrast. Area 2C is marked by generally low

flake density, except for sharply bounded clusters on

opposite sides of hearth 14. There were no significant

accumulations of fire-cracked rock. Too little was excavated at Area 2C to contextualize the pattern, but

there is a clear behavioral contrast with Area 28. The

bounded flake distributions at Area 2C are reminiscent

of the lobes at Area 2A.

A Preliminary Look at the Tool Distribution

Having defined what seem to be meaningful overall

patterns in the distribution of debitage and features, we should take a preliminary look at the tool distribution to see how it fits with the initial interpretations. As

noted previously, point pattern analysis of the tool distributions is hampered by the imprecise proveniencing

of many utilized flakes, bipolar cores and block cores. Although the provenienced portion of these types cannot be taken as a random sample of the overall distributions of the types, eliminating them entirely from a

point pattern analysis or shifting the entire analysis to

quadrats might lose useful information. Consequently,

the provenienced portion of the offending types was

considered to have at least rough representative value and a fc-means cluster analysis of the tool assemblage was undertaken. The results should be viewed as illustrative of general tendencies and the overall logic of

the analysis, not as the basis for robust conclusions.

Several different numbers of clusters could fit this

material depending on the degree of splitting/lumping one is willing to accept, but some of the tool clusters were stable through different runs. Figure 37 illustrates 12- and 9-cluster solutions in relation to the

flake and feature distributions. In most cases the tool

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 81
37/ Area 2 k-means cluster analysis, nme-cluster solution. 12 twelve-cluster solution.

clusters are associated with hearths, either centered

directly on the features or adjacent to them. In Area

2A, clusters 2, 4, 5, and 7 are stable in both solutions. The positioning of cluster 8 is roughly similar in the two solutions, but in the 12-cluster solution its centroid is displaced slightly north, with several items

being split off to form a new cluster (1 1) centered on

hearth 6. This seems to be a reasonable adjustment.

Additionally, in the 12-cluster solution the centroid of

cluster 9 is shifted south such that its tool contents are

split with new cluster 1 2. Each of these two clusters is

positioned adjacent to a hearth (hearths 5 and 4,

respectively). This corresponds better with expectations of hearth-centered distributions, but it may be somewhat artificial given the diffuse nature of the tool

distributions. Taken at face value, the stability of most

clusters over both solutions indicates a pattern, but

the differences suggest it would be worthwhile to run

additional analyses for Area 2A separate from the

other two sub-areas. This is discussed further below.

In Area 2B, clusters 3 and 6 are stable in both

solutions, with the former encompassing the central

82 CHAPTER 6
Area 2B

38/ Area 2: quadrat groupings used in the analyses.

pit-hearth complex and the latter situated in an area of

fire-cracked rock to the east. In Area 2C, cluster 5

remains stable between hearths 9, 10, 12 and 13. In

the 9-cluster solution cluster 1 includes both hearths

14 and 15, but in the 12-cluster solution cluster 1

splits, with a new cluster 10 emerging by hearth 15 and cluster 1 centered on hearth 14. Unfortunately,

too little was excavated around hearth 1 5 to evaluate

the significance of this splitting.

Overall, the relative lack of cluster overlap

between the three subareas reinforces the impression

derived from the flake distributions that the three

areas can be treated as independent units for analysis.

The following pages will present more detailed interpretations of the spatial structure within each subarea.

Area 2A

The preceding section used the overall distribution of

flakes and tools in relation to features at Area 2 to

establish a basic framework for analysis. Two behavioral modules were postulated for Area 2A. This initial

interpretation will now be investigated systematically

through an analysis of the distribution patterns of all

data classes. Figure 38 provides an overview of how

quadrats were grouped into larger model-based analytical units for some of the analyses.

Flake Distributions

The most valuable information comes from the pointplotted flakes: quartz, Ramah chert, fine-grained

cherts and slate (the latter two materials treated generically). Quadrat data are also provided for the various raw material types, since these counts include flakes found during screening and provide more secure identifications of color variants for Mugford chert and slate

than was possible in the field. The point plots for quartz and Ramah chert exhibit similar forms (Figures 39 and 40), but quartz provides a stronger demarcation of the north lobe while Ramah chert gives a clear definition of the south lobe.

Quartz flakes are concentrated close to hearths 6 and

8 at the north lobe and hearths 3b and 5 at the south

lobe. With the exception of hearth 3b, these concentrations lie mostly on one side of the hearths. Other clusters, particularly in the south lobe, are independent of

the hearths. At the north lobe, Ramah chert has slight

concentrations within and adjacent to hearths 7 and 8,

but is otherwise rather diffuse except for a clustering

NUKASUSUTOK-5; SPATIAL ANALYSIS 83
at the northwest corner of the lobe. At the south lobe,

there is a tight concentration of hundreds of Ramah

chert flakes on one side of hearth 4 and a broader,

probably overlapping, concentration on one side of

hearth 5. The 3-4 area between these two hearths

contains a total of ca. 1 500 Ramah chert flakes, making it the most intensive point of Ramah chert reduction/discard at Nukasusutok-5. A less voluminous clustering (ca. 600 flakes) occurs on one side of hearth 3a,

extending into what initially appeared to be a hearthindependent concentration at the northeast corner of

the south lobe. In retrospect, however, the adjacent

rock cluster associated with a red ocher stain may be a

hearth (H-l 6, Figures 25 and 33), although no charcoal was recorded in the field notes.

In sum, the distribution patterns of both raw

materials are partially, but not exclusively, hearth-centered. Each material exhibits fairly clear outer boundaries rather than a density gradient, consistent with

the impression derived from the total flake distribution. There is also a fairly clear inner boundary in each

case, resulting in a markedly lower flake density in the

84 CHAPTER 6
53x84y

50x64y

53x76y Ramah chert flakes

47x83y

44x79y

50x7 1y

1 2

I I I

a43x75y O fc' ^ U11

22 22 12 2

37

22 o

/I

23^,

26

43

27

Ramah chert flakes

34 -22V o27

27

14

23!

32

41

35

109

510

59

432

56

172

408

225

63

Yf6 ca62

92

34

20 11

't6x63y

41x61y

40/ Area 2 distribution of Ramah cliert flakes.

middle of each lobe. Consequently, the overall pattern

does not correspond with the exterior hearth model. As noted previously, however, the scatter of Ramah chert flakes to the east of the south lobe creates some interpretive problems. There is a reasonably

clear, albeit narrow, break in the density gradient

between the south lobe and the eastern scatter, but

there may be a palimpsest effect from a later occupation. To control for this possibility, Figure 41 presents

a plot of the Ramah chert flake distribution for the

south lobe with the uppermost level 1 flakes eliminated. This is not an ideal solution since level 1 was sufficiently deep that it probably combined some flakes from the two possible components. Nevertheless, the

modified plot strongly reinforces the idea of a clear boundary along this side of the lobe and reveals a linear distribution with a width very similar to that of the

western side of the lobe.

Patinated Ramah chert has a white and sometimes cracked surface indicative of thermal alteration. The quadrat diagram (Figure 42) indicates that patinated Ramah chert clusters strongly in the south lobe

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 85
with Area 2B. Since patination

is the result of thermal stress it

is not surprising to find the

material concentrated near

hearths, but its occurrence some distance from hearths

implies that in those cases it must have been removed from

the hearths and redeposited

elsewhere. This possibility is

discussed further below. The point-pattern distribution of fine-grained cherts,

along with a quadrat breakdown

by gray Mugford and black

chert variants (Figure 43) indicates they are mainly associated

with the south lobe and are

42/ Area 2 distribution of patinated Ramah cinert flal<es.

48x75y

+.

48x69y

•

• +

44x75y

• .../••• .•••<i.v. ••• • .• •• • :.•<'- ::-.V.»',i ..V V: -.ly ;•

44x69y

41/ Area 2A south lobe, lower level distribution of Ramah chert flakes.

adjacent to hearths and at the northernmost end of

the north lobe associated with hearths 2, 6 and 8, but

not with the other two hearths. It is absent from the

"middle" area between the lobes. The patinated

Ramah chert in units 49x78-79y north of the north

lobe may be partly or entirely the result of overlap

absent from the "middle" area. In the south lobe, both

materials cluster around hearth 4, with lesser amounts

near hearth 5. The black chert distribution is interesting since its highest frequencies (10 flakes) are found

in symmetric opposition at both ends of the lobe near

the "middle" area. In the north lobe, both cherts are

86 CHAPTER 6

Table 5: Area 2A Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Model Units

North Lobe Middle South Lobe Other TOTAL

N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)

Quartz 1 1 59 (47.0) 63 (58.3) 1065 (26.0) 301 (19.1) 2588 (31 .4) Ramah chert 1097 (44.5) 44 (40.7) 2634 (64.3) 1 182 (74.8) 4957 (60.1)

Patinated Ramah 42 (1 .7) 71 (1.7) 25 (1 .6) 1 38 (1 .7) Gray Mugford chert 20 (0.8) 35 (0.9) 4 (0.3) 59 (0.7) Green Mugford chert 2 (0.0) 2 (0.0)

Black chert 19 (0.8) 35 (0.9) 7 (0.4) 61 (0.7) Slate—total 129 (5.2) 1 (0.9) 252 (6.2) 61(3.9) 443 (5.4)

Beige 7 (0.3) 19 (0.5) 3 (0.2) Green 1 1 (0.4) 1 (0.9) 87 (2.1) 31 (2.0)

Gray 99 (4.0) 1 38 (3.4) 20 (1 .3) Gray-banded 8 (0.3) 1 (0.1) Red-brown 3 (0.1) 3 (0.1) 6 (0.4)

Indet. 1 (0.0) 5 (0.1) TOTAL 2466 108 4094 1580 8248

primarily associated with hearths 2, 6 and 8, while they

are absent from hearths 1 and 7, The small cluster of

both materials in units 49x77-78y north of the north

lobe may be a result of overlap with Area 2B.

Figure 44 shows the distribution of plotted slate

flakes (undifferentiated by color variant). Once again

the pattern is one of concentration in the two lobes and virtual absence from the middle. It is also clear

that within each lobe the outer boundaries of the

slate distributions fit closely with those of quartz and

Ramah chert. At the south lobe slate occurs as two

roughly parallel distributions on either side of the

central corridor. Closer inspection suggests it clusters adjacent to hearths 3a, 4, 5, with another apparently hearth-independent concentration at the northeastern edge of the lobe. The latter is consistent with

the tendencies noted in the quartz and Ramah chert

distributions. To pull this together, Table 5 compares the proportions of the flake raw material types by grouping

the quadrats into model-based units: the north and

south lobes representing behavioral modules, the

"middle" consisting of units near the large central rock between the lobes and "other" defined as all remaining units outside the lobes. There is a clear difference between the north lobe and middle subareas, with

their somewhat even proportions of quartz to Ramah

chert, and the south lobe and "other" subareas, which

have much higher proportions of Ramah chert to

quartz. Comparison with chi-square expected frequencies confirms the importance of the aforementioned

proportional differences, although the frequency of Ramah chert in the south lobe and "other" subareas

may be inflated by palimpsest effects from a Ramah

chert-rich later component. The expected frequencies

also indicate a slight over-representation of slate

flakes at the south lobe. If we consider flake raw materials by weight (Table 6), quartz clearly dominates in

all subareas, but the proportional weight of Ramah

chert is greater in the south lobe and "other" subareas,

consistent with the frequency data. The middle subarea's relatively balanced frequency of quartz and chert resembles the north lobe proportions (although by weight the Ramah chert propor88 CHAPTER 6
53x76y N

Slate flakes (generic)

3 IP o

Green slate flakes

^ 9

•I2I 9^

O o

Gray slate flakes

n I C3J

1)4 6 12C1I-,

II

H74

Gray-banded

slate flakes

O

O

Beige slate flakes

TJ

®

II

44/ Area 2 distribution of slate flakes.

NUKA5USUT0K 5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 89
Table 6: Area 2A Flake Raw Material Weights by Model Units in Grams

iNurin LUDc

N (%)

IV| lUU Ic N (%)

30Uin LOD€

N (%)

vjiner

N (%)

QuHrtz H DUzf \o / .0} 1 OA (-70 9\ 5 7 1 r7n 41 1 8HK ^1 1 OoD ^Do.

R9m3.h chert A7K (Q 7\ 77n 07 Q1

rdLirialcU rvdllldri 44. 7 Ri

Lirdy iviugioru cncii A^ (D ^ \ ^u.

1

) s? (^n 71 17 1

1

DidCK crtcri :3.D \\J.\

)

1 c m 0\

1 0.0 vu. J

j

1 H 1 1

ij 1 cc ii ivi uy 1 Ul U n ? en ni

3laLc —lOLdI yj.c. yJ. \ ) ? 7 1 7 ^ 11 Q 1 A a 51

I.J \\J .u

t

7 en 1

1

1 A in 'i\

Gr86n OQ z> (r\ Q\\j .L. \\J . \ }

1 7 1^1 f,7 A U A\

1 7 =^1 1 Q Q 71

Cray-banded 3 (0.1) 0.1 (0.0) 0.1 (0.0) Red-brown 0.9 (0.0) 0.5 (0.0) 2.6 (0.1)

Indet. 19 (0.4) 2 (0.0)

tion in the middle is somewhat higher), but the middle

has an extremely low overall flake total, entirely lacks

patinated Ramah chert and Mugford chert, and has

only a single slate flake. Thus, the low intensity of lithic reduction in the middle subarea stands as a marked

contrast to the two lobes and is also consistent with its

low frequency of retouched implements (n =14, see

Table 7), though not with the relatively high proportion of quartz cores (see below). The "other" subarea

has quartz/Ramah chert proportions similar to the

south lobe.

If we consider slate color variants by frequency,

both lobes are dominated by gray slate, while green

slate is the second most frequent variant. Nonetheless,

a chi-square test (x^ = 80.92) indicates there are significant differences in the spatial distributions of the

slate variants, the expected frequencies pointing to a

slight over-representation of gray slate in the north

lobe and slight a over-representation of green slate in

the south lobe and "other" subarea. The frequency of

green slate in the "other" subarea— most being concentrated east of the south lobe— could imply a behavioral link between the south lobe and the "external"

area to the east. If the comparison is conducted by

weight, however, there is parity in gray and green slate between the two lobes, but a repeated over-proportional amount of green slate in the "other" subarea

(Table 6). Thus, the similarities in slate type proportions between the south lobe and the "other" subarea

parallel the similarities in quartz/Ramah chert proportions between the same subareas.

Variation in flake raw materials can also be evaluated independent of the model units. Although it cannot be assumed that the distributions of tools and debitage are conditioned by the same depositional variables, a tool-cluster based quadrat grouping of flakes

might reveal additional dimensions of spatial variation. The quadrats were grouped according to the 9-cluster

solution, but the 1 m^ units did not coincide perfectly

with the clusters. The resulting table (not shown) was

not particularly enlightening, since the frequency variations were fairly consistent with the model-based

analysis. A better way of handling the debitage distribution independent of model assumptions was

exploratory correspondence analysis of raw material

frequencies by quadrats. The correspondence plot in

90 CHAPTER 6
i

Table 7: Area 2A Tool Classes by Model Units.

PT Bl PR FP SC UF SP CA SB ST BC CO TM OTH TOTAL

N 2.5 6 3 7 6 25 2 2 2 8 1 3 1 3 1 1 91.5 MID 0.5 2 1 4 1 4.5 1 1 4

S 8 6 2 2 1 1 41 2 1 4 35 32 1 1 .5* 1 2 1 58.5 OTH 2 2 1 1 4 27 6 7 12 8 5 2 77

TOTAL 1 3 16 6 10 22 97 4 3 12 51 57 37 7 6 341 % 3.8 4.7 1.8 2.9 6.5 28.4 1 .2 0.9 3.5 1 5.0 16.7 10.9 2.1 1.8

* a fragment conjoining with another in a different unit was assigned a value of .5

PT: points (bifacial), BL bifaces, PR: preforms (biface), FP: flake points, SC: scrapers (endscrapers and

flake knives), UF: utilized flakes, SP: slate points, CA: celt/adze, SB: slate blanks (unmodified plates and

blanks), ST: slate tool fragments (ground slate flakes and unidentified tool fragments), BC: bipolar

cores, CO: block cores (quartz), TM: tool manufacturing (hammerstones, schist tablets, whetstones),

and OTH: other (stemmed flakes, linear flakes, graver).

Figure 45 indicates that the first axis (horizontal)

accounts for 75.2% of the variation, seriating the

quadrats relative to their proportions of Ramah chert and quartz. The units on the left side of the axis are dominated by Ramah chert while the units on the right

side are dominated by quartz. The second axis (vertical) accounts for 18.2% of the variation, scaling the

quadrats relative to slate proportions. Units placed

towards the top of the axis have unusually high frequencies of slate. Symbol coding of quadrats by the model-based units indicates a clear pattern. Most of

the north lobe quadrats and all the middle quadrats

are pulled right by high quartz frequencies, while most

of the south lobe quadrats are pulled left by abundant

Ramah chert (although several are pulled by quartz).

"Other" quadrats are distributed in both the quartz and

Ramah chert groups, although three quadrats are outliers pulled by high frequencies of slate. Ten of the 1 3

"other" quadrats that group with the south lobe are

actually adjacent to that lobe, while 10 of the 15

"other" quadrats that group with the north lobe lie

adjacent to that lobe. Mugford chert has very little

influence on the plot. Thus, the correspondence analysis indicates that the model-based units are to a great

extent replicated by model-independent analysis.

Tool Distribution

The spatial distribution of tool classes may indicate something about functional or depositional variation

within Area 2A. The analyses are conducted using 14

largely functional classes, some of which (e.g., bifacial

points) could be further subdivided into formal/functional variants (see Chapter 8 for a description of the

tool material). Table 7 outlines the tool class frequencies in relation to the model-based units introduced in

the debitage analysis. Variation in the table can be

scaled by correspondence analysis and visualized in a

plot (Figure 46). The first axis of the plot accounts for 44.9% of the variation and primarily contrasts the

south lobe on the right side with the north lobe slightly towards the left. The south lobe is positioned with

bipolar cores, bifacial points, scrapers, utilized flakes and slate tool fragments. The north lobe is only distinguished by flake points. Common to both lobes are

block cores, bifaces and preforms. The middle subarea

is pulled to the extreme left of the plot, probably

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 91
because of a modest frequency

of block cores combined with

an absence of bipolar cores. Along the second axis, accounting for 34.9% of the variation,

the "other" subarea is distinguished towards the bottom of

the plot by slate blanks and tool

manufacturing items. Although

the low tool frequencies limit

the robustness of the analysis,

it does point to contrasts between the subareas. The

lobes are not replicate behavioral modules, but they do

share broad similarities. A more detailed assess- ment of tool class variation can

be had by combining the quantitative data with the spatial distribution diagrams. While some

of the tool classes can reasonably be evaluated in terms of

their point distributions, oth- ers— specifically, utilized

flakes, block cores and bipolar cores— lack systematic point

proveniencing and are best

evaluated by quadrats. Both

types of information are provided here. There are some interesting patterns in the distributions of block and bipolar cores

(Figures 47 and 48). The largely

unworked quartz block cores

are frequent in the middle area between the lobes, suggesting

they were cached or dumped

there. Half of the cores in this

area are located in quadrats

with few quartz flakes, while the

45/ Area 2A: correspondence analysis plot of flake raw materials by quadrat, coded by

analytical model units.

2.0-

1.5- c\ SP^

1.0-

Bl 0.5- Axis 1 (44.9%) ^'a • . ^ N Pj^^

-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5

.ST

SC ^BC 1.0

1 1 1 CO A ^""^

^UF

A

OTH

-1.0- OTH

• ^ SB

1 ^ - Tool class

'

• Model unit -2.0- ^TM

-2.5-

Axis 2 (34.9%)

46/ Area 2A: correspondence analysis plot of tool classes by analytical model units.

92 CHAPTER 6
47/ Area 2: distribution of Mock cores by quadrat.

48/ Area 2 distribution of bipolar cores by quadrat.

Other half are positioned within or adjacent to a cluster of quartz debitage at the northeastern corner of the

south lobe. Consequently, the placement of block

cores is partly independent of quartz reduction locations. There is also a slight concentration of block

cores at the northern end of the north lobe. Here, however, the cores are clearly associated with quartz flake

concentrations. In contrast, bipolar cores, the intermediary and final product of quartz reduction, are mostly

found within the south lobe, where they are associated

with the greatest densities of quartz flakes but are

largely independent of the distribution of block cores.

At the north lobe there are small clusters of bipolar

cores at each end of the eastern side; the cluster near

the northern end is associated with a concentration of

quartz flakes, but the southern cluster is not. Both

NUKASUSUTOK 5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 93
49/ Area 2 distribution of utilized flal<es by quadrat.

clusters are associated with or are adjacent to concentrations of block cores. In the quadrats east of the middle area between the lobes there are several bipolar

cores that are largely independent of the distribution

of both block cores and quartz debitage. This placement might suggest they are secondary refuse rather

than the products of In situ reduction. In sum, with the

exception of the eastern exterior area, the associations

suggest primary refuse accumulation combined with some degree of caching or dumping of block cores

separate from reduction areas. It is noteworthy that

possible caching areas are found in similar locations at

the northern end of both lobes.

Utilized flakes (Figure 49) are generally found

adjacent to the hearth features, although they are also

frequent near the eastern edge of the middle area and

in the corridor of the south lobe. There is also a small

concentration in the area east of the south lobe. The distribution of bifacial points is plotted in

Figure 50, biface preforms in Figure 51, and bifaces and fragments thereof in Figure 52. Most of the items

from the three classes are associated with one or the

other lobes, generally lying within 1 m of a hearth.

Both preforms and biface fragments are fairly evenly

distributed between the two lobes, but bifacial points

are more frequent in the south lobe. The reverse pattern is seen for flake points (Figure 53); seven points

are associated with the north lobe, while only two are

associated with the south lobe.

Endscrapers are made exclusively of fine-grained

chert, both gray Mugford and black chert. They occur

in both lobes, although they are somewhat more frequent in the south lobe, particularly adjacent to Hearth

3a (Figure 54). Three are found near the western edge

of the middle area. Two endscrapers lie near the open

northern end of the north lobe, although one is In the

area of presumed overlap with Area 2B. The distribution of endscrapers is only partly consistent with the

distribution of fine-grained chert flakes (Figure 43). On

the eastern side of the south lobe there are seven tools and only 23 flakes, while on the western side there is

only one tool but 46 flakes. Thus, discard/use and production/retouch are not always correlated. Ground slate tools are distributed fairly evenly

between the two lobes, with slate points and adzes

present in each lobe (Figure 55). The distribution of

raw slate plates and partially formed tool blanks

(Figure 56) is fairly even between the two lobes (two vs

three), but four are scattered in the area east of the

lobes. Overall, ca. 73% of all ground slate flakes and

94 CHAPTER 6
unidentifiable ground tool fragments are associated

with the south lobe (Table 7, Figure 57). The distribution of ground slate flakes struck from tool edges is shown in Figure 57. All but one of these are found in

the south lobe and in units adjacent to hearths. One

specimen from inside the south lobe conjoins with a

non-edge- struck slate flake in the area east of the

south lobe. A single edge-struck flake occurs in the

north lobe, adjacent to a hearth. In sum, although the

deposition of slate tools within each lobe is roughly

equivalent, the south lobe seems to exhibit a greater

degree of slate tool production and reworking, as indicated by the high frequency of unground and ground

slate flakes (Table 5; Figures 44 and 57). The area east

of the south lobe contains a modest number of ground

and unground slate flakes, plates/blanks and tools. The residual category "miscellaneous tools" (Figure

58) tends to be associated with the hearths and is fairly evenly distributed between the lobes. An exception is

the clustering of a flake knife, a graver/scraper and a stemmed flake near the eastern edge of the middle

area. Seen in conjunction with a cluster of utilized

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 95
53x84y

50x84y

47x83y

£1

53x76y

50x7 1y

Biface preforms

44x79y

43x75y

—2.

HJO

1 2

I I I

©H12 oH13

Biface preforms

11

46x63y

HU •

41x61y

57. Area 2: distribution of biface preforms

flakes in the same area (Figure 49), this might indicate some scraping/cutting functions were undertaken

there. A schist tablet is associated with hearth 6 in the

north lobe, while a hard slate whetstone lies adjacent to

hearth 3a in the south lobe. These may have been associated with grinding slate or bone implements, but the implement at hearth 6 is only associated with a single

ground slate flake, while hearth 3a is adjacent to several ground slate flakes and tools. The stories told by tool raw material frequencies

and weights are quite different (Tables 8 and 9). By frequency, the proportion of Ramah chert to quartz tools

is 2;1 across all the subareas except for the middle,

where they are even. This proportion would be much

higher if quartz cores were eliminated from the figures. By weight, however, quartz constitutes ca. 75% of

the material in all subareas except the middle, where it

is nearly 98%. This is much the same pattern as seen

with the flakes (Tables 5 and 6), where Ramah chert is

high in frequency but low in weight.

At this point it would be useful to consider the

tool distribution with the model-independent

96 CHAPTER 6
approach, using /c-means derived groupings. To sup- plement the overall 9- and 12-cluster solutions presented previously (Figure 37), a separate analysis of

Area 2A was conducted. The best result is a 1 2-cluster

solution (Figure 59) which is broadly similar to the

overall Area 2 12-cluster solution, but some new clusters are split off. While this may be a slightly better

grouping seen from the perspective of identifying

hearth-centered distributions, some of the new smaller clusters may be spurious. However, as mentioned

above, a serious problem is that the inadequate pointproveniencing of certain tool types limits the utility of

point pattern analysis. We could try to group the

quadrats according to the clusters defined by /(-means

analysis, but we run into difficulties, since the 1 m^

quadrats can overlap different clusters, particularly in

the more fine-grained 12-cluster solution. In an

attempt to maintain some form of model-independent

approach, the earlier 9-cluster solution (Figure 37) was

chosen for illustrative purposes. This still poses some

difficulties in that the clusters do not conform neatly to

the quadrat boundaries, although the number of probNUKASUSUTOK-5 SPATIAL ANALYSIS 97
lem areas is relatively small. Difficult quadrats were

assigned to a cluster based on degree of overlap and

the relative density of plotted tools. The resulting cluster groupings are very similar to the model-based subareas, so it is questionable whether this approach provides much information beyond that of the modelbased analysis. Nonetheless, the resulting tool fre- quency distribution is presented in Table 10. The many low cell frequencies in Table 10 render

analysis problematic, but Figure 60 presents a corre- spondence analysis plot to visualize possible variations between the clusters. The clusters lie in a ring

around the origin of the plot and their positioning relative to the tool classes does not suggest groupings.

There are minor differences between the clusters, but

the variation only involves one or two tool classes and

small numbers of items. Nuances can be identified by

considering the cells for which observed frequencies

depart somewhat from expected values. Bipolar cores

are slightly over-represented in cluster 2 (south lobe,

hearths 3a, b), concomitant with an under-representation of quartz block cores. In cluster 9 (middle, with

98 CHAPTER 6
overlaps from both lobes and the area east of the

lobes), block cores and slate tool fragments are overrepresented. There is a less-marked overweight of

scrapers and bifacial projectile points in cluster 2 and

of block cores and slate blanks in cluster 7 (east of the

lobes). Cluster 8, lying at the northern "entrance" to

the north lobe, exhibits a slight overweight of flake

points. There is a slight over-representation of utilized

flakes in cluster 9, but this does not seem terribly significant when the quadrat distribution pattern is

inspected (Figure 49). There is also an over-representation of ground slate flakes and unidentifiable slate

tool fragments in cluster 9, particularly in association

with hearth 4 (Figure 57). Ground slate flakes are also

concentrated near hearth 5 (Cluster 2), although this is

not statistically disproportional.

If we consider tool raw material frequencies by

cluster unit (Table 11), there are few differences between observed and expected frequencies other

than somewhat more than expected quartz in cluster 7

(east of the lobes)— mostly accounted for by cores—

and a slight over-representation of quartz and slate

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 99
(treated generically) in cluster 9. For the latter, the

quartz is accounted for by cores, while the slate consists of ground flakes— most of which are associated

with the edge of the south lobe. Thus, the clusterbased division provides little information beyond that

derived from the model-based units.

In sum, the /c-means approach does not provide

much information to supplement or contradict the model-based analysis. The 12-cluster solution for Area

2A alone (Figure 59) provides a schematic overview of

the hearth-centered distributions, while the "lumped" 9-

cluster solution for Area 2 as a whole (Figure 37) indicates that the major and most stable clusters strongly

parallel the divisions used in the model-based analyses.

Clearly, however, the necessity of using large and

coarsely grouped quadrats undermines the possibility

of isolating patterns that might be revealed by more

precise point-provenience analysis or smaller quadrats.

100 CHAPTER 6
Table 8: Area 2A Tool Raw Material Frequencies by Model Units.

iNurin LUDc IVIIUUIc LUUc 3UUIII LUUc 1 \J 1 ML

IN (/o) IN y/o) IN \/o) IN \/a) IN ^/o;

Qunrtz D.J (D^. D J ^ 1^ ^ O') A\ 1IDPi 11C\ \^\J 81 .O

J

OVJ J . J/ Ramah chert AR (AF, ni / . J ^ J J . 3u^Pi (AF, V^D.O;8\ 1 "^R iAF ^1 1 DO Vt'O . J ^

Gray MuQford J \J-->) J (. 1 .a;

DidCK cneri iL \iL.iLj 11 if, Q\ 18 K ^1

jIdLc lOldl \ A ^\ 1 ^7 1 ^

1 J V 1 O •

Gr66ri Oo 1 1 c aD

Gra,y 1

1 ? L.? CJ 78

D Q /H r^c/^\A/n Kcu Ui uwri 1

1 7 e.D

Vjidy DdnUcU 1

1 :3

inuei. 1

1 11 7

Schist 1 (1.1) 4 (5.2) 5 (1.5)

Other 1 (0.6) 1 (1.3) 2 (0.6)

*.5 denotes a conjoining fragment

Table 9: Area 2A Tool Raw Material Weights by Model Units. In Grams.

North Lobe Middle Lobe South Lobe Other N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)

Quartz 1751 (68.8) 1161 (94.7) 1759 (76.4) 1475.6 (58.2)

Ramah chert 284.2 (11.2) 64.4 (5.3) 302.3 (1 3.1) 165 (6.5)

Black chert 12 (0.5) 32 (1.4) 1 5 (0.6)

Gray Mugford 25.3 (1.0) 16 (0.7) 4 (0.2) Slate—total 294.7 (11.6) 0.3 (0.0) 160.6 (7.0) 1 55.1 (6.1) Green 111.5 0.3 98.7 144.1

Gray 16 19.8 9.9 Red-brown 167 3 1.1 Gray-banded 0.2 6.1

Gray/schist 33

Schist 177 (7.0) 33 (1.4) 554.5 (21.9)

Other 0.3 (0.0) 167 (6.6)

Distribution of Red Ocher and Bone Fragments

Figure 61 depicts the distribution of red ocher

stains and bone fragments. It is possible that more

red ocher stains were present but went undocumented given the difficulty of identifying them in

the very dark brown podzolized sand or because some were erased by deflation. Taking the data at

hand, red ocher stains are found almost exclusively

within the lobes, where they occur within or closely

adjacent to hearths. Stains are associated with both

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 101
Table 10: Area 2A Tool Classes; Quadrats Grouped by K-Means Cluster.

PT Bl PR FP sc UF SP CA SB ST BC CO TM OTH TOTAL

Cluster 2 7 6 2 2 1

1

32 2 1 4 1 9.5* 25 3 4 2 120.5

Cluster 4 0.5 1 1 1 2 8 2 1 2 3 3 24.5

Cluster 7 3 2 1 2 2 22 4 7 1 3 1 1 2 1 70

Cluster 8 1 4 2 5 4 20 1 6 6 8 1 1 59

Cluster 9 1.5 3 3 1 5 2 2 16.5 10 1 2 2 67

TOTAL 13 16 6 10 22 97 4 3 12 51 57 37 7 6 341

* .5 denotes a conjoining fragment

PT: points (bifacial), Bl: bifaces, PR: preforms (biface), FP: flake points, SC: scrapers (endscrapers and

flake knives), UF: utilized flakes, SP: slate points, CA: celt/adze, SB: slate blanks (unmodified plates and

blanks), ST: slate tool fragments (ground slate flakes and unidentified tool fragments), BC: bipolar

cores, CO: block cores (quartz), TM: tool manufacturing (hammerstones, schist tablets, whetstones),

and OTH: other (stemmed flakes, linear flakes, graver).

Table 1 1: Area 2A Tool Raw Material Frequencies by K-Means Cluster.

Cluster 2 Cluster 4 Cluster 7 Cluster 8 Cluster 4

N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)

Quartz 22 (18.3) 4 (16.3) 21 (30.0) 13 (22.0) 20 (29.9)

Ramah chert 55 (45.6) 13.5 (55.1) 35 (50.0) 33 (55.9) 21.5 (32.1)

Black chert 10 (8.3) 1 (4.1) 4 (6.8) 3 (4.5) Cray Mugford 3 (2.5) 1 (4.1) 1 (1.4) 1 (1.7) 2 (3.0)

Slate— total 26.5 (22.0) 5 (20.4) 11 (15.7) 7 (11.9) 19.5 (29.1) Green 1 1 3 4 3 9

Cray 12.5 5 1 8.5 Red-brown 1 2 2 1 Gray-banded 2 1 1

Gray/schist

Indet. 1 1

Schist 3 (2.5) 2 (2.9) 1 (1.7)

Other 1 (0.8) 1 (1.5) TOTAL 120.5 24.5 70 59 67

" .5 denotes a conjoining fragment

surface and pit hearths, although they seem most lobe and two small stains just south of the south

intensive with pit features. Deviating from this pat- lobe. No uncrushed ocher fragments were observed

tern is a patch 1 m north of hearth 8 at the north at Area 2A.

102 CHAPTER 6
The paucity of bone is a consequence of both taphonomic factors and recovery techniques. The

extremely acidic soil (pH 4.0-5.0) destroyed all but a few fragments of highly calcined bone. On the other

hand, it is possible that more fragments could have

been recovered with fine-screening (only 1/4 inch mesh was used). All bone fragments at Area 2A are

associated with the two lobes. At the north lobe, a single fragment is found in the pit of hearth 8, another

single fragment lies 1 m to the southeast and another

single piece lies between hearths 1 and 6. At the south

lobe, six fragments are associated with hearth 5. None

of these bone fragments could be identified to taxon.

Feature-Centered Distributions, Size-Sorting,

and Cultural Formation Processes

Since the behavioral modules suggested in the Area 2A

material might imply dwelling structures we should

consider more explicitly the ethnoarchaeologically

derived feature-centered models. As discussed in Chapter 3, we might expect to find different types of

distribution patterns associated with exterior and inteNUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 103
53K84y

50x84y

47x83y

CI

53x76y

50x7 1y

Ground slate flakes and tool fragments

44>i79y 1^

o

46x63y

43x75y

1 2

I I I o ©

• <•

41x67y

Ground slate flakes and tool fragments

(n) edge-struck flakes

n

11

41x61y

i

57/ Area 2 distribution of ground slate flakes and ground tool fragments.

rior hearths. In general, exterior hearths may have more extensive debris distributions with drop- and

toss-zones characterized by size-sorting of cultural

material: smaller items in the drop-zones adjacent to

hearths, larger items in the toss-zones further away—

a roughly concentric zonation. Interior hearths may

exhibit an adjacent concentration of cultural material

but may lack clear drop- and toss-zones because of

periodic maintenance of dwelling interiors designed to

prevent the accumulation of material in the sleeping

areas near the dwelling walls. Maintenance of dwelling

interiors may result in the development of exterior sec- ondary refuse deposits such as "door dumps" (Binford

1983:177). Thus, instead of concentric size-sorting

there is a distinction between small-sized items near

interior hearths and larger items in exterior dumps.

Evaluation of the total debitage distribution as

well as distributions of individual raw materials does

not indicate the concentric and gradual "distance

decay" patterning expected at exterior hearths.

Flakes are obviously clustered adjacent to hearths,

but they are generally concentrated on one side of

104 CHAPTER 6
53x84y

50x84y

53x76y

50x7 1y

47x83y

Miscellaneous tools

FSC= flake scraper/knife GSC= graver/scraper

GST= grindstone

HAM= hammerstone LFK= linear flake SFK= stemmed flake SHF= scfiist fragment

SHT= schist tablet WHS= whetstone

45x63y

SH£

Miscellaneous tools FSC= flake scraper/knife GSC= graver/scraper GST= grindstone

HAiVI= hammerstone LFK= linear flake SFK= stemmed flake SHF= schist fragment SHT= schist tablet WHS= whetstone

41x61y

58/ Area 2: distribution of miscellaneous tools.

the hearths rather than forming a ring around them.

The overall distributions are bounded in linear "lobe"

patterns which, to some extent, may be the result of

overlapping hearth-centered distributions. The outer edges of the lobes (particularly the southern one) are

fairly sharp, suggestive of a boundary effect. At the same time, the inner edges of the lobes indicate central areas with minimal debitage accumulation, either

a consequence of differential activity placement or maintenance of the central areas. The tool distribution patterns are also closely linked to hearths,

although the concentration of block cores in the

"middle" and the area east of the lobes deviates from

the overall pattern.

If the overall configuration of the debitage and

tool distributions seems more in line with an interior

hearth model, what about the size-sorting criterion? One problem in assessing size-sorting is that lithics may be less sensitive to the discard and maintenance

practices noted ethnoarchaeologically for bones and

implements of organic materials, given much less variation in size dimensions. Nonetheless, since lithics are

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 105
the only available data class their potential for revealing relevant patterning should be explored. A distinction between large/small tools and tool fragments was made with reference to a histogram of all tool maximum lengths for Area 2. Given a skewed distribution

with over 60% of the tools less than 40 mm long, small was defined as <39.9 mm, large as >40.0 mm. Given

the relatively small number of tools and their variable numbers across the units, it did not seem advisable to

calculate a size-sorting index. Instead, a subjective

evaluation was made in which units with either high

absolute numbers of large tools or high proportions of

large to small tools were identified and marked on

Figure 62. At the north lobe, units with large tools lie between hearths 7 and 8, adjacent to hearths 2 and 6, and associated with possible hearth 1 9. The latter concentration is strongly affected by the presence of several quartz block cores. There are no units with concentrations of large tools outside the open northern

side of the lobe, as might be expected from a "door

dump." At the south lobe, a unit with large tools is

directly associated with hearths 3a and 3b while another lies in the relatively debitage-free "corridor" between

hearths 3a and 4. Large tool units also occur at both

the eastern and western edges of the middle area. Most of the large implements on the eastern side are unused quartz block cores. As discussed previously,

these may represent a raw material cache rather than

a discard dump. In sum, there is little evidence for the

systematic removal of larger tools from within the modules to secondary deposits elsewhere.

Debitage might also have been subject to maintenance related size-sorting, especially quartz, the expedient reduction of which produced a wide array of

large chunks. Quartz chunks might be more annoying on a dwelling floor than small Ramah chert retouch

flakes and the larger quartz fragments would be easier to collect and discard outside a dwelling. However,

size-sorted patterns of debitage might also reflect the

spatial staging of lithic reduction sequences. Initial

106 CHAPTER 6
Tool class • Cluster

1.5-

CO^ 1.0-

Axis 1 (38.4%)

0.5- 9 7'

-1.0.^.OTH

1

^PR

-3.0 -2.0 1.0 *H

2.0

1 3.0

1 1 1 ST^ BC^

-0.5-

-1.0-

-1.5-

'SB

. 2

PT

4

^SP

Axis 2 (33.5%)

60/ Area 2A: correspondence analysis plot of tool classes byk-means cluster, based on

the overall Area 2 nine-cluster solution.

ing the associated tool context.

Reduction related size-sorting

might be indicated by associations between block cores and

larger debitage fragments and

bipolar cores and smaller debitage fragments, while mainte- nance related size-sorting

might be signaled by the cooccurrence of both core types

and larger debitage sizes. If all

reduction stages occurred at

the same locale the entire range

of core types and debitage sizes would be present.

Investigation of quartz

size-sorting was undertaken by

reduction of quartz block cores resulting in the production of large fragments might occur in one area,

then some of those fragments could be removed to

another location for further bipolar reduction, producing a concentration of small fragments. Nonetheless, it might be possible to distinguish between maintenance

related and reduction related size-sorting by considercalculating a size-sorting index (SSI; Wandsnider 1996,

see Chapter 3) for each of the 1 m^ quadrats at Area

2A. The SSI summarizes the representation of small and large items in a quadrat, with high negative values

indicating a dominance of large items, high positive

values a dominance of small items, and values near

indicating a mixture of sizes. The large and small flake

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 107
o

H11 OH17

Units with concentrations of large tools

H9

H)2 H15

o0.11

0.01 -i^

0.85 (jO.S?

0.03

0.11 0,08

-0.81

o.-ts

-0.01

')

0.36

-0.36

Size-sorting index (SSI)

predominance of large quartz flakes

predominance of small quartz flakes

u

-0.02 11

62/ Area 2: size distribution of tools and quartz flakes.

categories were constructed with reference to a line

graph of quartz flake sizes for Area 2 as a whole. Around 85% of the flakes were <35 mm in size and the

graph flattened out markedly above 35 mm, so "large" was defined as >35 mm. Figure 62 displays the sizesorting indices; units dominated by small or large

flakes are highlighted. At the north lobe there is a unit

with predominantly small flakes that lies between

hearths 2, 7 and 8. On its northern flank are three

units with a predominance of large flakes; two of these

also have significant numbers of large tools, as does

one unit to the southwest. Hearth 6 lies in one of the

aforementioned units dominated by large flakes, but

adjacent units to the north and east are dominated by

small flakes. Hearth 1 is situated in a unit with primarily large flakes and adjacent to a unit in the middle

subarea with mainly large tools (quartz cores). One

unit north of the north lobe (49x79y) has a preponderance of large flakes, but its location in the area of

probable overlap between Areas 2a and 2b renders it

problematic. At the south lobe the unit containing

hearth 3a is dominated by large quartz flakes while an

108 CHAPTER 6
1 1 6 2 1 1 1 Total biface-thinning flakes

1 2 11 3 6 1

4 5 1 3 2 4 3

2 2 7 1 2 2

2 1 :c ) 4 2 7 7

2 1 2 -(

8

4 8 21 2 7

\ 1 o

14 1 5 5 9 19

1 ^

4 20

^

4

3

3 7 9 24 16

6 @ 3 1 63 22 12 5

5 2 7 5 0" 7 30 a::

1 2 3 9 10

1 1 1 2 5

6 6 67 65 25 C 9 L

( )

3 2 1^ 2 . 1

14 2 i

6 11 24 9 c

2 2 1 2 1 2 2

( .

1 2

1 2

1

Large (>30mm) biface-thinning flakes

1

1 t

1 c

1 1

:>

1 - o T 2 2 1 3

/ (J 2 4

1 10 7 3 1

1 1 _ 1 2 10

2 4 5 3 C ) ( ) _^1

2 4

2 4 4

1 1

(

1

1

63/ /Area 2: distribution of Ramah chert biface-thinning flal<es.

adjacent unit is dominated by small flakes; both these

units also contain significant numbers of large tools. Two units on opposite sides of hearth 5 have a tendency towards mostly small flakes, while one nearby unit

at the western entrance of the middle subarea has a

concentration of large tools. An interesting pattern is

the presence of three units with large flakes just outside the eastern edge of the middle subarea, accompanied by three units near that edge with concentrations

of large tools (mostly quartz cores). This distribution

suggests that quartz blocks cached in the middle subarea may have been reduced in a location immediately

to the east; the cores may have been reduced mostly

by direct percussion (there are few bipolar cores),

which produced relatively large flakes. The bounded nature of the overall flake distributions has already been used to argue against an exterior hearth model. It is clear that the size-sorting data do not fit very well with the expectations of the exterior model: concentric zones of small items in drop

zones near the hearths, larger items in more distant

toss zones. Only the area around hearth 8 in the north

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 109
lobe appears to conform. Hearth 3a at the south lobe

actually exhibits the opposite pattern: large quartz

flakes and tools adjacent to the hearths, small flakes somewhat distant. This opposite pattern may represent spatial differences in the staging of quartz reduction: initial direct percussion adjacent to the hearth,

selection of desired fragments, then bipolar reduction

conducted a short distance from the hearth. Hearth 5

at the south lobe is ambiguous; it lies beside two units

with a preponderance of small quartz flakes, one of

which (44x74y) is adjacent to a more hearth-distant

unit with a very slight tendency towards larger flake

sizes. One of these hearth-adjacent units (44x74y) also

contained the largest concentration of small Ramah

chert flakes at Area 2. Nor do these data provide much clear evidence for

maintenance related size-sorting. Within the north lobe

there are four or five units with predominantly large

quartz flakes and three or four units with large tools. The south lobe has less in the way of large quartz

flakes, but has three units with many large tools.

Besides the area directly east of the middle zone, there

are no units outside the lobes with concentrations of

large tools or flakes that might suggest dumps. Thus,

the general impression is that if the lobes represent

dwelling structures there was not much effort devoted

to maintenance in the form of removing large-sized

lithic clutter (although the floors could be the result of

less fastidious pre-abandonment behavior [Stevenson

1991]). In sum, the quartz flake size-sorting data are ambiguous, but there are indications that some of the

variation might be related to spatial positioning of

reduction stages.

A final variable that might point to maintenance

activity is the distribution of thermally altered (patinated) Ramah chert flakes. These flakes must have been

transformed by direct contact with hearth areas, so

their occurrence in locations distant from hearths would indicate secondary deposition. Figure 42 indicates that patinated Ramah chert is strongly associated with hearths and that secondary deposits are mostly within an arm's length of a hearth. A concentration

occurs outside the northern end of the north lobe, but

it is possible that this is associated with the activities

that produced the fire-cracked rock concentrations at

Area 2B. Otherwise, several patinated flakes occur in

the exterior area to the east of the south lobe. These

might indicate dumping, but a cluster of rocks at the edge of the excavation (Figure 35) could represent a

hearth. In sum, the distribution of thermally altered Ramah chert does not provide much evidence for maintenance activity at Area 2A.

Refitting

Up to this point, micro-scale analysis has been used to

establish the presence of two behavioral modules. It is now time to consider the meso-scale question of their

relationship to each other and to other parts of Area 2A by looking at lithic refitting patterns. If we consider broken tools, virtually all conjoining tool fragments

are found nearby each other within the same quadrat.

The only cross-quadrat refits are two fragments of a

leaf-shaped (bipointed) biface that reconnect between

the southwestern portion of the north lobe and the edge of the south lobe and the middle subarea (Figure

50), a quartz block core with one piece in the inner

portion of the north lobe and its conjoining piece at

the northern end of the lobe (Figure 47), and two ground slate flakes joining between the inside of the

south lobe and the area to the east of that lobe (Figure

57). The latter connection between the south lobe and

eastern exterior area parallels previous observations of

similarities between the two areas in slate flake raw

materials and quartz/Ramah chert proportions.

To supplement this meager evidence an attempt was made to refit the quartz block cores with some of

the larger quartz "chunks" from the debitage. This

proved to be futile, perhaps due to insufficient effort,

but also because of the tendency for quartz to be

found either as minimally modified block cores, bipolar cores, or thoroughly shattered flakes, such that

there were few easily refitted intermediate forms. A

110 CHAPTER 6
more systematic refitting study of the Area 2A material might help clarify the spatial organization of the

site, but the bulk of the evidence at hand suggests the two lobes were behaviorally independent units.

Putting the Pieces Together

The multiple lines of evidence presented so far suggest the two lobes are distinct behavioral modules that

share similar general activity patterns, but which vary somewhat in tool types and raw material use. Both modules exhibit similar patterns of debitage distribution, each have roughly the same number of hearths and the hearths are positioned similarly at opposite

ends of the modules, although the north lobe also has

a central hearth. Defined in relation to the debitage

distributions the modules are of very similar size: ca.

4 by 3 m. The sharply bounded debitage distributions and the lack of the concentric drop/toss-zone pattern

hypothesized to characterize external hearths could

suggest the modules were associated with tent

dwellings. The lack of refits between the modules indicates a degree of behavioral independence. Two alternative dwelling configurations can be considered.

The first alternative (Figure 64) considers the

sharp external bounding of the debitage lobes to be

the consequence of a tent wall edge-effect and postulates two separate dwelling modules on the north and

south sides of the large central rock. In this scenario

debitage deposition is concentrated along the tent

walls, extending 1 .0-1 .2 m from the walls towards the

middle of the dwelling. Most of the hearths are located rather close to the postulated dwelling walls (ca. 0.5

m), with the exception of hearth 2 (centrally located)

and hearths 4 and 16 (ca. 1 m from the wall). In the

middle is a low flake/tool density area, which in the

north lobe is 0.5-1.0 by 3.0 m in size (although it is

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS
N

Depression Flake

65/ Area 2A: rectangular structure interpretation.

punctuated by hearth 2) and in the south lobe 0.7-1.0

by 2.5 m. These central spaces were either used for

activities that did not accumulate lithic refuse (e.g.,

sleeping) or were kept clean by maintenance procedures (which did not result in lithic size-sorting).

Openings at the northern ends of each lobe might indicate entrances. The hearth locations might suggest

that certain practices were focused on the inner and

outer portions of the dwellings.

Although the modules seem to be independent

behavioral units, the overall similarities and symmetries in spatial patterning are striking. At the macroscale level, the modules might represent independent

structures deliberately aligned in tandem with the

large flat central rock as a spatial fulcrum point. The

clustering of rocks in the middle subarea on both the

eastern and western sides of the large central rock

might indicate deliberate placement with reference to

two contemporary structures. This apparent common

conceptual plan could imply a cooperative relationship

between two households. The dwellings were not physically connected, but the total living space would have

measured 10 by 3 m in size and run north-south parallel to the beach front.

There are several objections to this alternative.

First, some of the apparent boundaries in the flake distribution patterns might be the result of wind deflation

and redeposition processes. The possible superposition noted near the eastern edge of the south lobe might also be attributable to such processes.

Additionally, the descriptive overview presented in

Chapter 5 noted the presence of several depressions at

Area 2A that might indicate deflation; two of these are

directly associated with the south lobe (Figure 64).

Depression 5 cuts across the middle of the lobe in an

east-west direction; its orientation cannot account for

112 CHAPTER 6
the empty "corridor space" in the lobe, although it

might have contributed to the accumulation of flakes

near hearth 4. Depression 6 lies beside hearth 5; it is

filled with flakes and seems to contribute little to accumulation or smearing of the distribution. Although less

obvious aeolian formation effects cannot be ruled out,

the similar configuration of both lobes suggests there

is some integrity to the pattern. On the other hand,

neither size-sorting patterns nor the distribution of

patinated Ramah chert suggest the operation of maintenance practices that might have been responsible for

creating bounded distributions.

Perhaps a more significant objection is the spatial

structure. The floor areas are rather small: 12-15 m^.

That is not unusual for hunter-gatherer tent dwellings,

but the small area is punctuated by multiple hearths

and the cleared central areas are of extremely limited

dimensions (0.5-1.0 by 3.0 m, 0.7-1.0 by 2.5 m) such

that very few people could be accommodated. The

proximity of several hearths to the hypothesized

dwelling walls is problematic given the potential for

igniting a tent covering. Additionally, the spatial configuration is different from most of the ethnographic

and archaeological examples discussed in Chapter 3,

in which hearths and debris accumulations are situated towards the center of the dwellings and the cleared

living space is positioned at the sides or the back.

In sum, the multiple hearths raise the problem of

feature contemporaneity, thus challenging the behavioral unity of the modules.

The second alternative also sees the two modules

as components of separate dwellings, but it requires a

gestalt switch to see them as parts of larger rectangular structures extending east-west, parallel to each

other and perpendicular to the beach front (Figure 65).

In this scenario the linear arms of the lobes are activity concentrations that divide the rectangular structures

into segments in a manner consistent with the longhouse model. The south lobe provides the best illustration of this interpretation, although it implies a structure that extends beyond the western boundary of the

excavation. The north-south ends of the south lobe

define the width of the structure (3.7-4.0 m). The

northern end of the structure is indicated by the dropoff in flake density between 47-48x, which occurs

short of the large boulders in 48-49x71 y that constitute a natural limit for a dwelling, and by a set of smaller rocks in 47x71 -72y that arc along the edge of the

flake density shift and which might be tent anchor

rocks. Some of the rocks in the "middle" subarea might

relate to the northern wall of the dwelling, while the

south side lacks indications of wall rocks. The overall

length of the structure is at least 6 meters and it contains at least three segments separated by the two linear lithic concentrations associated with hearths. Two

hearths lie within 50 cm of the north wall and two are

a similar distance from the south wall; the fifth lies 1 .2 m in from the south wall. Lithic reduction activities and

tool deposition are concentrated in the area within and

between the lobe arms; the eastern and western flanks

or segments have markedly fewer flakes and tools and

could therefore be sleeping areas. Refits of two sets of ground slate flakes between the center of the lobe and

the eastern flank or segment provide a behavioral linkage consistent with this interpretation.

The north lobe provides a weaker exemplification

of the interpretation. Its eastern boundary abuts

directly on several large boulders that are natural

dwelling limits. The sparse flake distribution towards

the west is not inconsistent with the interpretation,

but it is too meager to be strongly convincing. A

dwelling of 3.7-4.0 m in width and at least 5 m in

length is implied. Two hearths are located within 50 cm of the south wall while two are positioned 1.2-1.5 m in from the north wall. A fifth hearth is centrally

located between the lobe arms. A possible sixth

4Th e wall-centered deposition would be most like the pattern noted at one of the Ungava Bay Late Dorset longhouses (Figure 13b; Plumet 1985).

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS
hearth lies 50 cm from the north wall. This configuration implies that the eastern end of the dwelling was

the focus of lithic reduction and tool deposition

around the hearths while the western portion was an open area with little depositional activity.

Consequently, in contrast to the hypothesized southern dwelling, the northern structure was divided into two clearly contrasting sides: an eastern portion with

hearth activity and lithic reduction and a western portion with minimal deposition, perhaps a sleeping area.

Along the south wall a tongue of flakes protrudes

slightly into the middle subarea just west of the large

central rock, suggesting an extension of deposition

outside the dwelling (perhaps a doorway?).

The segmented structure alternative requires a

slight reorganization of the previously presented data.

Table 12 outlines the distribution of tool classes with

the excavation units grouped as closely as possible to

the hypothesized rectangular structures. A chi-square

test indicates no significant differences in tool class

representation between the two structures at the .05

level (-/^ = 21.53); but note the many low cell values).

Looking at the expected frequencies, flake points and

block cores are over-represented at the northern structure while ground slate flakes and tool fragments are

over-represented at the southern structure. Tool raw

material frequencies and weights (Table 13) exhibit

broadly similar proportions at the two structures; as

far as frequencies are concerned, there is no statistically significant difference between the structures

= 7.48). Slate is proportionally greater by frequency at the southern structure, but slightly greater by

weight at the northern structure. Table 14 compares

the flake raw materials. In relation to expected frequencies, quartz is over-represented at the northern

structure and Ramah chert is over-represented at the

southern structure. Among the slates, gray slate dominates by frequency at the northern structure while

both gray and green slates are well represented at the

southern structure. By weight, quartz dominates at

both structures, although there is a substantial weight

percent of Ramah chert (28%) at the southern structure. The frequency dominance of gray slate at the

northern structure is offset by relatively even proportions of gray and green slate by weight. Consequently,

although there is variation between the hypothesized

segmented dwellings, there are no grounds to posit

distinct contrasts in social practices.

This second interpretation of the modules is subject to the same objections as the first. Changing the

Table 12: Area 2A Tool Classes by Hypothesized Rectangular Structure

PT Bl PR FP sc UF SP CA SB ST BC CO TM OTH TOTAL

North 2.5 6 3 7 7 28 2 2 2 9 14 14 1 1 98.5

South 8 8 2 3 1 1 51 2 1 7 39.5 35 12.5 2 3 185

TOTAL 10.5 14 5 10 18 79 4 3 9 48.5 49 26.5 3 4 283.5

• .5 denotes a conjoining fragment

PT: points (bifacial), Bl: bifaces, PR: preforms (biface), FP: flake points, SC: scrapers (endscrapers and

flake knives), UF: utilized flakes, SP: slate points, CA: celt/adze, SB: slate blanks (unmodified plates and

blanks), ST: slate tool fragments (ground slate flakes and unidentified tool fragments), BC: bipolar

cores, CO: block cores (quartz), TM: tool manufacturing (hammerstones, schist tablets, whetstones),

and OTH: other (stemmed flakes, linear flakes, graver).

114 CHAPTER 6
Table 13: Area 2A Tool Raw Material Frequencies and Weights (in grams)

by Hypothesized Rectangular Structure

North North South South

N Wt (a) N Wt (a) (%)

Quartz 24 (24.4) 1 869.0 (69.8) 39.5 (21.4) 1 923.5 (72.3) Ramah chert 51.5* (52.3) 292.2 (10.9) 78 (42.2) 341 .3 (12.8)

Cray Mugford chert 4 (4.1) 28.3 (1.1) 4 (2.2) 16.0 (0.6)

Black chert 3 (3.0) 1 5.0 (0.6) 1 2 (6.5) 33.0 (1.2)

Slate—total 1 5 (1 5.2) 294.8 (1 1.0) 49.5 (26.8) 1 78.6 (6.7) Green 9 1 1 1 .6 1 7 1 07.7

Gray 1 16.0 26.5 61 .3 Red-brown 3 167.0 2 3.5 Gray-banded 1 0.2 3 6.1

Indet. 1 n.a. 1 n.a.

Schist 1 (1.0) 1 77.0 (6.6) Other 2 n 1

)

1 67.3 (6 31 TOTAL 98.5 185

* .5 denotes a conjoining fragment

gestalt does not resolve the problem of multiple

hearths within a small area, with their potential implication of re-occupation. The modules present interesting patterns, but their interpretation is problematic.

Consumption of Lithic Raw Materials and

Technological Organization.

Given the presence of two behavioral modules and

possible rectangular structures we can consider what

might be inferred about variations in raw material consumption and the spatial dimension of technological organization. The undifferentiated "other" subarea used in the previous analyses is now subdivided so as to accommodate the rectangular

dwelling interpretation: quadrats associated with the hypothesized rectangular dwellings are categorized

as "north-other" or "south-other" while the remaining

units are classed as "other." Thus, the north lobe and

north-other taken together constitute the northern

rectangular structure and the south lobe and southother constitute the southern rectangular structure.

Table 1 5 provides a breakdown of total raw material

weights (tools and flakes) by spatial position at Area

2A. Quartz is used prodigiously: 6 kg at the north

lobe (6.4 kg for the northern rectangular structure)

and ca. 4.5 kg at the south lobe (4.8 kg for the

southern rectangular structure). In contrast, the total

quantity of Ramah chert consumed (or discarded) at each lobe/structure is quite modest, although the

figure for the south lobe (1 .6 kg) is over double that

of the north lobe (0.7 kg), as is the figure for the southern structure (2.3 kg) versus the northern

structure (0.8 kg). Fine-grained cherts are rare and/or highly conserved, with a total of only 49 g discarded at the north lobe/structure and 76 g at the

south lobe/structure. Slate is also used quite modestly, with ca. 0.4 kg used at the north lobe/structure and 0.5 kg at the south lobe/structure. Slate

type weights vary spatially, however: while both

lobes use roughly similar amounts of green slate, the

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS
Table 14: Area 2A Flake Raw Material Frequencies and Weights (in grams)

by Hypothesized Rectangular Structure

North North South South N (%) Wt (g) (%) N (%) Wt (g) (%)

Quartz 1273 (46.8) 4678.0 (87.2) 1214 (24.3) 4035.2 (65.3)

Ramah chert 1 228 (45.2) 558.2 (1 0.4) 3322 (66.6) 1 732.0 (28.0)

Patinated Ramah 44 (1.6) 1 9.9 (0.4) 84 (1 .7) 49.2 (0.8)

Gray Mugford chert 20 (0.7) 4.0 (0.1

)

38 (0.8) 9.6 (0.2)

Black chert 21 (0.8) 3.9 (0.1

)

38 (0.8) 1 9.7 (0.3) Green Mugford 2 (0.0) 0.2 (0.0)

Slate—total 133 (4.9) 99.5 (1 .9) 291 (5.8) 330.7 (5.4)

Beige 7 1 .3 2

1

6.1

Green 1 1 39.3 1 1 1 73.1

Gray 1 03 36.0 1 52 1 46.9

Gray-banded 8 3.0 0.1 Red-brown 3 0.9 3 2.5

Indet. 1 19.0 5 2.0 TOTAL 2719 4989

.5 denotes a conjoining fragment

south lobe uses much more gray slate and the north

lobe more red-brown slate. The variations in the quantity of quartz and

Ramah chert outlined in Table 12 point to slight differences in raw material management and discard

practices at the two modules. Practices related to one

of the materials, however, cannot be directly compared

with those related to the other since they constitute

different kinds of reduction systems. Quartz was

reduced both by free-hand percussion on raw blocks and bipolar percussion, while Ramah chert was organized in a bifacial reduction system based on large preforms. A summary of the products of each reduction

system is presented in Table 16. As far as quartz is concerned, the total weight of

the material is greater in the north lobe. Both lobes

have about the same amount of flakes and block

cores. The south lobe has somewhat more tools, but

this is largely a consequence of the frequency of bipolar cores, of which there are twice as many at the south

lobe as at the north. This might suggest less intensive

reduction at the north lobe without the discard of

intermediate stage bipolar cores, or simply greater

reliance on direct percussion rather than the bipolar

technique. As noted earlier, the spatial distribution of

cores IS sometimes independent of the debitage.

Several block cores occur in the debitage-poor middle

subarea, seemingly cached or dumped there unrelated

to m situ reduction. Just east of the middle area there

are several bipolar cores that are independent of both

block cores and quartz debitage, which suggests they

are secondary refuse. Otherwise, the core/debitage

associations are suggestive of primary refuse from in

situ reduction.

For Ramah chert, the inhabitants of the south

lobe consumed over twice as much material by weight

as those of the north lobe, with a corresponding difference in flake production. The quantities of biface

fragments and preforms are similar, while the south

lobe has three times the quantity of bifacial points,

116 CHAPTER 6
Table 15: Area 2A Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes)

by Model Units. Rounded to the Nearest Gram.

North Lobe North-Oth Middle South Lobe South-Oth Other

g (%) g (%) g (%) g (%) g (%) g (%)

Quartz 6072 (83.3) 369 (78.5) 1 244 (94.5) 4483 (67.5) 337 (28.2) 2438 (83.6)

Ramah chert 757 (10.4) 91 (19.4) 72 (5.5) 1608 (24.2) 723 (60.5) 339 (1 1 .6)

Patinated Ramah 20 (0.3) 1 (0.2) 45 (0.7) 5 (0.4) 5 (0.2)

Black chert 1 5 (0.2) 3 (0.6) 47 (0.7) 3 (0.3) 1 1 (0.4)

Gray Mugford 28 (0.4) 3 (0.6) 22 (0.3) 2 (0.2) 0.1 (0.0)

Green Mugford 2 (0.2)

Slate—total 394 (5.4) 3 (0.6) 0.2 (0.0) 435 (6.6) 123 (10.3) 122 (4.2)

green 1 57 0.1 2 233 55 1 1 5

gray 49 3 1 86 51 5

beige 1 5 1 4 1

red-brown 167 4 3 1

gray-banded 1 5 0.1

indet. 19 2

Schist 744 555 1 79

Other 167 167

consistent with the differences in overall raw material

and flake quantities. On the other hand, despite having twice the amount of raw material, the south lobe

has only ca. 30% more tools than the north lobe; this

disparity suggests that some tools or preforms were

produced for curation to other localities. At both

lobes 70-75% of the discarded Ramah chert tools

could be considered expedient (i.e., utilized flakes,

flake knives, flake points), while 24-25% are curatable

bifaces. Unlike quartz, bipolar cores of Ramah chert do not represent a fundamental part of the reduction

system. Instead, they are most likely the product of

recycling tool fragments. A chi-square test indicates

there is no significant difference in the frequencies of

quartz and Ramah chert bipolar cores between the

subareas (/^ = 0.46). The distribution of Ramah chert bifaces and pre- forms may be more a consequence of discard behaviour than an indication of activity areas or spatial staging in tool production. A variable that may be more

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS

sensitive to tracking the spatial positioning of biface

reduction is the distribution of biface-thinning flakes

(BTFs). Archaeological data from quarry and site contexts (Cramly 1 978; Lazenby 1 980, 1 984) indicate that Ramah chert was often transported in the form of large

bifaces and preforms. Reduction of these implements

produces large quantities of BTFs and variation in the

size of these flakes is partly related to reduction stage. The spatial concentration of BTFs of different sizes may therefore indicate spatial staging in biface reduction. The approach is not without its methodological

problems (Andrefsky 1998:118), however, and the

effects of maintenance activity on size-sorting must be

considered.

All excavation units with significant quantities of Ramah chert produced considerable numbers of BTFs

(defined following House and Ballenger 1976; Raab et

al. 1979). In order to set a size threshold for identifying the products of initial stage biface reduction, a

"large" thinning flake category was defined as flakes

1 1 7
Table 16: Summary of the Quartz and Ramah Chert Reduction Systems at Area 2A

QUARTZ

Tools Block Cores Bipolar Flakes Total Weight (g)

North lobe 23 12 9 1 1 59 6072

North-other 1 1 114 369

Middle 5.5* 4.5 63 1 244

South lobe 35.5 14.5 21 1065 4483

South-other 4 1 1 1 54 555

Other 12 6 3 165 2438

RAMAH CHERT

Tools Points Biface. Frags.

Preforms Bipolar

Cores

Biface ThinningFlakes Total Weight (g)

North Lobe 48.5* 2.5 6 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 39 757

North-other 3 1 3 131 91

Middle 7.5 0.5 2 9 44 64

South Lobe 66 8 6 2 8 341 2705 1608

South-other 14 1 1 2 104 688 505

Other 18 1 1 5 59 369 339

.5 denotes a conjoining fragment

with one dimension in excess of 30 mm. This limit was

not entirely arbitrary in that: a) the overall Ramah chert

flake size distribution falls mostly less than 25 mm,

and b) observations from prehistoric workshops and

experimental reduction of Ramah chert bifaces suggests that the reduction of large transportable quarry

blanks and biface preforms will probably produce considerable debitage in the over 30 mm size range.

Figure 63 indicates that the distribution of large

and small BTFs is fairly consistent with the overall distribution of Ramah chert flakes, since units with several BTFs tend to be units with relatively many Ramah

chert flakes, although this is not always the case. By frequency, most of the BTFs are found in the south lobe, which also has the most Ramah chert debitage. The

overall distributions of small and large BTFs are similar and most of the major concentrations of each size class

occur adjacent to hearths. An exception to the latter is

the cluster of BTFs in 46x74y near the northeast corner

of the south lobe; this was also a locus of quartz reduction. There is also a slight concentration of BTFs in the

area east of the lobes, particularly at the eastern end of

the hypothesized southern structure. By and large, the

distribution of BTFs is consistent with the distributions

of bifacial points and preforms, except in the area east

of the lobes where there are relatively few implements

in relation to the number of BTFs. In sum, there is not much evidence for spatial variations in the staging of Ramah chert reduction. Tool production and discard

generally are spatially associated, except in the area

east of the lobes where production activity is associated with minimal tool discard.

Fine-grained cherts (mostly gray Mugford and

black chert) occur in minor quantities by frequency

118 CHAPTER 6
and weight and the size of the debitage is uniformly

small (see Chapter 9). This does not mean that these

materials were insignificant; their near-exclusive use

for endscrapers implies a high degree of selectivity.

The three bipolar cores of these materials likely represent recycled tool fragments. The spatial distribution

of both tools and flakes made from these cherts is

strongly, though not exclusively, limited to within the

two lobes.

Slates exhibit distribution patterns that are generally similar to the fine-grained cherts, but slate processing and discard is not as spatially restricted.

Finished slate tools and fragments thereof are all

found within the lobes as are the majority of ground

slate flakes, which represent the reworking of finished

tools. However, several ground slate flakes and two

blanks lie outside the south lobe in what would be the

eastern end of the hypothesized southern structure;

two of the ground flakes conjoin with pieces within the

south lobe. Otherwise, modified plates of slate raw

material and tool blanks occur both within and outside

the lobes. Slate flakes of all color types occur primarily within the lobes, but small concentrations of green

and gray slate flakes are also found in the eastern end

of the southern structure.

Area 2A Conclusion

Neither the two module nor the rectangular dwelling

interpretation fit precisely with reports from other

Early/Middle Labrador Maritime Archaic dwellings, but

the segmented structure model comes closest, given

the pattern of linear feature-centered distributions running across the width of a rectangular dwelling,

flanked by floor-areas with limited deposition. The seg- mented structure interpretation is also consistent with

the ethnoarchaeological and other archaeological

examples of interior dwelling space considered in Chapter 3, which generally exhibited centrally located

hearth-centered debris distributions flanked by relatively debris-free habitation areas. On the other hand,

the orientation of the hypothesized dwellings perpendicular to the beach front departs from most of the documented Maritime Archaic dwellings, which have

their long walls oriented parallel to a beach. The dwelling sizes implied by both interpretations

(modules: 4 by 3 m, rectangular: 4 by 6-i- m) are broadly consistent with the current picture of Early/Middle

Maritime Archaic structures. At Aillik-2 (near

Makkovik), several structures were found on shorelines

originally estimated to date 6000-5500 B.P.: a one seg- ment structure 3 m in length, a two segment structure

6 m in length and a four segment structure 10 m in

length (Fitzhugh 1984:10). More recently, Fitzhugh

(2002:7) reports a radiocarbon date of 6870±1 80 B.P.

for the latter 1 m structure and an additional five seg- ment structure 8 m in length from the same beach

level is dated 6400±1 1 B.P.. At Aillik West 1 , a three segment structure 9 m in length is radiocarbon dated

to 5210±270 B.P. (Fitzhugh 1984:10). At Hamilton

Inlet, Sandy Cove Complex sites (ca. 5000 B.P.) apparently contain structures with two or three hearths and

lengths of 12-16 m (Fitzhugh 1984:13). More detailed

investigations of Early/Middle Maritime Archaic sites

will be necessary to clarify the functional and cultural

parameters of these different spatial configurations

and to assess how the Area 2A features fit into the

range of variation.

Area 2B

Area 2B consists of a central pit and hearth complex

surrounded by extensive deposits of fire-cracked rock

(Figure 33, 66). Radiocarbon dates of 6100-6000 B.P.

indicate this subarea is slightly earlier than Area 2A.

Defining the southern boundary of Area 2B is some- what problematic. As discussed previously, some of

the quadrats in the 49-50x76-80y area may contain

palimpsest deposits resulting from an overlap between

the Area 2A and 2B occupations (see Figure 33). In particular, the high frequency of Ramah chert flakes plus

the presence of fire-cracked rock and clusters of other

small rocks in 49x76-80y strongly suggest this area is

part of the Area 2B occupation. Nonetheless, given this

NUKASU5UT0K 5 SPATIAL ANALYSIS 119
overlap problem and the predominant limitation of k- means cluster 8 to the area south of the 50x line, the

latter is used as a convenient, if imperfect, southern

boundary for the Area 2B analysis.

The central pit is a vaguely defined oval basin 1 .25

by 0.9 m in size, 5 cm deep, containing charcoal, red

ocher and calcined bone fragments. About 60-80 cm

to the west is hearth 1 1 , a disturbed feature that may

or may not have been contemporary with the pit. These

central features are surrounded by an area of 1.2-1.6 m radius that for the most part contains a diffuse scatter of small to medium-sized rocks. This relatively

rock-free central area is ringed by fire-cracked rock

deposits distributed as thin "carpets," some of which

extend beyond the boundaries of the excavation. The

smaller concentrations of the rock debris probably represent discrete depositional events while the larger

concentrations may be accretions of several depositional episodes. A small rock deposit overlaps the eastern edge of the central pit feature such that this

deposit must partially post-date the feature. Another

lesser concentration lies immediately to the west of the

pit, implying a close association. The largest continuous rock concentrations lie 1 .6 m to the northwest and

1.2 m to the southeast of the pit. The southeastern

concentration has a peculiar distribution around a

large boulder; the rock-free area adjacent to the boulder indicates that for some reason the fire-cracked

rock was not deposited directly up against the boulder.

Lithic debitage is mainly concentrated in the central

area that is relatively free of fire-cracked rock. An

exception is an almost circular flake concentration in

the southern corner of the excavation (50x 76-77y),

which is discussed further below. A preliminary interpretation of this pattern is that

the central hearth-pit area was employed in multiple

episodes of using rocks for cooking or heating, a

process involving the positioning of people in the

largely rock-free area surrounding the pit. Some of the small-medium size rocks plotted in this zone may represent unused raw materials for the heating process.

The fragmentary debris produced by the heating

process was then collected and discarded a short distance beyond the central features, creating the contin- uous carpets of fire-cracked rocks east and west of the

pit. The smaller concentrations immediately adjacent

to the pit may indicate the last cleaning phase prior to

the cessation of heating activity. Two alternative models could account for this concentric configuration: 1)

Binford's (1 983:1 53, 1 67-1 69) "drop/toss-zone" model

for patterning associated with external hearths and

activity areas, and 2) an external discard model, in which fire-cracked rock produced within a dwelling was discarded in a ring immediately outside the

dwelling walls. These two models provide the underlying framework for the analysis.

There is more to Area 28 than a concentric pattern, however; two additional features complicate the

analysis. The aforementioned circular concentration of

flakes in 50x76-77y is directly associated with a cluster of rocks and adjacent to a tongue of fire-cracked

rock that extends out from the main mass, as well as

another smaller fire-cracked rock dump. Although no

charcoal was recorded in the area of the flake/rock

concentration, the pattern of all these elements is very

similar to that noted at other hearths. The unusual

tongue-like configuration of the adjacent fire-cracked

rock deposit could be better explained as a result of dumping from this possible hearth (H-1 7), rather than

from the central hearth-pit complex. Thus there could

be two different feature-centered complexes at Area

2B. A second possible anomaly is the concentration of

fire-cracked rock on the west side of the boulder in

unit 50x79y; the concentration extends tongue-like

towards the north lobe at Area 2A. The shape of this

deposit and its orientation with respect to the boulder

suggests that instead of being thrown north to south

from the central portion of Area 2B, it could have accumulated by dumping from a location slightly to the

west. Two features 1 m to the west and south are possible source areas: a rock cluster (lacking charcoal)

suggestive of a possible hearth (H-1 8) and a small pit

120 CHAPTER 6
with charcoal and red ocher which might have been a

hearth (H-19). The following discussion provides a more detailed analysis of these patterns.

Tool Distribution

Detailed information on the distribution of tool classes

can be had in Figures 47 to 58. Beginning with a

model-based analysis, the tools are grouped using the

following units: central pit, hearth 11, fire-cracked

rock zone, possible hearth 1 7, and units adjacent to

hearth 1 7 (Figure 38). As shown in Table 1 7, all the formal tools are found either in the central pit/hearth

area (points, bifaces, flake knives) or near possible

hearth 1 7 (flake point, endscraper). Despite the large

number of fine-grained chert flakes adjacent to hearth

1 1 and the central pit (see below), no endscrapers—

which are made almost exclusively of this materialwere found in the central area. Utilized flakes are most

frequent in the central pit/hearth area, but they are

also found in the fire-cracked rock zone and adjacent

to possible hearth 1 7. Two quartz block cores occur in

the central area near the pit. Three bipolar cores are

present in the central area and another three are found

in the extreme southeastern corner of Area 2B, an area

with very few quartz flakes (Figure 39). Given the association between bipolar cores and quartz reduction at

Area 2A, the latter isolated bipolar cores might have

been tossed there from locations of quartz reduction

in the central area or at possible hearth 1 7. No finished ground slate tools or slate plates/blanks were found in

Area 2B, but there were several ground slate flakes, all

but one of which were associated with the pit or hearth

11. Given the presence of a modest number of slate

flakes (of four different raw material types) and a possible sandstone grindstone, this could suggest an emphasis on reworking curated tools rather than production activity.

Table 18 outlines the distribution of tool raw

material frequencies in relation to the model-based

units. No patterning is evident besides the lack of slate

tools in the hearth 17 units. Of the 42 tools from Area 2B, 39 have point provenience. Consequently, although the sample size is

small, a /(-means cluster analysis may be more robust

than at Area 2A. The overall 12-cluster /(-means solution computed for Area 2 as a whole (Figure 37) indicatTable 17: Area 2B Tool Classes by Model Units

Center H-ll Fire- H-17 Adjacent

Cracked H-17

TOTAL

N (%)

Stemmed points 1 1 (2.4)

Bifaces 1 1 (2.4)

Flake points 1 1 (2.4)

Endscrapers 1 1 (2.4)

Flake knives 2 2 (4.8)

Utilized flakes 9 3 5 4 21 (50.0)

Bipolar cores 1 1 1 3 6 (14.3)

Block Cores 2 2 (4.8) Ground slate flakes 3 2 1 6 (14.3)

Grindstones (?) 1 1 (2.4) TOTAL 18 8 7 1 8 42

NUKASUSUTOK 5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 121
Table 18: Area 2B Tool Raw Material Frequencies by Model Units

Center H-11 Fire-Cracked H-17 Adjacent H-1 7 TOTAL N (%)

Quartz 4 2 3 9(21.4)

Ramah chert 7 2 6 5 20 (47.6)

Black chert 2 2 4 (9.5) Cray Mugford chert 1 1 (2.4) Slate—total 4 2 1 7(16.7) Green 2 2 1 5 Gray 1 1

Indet. 1 1 Sandstone 1 1 (2.4) TOTAL 18 8 7 1 8 42

ed two clusters at Area 2B. Cluster 6 lies in the middle

of the central pit-hearth complex while cluster 3 is a

northeastern outlier to possible hearth 1 7. Inspection

of the tool distribution constituting cluster 6, however,

suggested this cluster lumps together several possibly

independent tool groupings. Consequently, a separate

/(-means analysis was conducted on the Area 28 materials. Three and 5-cluster solutions seemed best, but

the 5-cluster solution was preferred because it provided a good separation of what seemed like intuitively

reasonable groups (Figure 67). Clusters 1 and 4 are

associated with the pit, suggesting two depositional

positions on opposite sides of the feature, while cluster 5 is associated with Hearth 1 1 . Cluster 3 includes

items lying within or near the fire-cracked rock ring

southwest of the pit. Cluster 2 consists of implements

lying east of possible hearth 1 7.

Table 19 shows the tool classes associated with

each of these five clusters. The number of tools in each

cluster is similar. Although there are differences in the

Table 19: Area 2B Tool Classes by K-Means Cluster

Cl C-2 C3 C-4 C-5 TOTAL

Stemmed point 1 1

Biface 1 1

Endscraper 1 1

Flake knife 2 2

Utilized flake 3 4 4 5 3 1 9

Bipolar core 3 1 2 6

Block core 1 1 2 Ground slate flake 1 12 2 6

Grindstone (?) 1 1 TOTAL 7 8 6 9 9 39

Three items without point provenience: a utilized flal<e near Cluster 1 , a utilized flake near Cluster 4 and a

flake point equidistant west of Clusters 2 and 3.

122 CHAPTER 6
66/ Area 2B: features and total flake distribution.

types represented in each cluster, the low frequencies

make it difficult to assess the meaning of the variations. The best that can be said is that utilized flakes

are evenly distributed across the clusters while formal

tools have more restricted distributions. Five of the six

bipolar cores are associated with hearths (either hearth

1 1 or adjacent to possible hearth 1 7). These cluster

results may provide a more nuanced view of spatial

distributions within the model-based units, but they

reveal little about the nature of these patterns. The same might be said of the distribution of tool raw

materials by cluster (Table 20). Tools of Ramah chert

(mostly utilized flakes) are fairly evenly distributed

across the clusters, while black chert tools (all utilized

flakes) and green ground slate flakes are mostly limited to clusters 4 and 5 (the central subarea).

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 123
Table 20: Area 2B Tool Raw Material Frequencies by K-Means Cluster.

C-1 C-2 C 3 C-4 C 5 TOTAL N (%) Weight (g)

Quartz 2 3 1 3 9 (23.1) 973

Ramah chert 3 4 4 4 2 1 7 (43.6) 104

Black chert 2 2 4 (10.3) 18

Cray Mugford chert 1 1 (2.6) 2

Slate—total 2 1 2 2 7 (17.9) Green 1 2 2 5 9

Gray 1 1 1

Indet. 1 1 1

Sandstone 1 1 n.a. TOTAL 7 8 6 9 9 39

Three items without point provenience, all of Ramah chert other equidistant west of Clusters 2 and 3.one near Cluster /, one near Cluster 4, the

Flake Distribution

As noted above, the majority of the flakes at Area 2B

are concentrated in the central fire-cracked rock-free

area (Figure 66). Ramah chert is the most abundant

flake material. A significant quantity of these flakes is

found within the central pit and the vast majority lie

within a 1 .8 m radius of the pit edge, with the highest

density on the eastern and southern sides of the feature (Figure 40). The coterminous boundary between

the flakes and fire-cracked rocks is most clear along

the 79y line south and east of the pit. In some areas,

however, the distributions overlap: the extreme northwest corner of Area 2B, west and north of the pit, west

of the large boulder and in unit 49x78y. Nonetheless,

given the overall pattern of marked drop-off in flake

frequency beyond 1 .8 m from the pit, the clustering of many Ramah chert flakes associated with fire-cracked

rock in 49-50x78-79y (west of the boulder) may be the

result of overlapping deposition with Area 2A. The circular concentration of Ramah chert flakes

in 50x76-77y at the southern corner of Area 2B

appears to be a depositional unit quite separate from

the debitage associated with the central pit-hearth

complex. The concentration is 90 cm in diameter, with

a hollow center 30-40 cm wide. Several rocks occur

124

near the center of the flake distribution as well as on

its edges. Although no charcoal was noted here, the

configuration of flakes and rocks is strongly suggestive of a hearth (possible hearth 1 7). The Ramah chert

flakes on the northwest side of the concentration are

partially overlapped by a fire-cracked rock deposit that seems to extend out from the main mass. This extension may have originated from activities centered on

hearth 1 7 rather than being the result of dumping

actions associated with the central features. A similar

interpretation could also apply to the discrete firecracked rock cluster to the northeast of hearth 1 7

(51 x76-77y).

Patinated Ramah chert (Figure 42) is mostly concentrated in a 1 m wide arc to the north, to the east and south of the central pit. It is also associated with

the carpet of fire-cracked rocks south of the pit (51-

53x77-78. 5y), which contains little unpatinated Ramah

chert. Since patination is the result of thermal alteration the presence of patinated flake concentrations in

units entirely outside the pit and hearth features

implies they are secondary refuse dumped there after

removal from the combustion features. This contrasting distribution of unpatinated and patinated Ramah

chert is consistent with the argument of a central dropCHAPTER 6
zone (mostly unpatinated chert from tool retouch) and

an encircling toss zone (fire-cracked rock and patinated chert removed from the central hearth). The other

major concentration of patinated Ramah chert is

directly associated with possible hearth 1 7. The distribution of large Ramah chert biface-thinning flakes (BTFs; Figure 63) is limited to the quadrats

north and west of the central pit and hearth features,

with the exception of one flake east of the pit and a

single flake associated with possible hearth 17. Most

of the small BTFs are located on the opposite (south)

side of the pit. This contrast hints at differences in the

spatial positioning of biface reduction stages. Overall,

the proportion of BTFs is greatest in the central pithearth area (42.9%) and in association with possible

hearth 17 (27.2%; Table 20, below). Notably, however,

no Ramah chert points or preforms and only a single

biface were found at Area 28 (Table 20, Figures 50 to

52). Keeping in mind the limited excavation area, this

might suggest preparation of bifaces curated for use

elsewhere. The distribution of quartz flakes (Figure 39) is

generally consistent with that of Ramah chert,

although much less dense. With the exception of units 50x76-77y (associated with possible hearth 1 7), most

of the quartz flakes are located in the central area within 1.8-2.0 m of the pit. In contrast to Ramah chert,

quartz flakes are rare within the pit itself. The distributions of slate (Figure 44) and finegrained cherts (Figure 43) are similar; both occur

mostly in the central area, especially south and west of

the pit. This is opposite the trend for Ramah chert,

suggesting the materials were reduced at different

locations. Slate occurs mostly within the pit itself and

within a 1 .2 m radius of the pit edge, with the faint

suggestion of two scatters, one south and one west of

the pit. A few flakes are also associated with possible

hearth 17. Beige slate is clustered near hearth 11,

while the other types are mostly associated with the

pit. Black chert was mostly located outside the pit and

within a 1 .6 m radius of its edge and, like slate, is clustered in two scatters, one west and one southwest of

the pit. The latter cluster lies beside hearthl 1 , indicating an activity locus unassociated with the pit. There

are few gray Mugford chert flakes, but their distribution is more balanced between the eastern and western

sides of the pit. A very few black chert and gray Mugford chert flakes are associated with possible

hearth 1 7.

Given the preceding considerations, the flake distributions at Area 2B can be analysed by grouping the

50 cm^ quadrats into analytical units based on the feature-centered model (Figure 38, Table 21). A general

category of "central" units could be defined from

quadrats associated with the pit and hearth 1 1 , an area

mostly free from fire-cracked rock except for the clusters immediately adjacent to the features. But in order

to identify possible spatial variations the central area was subdivided by treating quadrats associated with

hearth 1 1 as a separate analytical unit. The "peripheral" area consists of the surrounding quadrats containing deposits of fire-cracked rock. Hearth 1 7 includes

those units closely associated with that feature, while

"adjacent" refers to those units northeast of hearth 1 7

that could represent a depositional zone related to the

feature. Ramah chert is the most dominant material

by frequency (64-79%) in all the subareas except for at

hearth 1 1 , where black chert and Ramah chert constitute 40% and 45%, respectively. Otherwise, green slate

is fairly restricted to the central area, a pattern similar

to the distribution of green slate tools. When expected

frequencies are calculated there is a clear over-representation of black chert at hearth 1 1 and of patinated

Ramah chert in the periphery subarea. The latter supports the toss-zone dumping interpretation. When the

five spatial categories are collapsed into three broader

units (central/hearth 11, periphery, hearth 1 7/adjacent), black chert remains over-represented in the central subarea and patinated Ramah chert is still overrepresented in the periphery, but there is also a slight

over-representation of unpatinated Ramah chert in the

hearth 17/adjacent subarea.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 125
Table 21: Area 2B Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Model Units

Central H-11 Periphery H-17 Adjacent TOTAL Weight (g) (%)

Quartz 131 (16.6) 32 (9.1) 60 (12.6) 88 (14.5) 21 (19.8) 332 1006 (56.7) Ramah chert 505 (63.9) 1 59 (45.2) 365 (76.5) 476 (78.7) 72(67.9) 1 577 608 (34.3)

Patinated Ramah 36 (4.6) 2 (0.6) 32 (6.7) 16 (2.6) 6 (5.7) 92 30.4 (1.7)

Black chert 57 (7.2) 142 (40.3) 4 (0.8) 2 (0.3) 205 47.5 (2.7)

Cray Mugford chert 11 (1.4) 6 (1.7) 4 (0.8) 3 (0.5) 1 (0.9) 25 4.8 (0.3)

Green Mugford chert 1 (0.1) 1 (0.2) 2 0.2 (0.0)

White/patinated Mug . 2 (0.3) 2 (0.6) 1 (0.2) 5 0.4 (0.0)

Slate—total 47 (5.9) 9 (2.6) 10 (2.1) 20 (3.3) 6 (5.7) 92 76.4 (4.3)

Beige 1 4 5 5

Green 1 5 3 1 1 20 31.1

Gray 6 3 1 10 3.9

Gray-banded 22 2 10 13 4 51 29.9

Red-brown 3 2 5 6.5 TOTAL 790 352 477 605 106 2330

Distribution of Red Ocher and Bone

Figure 61 illustrates the distribution of red ocher and

bone fragments. Virtually all the red ocher stains

occur within the central rock-free area. Besides the

distinct stains within the pit there are two other major

clusters of stains, one 1 .0-1 .5 m northwest of the pit,

the other 0.5-1 .2 m northwest of hearth 1 1 . Smaller

patches occur east of hearth 1 1 , near the southeastern extremity of Area 2B (76y line) and close to the

overlap zone with Area 2A. A total of 46 tiny calcined bone fragments were found within the pit, primarily on its western and northern sides near the red ocher

patches. Among these was a tiny piece of worked

bone that appears to be a pendant fragment with remnants of a gouged hole and striations on each face

(see Chapter 8). None of the bone fragments were

identifiable to taxon.

Refitting

The only refit accomplished at Area 2B involved two

fragments of a sandstone plate (possible grindstone)

that lay only a few centimeters apart (Figure 58).

Feature-Centered Distributions, Size-Sorting

and Cultural Formation Processes

The previous discussion provides a plausible basis for

concluding that there are two feature-centered distributions. The first is the pit-hearth complex, which seems to be associated with a central drop-zone and

peripheral toss-zone. The second is possible hearth

1 7, which has a restricted distribution of Ramah chert

debitage and adjacent dumping areas for fire-cracked

rock, but lacks further indications of a central drop zone and peripheral toss zone. If these interpretations

are reasonable, we might expect to find some evidence

for artifact size-sorting associated with the first distribution, but perhaps not with the second.

Tool size-sorting is difficult to quantify at Area 2B

because of the low frequencies. If consideration is limited to the relatively large quartz block cores, there are

only two items and both are associated with the

hypothesized central drop-zone (Figure 47). Quartz

flake size distributions are of limited use since quartz

occurs in relatively low frequencies (332 flakes) such

that size-sorting indices may not be very meaningful.

126 CHAPTER 6
Additionally, since most quartz flakes were either concentrated in the central area, or were associated with

possible hearth 1 7 in the southern corner of Area 2B,

drop/toss-zone comparisons are difficult. In any event,

calculation of size-sorting indices for quartz flakes

(Figure 62) results in low values for almost all of the

quadrats, in principal indicating little size-sorting.

Somewhat higher positive values suggesting a tendency towards smaller flakes are associated with possible

hearth 17, but this may only indicate intensive reduction. In sum, there is little evidence for size-sorting

related to either maintenance activity or reduction

staging.

The best evidence for drop/toss-zone behavior comes from the distributions of fire-cracked rock and

patinated Ramah chert. As discussed previously, the

association of thermally altered Ramah chert flakes

with the fire-cracked rock carpets south of the pit

(Figure 42) is a clear indication that material was

removed from the central hearth/pit area and redeposited a short distance away.

Consumption of Lithic Materials and

Technological Organization

The total weight of tool and flake raw materials from

Area 2B is presented in Table 22 as a rough estimate

of raw material consumption. The area is subdivided

into its two main behavioral units: the central pithearth area with its surrounding ring of fire-cracked

rock, and possible hearth 17 and its adjacent area.

Quartz dominates the central area with ca. 1.7 kg

despite a low frequency of both flakes and tools; only

0.4 kg of Ramah chert is present. Quartz and Ramah

are more evenly represented at the hearth 1 7 subarea. The total amounts of black chert and slate at Area 2B

are in both cases under 100 g. The other materials are

represented by trace quantities.

Table 22. Area 2B Total Lithic Raw

Material Weights (Tools and Flakes).

Central (g) (%) H-17 (g) (%)

Quartz 1 707.0 (73.8) 272.0 (58 5) Ramah chert 430.0 (1 8.6) 1 78.0 (38.3)

Patinated Ramah chert 23.1 (1 .0) 7.3 (1 6)

Black chert 65.3 (2.8) 0.2 (0.0)

Gray Mugford chert 6.1 (0.3) 0.7 (0.2) Green Mugford chert 0.2 (0.0)

White/patinated Mug. 0.4 (0.0)

Slate^total 79.8 (3.5) 6.6 (1.4)

Beige 5.0

Green 28.6 2.5

Gray 2.4 1.5 Gray-banded 27.5 2.4 Red-brown 6.3 0.2

Table 23 provides a breakdown of variables relevant to the technological organization of quartz and

Ramah chert at Area 2B. Given the paucity of quartz

materials there is little that can be said concerning the

relationship between cores and flakes. For Ramah

chert the lack of points, bifaces, and preforms, despite

considerable numbers of biface-thinning flakes (BTFs),

suggests the curation of finished products to other

locations or discard elsewhere on the site. As noted

previously, while most of the BTFs are located within

the central "drop-zone", almost all of the large BTFs lie

to the north and west of the pit-hearth complex, implying differences in the spatial positioning of biface

reduction stages.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 127
Table 23. Summary of the Quartz and Ramah Chert Reduction Systems at Area 2B.

QUARTZ

Tools Block Cores Bipolar Flakes Total Weight (g)

Central 6 2 2 223 1 707

H-17 3 3 109 272

RAMAH CHERT

Tools Points Biface. Preforms

Frags.

Bipolar

Cores

Biface- ThinningFlakes Total

Weight (g)

Central 1 5 1 1 96 1099 453

H-1 7 5 53 5 70 185

* includes patinated flakes

Area 2B Conclusions

It is unlikely that the extensive deposits of fire-cracked

rock at Area 2B accumulated within a dwelling structure because such waste probably would be removed

by regular maintenance activities. But the concentric

distribution pattern could be interpreted in two ways. The first alternative sees the configuration as similar to

Binford's (1 983:153-159, 165-1 70) outdoor hearth or

extensive activity area model. The space within a 1 .8 m

radius of the pit was used by individuals engaged in

cooking-heating practices involving thermally stressed

rocks, as well as lithic tool production and maintenance activities. This central core was a drop-zone for

flakes accumulating around knappers seated adjacent

to the pit. Shattered rocks resulting from cooking-heating within the pit were removed periodically and

dumped behind the individuals working around the

hearth, forming a roughly concentric toss-zone. Since

the flake distribution southeast of the pit seems coter- minous with the edge of the fire-cracked rock, prior

placement of the rock determined the limit of the debitage. The spatial distribution of thermally altered Ramah chert— directly associated with the hearths and as probable secondary refuse among the firecracked rocks— is consistent with this hearth cleaning

and peripheral dumping interpretation. The firecracked rock concentrations immediately adjacent to

the pit represent the last sequence of pit use, since one of the concentrations is partly superimposed on

the pit. The second alternative interprets the concentric

pattern as dwelling-related. The sharply bounded flake

distribution associated with the central hearth/pit feature is seen as internal to a dwelling and bounded by a

tent wall, similar to the modules at Area 2A. This interpretation implies a 4 m wide dwelling running southwest to northeast. In this case, however, there is a sec- ond edge-effect in which the inner boundary of the firecracked rock is partly coterminous with the outer boundary of the flakes. This contact zone could imply

that the fire-cracked rock was redeposited outside a

dwelling, partly along the outer edge of a tent wall. The overall pattern is complicated by three factors. First, it cannot be established whether or not

hearth 1 1 and the central pit were used contemporaneously and thus whether they constitute a paired activity unit. Second, there may be another hearth (no.l 7) in

the southern corner of Area 2B. This feature appears to

128 CHAPTER 6
41x61y

68/ Area 2C: features and total flake distribution.

involve spatially restricted behavior with adjacent rock dumping activity, but without the development of

clearly marked drop-toss zones. Further excavation to

the southeast would be required to clarify this. Third,

the nature of the distributions in the area of overlap

with Area 2A are unclear. Some of the fire-cracked

rocks in the overlap area might have originated at possible hearth 18 just north of the north lobe, but the

contribution of activities related to the lobe itself cannot be ruled out. Given the possibility of overlapping

deposits, as well as the limited excavation area, it is

difficult to regard one or the other of these alternative

interpretations as more robust.

Area 2C

The boundary between Areas 2C and 2A (Figure 38) was partly defined by behavioral discontinuity. The

entire northwestern end of Area 2C exhibits a very low

density of flakes and tools compared with the south

lobe at Area 2A. Indeed, there is a 6-7 m distance between the terminal edge of the south lobe and the

next major flake concentration at the southeastern end

of Area 2C (Figure 33). The other discontinuity is

chronological; the pit associated with hearth 1 (2 m

south of the south lobe) produced a radiocarbon date

of 6100+80 B.P.. At the extreme eastern end of Area 2C hearth 14 produced an unacceptable date of

1 600±80 B.P.. Although the lack of an acceptable date from the southeastern end of Area 2C means that contemporaneity with Area 2A cannot be ruled out, the

behavioral discontinuity and the date from hearth 10

suggest that Area 2C can be treated independently of

Area 2A.

Hearths 9,10,12 and 1 3 at the western end of the

subarea are all associated with an extremely low lithic

density (Figure 68). Furthermore, their orientation and

spacing seems rather regular, arranged in a rough rectangle 2 m by 2 m in size. Interestingly, this layout is comparable in size and configuration with the "lobes"

at Area 2A, such that the hearth grouping might be

interpreted as part of a dwelling module.

Unfortunately, the sparse flake and tool distributions

provide little additional information. The hearths

exhibit different forms, presumably indicative of different functions or practices, an attribute that was also

noted at Area 2A. Hearths 12 and 13 are simple clusters of cobbles. Hearth 10 seems to be a composite

feature consisting of a small circular pit flanked by an

NUKASUSUTOK 5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 129
elongated pit. Hearth 9 was a large stone-floored feature surrounded on three sides by inclined slabs, giving the impression of a box-hearth used for controlling

the dispersal of debris or for heat reflection.

Hearths 1 4 and 1 5 at the eastern end of Area 2C

may be another hearth pairing, since they are spaced 2 m apart, similar to the Area 2A module pattern. Hearth

14 consists of a large (1.2 m diameter) and diffuse

scatter of charcoal associated with a pair of large

rounded rocks.

Hearth 1 5, only partially excavated, appears to be

an elongated pit containing rocks and red ocher. Towards the southern boundary of the excavation

(41x62-63y), three large rocks associated with charcoal and a flake concentration may be evidence for

another hearth, although the configuration is unclear. The flakes at hearth 14 exhibit abrupt density

changes on either side of the feature, creating a 1 .2 m

wide band very similar to the widths of the linear flake

distributions at the Area 2A lobes. The flakes associated with hearth 1 5 suggest a similar pattern, but further

excavation is needed to evaluate this. It should also be

noted that Area 2C is adjacent to a blow-out containing rock clusters that probably represent hearths

(Figure 71). Thus, the eastern portion of Area 2C and

the adjacent deflated area could constitute connected

activity areas. The overall Area 2 /c-means cluster analysis (Figure

37) identified two tool clusters in Area 2C, one related

to hearths 9, 10, 12 and 1 3 (cluster 5), the other associated with hearths 14 and 1 5 (cluster 1). It seems reasonable to divide Area 2C into two broad analytical

subunits based on the spacing of the hearth features,

the marked differences in flake densities and the two

/(-means clusters (Figure 38). Area 2C1 will refer to the

northwestern portion of the area (units between 69-

71 Y and 65Y) and Area 2C2 to the southeastern portion (units between 6r65Y). The analysis could be more nuanced, however, with additional feature-related subdivisions.

Tool Distribution

Figures 47 to 58 depict the tool class distributions.

Little can be said about the 2C1 distribution, except

that there is an unusually high proportion of schist

tablets and fragments. One bar-shaped chlorite schist

object and one flat plate of phylite schist lay adjacent

to hearth 9, the box-like feature. These implements

CHAPTER 6
Table 24: Area 2C Tool Classes by K-Means Cluster and Subarea.

CI C-2 C-3 C-4 Outliers 2C1 2C2 TOTAL N (%)

Stemmed points 1 1 1 (1 0)

Bifaces 1 3 1 1 4 5 (S 2)

Biface preforms 1 1 2 2 (2 1)

Endscrapers 1 1 1 1 2 (2 1) Stemmed flakes 1 1 (1 0)

Utilized flakes 6 17 3 1 1 7 24 31 (32.0)

Celts/adzes 2 1 3 3 (3 1)

Slate blanks 1 1 1 (1 0) Ground slate flakes 3 17 1 12 20 22 (22 7)

Bipolar cores 1 1 1 1 2 (2.1)

Block cores 6 9 2 1 18 19 (19.6)

Disc cores 1 1 1 (1.0) Hammerstones 1 1 1 (1.0)

Schist tablets/frags 2 3 4 2 6 (6.2) TOTAL 21 53 4 5 5 19 79 97

might have been used in the polishing of ground slate

tools, although there is a paucity of ground slate tools,

slate blanks, as well as ground and unground slate

flakes in the subarea. At 2C2 the distributions of

almost all the tool types are closely associated with

hearths 14 and 15. The exception is endscrapers

(Figure 54), one of which is associated with hearth 1 3,

the other which lies 1 m distant from hearth 15. Ground slate flakes (Figure 57) also cluster around

Hearths 1 4 and 1 5. Of the 98 tools from Area 2C, 91 have point provenience. A /c-means analysis was run for Area 2C alone,

producing slightly better cluster resolution than in the

overall Area 2 analysis. The 5-cluster solution seemed

best, isolating small clusters associated with hearths 9 and 1 2 (four items in each) and separate clusters associated with hearths 14 and 15, but it also created a

fifth cluster west of hearth 14 that was diffuse and

probably not behaviorally relevant. Consequently, a

modified version of this cluster solution was used

(Figure 69) in which the fifth cluster was dissolved,

with two of its members being reassigned by reasonable proximity to cluster 2, while the other four members, plus an outlier of cluster 1, were placed in an

"outlier" category, denoting lack of clear relation to the

feature-centered distributions. Table 24 presents the

tool frequencies resulting from this cluster analysis.

The low tool frequencies hinder the identification

of statistically significant patterns, but at hearth 14

(cluster 2) several types are prominent: bifaces, utilized flakes, ground slate flakes and perhaps tool manufacturing implements such as a hammerstone and

schist tablets. A more general picture can be had by

combining clusters 1 and 2 with their adjacent outliers

(Area 2C2) and comparing this with combined clusters

3 and 4 (Area 2C1 ), with the addition of quadrat provenienced items. Low tool frequencies still plague the comparison (Area 2C1= 19 items, vs Area 2C2= 81

items) such that it is difficult to discern any statistically significant differences. About all that can be said is

that Area 2C2 has high frequencies of utilized flakes,

quartz block cores, bifaces, biface preforms, and

ground slate flakes and tool fragments. Notable, however, is the relative lack of quartz bipolar cores (n=l)

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 131
Table 25: Area 2C Tool Raw Material Frequencies and Weights by Cluster and Subarea

r-i r-4 C\ 1 it*! i ore

Quartz ao o 1 ^ \C-ZJ\J) 1 o J /

r\al 1 Idi 1 L 1 1 c 1 L Qo

-)

L. 11 1 ^ ^ J OH;

Rlarl/ rhtart DldL K L 1 1 1; 1 I

1 1 ? (4'!

Q|jlaLc atp—tnt;! LULdl1 f, ] 7 ] ^ ^ V J ^ J /

J

1

1 1 en 81 Rl

(~.

v_i rod n 1 cell KJ in R 3 'I'l

G r3.y 1

1 2

Vjldy UdilUcU c

R o H - h rr\\A/n rxc u ui KJvv t \ 2 3 n 61

r~. roon-nrav/ cnofl/ltiri I

1 "^1

Schist 4 3 4 (664) 4 (30)

Other 1 2 3 (145)

TOTAL 23 54 4 5 5 19 79

in contrast to the abundance of quartz block cores and

quartz debitage.

When tool raw materials and weights are considered (Table 25), Area 2C2 has an overwhelming domination of quartz by weight, but Ramah chert and green

slate are also important by both weight and frequency.

Flake Distribution

Point-plots are lacking for the westernmost portion of

Area 2C1. Fortunately, however, the quadrat counts from that subarea are so low that the information loss

is not critical for assessing the spatial patterning.

High frequencies of quartz flakes are associated with

hearths 14 and 15 (Figure 39). Small numbers of

quartz flakes lie immediately north and west of

hearths 9 and 10; the southern and eastern sides of

these features are virtually devoid of quartz. Hearths

12 and 13 are also virtually devoid of quartz flakes. Ramah chert (Figure 40) exhibits virtually the same

pattern as quartz except for a small cluster associated with hearth 12. Virtually all the patinated Ramah

chert (Figure 42) is associated with hearth 14. Small

clusters of black chert flakes (Figure 43) are found

adjacent to hearth 14 and directly associated with

hearth 1 2. Cray Mugford chert is virtually absent from

Area 2C. Slate flakes (Figure 44) of all color variants

are mostly associated with hearth 14. Table 26 contrasts the flake raw material frequencies and weights

by the two subareas. By frequency there is little difference between the subareas, but by weight Area 2C1

has a relatively high proportion of Ramah chert. A more nuanced view might be provided by a breakdown of flake materials by hearth feature,

essentially paralleling the /(-means cluster analysis of

tools. Quadrats were grouped by feature proximity

and in relation to breaks in flake density; outlying

quadrats were eliminated (Table 27). The numbers

for hearths 9 and 10 are uncertain, since the 1 m^

quadrats in this area cannot be as closely related to

the features as the 50 cm^ quadrats further south.

Hearths 10, 12, 13 and 14 all display high percentages of Ramah chert, in contrast to hearths 9 and 1 5

which have high percentages of quartz. Taking into

account the small sample sizes from some of the

hearths and the incomplete excavation at the southern end of Area 2C, there is at least a suggestion of

variations within each of the broader subareas used

previously.

132 CHAPTER 6
Table 26: Area 2C Flake Raw Material Frequencies and Weights by Subarea

FREQUENCY WEIGHT

2C2 N (%) ^v-^ IN V/**/ 2C2 N (%) TDTAI 1 Kj 1 rA Liny N /o/

Quartz 94 (39.9) 630 (40.1) ^ O J J 2416 (87.1) Ramah chert 1 1 5 (48.7) 825 (52.4) 1 J -7 V J 1 . -7/ 293 (10.6)

Patinated Ramah 6 (2.5) fin ftp, R fil 7 4 en fi^ 24

Black chert 13 (5.5) 1 1

1 1 yj. 1

)

^8 rn c)^ 2.4 (0.1)

Cray Mugford chert 3 (0.2) 1.3 (0.0) 1 ^ en 4^

Slate—total 8 (3.4) 44 (2.8) 37 (1.3) '^R7 (^0 7)

Beige 3 9 4 22 26

Green 3 1 7 20 31 252 283

Gray 2 13 15 22 42 64

Gray- banded 3 3 14 14

Red-brown 2 2 4 TOTAL 236 1573 1809

Table 27: Area 2C Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Hearth Feature

H-9 N (%) H-10 N (%) H-12 N (%) H-13 N (%) H-14 N (%) H-1 5 N (%)

Quartz 79 (82.3) 2 (10.0) 5 (7.0) 310 (28.8) 255 (71 .0) Ramah chert 6 (6.3) 15 (75.0) 55 (77.5) 1 5 (93.8) 671 (62.3) 96 (26.7)

Patinated Ramah 4 (4.2) 2 (2.8) 58 (5.4)

Black chert 2 (2.1) 2 (10.0) 7 (9.9) 1 (6.3) 6 (0.6)

Gray Mugford chert 1 (0.1)

Slate—total 5 (5.2) 1 (5.0) 2 (2.8) 31 (2.9) 8 (2.2)

Beige 3 5 2

Green 1 1 1 3

Gray 2 1 2 1 Gray-banded 2 1 Red-brown 1 1 TOTAL 96 20 71 16 1077 359

Red Ocher and Bone Distribution

Figure 61 shows the distribution of red ocher stains and clumps as well as bone fragments. Some of the

red ocher stains occur inside hearth 1 5, but most are

concentrated in two areas on opposite sides of hearth

14. The patches on the southwest side are larger and

their configuration is virtually identical to the shape

of the flake distribution present in the same area

(Figure 68), suggesting their spatial extents were limited by the same factors. The red ocher stains on the

northeast side of hearth 14 are smaller, but they also

fit fairly well with the accompanying flake distribution. Together, these two patches are consistent with

the tendency for a bounded linear distribution of

NUKASUSUTOK-5: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 133
debitage running southwest-northeast across hearth

14. Small clumps of red ocher lay within the bounds

of hearth 1 4. A total of 651 tiny and unidentifiable calcined bone fragments occurred within and adjacent to hearth

14; most of these were recovered by fine-sieving the

charcoal samples. Associated with hearth 1 2 were 294

tiny and equally unidentifiable bone fragments.

Refitting

Only broken tools were considered for refitting. A total

of three items was refitted, but all the pieces lay within a few centimeters of each other. Thus, no connection can be drawn between Areas 2C1 and 2C2 or between 2C and other parts of Area 2.

Feature-Related Distributions, Size-Sorting and

Cultural Formation Processes

The small amount of lithic material from Area 2C1 renders difficult any analysis of size-sorting. At 2C2,

quartz block cores are concentrated around hearths 14

and 15, although several are found in quadrats up to

2 m southwards where they may have been cached or

thrown. The distribution of large-sized tools tends to

be centered around hearths 14 and 15 (Figure 62); to some extent this is correlated with a high frequency of

quartz cores. When quartz flake size distributions are

considered using the size-sorting index (Figure 62)

there are three units with predominantly small flakes

directly associated with and adjacent to hearth 1 4, and two units with tendencies towards larger flakes between hearths 14 and 15. Three other units to the

south also have tendencies towards larger flakes; each

of these units were associated with a quartz core.

Thus, as at Area 2A, there is a tendency to find both

small and large flake units in what might be expected

to be drop zones around hearths. This may indicate a

lack of maintenance or a spatial repositioning of

quartz reduction from the initial reduction of block

cores in one place (producing larger debitage) to sec- ondary reduction of bipolar cores in another place

(producing smaller debitage). The tendency of units

Table 28: Area 2C Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes). In Crams

2C1 (g) 2C2 (g) TOTAL (g) (%)

Quartz 575 5109 5684 (70.3)

Ramah chert 205 877 1082 (13.4)

Patinated Ramah 2.4 24 26.4 (0.3)

Black chert 7.8 2.4 10.2 (0.1)

Cray Mugford chert 1.3 1.3 (0.0)

Slate—total 6.5 407 439 (5.4)

Beige 4.8 25 29.8 Green 31 587 618

Cray 22 70 92

Cray-banded 16 16 Red-brown 1 5.6 6.6

Cray-green speckled 25 25

Schist 665 30.6 695 (8.6)

Other 145 145 (1.8)

134 CHAPTER 6
with larger flake sizes to be associated with unreduced

quartz block cores may support this.

Consumption of Lithic Materials and

Technological Organization.

Given the paucity of material from Area 2C1 and the

incomplete excavation of what seems to be a possible

dwelling module at Area 2C2, there is not much point

in drawing particular conclusions concerning raw

material consumption and technological organization.

The most relevant observation is that if Area 2C1 represents a dwelling module then it indicates very little

deposition of lithic materials, in sharp contrast to Area 2C2 and especially to the inferred dwellings at Area

2A. Table 28 outlines the total raw material weights

(tools and flakes) from the Area 2C subareas.

Variations in quartz and Ramah chert reduction

patterns between Area 2C1 and 2C2 are outlined in

Table 29. Perhaps the most striking observation is the

almost complete lack of quartz bipolar cores (n=l) in

contrast to an abundance of block cores. This might

indicate quartz reduction by free hand percussion

rather than by the bipolar technique. A second bipolar

core is of Ramah chert. There is also a single small disc

core of Ramah chert; its sharp edges and lack of crushing indicate that it was not a product of bipolar percussion; it is probably an extremely reduced tool fragment. Most of the Ramah chert biface-thinning flakes

(Figure 63) are concentrated within a 1 m radius of

hearth 14. The distribution of large biface-thinning

flakes (Figure 63) is similar.

As far as the other raw materials are concerned,

the paucity of slate plates and blanks (n=l), combined

with the modest representation of ground slate flakes,

might indicate emphasis on tool maintenance rather

than production. The extremely low frequency of black and Mugford chert also suggests a similar maintenance pattern.

Module A Tool

Rectangular structure Flake

70/ Area 2C dwelling interpretations.

NUKASUSUTOK-5 SPATIAL ANALYSIS
Table 29: Summary of the Quartz and Ramah Chert Reduction Systems at Area 2C

QUARTZ

Tools Block Cores Bipolar Flakes Total Weight (g) Area 2C1 2 1 94 575g

Area 2C2 20 16 1 630 5109 g

RAMAH CHERT

Tools Points Biface. Preforms

Frags.

Bipolar

Cores

Disc

Cores

Biface- ThinningFlakes Total Weight (g)

Area 2C1 7 1 1 1 16 121 207 g Area 2C2 34 4 4 1 98 885 901 g

Area 2C Conclusions

Area 2C received insufficient excavation to draw many

robust conclusions about spatial patterning. The visual impression is that the four form/function differentiated hearths at Area 2C1 may constitute a dwelling

module in a pattern reminiscent of Area 2A.

Unfortunately, the sparse lithics provide little additional contextual material to evaluate this. On the other

hand, the low density lithic distribution, combined with

a 6100 B.P. radiocarbon date, militate against this configuration being part of a longhouse structure affiliated with Area 2A. At Area 2C2 the hearths and linear

flake distributions strongly suggest a dwelling module

similar to those inferred from the "lobes" at Area 2A

(Figure 70). If the Area 2C2 hearth/flake configurations

represent dividers in a segmented rectangular structure, then that structure would be aligned northwestsoutheast, parallel with the beach front (Figure 70), in

contrast to the perpendicular orientation at Area 2A. The area of sparse deposition between hearth 14 and

hearths 1 2 and 1 3 could then be viewed as a flanking

floor space similar those inferred for the southern rectangular structure at Area 2A. It might even be possible to suggest that the hearths at 2C1 (at least hearths

1 2 and 1 3) are part of the same longhouse structure,

although this would require that the longhouse is partitioned into large segments of high and low deposition intensity. Clarification of these alternatives can

only be had by extending the Area 2C2 excavation

towards the southeast.

CHAPTER 6
Nukasusutok-5, Area 2A, 1979, with Jack Contin and Chuck Curtis. (Photo: B. l-iood)

NUKASUSUTOK-5 SPATIAL ANALYSIS
138 CHAPTER 7
Nu kasusuto

Areas 1 an

This chapter presents analyses of Areas 1 and 3 at

Nukasusutok-5. The treatment of Area 1 is brief since

the size of the excavation field was small and there

were few features and formal tools. Area 3 is discussed more in-depth, given the presence of unusual red

ocher features.

Area 1

Area 1 was a small 16 m^ excavation field at the edge

of the blow-out towards the eastern end of the site

(Figures 21, 22, 71). On the southwest side of the

excavation was a cluster of rocks, half of which were

inside the bounds of the excavation, half outside.

Measuring 1.5 m in diameter, the cluster consisted of

small cobbles and a few flat slabs. The feature was

entirely deflated and no tools, charcoal or red ocher were associated with it, only a few flakes. To the northwest in the blow-out were rock clusters that may represent three or four hearths. The most northerly of

these was 1 m in diameter and consisted of eight cobbles and one flat slab. It was accompanied by charcoal

flecks and small granules of red ocher as well as by

Ramah chert, quartz, slate and black chert flakes. The

other features had no visible cultural material. The in situ deposits showed that beneath the surface vegetation and humus there were fine mottled

brown sands extending to about 30 cm below the surface, where they contacted beach gravel. A thin, dis- continuous leaching zone was present. Lithic material

occurred from just below the humus to about 25 cm

NUKASUSUTOK'5: AREAS 1 AND 3

below the surface. The area was excavated in 5 cm

levels, which were lumped together for analytical

purposes.

Flakes

The total flake distribution is shown in Figure 71 , while

Figures 72 to 74 depict the distribution of individual

raw material types by plots and quadrat counts. Quartz

is frequent in the eastern extension of Area 1 and

occurs in a major concentration near the center of the

excavation. There is also a dense concentration of

mostly fingernail-sized fragments beside a rock at 37.30x 52.80y. This concentration was probably the

result of a single reduction event involving one or more quartz cores. There is also a more diffuse oval

concentration of quartz in 36x51-52y. Ramah chert

frequencies are modest over most of the excavation,

but there is a higher frequency cluster in 36x51-52y,

the same location as the diffuse quartz concentration.

Only one flake of patinated Ramah chert and two

biface-thinning flakes of Ramah were identified. A few

black chert flakes are present, mostly towards the center of the excavation, and only two slate flakes were

recovered. Table 30 summarizes the flake raw material frequencies and weights.

Tools

The excavated tool distribution is shown by quadrat in

Figure 75, while Table 31 outlines the implement

classes from the excavated area as well as those sur1 39
face collected from the blow-out by the Smithsonian

Institution. The single quartz bipolar core from Area 1

is in the same quadrat as two quartz block cores. The

third block core lies close to the concentration of small

quartz flakes in 37x52y. All the utilized flakes (exclusively Ramah chert) occur in the eastern extension of

the excavation. One of the biface fragments (black

chert) is associated with the probable hearth on the

west side of the excavation, while the other (slate) lies

to the north of the feature. The collection is so small and unrepresentative that little can be inferred from it.

Table 30: Area 1 Flake Raw Materials by

Frequency and Weight

N (%) WT (g) Quartz 1 1 73 (75.0) 3892 (96.1)

Ramah chert 376 (24.0) 151 (3.7)

Black chert 13 (0.8) 2 (0.0) Cray Mugford chert 1 (0.1) 1 (0.0) Cray slate 2 (0.1) 5 (0.1) TOTAL 1 565 4051

Table 31. Area 1 Tool Class Frequencies.

Excavation Surface N %

Bifacial points 1 4 5 (1 1.6 )

Flake points 4 4 ( 9.3)

Bifaces 1 1 2 (4.7)

Endscrapers 3 3 (7.0)

Flake knives 3 3 (7.0)

Utilized flakes 4 1

8

22 (51.2)

Bipolar cores 1 1 (2.3)

Block cores 3 3 (7.0) TOTAL 10 33 43

Area 3

Area 3 lay 38 m west of Area 2, slightly downslope on

a narrow, gently sloping terrace at 28 m asl. (Figure

22). In 1979 shovel-testing on the terrace revealed a

remarkable red ocher deposit, so an excavation area of

28 was opened. Three more features were

exposed, two of which had red ocher deposits (Figure

76). Additional shovel tests along the terrace provided

negative results except in one area 4.5 m southwest of

the main excavation, where a Ramah chert biface base was uncovered. An additional excavation unit 1 by 3 m

in size was opened at that spot, but only a few quartz

flakes and a small fleck of red ocher were encountered.

The red ocher features were initially believed to be

burials, but evaluation of this hypothesis was complicated by the presence of an almost impenetrable

indurated soil horizon (cemented "hardpan") that lay

beneath the entire surface of Area 3. During the 1980

field season the cemented zone beneath two of the red

ocher features was pick-axed down to the underlying

bedrock, but no evidence for interments was found. The interpretation of these features remains problematic and is discussed further at the end of this chapter.

This section begins with a discussion of the

unique pedological situation at Area 3. A description of

the features is then provided, followed by a consideration of their artifact associations. After a discussion of

dating, some interpretive possibilities are presented.

Pedology

The soil profile from Area 3 (Figure 77) can be classified within the Ortstein Ferro-Humic Podzol subgroup

(Canada Soil Survey Committee, Subcommittee on Soil

Classification 1 978). The profile has a thin humus horizon underneath a vegetation mat of lichen, crowberry

and dwarf birch. A 2 cm thick light gray leaching horizon is underlain by a mottled red-brown horizon containing black-coated, cohering sand grains. In some

places this changes abruptly into a platey-textured

semi-cemented horizon, which in turn grades into an

indurated horizon measuring up to 50 cm thick. The

indurated horizon lies directly upon bedrock which, in

the center of Area 3, was contacted at 80 cm below the

present ground surface. Within the iron-consolidated zone is a considerable amount of semi-decomposed

roots. The extremely dark colouration of the sand

140 CHAPTER 7
40x55y 40x53y

Quartz flakes

36x57y

o

o

^ 9(9 •

CD

a...-

V/

36x51y

Q

Flake concentration

Flat rock

134 163

Quartz flakes

63 113

3 5 102 464 34 4

1 1 10 4 41 31

72/ Area 1: distribution of quartz flakes.

40x55y 40x53y

O

Ramah chert flakes

1

36x57y

O

.;-0

CPs a-'

Q

°Q Flat rock

36x51

y

p=i8 22

Ramah chert flakes

14 16

5 6 33 16 8 4

12 18 35

BTF=1 4 61 114

BTF=1

BTF= biface-thinning flake P= patinated Ramah chert

73/ Area 1 : distribution of Ramah chert flakes.

makes it very difficult to identify possible feature-related colour shifts.

Field investigations in 1979 determined that this cemented soil horizon was present under most of the

western end of Nukasustok-5, from Smithsonian Test

Pit C to the entire surface of Area 3. Although the appearance of the podzol profile itself was sufficient

evidence to question Fitzhugh's (1978:77) suggestion

that this was fat-consolidated sand, the extensive spatial distribution of this pedological feature cast even more doubt on the interpretation. Samples of the Area

3 indurated horizon were analysed in the laboratory

for total organic carbon using the Walkley-Black wet

oxidation method (Jackson 1958:219-222). The results

indicated the cemented horizon did not contain any more organic carbon than samples from the surrounding soil matrix or from Area 2. A sample of the indurated horizon procured by the Smithsonian in 1975 from

Test Pit C was subjected to amino acid analysis by

David Von Endt of the Smithsonian Institution. No

amino acids were identified in this sample (Fitzhugh,

personal communication). In addition, the total iron

NUKASUSUTOK 5: AREAS 1 AND 3 141
Black chert flakes Gray slate flakes

3 2 1

1 2 3 1 1 2

(a) (b)

74/ Area 1 : distribution of blacl< chert and gray slate flakes.

(a)

Utilized flakes Bipolar cores

(b)

75/ Area I : distribution of utilized flakes, bipolar cores, block cores and bifaces.

content was determined by atomic absorption spec- trophotometry (Hood 1981; Appendix C). The Area 3

profile exhibited an iron-depleted A horizon and ironenriched B horizon consistent with podzolization. The

cemented soil horizon is therefore a natural pedological phenomena, not a cultural deposit. As the discussion below will demonstrate,

Maritime Archaic people engaged in some degree of

sub-surface activity at Area 3, so the genesis of the

iron pan must have begun subsequent to the occupation, which is suggested to date ca. 5000 B.P..

Precisely when iron pan formation began is impossible

to determine without further analysis, but radiocarbon

dating the onset of such pedological features is

plagued by complex problems related to how organic

carbon is incorporated into cemented horizons

(Lascelles et al. 2000). An important question is whether iron-pan genesis was a strictly local phenomenon, perhaps a consequence of changes in topography and drainage related to marine shoreline displacement, or whether it was triggered by broader climatic changes such as increased precipitation. Answering

this question is problematic because the causes of

iron-pan formation are not well understood. Several mechanisms have been proposed: translocation of

weathered iron minerals by a fluctuating water table,

translocation of iron and aluminum bound up with

organic compounds (chelates), or inorganic translocation and precipitation of iron (Anderson et al. 1982;

Davidson 1987; Moore 1976).

142 CHAPTER 7
22xt21y

19xl21y

76/ Area 3: level I features.

20x11 9y

Features

The four features at Area 3

(Figures 76, 78, 79) were clustered together, evenly spaced

about 2-2.5 m distant from each

other (center to center). Along

the northeast edge of Feature 1 was a sand hummock (Figure

76), which when cross-sectioned revealed an upper

leached zone underlain by mottled brown sand, then a charcoal layer overlying red ocher.

This sequence indicates that the hummock covers the edge of

the feature and thus must postdate it. The hummock is likely a

product of aeolian action and

downslope movement. Each of

the cultural features will be

described in turn.

Feature 1: Feature 1 consisted

of an oval stain of red ocher,

1.2 m in diameter and 4 cm

thick at its center, which was

capped by a loose arrangement

of small cobbles oriented

towards the center of the ocher

(Figures 76, 80, 81 ). A thick linear deposit of charcoal, 1.8 m

long and 40 cm wide, lay directly on top of the ocher, crossing

the entire feature in a northeast-southwest direction. The subsurface beneath

Feature 1 was excavated down to bedrock, which

required the assistance of a pick-axe to penetrate the

indurated layer. The only subsurface feature identified was a peculiar lens of yellow sand that lay ca. 30 cm

beneath the western edge of the red ocher deposit

(Figure 82). This lens was 85 cm by 65 cm in size, with

23x1 15y

Thick red ocher

I I Diffuse red ocher ^ Small red ocher patch

Charcoal

Hummock

18x115y

22x1 19y

Vegetation/peat

I I Gray leached sand

I I Brown mottled sand

Platey iron pan

Completely indurated iron pan

Bedrock

77/ Area 3: soil profile.

an irregular depth ranging from 2.5 to 7 cm. Charcoal was present on top of and within the upper portion of

the sand, slightly off-center. A utilized flake of Ramah

chert was associated with the sand. It is difficult to

account for this lens. Its peculiar form indicates it was

not a single decayed rock, although it might have consisted of several rocks of similar composition clustered

NUKASUSUTOK-5: AREAS 1 AND 3 143
78/ Area 3 overview, Feature 1 excavated.

79/ Area 3: vertical bipod photo, Feature 1 excavated.

together. It is unlikely to have been related to organic

material since the rapid decay of the latter would have

resulted in the lens having been cemented and discolored by the strong iron translocation processes.

Directly associated with the surface of Feature 1

were; a small ground slate celt, a ground slate flake, a fragment of a beveled ground slate tool, a flake knife

of Ramah chert, several fragments of a hexagonal

cross-sectioned implement of ground slate ( possibly a woodworking tool), part of a slate blank, a bipolar core

and two utilized flakes. There were also flakes of quartz,

Ramah chert and slate. Two radiocarbon dates were obtained from Feature 1. The first sample consisted of

charcoal from the thick deposit on top of the red ocher and it produced a date of 2845±70

B.P. (UCa-3869). This was unacceptably late, so a second

date was run on charcoal from

Level 2, beneath the red ocher

deposit. The result was closer

to expectations: 5090±95 B.P.

(SI-5534).

Feature 2: At the center of

Feature 2 (Figure 76, 79, 83) was a roughly circular arrange- ment of small cobbles and flat

slabs, 75 cm in diameter. About

30 cm to the northeast were

three flat slabs associated with

a small red ocher stain that

contained a pocket of charcoal.

Several other rocks lay scattered to the west and southwest of the circular arrangement. The sub-surface of

Feature 2 was pick-axed down

to bedrock. Underneath were a number of rocks; two

large ones were situated on the southeastern edge of

the feature while a series of small rocks was positioned in an arc along its northwestern edge (Figure

82). A patch of red ocher and charcoal lay directly

underneath the main surface level concentration.

Nearby were two small posthole-like concentrations of

yellow sand, similar to that found beneath Feature 1

.

Together, these features suggest a subsurface activity

area 1 .6 m by 1 .3 m in size.

144 CHAPTER 7
80/ Area 3: Feature 1.

Four tools were directly

associated with the feature: two

flake points of Ramah chert, an

endscraper of fine-grained

beige IVlugford chert, and a

quartz core. A substantial amount of quartz flakes was

also associated with Feature 2

(see below).

Feature 3: Feature 3 (Figures 76,

79, 84) was similar in configuration to Feature 1 . It consisted of

an oval red ocher stain, 1 m in

diameter and 4 cm thick,

capped by a flat rock slab and

several smaller cobbles. The feature was cross-sectioned and

excavated down to the top of

the indurated horizon. This procedure revealed a considerable

amount of charcoal underneath

the ocher, beneath which was a

cluster of small cobbles and

quartz chunks packed into an

area of 80 by 45 cm (Figure 82,

85). Excavation of the indurated

zone was not attempted. Tools

directly associated with the feature included: a flake point of Ramah chert, a chlorite schist

tablet, a utilized flake, and a bipolar core. There was

also a considerable quantity of quartz flakes. Two

radiocarbon dates were run on charcoal from Feature 3: 2770±205 B.P. (UCa-3159) and 2805±70 B.P. (UCa3870). Both were unacceptably recent.

Feature 4

This feature (Figure 76), left mostly unexcavated, consisted of a cluster of small cobbles that may have

extended beyond the limit of the excavation. No red

81/ Area 3: Feature I vertical bipod pinoto.

ocher was present, but a charcoal stain lay adjacent to

the cobble cluster.

Flake Distribution

Figures 86 to 88 depict the point-plotted and quadrat

distributions of flake raw materials. The point-plotted

flakes are presented in two levels, the first being the

gray leached zone and upper portion of the red-brown

sand (ca. 5-1 cm), the second consisting of the lower

red-brown sand and the underlying iron-consolidated

NUKASUSUTOK-5: AREAS 1 AND 3 145
22x121y

I9x121y

82/ Area 3 level 2 features.

horizon. The upper level quartz

flakes cluster somewhat with

Features 2 and 3, but have a much more diffuse spread near

Feature 1. Two small clusters of

quartz flakes, representing

either individual reduction

episodes or intentional deposition, lie between Features 1 , 2 and 3. Ramah chert flakes in the

upper level have a diffuse overall distribution but are clearly

associated with Features 1 and

3, which display the most

intense red ocher concentrations. Slate flakes from the

upper layer are associated only

with Feature 1 . The lower level

quartz flakes are clustered

underneath Features 2 and 3. At

Feature 2 they form an oval or

circular pattern more-or-less

coterminous with the buried

rock cluster, while at Feature 3

they lie immediately adjacent to

(though rarely within) the subsurface rock cluster. Lower

level Ramah chert is associated

exclusively with Feature 2.

Three flakes were measured at

ca. 50 cm below the sand surface along the western edge of the feature. Almost all

the lower level slate flakes occur in a small concentration adjacent to the cluster of rocks beneath Feature 3. The lower level flakes, combined with the buried

rocks, indicate some degree of deposition below the

surfaces of Features 2 and 3. Beneath Feature 2 this

deposition appears as a somewhat circular "basin" 1.7 m in diameter and up to 40 cm deep, while beneath

Feature 3 there is a basin 1 .0 by 0.8 m in size and 1 5-

20 cm deep. Feature 1 lacked indications of subsurface

F1

F3

23x1 15y

LI ocher features

18x115y

83/ Area 3: Feature 2.

flake deposition, as did the buried yellow sand lens

that seemed to be associated with the feature.

Table 32 tabulates the flake raw material variations in relation to the features, based on the quadrat

counts. The 1 m quadrats fit reasonably well with the

features, with the exception of 20x1 1 6/1 1 7y, which lie between Features 1, 2 and 3 in an area of seeming

overlap. These units have been treated separately.

Figure 89 shows the quadrat groupings used in the

analysis. The figures for Feature 4 are incomplete,

146 CHAPTER 7
Table 32: Area 3 Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Feature

F 1 F-2 F 3 F-4 OVERLAP OTHER TOTAL

N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)

Quartz 120 (57.4) 704 (96.0) 405 (83.9) 18(66.7) 293 (86.7) 29 (63.0) 1 569 (85.5) Ramah chert 79 (37.8) 28 (3.8) 69(14.3) 8 (29.6) 42 (12.4) 12 (26.1) 238 (13.0)

Patinated Ramah 1 (0.5) 1 (0.0)

Slate total 9 (4.3) 1 (0.1) 9 (1.9) 1 (3.7) 3 (0.9) 5 (10.9) 28 (1.5)

beige 9 1 1 3 4 17

gray 1 7 1

gray-banded 1 1

red-brown 1 1 TOTAL 209 733 483 27 338 46 1836

Table 33: Area 3 Tool Class Frequencies by Feature

F 1 F-2 F-3 Overlap F-4 Other TOTAL N(%)

Bifaces 1 1 1 3 (4.5)

Biface preforms 1 1 (1.5)

Flake points 2 1 3 (4.5)

Scrapers/knives 1 1 2 (3.0)

Utilized flakes 4 2 4 2 1 1 3 (19.4)

Celts 1 1 (1.5) Hexagonal slate tool 0.5* 0.5 1 (1.5)

Slate blanks 0.5 0.5 1 (1.5) Ground slate flakes 6 3 1 1 3 14 (20.9)

Bipolar cores 1 1 1 1 1 5 (7.5)

Block cores 3 6 5 6 20 (29.9)

Disc cores 1 1 (1.5)

Schist tablets 2 2 (3.0) TOTAL 18 13 17 9 3 7 67

.5 denotes a conjoining fragment

since it was not excavated fully. All the features exhibit a high proportion of quartz, although Features 1 and

4 also have moderate proportions of Ramah chert.

Inspection of the chi-square expected frequencies for

this table (treating slate generically) indicates that

NUKASUSUTOK-5 AREAS 1 AND 3

Feature 1 has a higher than expected frequency of Ramah chert, while Feature 2 has a lower than expected frequency of Ramah. Slate is notable for its paucity,

although it is mainly associated with Features 1 and 3.

Fine-grained cherts are absent.

147
84/ Area 3: Feature 3.

Tool Distribution

Figure 90 portrays the plotted

tool distribution along with the

results of a /(-means cluster

analysis. A four cluster solution seems best: cluster 1 is associated with Feature 3, cluster 3

with Feature 2 and clusters 2 and 4 with Feature 1 . There is a

strong tendency for tools to be

associated with the features.

Since Area 3 has some of the same provenience problems as

Area 2A (many bipolar cores and utilized flakes only provenienced to 1 m^ grids), further

analysis was conducted using

the quadrat distributions of the

tool classes (Figures 91 to 96). Quadrat groupings were the same as used for the flakes

(Figure 89). Table 33 presents

tool class frequencies broken

down by their association with

the different features. The tool

class frequencies are low, but one might point to the association of flake points with Feature

2, slate tool fragments with

Feature 1 (one hexagonal crosssection fragment, possibly of a woodworking implement, and ground slate flakes) and

schist tablets and fragments with Feature 3. Variations

in tool raw materials (Table 34) are not particularly

instructive, except insofar as Feature 1 is associated

with quite a few items of Ramah chert (paralleling its

higher than expected frequency of Ramah chert flakes) and slate. In contrast to the paucity of slate flakes,

slate tools or fragments thereof are fairly common.

The tool distribution can also be considered by

depth, which was recorded by depth below surface and

85/ Area 3: Feature 3 sectioned, showing rock cluster beneath the red ocher layer.

soil profile level. As with the flakes, two levels can be

distinguished: the upper level consisting of the gray

leached zone and the top portion of the red-brown

sand, the second consisting of the lower red-brown

sand and the underlying iron-consolidated horizon. At

Feature 1,15 implements were associated with the

upper level, while 4 occurred in the lower level. The latter included a bipolar core of Ramah chert, two utilized

flakes of Ramah chert (one at ca. 43 cm below the sand

surface, directly associated with the yellow sand lens)

148 CHAPTER 7
Table 34. Area 3 Tool Raw Material Frequencies by Feature.

F-1 F-2 F-3 Overlap F-4 Other TOTAL

Quartz 3 7 5 6 1 22 (32.8)

Ramah chert 7 4 7 1 2 3 24 (35.8)

Slate total 8 1 3 2 1 3 18 (26.9)

beige 5 1 1 7

gray .5* .5 3 1 5

green .5 .5 1 2

gray-banded 1 1

red-brown 1 1 1 3 Mugford chert 1 1 (1.5)

Schist 2 2 (3.0) TOTAL 18 13 17 9 3 7 67

.5 denotes a conjoining fragment

and a flake knife of Ramah chert 1 cm above the yellow sand lens. At Features 2 and 3, all the point-provenienced tools lay within the upper level.

Refits

It was possible to refit pieces of three tools at Area 3

(Figure 90). One refit consisted of a hexagonal crosssectioned ground slate implement (probable woodworking tool) that was broken into five fragments, four

of which refit within Feature 1 , while one fragment lay

near the northwest edge of Feature 2 (Figure 94). A

slate blank fragment associated with Feature 1 was

conjoined with a fragment from the east side of

Feature 2 (Figure 94). These two refits suggest a

behavioral connection between Features 1 and 2.

Finally, two pieces of a Ramah chert flake point refit

over a short distance at Feature 2.

Consumption of Lithic Raw Materials and

Technological Organization

Table 35 summarizes the weights of flake and tool

materials at Area 3. Quartz clearly dominates, with

only small amounts of other raw materials being represented. Slate occurs primarily as tools; very little

occurs as flakes. Mugford chert is represented by a single tool (endscraper). Table 36 outlines the products of

the quartz and Ramah chert reduction systems at Area

3. Quartz is notable for a high frequency of block cores and relatively few bipolar cores. The Ramah chert assemblage is too small to draw any firm conclusions,

but it might be noted that 1 of the 1 7 biface-thinning

flakes (BTFs) were classified as "large" (>30 mm), an

unusually high proportion. Figure 97 shows the distribution of BTFs by quadrat; three were associated with

Feature 1, three with Feature 2 and 1 1 with Feature 3.

Eight of the ten large BTFs were associated with

Feature 3.

Dating

Table 37 summarizes the radiocarbon dates for Area 3.

Only one of the four dates is reliable. The date of 5090±95 B.P. was run on alder/birch and willow charcoal procured from the subsurface of Feature 1 , thus it

is contextually more secure than the overlying charcoal

deposit from which the 2845±70 B.P. date was derived. The latter sample and all the other later date samples

contained coniferous material (Dosia Laeyendecker,

personal communication). Given that pollen (Short

NUKASUSUTOK 5: AREAS 1 AND 3 149
L-1 quartz flakes

22x121y

19x121y

23x1 15y

L-2 quartz flakes

22x121y

19xl21y

18x1 15y

23x1 15y

3 119 94 84

4 10 18 105 282 20

5 69 8 245 48 2

8 15 74 233 62

9 9 31 5

11

Quartz flakes

86/ Area 3 distribution of quartz flal<es. (a) Level 1 . (b) Level 2. (c) Total.

1978:32) and macrofossil data indicate the first coniferous forest did not migrate to the Nain area until 4500-4200 B.P., and that there is no indication of Late

Maritime Archaic lithic material at Area 3, the three

third millennium B.P. dates likely pertain to a postoccupation burn event. Consequently, the large charcoal concentration overlying Feature 1 was not part of

the ritual practice involved in constructing the feature.

Relative sea-level dating is of little help. According

to the uplift curve presented in Figure 5, Area 3's elevation of 28 m asl. corresponds to ca. 6800 B.P., but

nothing in the lithic material suggests the locality is

that old. If we accept the 5000 B.P. radiocarbon date,

then Area 3 was positioned far above its contemporary

shoreline, ca. 1 2 m asl. The paucity of tool material at Area 3 provides

only a slim basis for typological dating. A stemmed

flake point from Feature 2 is almost identical to one

from Area 2A (Figures 1 13:a and 100:j, respectively).

The presence of quartz block cores, flake points, an

endscraper of Mugford chert and schist tablets is generally consistent with the Area 2 assemblage and

CHAPTER 7
Table 35. Area 3 Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes). In Crams.

Total (n\ (%\

Qu3rtz J OOD \0 1 .\Jl 1 nafin ^ ^q? a'*

r\arridll Lllci I

Dciyt: IvIuyiUlU LriclL 1 01

C 1 rito tnta 1

1 / . J \\J .D )

1 ? ? n 11

Be iQC 1 J . J ? ? ?

G r3,y 1 . C. Cray-banded 0.2 0.2 Red-brown 1 68 69

Green 22 22

Schist 269 (6.1) 269 (2.4)

Table 36. Summary of the Quartz and Ramah Chert Reduction Systems at Area 3.

QUARTZ

Tools Block Cores Bipolar cores Flakes Total Weight

24 18 2 1569 10460

RAMAH CHERT

Tools Points Biface Frags. Preforms Bipolar Cores Disc Cores Biface-Thinning Flakes Total Wt

23 - 2 1 3 1 17 238 467

Table 37. Radiocarbon Dates from Area 3. Calibrated with OxCal 3.10 (Bronk-Ramsey 2005).

Provenience B.P. Calibrated BC 1& Lab.No. Comment

Feature 1 , level 2 5090±95 3980-3770 SI-5534 alder/birch, willow

Feature 1 , overlying 2845±70 UCa-3869 coniferous In undated feature sample

Feature 3 2770±205 UCa-31 59 birch and conifer in undated feature sample

Feature 3 2805±70 UCa-3870 birch and conifer In undated feature sample

points to a common Middle Maritime Archaic periodization.

Area 3 Conclusions

The Area 3 features, especially 1 and 3, bear at least a

superficial resemblance to Maritime Archaic mortuary

features. Burials at the Rattlers Bight cemetery

(Fitzhugh 1 976a: 1 23- 1 2 5 , Fitzhugh 1978a:85,

Fitzhugh 2006) consisted of red ocher-lined pits, 0.75-

1 m in diameter, that were generally covered by flat

slab rocks and layers of sand and rock fill. A similar

pattern was documented at the Port au Choix cemetery

NUKASUSUTOK-5: AREAS 1 AND 3 151
L-1 Ramah chert flakes

22x121y

19x121y

. Co

- o

°

23x1 15y

18x115y

L-2 Ramah chert flakes

22x121y

19x121y

23x1 15y

18xl15y

Ramah chert flakes

6 5 6

3 9 8 3 7 1

7 53 4 26 16 2

5 1 58 8

8 2

87/ Area 3: distribution of Ramaii chert flakes, (a) Level I . (b) Level 2. (c) Total.

(Tuck 1976:12-13). However, the initial suspicion that

the features discovered at Area 3 might be burials

could not be confirmed. Extreme post-occupation podzolization processes marked by extensive translocation of iron and humic acids eliminated any possibility

of using variation in soil colour to identify sub-surface

pits. On the other hand, the clustered distribution of

rocks, flakes and a small number of tools beneath the

surface of features 1, 2 and 3 indicates deliberate and

focused sub-surface deposition. An initial alternative

interpretation of the features was that they could be an

expression of mortuary ceremonialism without interment: "cenotaphs" for comrades lost at sea without

recovery of their bodies (Hood 1 981 :1 38) .

But accumulating knowledge of the northern

Maritime Archaic indicates the culture was marked by

such a varied array of ritual expression in material culture that non-mortuary practices should also be considered. For example, red ocher deposits are often

associated with hearths, either as flecks adjacent to

the features or as distinct deposits within hearth pits.

This hearth association may be related to processing

152 CHAPTER 7
L-1 slate flakes

22x12ly

19x121y

23x1 15y

18xl15y

L-2 slate flakes

22x1 21

y

19x12ly

23x1 15y

18x115y

Slate flakes

8=1

RB=1 8=1 G=1

8=3 8=7 8=3

8=1

8=1

G8=1

G=7

8=1

8= beige

G= gray G8= gray-banded

R8= red-brown

88/ Area 3: distribution of slate flakes, (a) Level I. (b) Level 2. (c) Total.

hematite by heat alteration and/or it may connect

ocher with transformation symbolism (cooking, thermal alteration). Traces of combustion in the form of

charcoal were found at all the Area 3 features. The

charcoal layer overlying Feature 1 may post-date the

feature, but there was also scattered charcoal within and below the red ocher deposit. At Feature 2, a pocket of charcoal occurred within the red ocher deposit,

while at Feature 3 charcoal was concentrated beneath

the red ocher and above a concentration of small cobbles and quartz chunks. Although the Area 3 features

are clearly not conventional hearths, their meaning

should be considered in terms of how their constitutive elements might signal metaphorical relations with

the domestic features. A more systematic documentation of red ocher's relationship with hearths of different form/function would provide a better context for

understanding the varied associations of the material. One of the interesting aspects of the features is

their spatial patterning, which combines an alternating

or oppositional sequencing of forms with a possible

directional orientation. The two features with thick

NUKASUSUTOK 5: AREAS 1 AND 3 153
89/ Area 3 quadrat groupings used in the analyses.

Biface

* Flake point

+ Bipolar core

Block core

Disc core

• Endscraper

Flake knife

• Celt

• Hexagonal state tool

18xl15y

o Slate blank

> Ground slate flake

Scfiist tablet

• Utilized flake

90/ Area 3: tool distribution and k-means cluster analysis.

oval deposits of red ocher (Features 1 and 3) lie opposite each other along an axis that is almost northsouth. The other two features, which either lack red ocher (Feature 4) or contain only a modest amount

(Feature 2), lie opposite each other along an east-west

23x1 15y

22x121y

19x121y

Block and

D=1

18x115/

disc cores D= disc core

92/ Area 3 distribution of block cores.

axis. This may be merely coincidental and we have no means of ascertaining contemporaneity between the

features other than a couple of refits possibly connecting Features 1 and 2. Nonetheless, the nearly equidistant spacing of the features relative to each other suggests deliberate placement. The only patterning in lithic materials consonant with this spatial arrangement is

that the major red ocher features (1 and 3) tend to be more strongly associated with Ramah chert and slate. Understanding these features and their contextual

relationships will require comparative data from other

Maritime Archaic sites.

154 CHAPTER 7
23x1 15y

22x121y

19x121y

1

1

1 1

ar cores

1

18x115y

95/ ,4refl 3; distribution of bipolar cores.

18x1 15y

22x121y

19x121y

ST=.5 SB=.5

ST=1 C=1 SB=5 —

;

ST=.5

tools

18x1 15y

ST= slate tool (fragment) SB = slate blank C = celt

94/ Area 3: distribution of slate tools.

23x1 15y

22x121y

19x121y

Ground slate flakes 18x1 15y

22x121y

19x121y

FK=1

Bl=1

Miscellaneous

tools

FP=1

FP=2

ES=1

FP=1

ST=1

ST=1

81=1

18x1 15y

FP = flake point ES=endscraper ST = schist tablet Bl=biface FK= flake knife

96/ Area 3: distribution of other tool classes.

23x1 15y

22x121y

19x121y

Blface-thinning

flakes total (large)

i(i;

2(1)

10(7) 1(1)

18x1 15y

97/ Area 3: distribution of Ramah chert biface-thinning

flakes.

95/ Area 3: distribution of ground slate flakes.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: AREAS 1 AND 3 155
O f Z 3 5

98/ Nukasusutok-5: stemmed bifacial points, a: Area 1 surface: b: Area 2A: c: Area 2C1

.

CHAPTER 8
Nukasusuto

Material Culture

The preceding chapters outlined the spatial patterning

at Nukasusutok-5 and made general references to the

material culture insofar as it was relevant to the spatial

patterning. The function of this chapter is to present a

descriptive overview of the assemblages from each

subarea. Each assemblage is broken down by traditional implement classes and the formal variation in these

classes is summarized. A systematic consideration of

technological organization at the site is presented in

Chapter 9.

DEFINITIONS

For the most part, the categories of lithic implements

used here follow the system developed by the

Smithsonian Institution during the 1970s. There are

deviations, of course, and some categories need more

precise definition. Consequently, a series of clarifications is presented prior to describing the assemblages.

Bifacial Points and Flake Points

A bifacial point is retouched over most of its dorsal and ventral surfaces; it may be made on a flake or from

a bifacial preform. A flake point is made on a flake and

has retouch limited to its margins, either bifacial, unifacial or on alternating edges.

Bifaces and Biface Preforms

Biface denotes implements with bifacial retouch, either

a generic form that does not suggest a particular end

product or an implement fragment that is not further

NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE

identifiable. Biface preform denotes bifacially

retouched implements that are assumed to represent

the penultimate reduction stage for a specific implement class.

Endscrapers, Flake Knives and Utilized Flakes

Endscrapers are small implements, generally trapezoid

or triangular in form, with clearly defined abrupt angle

retouch at one end and varying degrees of retouch on

their lateral edges. Flake knives are flakes with fairly

distinct, continuous and moderate-to-abrupt retouch

along a lateral edge; this form might also be termed a backed knife or flake. The term does not exclude a

scraper function. Utilized flakes bear traces of intentional retouch or use wear that is less distinct, generally discontinuous and usually, though not always,

shallow angled.

Bipolar Cores

This term replaces the problematic piece esquillee.

The latter seems to have been introduced into

Labrador archaeology by McChee and Tuck (1975); a contemporary paper (Fitzhugh 1975:122) refers to them as "quartz nuclei or wedges." There has been a

long debate in the lithic technology literature regarding bipolar cores and piece esquillee; since these implements constitute such a large part of

Early/Middle Maritime Archaic assemblages the main

points of the discussion will be summarized here. The

heart of the debate is whether piece esquillee are

1 57
b c

99/ Nukasusutok-5 bifacial points and bifaces. a: stemmed point, Area 2A: b: stemmed point, Area 28;

c: side-notched biface, Area 2A. d bipoint preform. Area 2C2, e bipoint. Area 2A. f biface, Area 2B.

tools or exhausted bipolar cores. MacDonald's

(1968:88) discussion of Paleoindian lithics regards

them as tools for wedging or slotting bone, antler or wood. LeBlanc (1992) provides evidence suggesting

this may be the case in some contexts. But most commentators have either regarded piece esquillee as

bipolar cores or have tried to clarify the distinctions between the two (e.g., Flenniken 1 981 ; Hayden 1 980;

Kuijt et al. 1 995; Lothrop and Cramly 1982; Shott

1989). When cryptocrystalline materials are involved

the bipolar technique is seen as a method for reducing small nodules that cannot be handled by direct

percussion. In the case of vein quartz, however, the

non-isotropic structure and resultant blocky fracture

renders attempts at controlled flaking by direct percussion difficult. Consequently, the use of vein quartz

is frequently associated with bipolar reduction techniques aimed at producing large quantities of deba ^

c 6

1 00/ Nul<asusutol<-5: biface fragments and flake points,

a-f: biface stems, all Area 2A; g: biface tip, Area I ; h-p: flake points, all Area 2A.

itage (e.g., Callahan 1987; Callahan et al. 1992;

Flenniken 1981; Knutsson 1998). Some of this debitage is selected for further bipolar reduction. A variety of flakes derived from this process can be used

expediently for simple processing tasks or specific

size/shape variants might be selected for hafting,

along the lines of Flenniken's (1 981 ;60-96) discussion

of quartz "microliths" hafted in wooden handles and

used for processing fish. At any stage in the reduction

process bipolar cores could be recycled for use as wedges, scrapers, etc. The term bipolar core is used here since most of

the evidence from Nukasusutok-5 points in the direction of such a reduction system for quartz. It should

be noted, however, that Ramah and Mugford cherts sometimes were subjected to bipolar percussion to

reduce small fragments, although a wedging function

cannot be disregarded.

CHAPTER 8
Block Cores

The term block core is adapted from Hayden et al.

(1996) to denote unmodified or partially modified

pieces of vein quartz. They are grouped into shape categories, of which tabular blocks and water-rolled cobbles are the best defined. The distinction between

quartz core fragments and large flakes is ambiguous;

a detailed analysis of the quartz reduction system

would be necessary to provide a more nuanced classification.

Ground Slate Flakes and Ground Slate Tool

Fragments

Ground slate flakes are pieces of debitage bearing

traces of grinding but without identifiable elements of

tool edges or surfaces. Ground slate tool fragments

exhibit features more clearly indicative of removal

from specific tools, such as spalls from slate point lateral edges or adze bits, or lateral edges of an unclassifiable tool.

Slate Plates and Blanks

Slate plates are the unmodified or slightly retouched

raw materials used for slate tool production. Slate

blanks are moderately retouched items that lack sufficient formal characteristics to be considered preforms

for specific tools.

AREA 1

Bifacial Points

Five bifacial points were found in Area 1 , of which four

are from the Smithsonian surface collection. Two specimens are whole points while three are distal fragments. Both complete points are fabricated from

Ramah chert. One is rather long (L=143.1 mm,

W=38.4, TH=10.8), made on a large flake, with complete bifacial retouch proximally and distally, but with

medial retouch limited to the margins on its ventral

side (Figure 98:a). It has rounded shoulders and a

slightly contracting stem with a convex base. The secNUKASUSUTOK-5; MATERIAL CULTURE

ond example (illustrated in Fitzhugh 1978: Figure 9n)

is about half the length of the former and also has a

slightly contracting stem with a convex base, but its

shoulders are more sharply angled. Of the three distal

fragments, two are of Ramah chert and one of black

chert (Figure 100:g); only the latter specimen was

acquired from the excavation.

Flake Points

All four flake points were surface collected and are made of Ramah chert. Two proximal fragments have

slightly tapered stems (one is illustrated in Fitzhugh

1976: Figure 9s) and both are retouched bifacially

along their margins. The third specimen is a tip fragment. A very small flake point can be considered a

micropoint (illustrated in Fitzhugh 1976: Figure 9q); it

has a short stem and is retouched on alternate sides above its shoulders and unifacially on the stem.

Bifaces

Two items are classed as bifaces. One is a medial fragment of black chert while the other is a bifacially

worked piece of black slate (Figure 1 02:f); the latter is from the excavation.

Endscrapers

All three endscrapers were surface collected. One is made of gray Mugford chert, the other two of greenish-yellow Mugford chert. In plan they are trapezoid

and each has a differently shaped working edge: concave, straight and convex. The working edge of one

specimen originally may have been oriented diagonally. Two specimens exhibit small spurs on one distal

corner, in both cases formed by a tiny notch placed on

the lateral margin just below the corner. The straightedged specimen is illustrated by Fitzhugh (1976:

Figure 9r).

Flake Knives

The three examples of flake knives from the surface

collection are all made from black chert.

1 59
Utilized Flakes

Area 1 has a total of 22 utilized flakes, of which 18 were surface collected and four excavated. All but one

are made of Ramah chert; the exception is made of

black chert.

Bipolar Cores

A single quartz bipolar core was found at Area 1

.

Block Cores

Three quartz block cores were recovered from the

excavation. One of these is an unmodified squarish

block, the second is a split tablet, while the third is a

split discoid.

AREA 2A

Bifacial Points

A total of 1 3 bifacial points or fragments thereof was

recovered from Area 2A. Of these, 1 1 are classified as stemmed points, of which 10 are made of Ramah

chert, one of quartz. The single whole example (Figure

98:b) is made of Ramah chert and is completely bifacially flaked, with a slightly contracting stem and a convex base that bears a remnant striking platform

(L = 75.6 mm, W =30.5, TH =8.1). An almost identical example was found at Area 2C (Figure 98:c). The

quartz specimen (Figure 99:a) lacks most of its stem

and exhibits angled rather than indented shoulders, one of which is unifacially retouched while the other is

roughly fractured perpendicularly. The remaining nine examples are all proximal stem fragments, perhaps

discarded during the rehafting process. Four stem

form variants might be identified: large, tongueshaped with a thinned convex base (one specimen.

Figure 100:a); small, almost straight-sided with a

straight or slightly convex thinned base (two speci- mens, Figure 1 00:c, d); contracting sides with a convex

or near-straight base (three specimens, Figure 100:e,

f): contracting sides with a pointed base bearing a remnant striking platform (three specimens. Figure 1 00:b).

Of the remaining two bifacial points, one is a

nearly complete side-notched biface made of Ramah

chert (Figure 99:c). It has few retouch flakes and one

lateral edge is rounded by wear or grinding (L = 54.9 mm, W =21.9, TH =8.3). The other item is a Ramah

chert leaf-shaped bipoint (Figure 99:e) with a slightly

asymmetric form, abrupt retouch limited to its lateral margins and numerous step fractures (L = 82.1 mm,

W =23.0, TH = 9.2). A similar specimen was found in Area 2C (Figure 99:d).

Flake Points

All of the 1 flake points from Area 2A are made from

Ramah chert. One is made on a small flake with a

striking platform as a base and with abrupt lateral edge retouch (Figure 100:p), while the other has

slightly serrated bifacial retouch along its lateral margins and a snapped-off base (Figure 100:o). Five of

the others are complete. Two have symmetrically contracting stems with a striking platform at the base

(Figure 100:i, j), while two more have asymmetrical stems (Figure 100:h, k). Metrics: xL = 39.8 mm, r =

29.9-52.2; xW = 22.7 mm, r = 1 6.4-26.1 ; xTH = 3.8,

r =2.7-4.8. One of the three nearly complete specimens has

a snapped-off stem (Figure 100:m), another lacks a stem but has part of a bulb of percussion at its base

(Figure 100:n), while a third has a base and lateral edges constituted by snaps and a retouched tip. A

proximal fragment has a short asymmetrical stem formed by retouch around a basal striking platform

(Figure 100:1). Marginal retouch patterns vary across

the specimens; several have alternating retouch, some bifacial, others unifacial. Two tiny specimens

measuring under 20 mm in length can be considered

micropoints.

Biface Preforms

All six of the implements classed as biface preforms

are made of Ramah chert. One is whole (L = 61 .2 mm,

W = 42.1 , W = 9.3), another nearly complete and there

160 CHAPTER 8
e f

1 01 / Nukasusutok-5: bifaces and preforms, a: hiface, Area

2A; b-d: bifaces, Area 2C; e-f: point preforms, Area 2A.

are two distal and two proximal fragments. Five of the

six are of similar form and dimensions (Figure 1 01 :e,

f; Figure 102:a, d, e), representing bifaces ranging

from 60-80 mm in length and 25-35 mm in width, with

convex bases. They tend to be roughly flaked; one

exhibits numerous step fractures and another is only

retouched on the margins of its ventral surface. One is

thermally altered (Figure 102:e). All appear to be projectile point preforms. The remaining specimen is an

oval flake with retouch mostly limited to its margins; a

proto-stem is formed by slight notching on alternate

sides (Figure 1 02:g).

Bifaces

Of the 1 6 bifaces, one is made of quartz while the rest

are made of Ramah chert. The quartz implement has a

"hand-axe"-like form (Figure 1 10:a) with alternate edge

flaking (L = 120.9 mm, W = 66.8, TH = 21.6). Eight of

1 02/ Nukasusutok-5: bifaces and preforms, a: biface. Area 2A: b-c: preforms. Area 2C; d-e: preforms. Area 2A:

f: biface fragment, Area 1 , g: preform. Area 2A, h; biface. Area 3; i: biface, Area 2C.

the Ramah chert specimens are distal portions of projectile points, two of which exhibit impact fractures. Six

items are lateral or proximal edge fragments. The last example is the base of a large asymmetric biface of Ramah chert (Figure 1 01 :a). Made on a large flake, the

dorsal surface has large, broad flake scars removed

over its entire surface while the ventral retouch is limited to the margins (W = 51 .9 mm, TH = 10.0).

Endscrapers

The Area 2A collection includes 16 endscrapers or fragments thereof, of which 1 1 are made of black

chert, four of gray Mugford chert and one of patinated Mugford chert. Of the nine reasonably complete

specimens (Figure 103:a-d, f, g, j), seven are trapezoid in form, two triangular. There was a consistent

selection of flakes in the 5-7 mm thickness range. Summary statistics are as follows:

NUKASUSUTOK-5 MATERIAL CULTURE 161
1 03/ Nukasusutok-5: endscrapers, flake knives, gravers and linear flakes, a-d, f-g, i-l, n: endscrapers, Area 2A,

e, m: endscrapers Area 2C, h: endscraper, Area 2B, o flake knife/scraper, Area 2A; p: graver (?), Area 2A;

q-s linear flakes, Area 2A.

1 04/ Nukasusutok-5: stemmed flakes and flake knives,

a-c stemmed flakes. Area 2A: d: stemmed flake/flake

knife. Area 2C, e-i flake knives. Area 2A.

Length: r = 1 7.9-31 .4 mm,

Width: r= 16.7-31.8 mm,

Thickness: r = 3.2-7.0 mm.

x = 22.8, sd = 4.3

x = 22.2, sd = 4.3 x=5.5, sd=1.4

Working edge shape is relatively straight in five

cases, convex in one, concave in one and concavo-convex in two. Edge angles range between 40-65 . The

amount of retouch on the lateral margins varies considerably. One example exhibits slight spurring on

both its distal corners due to lateral edge notching just

below the corners (Figure 103:d) while a second has

spurring on one distal corner as a result of similar lateral edge notching (Figure 103:f). The two triangular

forms (Figure 103:a, i) are very close in size and both

have concavo-convex working edges. One specimen

has a slight spur on its right distal corner (Figure

103:i), while the other has a short, straight, retouched

edge with considerable use damage on its right distal

corner (Figure 103:a). Two specimens exhibit other

forms. One is made on a thin flake and has a relatively long convex working edge terminated by a small

notch at one end (Figure 103:1) while the other is a more irregular fragment with a fairly straight working

edge (Figure 103.n). The remaining items are lateral and distal edge fragments.

Flake Knives

Of the seven flake knives, four are made of Ramah

chert, two of quartz and one of black chert. Three of

the Ramah chert specimens are whole or near complete (Figure 104:f-h). They are made on flakes with

lengths in the 42-51 mm range and all have convex

edges with edge angles ranging from 50-70'. One

Ramah chert specimen and the black chert example

162 CHAPTER 8
105/ Nukasusutok-5: bipolar cores arid disc core, a-d, f-h: bipolar cores, Area 2A; e: bipolar core, Area 2C, I: block core with bipolar percussion. Area 2A: J: disc core. Area 2C.

(Figure 104:i) are fragments. Of the two quartz implements, one has fine retouch along a straight edge and

ventral step fractures on one corner (Figure 103:o),

such that it is unclear whether it should be classed as

a flake knife or a scraper. The other quartz specimen

is uncertain. An eighth flake knife of Ramah chert is

illustrated in Figure 104:e. It is from the northern end

of Area 2A, but was eliminated from the analysis

because of uncertain provenience.

Utilized Flakes

Of the 97 utilized flakes, 88 (90.7 %) are made of Ramah chert, five (5.2 %) of quartz, three (3.1 %) of

black chert and one (1 .0 %) of gray Mugford chert.

Bipolar Cores

Area 2A has a total of 57 bipolar cores. Some examples

are illustrated in Figure 105:a-c, f-h. Given this relatively large sample size, a detailed attribute analysis was

conducted on 56 specimens (one was missing at the

time of analysis) to determine if the material could

reveal underlying patterning. The approach was modeled after Lothrop and Cramly (1982). Somewhat simplified, the main variables considered were:

1 ) raw material

2) number of axes of percussion (one, two,

indeterminate)

3) length of each axis of percussion

4) thickness

5) edge surfaces (as seen laterally): straight,

convex, concave, irregular, flat platform,

indeterminate

6) edge shape (as seen vertically, i.e., from

above the platform): straight, bowed,

wavy, irregular, indeterminate

7) edge damage (combinations thereof):

crushing, sharp, faceted, step fractured

Figure 106 provides a graphic depiction of the

variables. A major problem in recording and evaluating

the results is the absence of any positional criterion

(such as proximal/distal) to distinguish consistently

between the first and second axes of percussion.

Another difficulty is the fragmentary state of many

specimens, which prevents complete measurements or

hinders the comparison of edge characteristics on

opposite sides of an implement. The following summary of the results is based on data derived from an arbitrarily defined first axis and from specimens for which

metric variables could be considered as complete measurements. Edge A is the first edge of the axis.

Edge B is the opposite edge.

Raw Materials: quartz = 34 (60.7%), Ramah chert = 18

(32.1%), gray Mugford chert = 2 (3.6%), black chert = 2 (3.6%).

Number of Axes of Percussion: 1 = 28 (50.0%), 2 = 18

(32.1%), indeterminate =10(1 7.9).

NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE 163
Axis 1

Thickness

A2-

Core Orientation

Axis 2

straight Convex

Edge Surface

Concave Irregular Flat Platform

Straight

Edge Shape

Bowed Wavy Irregular

{T\ (T\ ff^

Crushing Step Fractured Edge Damage

Sharp Facetted

/06/ Bipolar core analysis variables and attributes.

Axis 1 Length:n = 32, r= 15.7-38.6 mm, x= 27.21 , sd = 5.82

flat platform = 2 (3.6%), indeterminate = 2 (3.6%)

Axis /, Edge A Shape: straight=

8 (14.3%), bowed = 18 (32.1%),

wavy = 23 (41 .1%), irregular = 1

(1.8%), indeterminate= 6

(10.7%)

Axis 1, Edge A Damage:

(instances of each type in sample; specimens can have combinations of damage types);

crushing = 41 (73.2%), sharp =

6 (10.7%), faceted= 27 (48.2%),

step fractured = 20 (35.7%)

Axis I, Edge B (opposite)

Surface: straight = 7 (12.5 %), convex = 7 (12.5 %), concave =

3 (5.4%), irregular= 4 (7.1%), flat

platform= 1 (1 .8%)

Axis 1 , Edge B Shape: straight =

7 (1 2.5 %), bowed = 4 (7.1%), wavy= (9 (16.1%), irregular =

1 (1.8%)

Axis I, Edge B Damage:

(instances of each type in sample; specimens can have combinations of damage types);

crushing = 23 (41.1%), sharp = 6

(18.8%), faceted = 12 (37.5%), step fractured = 9 (28.1%)

Axis 2 Length: n = 27, r = 9.4-47.2 mm, x = 23.97, sd = 9.08

Thickness: n=47, r = 3.9-23.4 mm, x = 1 0.93, sd= 4.60

Axis I , Edge A Surface: straight = 1 6 (28.6%), convex =

25 (44.6%), concave = 8 (14.3%), irregular = 3 (5.4%),

Cross-tabulations were run between the nominal

variables surface, shape and damage for Axis 1 , Edge A

(the best sample size) to investigate attribute combinations. Only the combination of edge surface and edge

shape exhibited interesting patterning, with a slight tendency (when expected values were calculated) for con164 CHAPTER 8
vex edge surfaces to be associated with wavy edge shapes.

Area 2A Bipolar Core Sizes

20

16

E

in

in

a>cu 8 -

10 15

Bivariate metric analysis

provides more interesting

results. Figure 107 is a scatter diagram of Axis 1 length

against thickness, coded for different raw material types. There

is a slight tendency for three

groups in the plot: (1) speci- mens <20 mm long and <8 mm

thick, (2) those from 21-34 mm

in length and between 6-14 mm

thick, and (3) those >30 mm

long and >12 mm thick. Ramah

chert specimens cluster in the

shorter/thinner area of the plot

while quartz is spread out more broadly, although with

a clear break between "medium" and "large" groups. The Mugford and black chert specimens lie in the middle. The contrasts between quartz and Ramah chert

likely indicate differences in the sizes of the raw materials when bipolar reduction commenced: quartz

reduction began with block cores and large flakes

while Ramah chert bipolar cores are probably the

result of recycling broken tool fragments.

By way of comparison, Flenniken (1981:48)

divides his Northwest Coast quartz bipolar cores into

three size categories, although he provides no his- togram or scatter plot data on the shape of the distributions. Lothrop and Cramly's (1982:16) mostly chert

pieces esquillees exhibit a unimodal size distribution

suggestive of a continuous reduction process. Although the non-unimodal size distribution at Area 2A may simply be an artifact of sample size or reflect

stages of core exhaustion (MacDonald 1968:86), it

could also be related to purposeful selection of core

sizes for the production of different types of flakes.

For example, Flenniken (1981:43-46) identifies what

he terms "microliths" as deliberate products of the

bipolar reduction of quartz. This category may be

A Ramah

Quartz • Chert

20 25 30 Length (mm)35 40 45

107/ Area 2A bipolar core size distriiyution.

more a reflection of the investigator's expectations

and sorting procedures than of prehistoric intentionality, but it is clear that careful bipolar reduction can produce at least some fairly regular columnar or linear

flakes, although they will likely constitute a small proportion of the total debitage. The quartz debitage from

Area 2A (and the other subareas) contains little that

resembles deliberately produced linear or columnar

flakes. Consequently, it is more likely that discontinuities in the bipolar core size distribution are the result

of selectivity in the size of shatter chosen for further

bipolar reduction.

It is difficult, however, to see the smallest bipolar

core size group as the result of reduction aimed at producing flakes since flakes produced from these cores would be extremely small and cores under 20-25 mm

are difficult to hold between the fingers without risking injury during bipolar percussion. If any of the bipolar cores were used for splitting/wedging functions it was perhaps these.

Block Cores

Area 2A produced a total of 37 quartz block cores,

which can be divided into five sub-groups. The first

NUKASUSUTOK-5; MATERIAL CULTURE 165
f

108/ Nukasusutok-5 slate and schist tools, a: ground slate

point, Area 2A. b flake adze. Area 2A, c: reworked flake adze. Area 2A, d slate blank. Area 2A. e celt/adze blank. Area 2A, f: schist whetstone, Area 2A.

group consists of 1 1 tabular or sub-tabular cores, unmodified except for one or two flakes removed (e.g.,

Figure 1 10:b). Summary statistics are as follows:

Length: r = 58.3-1 2 1 .4 mm, x=82.1, sd = 20.1

Width: r = 41 .4-70.3 mm, x = 56.6, sd = 1 1 .6

Thickness: r = 1 5.7-46.7mm, x=31.7, sd = 9.06

The second group consists of five quartz beach

cobbles marked by various degrees of water-rolling.

Four are battered and two of these were split in half. The remaining specimen has only a single flake removed. Their size range is slightly smaller than for

tabular cores. Summary statistics are as follows;

Length: r = 29.8-63.5 mm, x=52.2, sd = 1 3.4

Width: r = 25.1-52.6 mm, x=43.1, sd = 12.1

109/ Nukasusutok-5: ground slate tools, a: adze, Area 2A;

b-c: celts, Area 2C.

Thickness: r = 22.7-35.2 mm, x=30.3, sd= 5.8

The third group consists of 1 3 cores with traces of

bipolar percussion. Some of these could be called

bipolar cores, but they are distinguished from the latter because of their size and their place at the initial

phase of the reduction process. Figure 110:d illustrates an example with crushing on its long sides and

on a flat platform at one end; the opposite end has

large step fractures. The core is broken across its

width, but there was clearly an attempt to split it

lengthwise using bipolar percussion. Summary statistics are as follows:

Length: r= 53. 1 -1 22.8 mm, x= 72.4, sd=18.9

Width: r= 35.2-70.9 mm, x=51.5, sd=10.2

Thickness: r= 25.5-43.7 mm, x= 33.0, sd= 6.1

166 CHAPTER 8
/ 1 0/ Nukasusutok-5: quartz biface and cores, a: biface, Area 2A: b: tabular block core, Area 2A: c: core/hammerstone, Area 3; d: block core with bipolar percussion, Area 2A.

1 1 1 / Nukasusutok-5: slate and schist implements, a-c: ground slate point tips. Area 2A, d: ground slate tool frag- ment (point stem''). Area 2A; e schist tablet. Area 3: f: ground slate tool fragment. Area 2A: g schist tablet. Area 3.

The fourth group consists of two specimens, one

discoid the other lenticular in form. The former has

three or four flakes removed while it is uncertain whether the latter has been culturally modified. Finally,

the fifth group consists of 5 cores with irregular

shapes and the following summary statistics:

Length: r = 50.2-82.2 mm, x = 66.2, sd = 13.2

Width: r = 40.2-65.9 mm, x=52.1, sd = ll.l

Thickness: r = 30.4-48.6 mm, x=36.6, sd = 6.9

Ground Slate Points

Portions of four ground slate points were found at Area

2A. Three of the four are distal fragments while one is most of a medial portion. Two of the distal fragments

have broad flat blades (Figure 1 1 1 :a-b); one is made of

green slate the other of beige slate. The third distal

fragment is narrower with a lenticular cross-section

(Figure 1 1 1 :c) and made of gray slate. The medial

specimen is made of green slate and consists of the

lower portion of the point's blade and the upper part

of its stem (Figure 1 08:a). Its blade element is very thin

and flat (W= 22.6 mm, TH= 3.5); the stem is formed by

a slightly rounded constriction.

Ground Slate Adzes

Three examples, all made of green slate, suggest two

types of slate adzes. The first (Figure 109;a) is a large

triangular form with bifacially retouched margins and

a plano-convex cross-section (L= 105.6 mm, W= 53.0,

TH= 1 3.3). Very fine polishing at the bit end extends

40-70 mm back from the working edge. The bit has an edge angle of 60 and exhibits very little evidence of

wear. The poll end of the tool has a small surface

NUKASUSUTOK-5. MATERIAL CULTURE 167
ground to an angle of 60°; this may be a trace of a sec- ond reworked bit or a hafting modification. The second

example (Figure 1 08:b) is a small trapezoid adze made

on a flake with a remnant striking platform at its poll end (L = 64.5 mm, W = 33.9, TH = 6.5). The implement

has light dorsal retouch on its lateral margins, a bit

angle of 35 and polishing limited to within 1 2-1 8 mm

of the working edge. The third specimen (Figure 1 08:c)

is probably a reworked flake adze similar to the latter

type. It consists of a triangular flake with fine abrupt

retouch on the distal end, slight retouch on its lateral

edges and polishing remnants on one distal corner and

one lateral edge. Its maximum width (33 mm) is very

similar to that of the previously described flake adze.

Slate Blanks

Three items are classified as slate blanks. One is a triangular celt or adze preform of green slate (Figure

108:e), bifacially flaked over its entire surface, with

preliminary grinding of a few facets near the bit end

(L = 62.9 mm, W = 42.7, TH = 1 7.0). The second is a

celt or adze preform of gray slate made on a thin

slate plate (Figure 1 12:b). The implement is unifacially retouched on its lateral margins and widest end; two step fractures at the wide end are ground slightly (L = 82.4 mm, W = 49.0, TH = 1 0.7). The third item

is a bifacially flaked fragment of green slate (Figure

1 12:d).

Slate Plates

Of the nine slate plates or fragments thereof, six are made of green slate, two of red-brown slate and one of

beige slate. All but one are thin plates of slate with

varying amounts of edge retouch (e.g., Figure 1 1 2;a, e,

f). The remaining example is a thicker ovoid piece with

bifacial retouch on one edge and extensive step fracturing on the opposite edge (Figure 1 12:c).

Ground Slate Flakes and Tool Fragments

Of the 49 items categorized as ground slate flakes, 24

(49.0 %) are made of gray slate, 1 6 (32.7 96) of green

slate, four (8.2 %) of gray-banded slate, two (4.1 %) of

red-brown slate, two (4.1 %) of indeterminate color

slate and one (2.0 %) of greenstone. Seven of these specimens are edge-struck flakes from tools; four have

medial ridges while three have convex surfaces. Two

items are classed as ground slate tool fragments. One

is a piece of gray slate with one edge ground perpendicularly and two other edges bifacially flaked (Figure

1 1 1 :f), apparently a reworked implement fragment.

The other is a piece of green slate with rounded lateral edges suggestive of a ground slate point stem

(Figure 1 1 1 :d),

Hammerstones

A single hammerstone was recovered, consisting of a

small water-rolled cobble with battering concentrated

at one point.

Whetstones

The single whetstone (Figure 108:f) is a thin bar of dense gray schist (L = 87.2 mm, W = 30.7, TH = 5.2). The working edge runs the length of one side of the

tool, with wear on both faces but mostly on one. The

opposite lateral edge is ground perpendicularly.

Several linear incisions made by a pointed tool are visible on one face of the implement as well as on the

perpendicular non-working edge. These do not seem

to constitute decoration.

Schist Tablets and Ground Schist Fragments

Three schist tablets and two fragments of ground

schist were recovered. The three tablets are all made

of chlorite schist. Two (Figure 1 1 3:a, b) are rectangular with somewhat battered lateral edges suggestive

of deliberate shaping (L = 117.4 mm, 100.1 mm;

W = 67.1, 56.4; TH = 31.8, 21.2). Both have one smoothed surface, possibly from grinding. The third

tablet (Figure 113:d) is a knife-shaped bar with no

obvious modification (L = 165.0 mm, W = 44.6,

TH = 1 7.2), so it is uncertain whether the implement

is a cultural affordance.

168 CHAPTER 8
Graver (?) An unusual tool made of black chert may be a graver

(Figure 103:p). It resembles an endscraper with oversize spurs extending from each distal corner (L= 37.4 mm, W= 18.4, TH= 4.9). The left distal spur is shaped

like a screwdriver tip while the right spur tapers to a

perforator-like point. The concave distal edge exhibits

scraper-like wear traces and parts of both spurs also

exhibit use-wear. Another possibility is that the speci- men is an effigy.

Stemmed Flakes

Three Ramah chert implements are classified as stemmed flakes because they exhibit more systematic

retouch than utilized flakes and a tendency towards

stem definition, but they do not resemble flake points.

One is a roughly triangular flake (L= 55.7 mm, W=

39.2, TH= 4.3) with a short stem formed by alternating

unifacial retouch on a slightly indented left shoulder

and more sharply defined right shoulder (Figure

104:a). The lateral margins of the "blade" have fine

bifacial retouch limited to the margins. The second

(Figure 104:b) is a proximal fragment with a stem formed by a single dorsal flake removal on each side;

the lateral edge margins above the stem have fine bifacial retouch. The third specimen (Figure 104:c) is a triangular flake with dorsal retouch distally and on one

lateral edge (L= 36.0 mm, W= 41 .2, TH= 3.5).

Linear Flakes

Two items are classified as linear flakes. One is made

of Ramah chert (Figure 103:r) and has a short bladelike form with two medial "arrises," dorsal polishing on

its distal end and dorsal utilization wear on its lateral

margin (L= 38.7 mm, W= 14.0, TH= 3.4). This speci- men may be a product of columnar fracturing during

bipolar reduction. The other example is a medial fragment of gray Mugford chert (Figure 1 03:q); one lateral edge is retouched ventrally along its entire length, the

other is retouched dorsally along half its length (L=

28.4 mm, W= 14.6, TH= 2.3). A third linear flake fragment of Ramah chert is illustrated (Figure 103:s), but

it was dropped from the analysis because of uncertain

provenience.

AREA 2B

Bifacial Points

The single bifacial point from Area 2B is a proximal

fragment made of quartz (Figure 99:b). The specimen

is crudely flaked bifacially and has a contracting stem. One lateral edge has an angled rather than indented

shoulder while the other bears only a slight indentation indicative of a tentative shoulder (W= 26.4 mm,

TH= 1 3.5).

Flake Points

The single Ramah chert flake point is an uncertain specimen bearing limited unifacial retouch, some of

which seems designed to taper the flake near its tip and even out one lateral margin.

Bifaces

The only biface (Figure 99:f) is the distal or proximal

fragment of a thin, very finely flaked, asymmetric

biface of Ramah chert (W = 45.3 mm, TH = 7.6). The

quality of flaking suggests the implement is a finished

product ("bifacial knife"), but it might be a preform for

a lanceolate bipoint such as those illustrated in Figure

99:d, e. Comparison of the biface with the latter two

points suggests a reduction process in which the symmetric lateral edge was "keeled" against the hand while

the asymmetric edge was reduced towards the bipoint

form. This technique might have minimized the risk of breakage when producing the narrow lanceolate

forms.

Endscrapers

The single endscraper (Figure 103:h), made of gray Mugford chert, is trapezoid with a slightly concave distal edge and a unifacially retouched lateral edge (L=

15.1 mm, W= 21.1, TH=9.9, edge angle= 60 ).

NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE 169
/ 1 2/ Nukasusutok-5 slate plates and blanks, a, c, e-f: plates, Area 2A: b, d: blanks, Area 2A.

Flake Knives

Both examples are fragmentary and made of Ramah

chert.

Utilized Flakes

Of the 21 utilized flakes, 17 (71.4 %) are made of Ramah chert, four (1 9.0 %) of black chert, one (4.8 %)

of slate and one (4.8 %) of quartz.

Bipolar Cores

Of the six bipolar cores, five are made of quartz, one

of Ramah chert. Most of these are fragmentary, so no summary metrics can be presented.

Block Cores

Two quartz block cores were recovered. One is a subtabular specimen, unused except for the possible

removal of two flakes, the other is unused and prism-

/ / 3/ Nukasusutok-5: schist tablets, a-b, d: Area 2A;

c: Area 2C.

shaped (L= 78.2, 1 1 5.8 mm, W= 56.0, 90.6, TH= 39.0,

70.3).

Ground Slate Flakes and Tool Fragments

Of the five ground slate flakes, four are made of green

slate and one of gray slate. A sixth flake, made of

green slate, is an edge fragment from a celt or adze.

Grindstones (?) Two conjoining fragments of a sandstone plate were

found at Area 2B. It is uncertain whether this was a cultural affordance, but it could have served as a grindstone for slate tools.

Bone Pendants

A small fragment of a bone pendant was recovered

from the fine-sieved charcoal sample taken at hearth

1 1 , dated 6040±90 B.P.. Ca. 9 mm in length and 2.4

170 CHAPTER 8
/ 1 4/ Nukasusutok-5: fragment of bone pendant, Area 2B. (Length 9 mm).

mm in thickness, the artifact has a gouged hole, flattened and rounded edges, one incised line and two

small notches on one face, and a single incised line on

the other face (Figure 1 1 4).

AREA 2C

Bifacial Points

The single bifacial point is from Area 2C1 (Figure 98:c). Made from Ramah chert, it is nearly complete, finely

flaked, exhibits a contracting stem, rounded shoulders and has a biconvex cross-section (W= 28.2 mm, TH=

8.5). It is virtually identical to a specimen from Area 2A

(Figure 98:b).

Biface Preforms

The two biface preforms are made of Ramah chert and

are complete. One could perhaps be classed as an

/ / 5/ Nukasusutok-5: Area 3 flaked implements, a-c: flake

points: d: endscraper: e: biface preform; f: disc core; g: biface fragment; h: flake knife.

unfinished lanceolate bipoint (Figure 99:d), but here it

is treated as a preform since its asymmetric shape

results from retention of a small portion of unfinished

edge (L= 91 .1 mm, W= 28.6, TH= 1 1 .8; biconvex crosssection). As noted above, it is possible that Figure 99:fd-e illustrates a reduction sequence. The other example is made of thermally altered Ramah chert and

exhibits a lanceolate form with a striking platform at

its base (Figure 102:c); it was broken about one third

of the way down from its distal end (L= 48.2 mm, W=

19.1, TH= 7.0; biconvex cross-section). The break

occurred during the final tip-to-base retouch sequence

since the tip is well retouched but the medial and proximal portions are still roughly flaked.

Bifaces

All five biface fragments are made of Ramah chert. Two large fragments (Figure 101:c, d) are similar in

NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE 171
form: asymmetric with slight stemming or notching

and plano-convex cross-sections resulting from extensive retouch on their dorsal surfaces but only marginal retouch on their ventral sides (W = 41.1, 45.5 mm,

TH = 10.7, 13.3). Figure 101;d might be a stemmed

point preform, but both could conceivably be early

stages in the production of bipoints using the asymmetric reduction technique described previously. A

third specimen is the proximal fragment of a large

biface made on a flake (Figure 1 01 :b), with a remnant

striking platform on its proximal end and retouch

limited mostly to its lateral edges (W = > 60 mm,

TH =10.3). Another implement is the distal end of a

large thick biface, possibly a quarry blank (Figure

102:i). The last example is a lateral edge fragment of

thermally altered Ramah chert.

Endscrapers

One of the two specimens is made of black chert, the

other of Ramah chert. The black chert implement

(Figure 103:e) is trapezoid in form, has double concavities on its working edge and abrupt dorsal retouch on

its lateral margins (L = 22.4 mm, W = 23.8, TH = 9,0). The Ramah chert specimen (Figure 103:m) is problematic since Maritime Archaic endscrapers are almost

never made from this material. The implement has a

stem created by unifacial retouch along its lateral margins (dorsally on one edge, ventrally on the other). The

distal "ears" produced by the stemming have dorsal

retouch and the distal edge itself is broken, with two

notch-like flakes removed and the subsequent imposition of slight edge retouch (L = 36.7 mm, W = 31.5,

TH = 7.7). Polishing is present on the distal corners.

Utilized Flakes

Of the 31 utilized flakes, 26 (83.9%) are made of Ramah

chert, four (1 2.9%) of quartz and one (3.2%) of black chert.

Bipolar Cores

Only two bipolar cores were found at Area 2C; one is made of quartz, the other of Ramah chert.

Block Cores

Of the 1 9 block cores, 1 8 are made of quartz, one of

gray quartzite. Of the quartz cores, 1 1 were tabular in

shape. Of these, eight were unused except for minor

flaking, four may have been fractured off larger blocks and two have traces of bipolar percussion on their long

ends. Four have slightly rounded cortex suggestive of

water-rolling. Five cores were prism shaped. Three of

the latter are virtually unused while 2 exhibit traces of

bipolar percussion. Two cores are simply fragments of

blocks. The gray quartzite core is a fragment of a

water-rolled cobble split by bipolar percussion. A few

flakes removed on one edge might indicate use as an

expedient scraper. Summary statistics are as follows:

Length: r = 48.7-97.7 mm, x = 74.9, sd = 15.8

Width: r = 31.9-88.9 mm, x = 56.5, sd = 15.5

Thickness: r = 19.1-70.4 mm, x = 33.5, sd = 12.5

Disc Cores

The single example of a disc core is made of Ramah

chert (Figure 1 05:j). It is a small bifacial disc with sharp

edges and no evidence for crushing that might indicate

bipolar reduction (L = 40.0 mm, W = 39.6, TH = 27.5).

Ground Slate Celts

Two celts were found at Area 2C, one complete and the

other near-complete; both are made of green slate. One is a large sub-triangular specimen (Figure 109:b)

with bifacial flaking along its lateral edges and on

its poll end (L = 148.3 mm, W = 60.2, TH = 19.7).

Polishing is limited to an area 38-48 mm back from the

bit edge. The bit has little damage besides some

crushing and small flakes removed from near the middle of the working edge. Near the poll end some of the

flake facets are polished, presumably hafting-related.

Red ocher stains are visible on the celt surface. The

second example (Figure 109:c) is a small, presumably

sub-triangular, celt with bifacial retouch on both lateral edges, one of which has a thin perpendicularly

ground facet (L = >82.0 mm, W = 39.2, TH = 1 2.4). One

CHAPTER 8
face of the tool is mostly polished and flat; the other

face is completely polished, but the edge portion has

canted grinding that produces a ridge running parallel

to the lateral edge.

Ground Slate Celt/Adze

One artifact of greenstone is the proximal (poll) fragment of a celt or adze (Figure 108:d). It is bifacially

flaked and the lateral edges have slight perpendicular

grinding. The poll edge is slightly ground on one side

and one medial flake facet is slightly ground.

Slate Plates

The lone slate plate, of indeterminate slate color (due

to weathering), has fine flaking along one edge and an

area of possible edge grinding.

Ground Slate Flakes and Tool Fragments

There are 22 ground slate flakes, of which eight

(36.4%) are made of green slate, six (27.3%) of beige

slate, three (1 3.6%) of gray slate, three (1 3.6%) of red- brown slate and two (9.1%) of gray-banded slate. One

flake is an edge-struck fragment from a tool.

Hammerstones

The single hammerstone is a small egg-shaped cobble

with slight crushing at one end.

Schist Tablets

Two schist tablets were found. One is a large rectangular tablet of chlorite schist (Figure 113:c) with

battered edges and one smoothed surface suggestive of use in grinding (L = 171.0 mm, W = 67.7,

TH = 27.1). The other is a thin triangular tablet of

phyllite schist; it is uncertain whether this was a

cultural affordance.

Schist Fragments

Six fragments of schist were collected, of which two

display grinding indicative of cultural modification.

Stemmed Flakes

One Ramah chert implement is classified as a stemmed

flake (Figure 104:d). Made on a long flake, it has light

dorsal retouch on one lateral edge while a slight stem

shoulder is formed by ventral retouch (L = 82.9 mm, W

= 36.8, TH = 5.3). Perhaps it could also be classified

as a flake knife.

Red Ocher Nodules

The vicinity of hearths 1 4 and 1 5 produced eight small

red ocher nodules, weighing a total of 52 g. Three tiny

nodules near hearth 12 weighed 0.4 g.

AREA 3

Flake Points

All three flakes points are made of Ramah chert. One

is almost complete with a contracting stem (Figure

115:a); the margins of its lateral edges and stem are

retouched unifacially on alternate sides and the blade

element is slightly serrated (L = 43.1 mm, W = 22.0,

TH = 2.2). Another specimen is a proximal fragment

with a stem element formed by a retouched shoulder

on one lateral edge and a shallow notch on the opposite edge (Figure 1 1 5:b). A striking platform is retained

at the base of the stem and the blade margins are

retouched on alternate sides (W= 21.4 mm, TH= 2.9). The third example (Figure 1 1 5:c) is missing part of its

base and has slightly serrated bifacial retouch limited

to its margins (L= 28.4 mm, W= 18.7, TH= 3.1).

Biface Preforms

The single example is made of Ramah chert and is a

proximal fragment with a convex base (Figure 1 1 5:e).

Bifaces

All three biface fragments are made of Ramah chert. Two are edge fragments with deep flake scars, reminiscent of quarry blanks (Figure 1 02:h, 1 1 5:g), while the

third is the lateral edge of a smaller biface.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE 173
Endscrapers

The single endscraper from Area 3 (Figure 115:d) is made of an unusual extremely fine-grained beige

chert, presumably from Cape Mugford. It has a straight

distal edge (50' angle) and distinct polishing on its lateral edges (L = 19.0 mm, W = 19.1, TH = 2.8).

Flake Knives

The single flake knife (Figure 1 1 5:h) is made of Ramah

chert and has two distinct retouch areas, both dorsal;

the lateral edge angle is 60 while the proximal edge is

20* (L = 54.8 mm, W = 35.1 , TH = 9.2).

Bipolar Cores

A total of five bipolar cores was found at Area 3; two

are made of quartz, three of Ramah chert.

Block Cores

Of the 20 quartz cores, seven are tabular in form, six

are made from rounded water-rolled cobbles, three are

squarish or prism-shaped, two conical, two semi-discoidal and one irregular. Three tabular specimens are unused or exhibit minimal modification; two were

probably split with bipolar percussion and two others were fractured. Two of the tabular cores are slightly

water-rolled. Of the rounded cobbles, three bear traces

of bipolar percussion while a fourth is heavily battered,

suggesting use as a hammerstone or resistance to

repeated efforts at bipolar reduction (Figure 110:c). One squarish and one conical core show traces of bipolar percussion. Summary statistics are as follows:

Length: r = 38.2-93.9 mm, = 70.8, sd = 12.4

Width: r = 36.9-86.1 mm, = 56.5, sd = 12.2

Thickness: r = 24.0-72.2 mm, = 40.9, sd = 11.2

Disc Cores

The single disc core (Figure 115:f) is a small Ramah

chert specimen with bifacial flaking and severe step

fractures on both faces (L = 44.7 mm, W = 39.3,

TH = 18.8).

/ 16/ Nul<asusutol<-5: Area 3 slate Implements, a: ground

slate hexagonal shaft; b: celt, c: ground tool fragment; d: blank.

Ground Slate Celts

The single example is a red-brown slate specimen that was probably sub-triangular in form prior to being broken longitudinally (Figure 1 16:b). The remaining lateral edge is bifacially flaked. Polishing is concentrated

near the bit but also occurs elsewhere on the tool. The

poll end has a bevelled ground surface, either a remnant bit or hafting modification (L = 86.2 mm,

W = 32.0, TH = 1 5.7).

Hexagonal Ground Slate Tool Fragment

Figure 116:a illustrates a hexagonal shaft of polished

green slate that tapers longitudinally. The tool was

broken into several pieces that were spread between

Features 1 and 2. Retouch on the ventral surfaces of some fragments indicate the implement was flaked

after it was broken. The shape and thickness of the

object (W = >26.2 mm, TH = >1 2.0) suggest it is not a

174 CHAPTER 8
projectile point but possibly the shaft of a more robust

tool such as a small gouge.

Slate Blanks

The single slate blank is a conjoined specimen made

on a plate of gray slate (Figure 1 1 6:d). It is sub-rectangular in form and bifacially retouched along three

edges; the fourth edge bears a remnant of the original

flat plate edge (L= 99.6 mm, W= 52.2, TH= 8.0).

Ground Slate Flakes and Tool Fragments

Of the 1 3 ground slate flakes, seven (53.8%) are made

of beige slate, four (30.8%) of gray slate and one each

(7.7%) of green and red-brown slate. One flake is a tool

fragment with a ground, heavily battered bevel (Figure

1 16:c).

Schist Tablets and Fragments

Two schist tablets were recovered. One is a small knifeshaped bar of chlorite schist (Figure 1 1 1 :e) that appears

worn, although not necessarily by cultural modification

(L = 81.9 mm, W= 28.6, TH = 6.7). The other is an

unmodified plate of phyllite schist (Figure 1 1 1 :g); its

association with Feature 3 suggests it was a cultural

affordance (L = 1 1 7.3 mm, W = 1 01 .9, TH = 1 0.2).

Red Ocher Nodules

Tiny fragments of red ocher were associated with two

features. Nearby Feature 2 were nine fragments weighing a total of 3.2 g. Adjacent to Feature 3 were three

fragments, weighing 14.2 g.

THE NUKASUSUTOK-5 ASSEMBLAGE

IN A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

As discussed more fully in Chapter 9, significant problems are encountered when comparing Maritime

Archaic assemblages. Raised beach sites that have

been reoccupied repeatedly, like Nukasusutok-5, have

horizontal stratigraphy and potential palimpsest

deposits. Consequently, surface collections, test pits

and limited excavations that do not define behaviorally relevant units (such as dwelling modules) may pro- duce an unrepresentative material of limited value for

inter-assemblage comparisons. Nonetheless, some

general observations should be made regarding the

position of the Nukasusutok-5 assemblage relative to

other material from northern and central Labrador.

Since the radiocarbon dates from Nukasusutok-5

are spread between 6000-5000 B.P. it is hardly surprising that the material shares similarities with both the Naksak Complex of northern Labrador (7000-6000

B.P.) and the Sandy Cove Complex (5200-4500 B.P.) of

the central coast. Nukasusutok-5 and Naksak sites

share lanceolate bipoint projectiles, side-notched

bifaces, convex-based bifaces, endscrapers, small celts and a high frequency of bipolar cores (cf., Fitzhugh

1978:Figures 6-9). They differ, however, in that Nukasusutok-5 lacks nipple-based points but has a distinct inventory of flake points. Nukasusutok and the Sandy Cove Complex have in common tapered stem

points, convex-based bifaces and copious use of

quartz reduced by bipolar techniques. They differ in

that Nukasusutok has more extensive use of Ramah

chert while Sandy Cove lacks endscrapers.

The general stylistic sequence of Maritime Archaic

projectile points goes from early triangular and nipplebased types (7500-6000 B.P.) to more sharply shouldered, tapered stem forms (6000-3500 B.P.). Only two

projectile points from Nukasusutok-5 are reasonably

associated with the 6000 B.P. component. The speci- men from near hearth 1 1 at Area 2B, dated 6040±90,

probably has the best context; it is quartz and has a

tapered stem angled with the blade rather than clear

^In contrast, an Early Maritime Archaic gouge from Koliktalik-1 in the Main area has a relatively cylindrical cross-section (Fitzhugh 1978: Figure 6j) and Late Maritime Archaic gouges have triangular or rectangular cross-sections (Fitzhugh 1978:

Figure 5m, Tuck 1976; Plate 33).

NUKASUSUTOK-5: MATERIAL CULTURE
shoulders (Figure 99:b). A larger but similar quartz

point (Figure 99:a) was associated with the south lobe

at Area 2A, which has one radiocarbon date of 5670±1 75 B.P.. A point from Area 2C1 was found ca. 2 m from hearth 1 0, dated 6050±80; it is made of Ramah

chert and has a tapered stem with rounded shoulders

(Figure 98:c). The latter point is virtually identical to

one from the southern lobe at Area 2A (Figure 98:b),

dated ca. 5600 B.P.. The several stem fragments from

the site (Figure 100) provide no information on shoulder form. The rounded shoulder points from

Nukasusutok-5 (Figure 98:b, c) are very similar to a

point from Karl Oom lsland-3 in the Nain area, dated 6080±380 B.P. and 6120±120 B.P. (Fitzhugh 1 985:83,

1990:301). Considered as a whole, the Nukasusutok

points and stem fragments bear a general resemblance

to those from the Cull Arm-1 site in the Nain area,

dated 5605±160 B.P. and 3285±80 B.P. (probably

multi-component; Fitzhugh 1978:66, 78), as well as

slightly later sites in other regions: Okak-2 in Okak Bay

(4765±85 B.P., 4905+80 B.P.; Fitzhugh 1978:66, 78)

and Sandy Cove-2 at Hamilton Inlet (no radiocarbon

dates; Fitzhugh 1 972:92, 288).

In conclusion, elements of the lithic assemblages

from the various subareas at Nukasusutok-5 resemble

those from Naksak Complex sites dated ca. 6000 B.P.,

although there are also similarities with later sites in

other regions. Initially, the latter tendencies led

Fitzhugh to disregard the ca. 5500 B.P. radiocarbon

dates and place Nukasusutok-5 in the 5000-4500 B.P.

range, based on "...typological convergence toward

Rattlers Bight point styles and greater use of Ramah

chert at the expense of quartz and Sandy Cove similarities..." (Fitzhugh 1978:77). This placement has been

repeated more recently (Clark and Fitzhugh

1992:196). It should now be clear from the larger

excavated assemblage and additional radiocarbon

dates that there is no basis for such a dating other

than the problematic 4645+65 B.P. assay from Test Pit C at the western end of the site. The excavated assemblage from Nukasusutok-5 can therefore constitute a

baseline for defining a late Naksak phase in the 6000-

5000 B.P. time range.

-r 1,0

FP

SP SB

-- 0.5

-1.5 Axis 1 (68.3%) hOTH

-1.0^ PI ^-0.5 • SC

UF,

A Tool class

• Area

2B

PR

Bl 0.5

i^HCO

1.0 1.5

ST

CA

2C

A ---0.5

TM

-1.0 Axis 2 (22.0%)

/ / 7/ Correspondence analysis plot of tool classes and Nukasusutok-5 subareas.

1 76 CHAPTER 8
NuLasusutok-^: Inter-Area

Co arisons elusions

The previous chapters have described and interpreted each of the subareas at Nukasusutok-5. While

each subarea stands on its own as an analytical unit,

they will now be compared to consider the implications of intra-site variation. Evaluation of intra-site

variation is based on comparisons of tool assemblages, lithic raw materials, technological organization and behavioral inferences drawn from spatial

patterning. Area 1 is omitted, since the scale of

investigation was too limited to draw conclusions.

Areas 2A and 2B contained spatial configurations

that were not completely exposed by excavation, but

their assemblages will be considered nonetheless.

The chapter ends with some observations on the significance of Nukasusutok-5 for understanding patterns in Early/Middle Maritime Archaic assemblage

structure.

INTER-AREA COMPARISONS

Tool Assemblages

The first characteristic to be compared is variation in

tool assemblages. Table 38 outlines the tool class percentages at each subarea, showing obvious differences in the proportions of utilized flakes, bipolar

cores, block cores and slate tool fragments. Figure

1 1 7 displays a correspondence analysis plot based on

the frequency data. The first dimension accounts for 68.3% of the variation and distinguishes Areas 2C

and 3 on the right, pulled by block cores, from Area 2A on the left, pulled by bipolar cores. The second

dimension, which accounts for 22.0% of the variation,

contrasts Area 2B on the bottom, pulled by its high

percentage of utilized flakes, with assemblages in which block cores are frequent and flake points have

a modest significance: Area 3 in particular and Area 2A to a lesser extent. Thus, the subareas are distin- guished mainly in terms of lithic reduction and expedient tool variables. The more form-invested tool

classes do not occur in high enough frequencies to draw reliable inferences about intra-site patterning.

Tool Raw Materials

Table 39 provides a percentage comparison of tool raw material frequencies between the subareas.

Quartz tools occur in similar percentages across the Area 2 subareas while Area 3 has a slightly higher

proportion. Ramah chert is also fairly even across

the Area 2 subareas, but is slightly less frequent at Area 3. Mugford and black cherts occur in relatively

low percentages over most of Area 2, with the exception of Area 2B, which has a high proportion of black

chert. Area 3 is notable for containing only a single

tool of Mugford chert. Slate varies slightly, with similar proportions in Areas 2A and 2C, a higher proportion in Area 3 and lower percentage in Area 28.

Schist is most frequent at Area 2C. Thus, the differ- ences between the subareas are fairly minor.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Table 38. Inter-Area Percentage Comparison of Tool Classes.

PT Bl PR FP SC UF SP CA SB ST BC CO TM OTH TOTAL

2A 3.8 4.7 1.8 2.9 6.5 28.4 1.2 0.9 3.5 1 5.0 16.7 10.9 2.1 1.8 341 2B 2.4 2.4 2.4 7.2 50.0 14.3 14.3 4.8 2.4 42

2C 1.0 5.2 2.1 2.1 32.0 3.1 1.0 22.7 2.1 20.6 7.2 1.0 97

3 4.5 1.5 4.5 3.0 19.4 1.5 1 .5 22.4 7.5 31.4 3.0 67

PT: points (bifacial), Bl: bifaces, PR: preforms (biface), FP: flake points, SC: scrapers (endscrapers and

flake knives), UF: utilized flakes, SP: slate points, CA: celt/adze, SB: slate blanks (unmodified plates and

blanks), ST: slate tool fragments (ground slate flakes and unidentified tool fragments), BC: bipolar

cores, CO: block cores (quartz), TM: tool manufacturing (hammerstones, schist tablets, whetstones),

and OTH: other (stemmed flakes, linear flakes, graver).

Table 39. Inter-Area Percentage Comparison of Tool Raw Materials.

Area 2A Area 2B Area 2C Area 3

Quartz 23.5 21.4 23.5 32.8 Ramah chert 46.3 47.6 38.8 35.8 Mugford chert 2.3 2.4 1 .5

Black chert 5.3 9.5 2

Slate 20.5 16.7 24.5 26.9

Schist 1.5 8.2 3.0

Other 0.6 2.4 3.1

Total 341 42 98 67

Flake Raw Materials

The next comparison is flake raw material percentages, as summarized in Table 40 and visualized in a

stacked column graph (Figure 118). There are moderate differences in the proportions of quartz and

Ramah chert between the Area 2 subareas, but

quartz almost totally dominates at Area 3, associated with a high frequency of block cores. Areas 2B

and 2C have more patinated (thermally altered)

Ramah chert. Area 28 has a high percentage of black

chert, while Area 3 has little slate and entirely lacks Mugford and black chert.

Technological Organization

Organizational studies of lithic technology in

"Americanist" archaeology have treated lithic pro- curement and use as embedded within a regional

settlement system (e.g., Andrefsky 1 998:1 89ff.; Bamforth 1991; Binford 1979; Nelson 1991; Odell

1996; Parry and Kelly 1987). Although a regional

scale of analysis is impossible here, given the absence of detailed information on other Maritime

Archaic lithic assemblages, the discussion is conducted with this broad scale in mind. Another

perspective connects social agency theory with

178 CHAPTER 9
Table 40. Inter-Area Percentage Comparison of Flake Raw Materials.

Area 2A Micd £.0 Area 3

Qudrtz 1 d P Oj.d

rvdiilall Li Ici I fin 1 fi7 7

rdLlllaLcU rvdillctll 1 7 ^ Q ^ fi n n

Mugford chert 0.7 1.4 0.2

Black chert 0.7 8.8 1.3

Slate 5.4 3.9 2.9 1 .5

Total 8248 2330 1809 1828

Nukasusutok-5 Flake Raw Materials

100 %

90%

80 %

70 %

60 %

50 %

40 %

30 %

20 %

10%

0%

Slate Black chert Mugford chert n Paiinafed Ramah chert S Ramah chert Quartz

Area 2A Area 2B Area 2C

Subarea

Area 3

/ 1 8/ Stacked column graph of Nukasusutok-S flake raw materials by subarea

Leroi-Courhan's concept of chame operatoire to

focus on technology as sequences of choices structured by cultural schemas (e.g., Chilton 1999;

Dobres 2000; Gamble 1999; Karlin and Julien 1994;

Perles 1992; Schlanger 1994; Stark 1998). This

approach is used implicitly here at the site-specific

level, with an assumption of linkages to the regional

scale through the settlement system. Chapters 6-7

deployed certain organizational concepts as part of

the descriptive framework for the spatial analysis, so

the subareas will now be compared more explicitly

from this perspective. Each lithic raw material is

treated separately since they

are used in different kinds of

reduction systems.

Quartz

Quartz is ubiquitous in

Early/Middle Maritime Archaic

assemblages in central and

northern Labrador, but largely goes out of use after 4500 B.P..

It is widely dispersed as veins in

the Precambrian bedrock,

including two outcrops identified on Nukasusutok Island, one

on a hill north of Nukasusutok5. Archaeologically, quartz

occurs primarily in the form of unmodified or minimally retouched flakes, block cores and bipolar cores, but

it was also used occasionally for crude projectile

points. The quartz reduction system began with the

collection of small quartz blocks, either tabular pieces

derived from the bedrock or water-rolled pebbles from

beach deposits; both are in evidence at Nukasusutok5. The spatial analysis of Area 2A suggested that unor minimally modified blocks were cached in the middle area between the two behavioral modules, while most reduction occurred within the modules.

Reduction was accomplished by both freehand and

NUKASUSUTOK-5: INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Table 41. Variation in Elements of Quartz Technology at Nukasusutok-5.

No. Tools Block Cores Bipolar cores Flakes

Area 2A 80 37 34 2588

Area 28 9 2 5 332

Area 2C 22 1 7 724

Area 3 24 1 8 2 1569

bipolar percussion, but the lacl< of partially retouched

cores intermediate between the minimally modified

blocks and bipolar cores indicates that reduction proceeded rapidly from a raw block to an exhausted bipolar core. The desired product of the reduction process was flakes, since very few visibly retouched imple- ments are found. A wide variety of these flakes could

have been used expediently for simple cutting/scraping functions or specific size/shape variants might

have been selected for hafting, along the lines of

Flenniken's (1981:60-96) discussion of quartz

"microliths" hafted in wooden handles being used for

processing fish. Flakes might also have been selected

for further bipolar reduction to produce even smaller

fragments. At any stage in the reduction process bipolar cores could have been recycled for use as scrapers, wedges, etc.

At Nukasusutok-5, quartz reduction characteristics vary slightly between the sub-areas. Table 41 compares aspects of quartz technology at each subarea,

with the exception of the small assemblage from Area

1 . The subareas at Area 2A are combined, so some of

the spatial variation is masked. For all subareas, block and bipolar cores constitute ca. 80% or more of the

quartz items classed as tools. Thus, as already noted

above for Area 2A, quartz was rarely used to produce

recognizable retouched implements; the primary goal was flake production, although the cores could have

been put to secondary uses. Areas 2A and 2B have relatively high proportions of bipolar cores relative to

block cores and total tools, while Area 3 has few bipolar cores and Area 2C none. While these observations

may be affected by incomplete excavation at Areas 2B

and 2C, there is at least a hint that bipolar reduction was less significant at Areas 2C and 3.

If bipolar reduction was less prominent at Areas 2C and 3, these subareas might also exhibit quartz

flake size distributions with a better representation of

larger sizes than the other subareas since bipolar

reduction could lead to more thorough reduction of

quartz than the freehand percussion technique. The

line graphs of quartz flake size distributions (Figure

1 1 9) do not provide much support for this. Area 3 has

the lowest percentage of material in the <10 to <20

mm categories (i.e., fewer small flakes) and a slightly

higher percentage in the 35-40 mm category. Area 2C

has the highest percentage of material in the 1 0-1 5mm

category (small flakes) and a slightly elevated percentage in the 25-30mm category. Area 2A, which has

large numbers of bipolar cores, has the lowest percentage of flakes in the smallest <1 0mm category, but the

highest in the 15-20 mm and 20-25 mm categories.

Thus, by themselves, the quartz flake size distributions are not very clear indicators of differences in

reduction patterns. More detailed analysis of quartz

fracture patterns (cf., Callahan et al. 1992; Knutsson

1998) is necessary to fill out this picture.

Ramah Chert

Ramah chert was derived from its bedrock sources 300

km to the north in the Ramah Bay region (Gramly 1 978; Lazenby 1980). The material could be quarried directly from the bedrock or easily picked up as large blocks

or plates in stream beds or from loose talus slopes.

These blocks were processed at or near the sources

into biface blanks of varying sizes, which were then

180 CHAPTER 9
transported south. The blanks

were modified as needed by

bifacial reduction into the

required tool form.

Consequently, Ramah chert

debitage in the Nain region consists mostly of biface-thinning

and other secondary retouch

flakes, with little trace of pri- mary reduction flakes bearing

cortex. "Stage 1" quarry blanks seem to be rare in the Nain area,

but smaller bifacial point pre- forms are frequent. Ramah

chert was used primarily for

projectile points throughout the

time span of the Maritime

Archaic, although flakes from

biface reduction were selected

for use as expedient tools (utilized flakes, flake knives, flake

points). In contrast to Dorset,

the Maritime Archaic almost

never used Ramah chert for

endscrapers. In sum, this is a

classic example of a curated

biface technology (cf., Kelly

1988; Parry and Kelly 1987).

Table 42 compares ele- ments of Ramah chert technology between the subareas. Area

3 stands out for its general

paucity of Ramah chert, yet it

also has: a) a relatively high proportion of tools to flakes, and b)

a high proportion of large

biface-thinning flakes (BTFs),

perhaps linked to the presence

of possible quarry blank fragments among the bifaces. These variations may be minor.

Quartz flake size distribution

35,0 -1

<10 <20 <30 <40 <50 <60 <70 <80 <90 <100

5 mm classes

/ / 9/ Quartz flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5.

Ramah chert flake size distribution

45,0 T

<10 <20 <30 <40 <50 <60 <70 <80

5 mm classes

i 20/ Ramah chert flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5.

Fine-grained chert flake size distribution

<10 <15 <20 <25 <30 <35 <40 <45 <50

5 mm classes

121/ Fine-grained chert flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5.

NUKASUSUTOK 5 INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS 181
Table 42. Variation in Elements of Ramah Chert Technology at Nukasusutok-5.

Tools Bifacial PointsBifaces Preforms Retouched

Flakes*

Utilized flakesBipolar

Cores

BTFs

(N/large)

Flakes

Area 2A 1 58 12 1 5 6 1 7 88 19 637/88 4957

Area 2B 20 1 2 1 5 1 149/8 1669

Area 2C 41 1 5 2 1 25 2 114/14 1006

Area 3 23 1 2 4 13 3 17/10 238

'includes flake points, flake knives and stemmed flakes

Table 43. Variation in Elements of Fine-Crained Chert Technology at Nukasusutok-5.

Tools Endscrapers Util./ret. flakes Bipolar Cores Flakes

Area 2A 26 16 5 4 122

Area 2B 5 1 4 237

Area 2C 2 1 1 19

Area 3 1 1

but they parallel other behavioral differences linked to

the presence of the red ocher features. Otherwise, the

large number of BTFs at Area 2A is clearly associated

with the substantial numbers of bifacial points, biface

fragments and preforms. The bifacial tool component

varies from highs of 2 1 % and 1 9.5% at Areas 2A and

2C, respectively, to lows of 1 3% and 5% at Areas 3 and

2B, respectively. The proportion of expedient tools

(retouched and utilized flakes) is high in all the assemblages, ranging from 63% to 85% of all Ramah chert

implements. It is notable that Ramah chert occasionally was subjected to bipolar reduction, but this was a

secondary technique implemented on broken tools or

flakes produced by direct percussion. It is unclear whether the purpose was production of small flakes to maximize the use-life of the material or a specific function such as wedging/splitting.

Figure 120 charts the size distribution of Ramah

chert flakes at the four subareas. The distributions

have generally similar profiles except for the smallest

<10 mm flake size category. For the latter. Areas 3 and 2A have relatively low percentages (17.2% and

24.4%, respectively) while Areas 2C and 2B have higher percentages (39.2% and 36.6%, respectively). All

areas were screened with the same mesh size, but the

differences could indicate some kind of collection bias

since the low-percentage areas were both excavated

in 1979 and the high percentage areas in 1992-93.

Reviewing the results for quartz (Figure 1 1 9), the Area 2A excavation from 1 979 also exhibits a slightly lower

percentage in the smallest size class than the other

subareas, which might support the case for collection

bias. Looking more closely at the line graph, Areas 2B

and 2C have almost identical profiles from the 1 5-20 mm class onwards. Area 3, however, has a consistently higher representation of the larger flake sizes from

1 5-20 mm onwards, while Area 2A is intermediate. If we hypothetically assign a slightly larger number of

flakes to the smallest size class to compensate for collection bias it is likely that Area 3 would still have a

182 CHAPTER 9
relatively low percentage in the smallest size class and

the overall profile would remain similar. Although the

difference may, therefore, be "real," the small sample

size from Area 3 (238 flakes) should also be taken

into account.

Fine-Grained Chert

The term fine-grained chert refers to both Mugford

cherts of varied colour (gray, green, beige, patinated)

as well as black chert, some of which was derived from

the Mugford sources (Cramly 1978; Lazenby 1980), some of which might have been from sources in Sagiek

Bay (Chapter 2). These cherts occur as thin tablets that

are transportable without the systematic preliminary

reduction used for Ramah chert. Nonetheless, not a

single core of the material occurs at Nukasusutok-S.

Fine-grained cherts were used almost exclusively for

the production of small endscrapers, although one

biface fragment is present in the Nukasusutok-5 collection. A few utilized flakes and bipolar cores are also

present. As noted in the comparison of flake and tool

raw materials (Tables 39, 40), fine-grained cherts

occur in rather low percentages. The low frequency of

these items is underlined in Table 43, which combines

the Mugford and black cherts. Only Area 2A has a substantial number of tools, while Area 2B has twice as many flakes but substantially fewer tools. This might

be interpreted as a high rate of tool discard at Area 2A,

contrasted with more production or retouch at Area 28

combined with less discard, or curation of finished

products to other localities. The almost complete

absence of fine-grained cherts at Area 3 reinforces the

impression that this subarea differs from the others in

function, meaning and chronology. It should be

emphasized, however, that low overall frequency of

fine-grained chert need not signify minor cultural or

organizational significance. Considerable effort was expended to acquire a material that was used mostly

for a single purpose: endscrapers.

Figure 121 shows the size distribution for finegrained chert flakes at Area 2. Again, the portion excavated in 1979 (Area 2A) has a lower percentage of

material in the smallest size class. Areas 2A and 28

parallel each other closely, while Area 2A exhibits a

slight peak in the 20-25 mm size class. Overall, there

is a strong skewing towards small flakes of 10-15 mm

or less, which implies emphasis on secondary and tertiary retouch rather than any form of core reduction. In sum, the flake size distribution, the small size of the

finished tools (endscrapers) and the lack of cores suggest that fine-grained cherts were curated as finished

tools or flake preforms.

Slate

The most likely source for the slates is the Cape

Mugford region. Several colour and texture variants were used. In contrast to the fine-grained cherts, it

appears that raw plates of slate were often transported "as is" from the sources then reduced as needed.

This is suggested by the presence of several minimally worked plates in the Nukasusutok material. These

raw materials were then roughed into blanks and preforms by direct percussion. The latter were then ground into finished tools, possibly with schist tablets.

Table 44 outlines elements of the slate technology system at Nukasusutok-5. Area 2A was the obvious

center for slate reduction. A considerable number of

raw slate plates and tool blanks were present, either

cached as raw materials or discarded during the manufacturing process. The frequency of ground slate

flakes, in some cases clearly edge-rejuvenation flakes,

attests to the reworking of finished or partly finished

tools. Attempts to refit these flakes to the tools found

in the subarea were unsuccessful, suggesting the

"cores ' were removed from the site. Combined with the

low frequency of finished tools, this could imply maintenance of curated implements. Areas 2C and 3 exhibited only modest indications of tool production and

maintenance while Area 28 had the fewest indicators

of slate reduction. The flake size distribution for slate

is portrayed in Figure 122. The line graph profiles are

extremely variable, most likely an expression of ranNUKASUSUTOK 5: INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS 183
Slate flake size distribution

<30 <40

5 mm classes

122/ Slate flake size distribution at Nukasusutok-5.

dom variations in small samples rather than meaningful patterning.

the social composition of the

groups. But the differences

could also be the result of "fallout" from activities positioned

at different points on the pro- curement and reduction cycle;

that is, a consequence of raw

material availability and contingent organizational constraints

rather than a direct reflection of

site-function requirements or

social variables. Sorting out

these alternatives requires situating Nukasusutok-5 within the

regional and supra-regional contexts of Maritime

Archaic settlement and procurement systems.

SUMMARY

The Maritime Archaic inhabitants of Nukasusutok-5

organized their lithic technology into two primary systems: a) a highly expedient component using an abundant local raw material (quartz), and b) a highly curated component involving non-local materials. The latter

consisted of different reduction systems for each of

the materials involved. The Ramah chert system

involved the transport of large bifaces that were: a)

reduced along a core-tool trajectory to produce "high

performance" form-invested tools (points, bifaces),

while b) debitage from core reduction was employed

for expedient tools (utilized flakes etc.). Fine-grained

cherts were transported as small tablets, flakes or finished tools, with a strong focus on a specific implement— endscrapers— and little expedient flake use.

Slate was transported as raw plates, blanks and finished tools; production and maintenance involved a time-consuming grinding process after initial reduction. The subareas at Nukasusutok-5 differ slightly in

the emphasis placed on these organizational systems.

These differences may signal choices made in

response to site-function considerations or variation in

CONCLUSIONS

Nukasusutok-5 is one of the few Early/Middle Maritime

Archaic sites that has been excavated sufficiently to

provide a reasonably representative sample for understanding spatial patterning and assemblage composition. As such, it is difficult to place the site in a broader systemic context because there are insufficient comparable assemblages to work with. By way of conclusion, a number of points that could be pursued in

future research are discussed.

In the last major synthesis of northern Maritime

Archaic culture-history, Fitzhugh (1978:72) grouped most of the Early/Middle Maritime Archaic sites in the

Nain region into the "Naksak Complex," although he

recognized that this entity was problematic:

Many of these sites are deflated or partly

eroded, with artifacts found on the surface and in buried deposits. Local topographic

conditions rendered some sites useful for

long periods, while others were occupied

briefly. Until these factors can be analyzed it seems better to acknowledge the probable

184 CHAPTER 9
Table 44. Variation in Elements of Slate Technology at Nukasusutok-5.

Tools'^ Ground flakes/fragments Plates/blanks Schist Flakes

Area 2A 7 51 1 1 5 443

Area 2B 6 92

Area 2C 3 24 1 6 52

Area 3 2 1 3 1 3 20

Points, celts/adzes

"lumped" nature of this complex (Fitzhugh

1978:72).

Fitzhugh goes on to refer to "considerable typological variation" at some sites, particularly those situated in topographical locations that could be used over

long periods of time, and he mentions sites of different character and dating that may form the basis for

defining additional archaeological complexes, such as

the Nukasusutok and Gull Arm Croups (Fitzhugh

1 978:72-77). This sense of barely ordered variability is

understandable since the data base was derived mostly from surface surveys and small test excavations, and

radiocarbon dates were scarce. But ordering that variability will be difficult without a better understanding

of individual site structure.

Nukasustok-5 illustrates some of these problems.

It is located in a protected harbour on a prominent

tombolo beach that was a magnet for settlement from

6000 B.P. to 4500 B.P. and perhaps later. Area 2

revealed three or four occupation components representing at least two chronological phases (ca. 6000

B.P. and 5500 B.P.). Components of these two phases

overlapped slightly at the junction of Areas 2A and 2B.

Within Area 2A two behavioral modules that might represent dwelling features were identified. The modules

were similar in spatial organization but varied somewhat in tool and flake raw material contents. Area 2C

might have contained a similar dwelling module. Area

2B exhibited a different behavioral pattern consisting

of a central pit-hearth complex ringed by deposits of

fire-cracked rock. This pattern was interpreted as

either an outdoor feature with a concentric drop-toss zone or a dwelling module with fire-cracked rock discarded outside along a tent wall. The Area 2 subareas

displayed slight differences in their frequencies of tool

types and lithic raw materials and in their technological organization, but the chronological distinctions

suggested by the radiocarbon dates were not parallelled by clear differences in tool typology. The probably later occupation at Area 3 (5000 B.P.) was not so much typologically different as it was behaviorally distinct from the Area 2 occupations.

At the intra-site level of analysis, the Nukasusutok-5 material underlines: a) the importance

of excavating and analysing entire behavioral units so

as to provide a meaningful baseline for comparison,

and b) the need to acquire several such samples from

large, complex and chronologically diverse sites in

order to understand both their chronological position

and their role in the regional settlement system. At the

inter-site level, the variability uncovered in the

Nukasusutok-5 material raises problems as to what is

an adequate unit of inter-assemblage comparison. The

subareas cannot simply be lumped together and compared with some other composite of assemblages or

with more discrete assemblages. To be meaningful,

comparisons and culture-historical integration must be

based on behaviorally distinct assemblages, such as

the possible dwelling modules at Area 2A. Another implication of the present analysis is

that comparisons based on traditional tool typology

NUKASUSUTOK-5: INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS 185
may be of limited value for understanding settlement

systems and social process. It may be more useful to

investigate other dimensions of variation such as patterning in different lithic reduction systems, as discussed in this chapter. The intra-site analysis of Nukasusutok-5 suggests that assemblages could be

scaled in relation to which components of lithic

reduction systems are present or absent and in relation to the articulation between expedient and more

"organized" components of the technologies.

Unfortunately, such analyses cannot be undertaken

until such a time as a sufficient number of appropriate assemblages become available. The analysis of Nukasusutok-5 also contributes to

the empirical and methodological aspects of Maritime

Archaic dwelling structure studies. At Area 2A it was

possible to identify two behavioral modules that might be dwelling remains. Two alternative interpretations were suggested: (1) each module represents a

small tent structure of 4 by 3 m in size; the spatial

organization of activities at each structure was highly

symmetrical and the dwellings had a common orientation to a large central rock, and (2) each module was

a component of a larger rectangular segmented structure of 4 by 6-1- m in size; although the spatial organization of the modules was highly symmetrical the modules were integrated into the rectangular structures in slightly different ways. Both interpretations were problematic, however, since the multiple hearth

features could indicate re-occupation events rather

than discrete dwellings. Consequently, although the "longhouse model" provided a framework for identifying spatial patterning, the meaning of that patterning

remained ambiguous. More detailed investigations of

Early/Middle Maritime Archaic sites will be necessary

to clarify how the Area 2A patterns fit into the range

of variation in Maritime Archaic site structure. The methodological strategy outlined in Chapter

3 involved playing off a model-based analysis versus model-independent pattern recognition techniques.

The model-based analysis focused on hearth-centered

distributions that could be viewed within the segmental or modular framework of the longhouse model.

Qualitative visual analysis of flake distributions

proved to be the crucial element in identifying behavioral modules. Other lines of evidence were then

explored within this postulated modular framework,

largely through the use of simple cross-tabulation

techniques. K-means cluster analysis was used as a model-independent exploratory technique to identify

tool groupings by physical proximity rather than by

sorting them into preconceived behavioral modules.

This proved useful for mapping hearth-centered distributions at the micro-level and for pointing to possible

variations in the lithic materials associated with each

feature, but the sample sizes in each cluster were too

small to have much statistical significance. The cluster analysis could not provide a basis for combining

hearth-centered distributions into larger behavioral

units; ultimately, this had to be accomplished by qualitative means and within model assumptions. A different model-independent technique, correspondence

analysis, was used to explore patterning in flake raw

materials at Area 2A. The results were consistent with

the model-based analysis.

Overall, the analysis showed that relatively simple qualitative and quantitative methods are capable

of detecting meaningful patterning at Maritime

Archaic sites lacking in traces of architecture that would facilitate the definition of analytical units. But

this patterning would have been difficult to identify

if the flake distributions had not been plotted systematically in the field. Consequently, future analyses of Maritime Archaic (and other) sites should

point plot debitage distributions so as not to miss

patterns that would be indistinct in quadrat summaries. Spatial data should be as high resolution as

possible, otherwise it may be difficult to identify

behavioral modules such as those that were crucial

to the present analysis.

186 CHAPTER 9
Edward Flowers and Sam Saimat looking for basking seals on the sea ice near Dog Island, April 1994.

NUKASUSUTOK-5: INTER-AREA COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS 187
1 23/ Nukasusutok-l 2: overview towards the southwest.

CHAPTER 10
Nukasusutolc-lZ: Earlt)/

Middle Dorset Axial Structures6

Nukasusutok-1 2 (HcCh-14) was discovered during a 1979 survey when a well preserved axial structure

(Structure-1 ) was observed almost completely exposed

in a blow-out. The few tools noted on the surface indicated a Dorset affiliation, but the feature bore a striking resemblance to Pre-Dorset axial structures and it seemed to differ from Middle and Late Dorset tent ring

structures recorded in northern Labrador by the Torngat Archaeological Project (e.g., R. Jordan

1980:611). An Early Dorset affiliation was suspected,

so the site was investigated further in 1980. It was

revisited briefly in 1992. The site is situated at the head of a shallow bight

on the south side of Nukasusutok Island, west of Wyatt

Harbour (Figure 1 6). It lies at an elevation of 5.5-7.5 m

asl. at the western end of a narrow east-west trending

pass between steep rocky hills. At the time of occupation, higher sea level would have resulted in a well-protected cove extending considerably further inland than

at present, providing an excellent location for boat

landings. Lithic material occurs sporadically over an

area of roughly 1500 m^, at least half of which is

wholly or partially deflated, the rest is covered with

lichen and crowberry. Two axial features (Structures 1 and 2) were clearly visible near the middle of the

beach, while traces of a third (Structure 3) lay towards

the southern side of the pass, and a fourth (Structure

4) was identified in a test pit on the northern edge of

the pass beside a rock-fall (Figures 123 and 124).

Three test pits (TP 1-3) in a small area on the south

side of the pass revealed a rich tool deposit, but no

trace of structural remains. It is possible that additional structures are present at the site, deeply embedded

in the gravel. Most of the site is underlain by aeolian

sands and gravel, but two large clay boils are located

on a low ridge in the center of the main deflated area

near Structure 2. The three test pits (TP 1-3) on the

south side of the pass exposed a thick basal clay

mixed with small cobbles. The 1980 fieldwork consisted of the complete

excavation of two axial features (Structures 1 and 2) and the excavation of seven test pits, two of which

revealed the presence of additional structures. The two

excavated structures will be presented first, followed

by the test units.

STRUCTURE 1

Structure 1 was the lowest feature identified at the

site, located at ca. 6.5 m asl. in the middle of the beach

pass. When discovered in 1 979 the feature was almost

completely exposed in a sand-gravel blow-out. A total

of 23.25 m^ was excavated to expose entirely the

^Nukasusutok-1 2 was described previously in Hood (1 986). This chapter is based on the earlier report, but the material has been reworked, supplemented with tool descriptions and reinterpreted. It should be regarded as the "authoritative" account.

NUKASUSUTOK-1 2 EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 189
oQo-^ .

rock fall OVO^O

1

1 24/ Nukasusutokl 2 sitemap.

Structural components and recover any buried lithics. The structure consisted of a ca. 6 m long axial feature

aligned NNW-SSE, running obliquely to the beach front

(Figures 1 25 and 1 26). Excavation at the southern end

of the structure required the removal of 25 cm of laminated aeolian sand and thin humus horizons to expose a 2 cm thick black humus zone that appeared

to correspond with the floor level of the feature. This humus level was limited to the outer periphery of the

excavation, mostly outside what were interpreted as

tent anchor rocks. Consequently, the structure took

the appearance of an axial feature bisecting a 3.5-4.0 m wide sub-rectangular patch of gravel. Although it is

possible this gravel patch is a partial consequence of

deflation, its orientation relative to the feature suggests a thin sod layer may have been removed to provide a gravel floor for the dwelling or that it was trampled away during the occupation.

The axial feature was 5.0 m long and 0.75-l.Om

wide. It was constructed of parallel rows of thick flat- topped rocks embedded in the gravel end-to-end

lengthwise, but was disturbed at its northern end.

Several rocks on the eastern edge of the feature were

slightly displaced to the west and on the western edge

some of the axial rocks were missing. At both ends of

the feature were high large rocks, morphologically

unlike those composing the feature itself. These endrocks lay perpendicular to the feature's long axis and

formed the feature terminus, although they were

placed slightly back from the feature and did not form

a continuous alignment with it. There were no transverse partitions or paving stones inside the axial border rocks, but at each end of the feature were the

remains of hearths. Just south of the feature's center

lay two thin flat slabs, one of schist. Both slabs were

notched on one longitudinal edge and modified to be

flat on the other edge. These were presumably soapstone vessel support rocks. To the north of the feature's center were a broken, blubber-stained, firecracked rock and a thin slate slab with a battered and

notched edge, probably the remains of additional vessel support rocks. The only tools associated with the structure were

the proximal portions of two Ramah chert microblades

(W= 1 2.4, 1 2.4 mm, TH= 4.5, 2.8). One of these was

surface collected from near the terminus rocks at the

north end of the feature, the other was excavated from

within the black humus zone at the southern boundary

190 CHAPTER 10
1x6y

5x6y

1x1y

o

(7

5x0y

Gravel floor edge

Burned fat-stained rock

Schist slab

F Flat rock

N Notched rock

• Microblade

of the excavation. The latter specimen may not be associated with Structure 1 since several rocks at the humus zone level

of this end of the excavation

may be part of another buried

feature. No flakes were found in

Structure 1

.

1 25/ Nukasusutok-l 2: Structure 1.

1 26/ Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 1, view towards the south.

NUKASUSUTOK 1 2 EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 191
]27/ Nukasusbttok-l 2 Structure 2.

STRUCTURE 2

Structure 2 (Figure 127 and

128) was located near the center of the beach, about 28 m

east of Structure 1 and adjacent

to the large clay boils. Its elevation was no more than a meter

above Structure 1 and it was oriented at an oblique angle to the beach front, running NE-SW. The structure consisted of an

axial feature 4.0 m long and ca.

0.7 m wide, constructed of thick

flat slabs embedded in the surface gravel end-to-end lengthwise. The feature boundary

rocks were displaced at the center of the alignment for a distance of 1.5 m and the

scatter of rocks at both ends of the feature indicated a

greater degree of disturbance than at Structure 1 . The

southern end of the feature was bounded by two high

large terminus rocks, structurally continuous with the

feature, but the northern terminus was indistinct. The axial feature contained at least two and possibly three hearth areas, one at each end of the alignment and perhaps another in the middle. At the southern end of the feature two thin, flat, notched and blubber-encrusted schist slabs lay fallen between the feature boundary rocks near a concentration of crumbled

schist fragments. A third notched and burned fatencrusted schist slab was wedged vertically against a

western boundary rock. These notched slabs were

probably used as soapstone vessel supports and frag- ments of a near-complete soapstone vessel were found

nearby. Several small horizontally placed flat slabs

inside the feature may be the remnants of a floor pavement. At the northern end of the alignment were a pair

of fallen notched and burned fat- encrusted schist

slabs that lay near a concentration of crumbled schist fragments and a soapstone vessel sherd. Several horizontal flat slabs, one of which was levelled with a shim

10x10y

12K8y

^ Axial passage border rock

Burned fat-stained rock CD Schist slab

F Flat rock

N Notched rock

rock, may be the remains of an internal floor pavement. In the disturbed center of the feature were three

blubber-encrusted rocks, a stray notched schist slab and a soapstone vessel sherd. These may be the

remains of a third hearth, but considering the degree

of disturbance they could have been thrown there from

the other hearth areas. The overall dimensions of the structure were difficult to determine given the absence of obvious perimeter anchor rocks and the lack of axial terminus rocks

at the north end of the passage. But judging from the

artifact distribution and the position of possible

perimeter rocks the structure may have been about

five meters long and four meters wide.

Spatial Patterning

Unlike lithic sterile Structure 1, Structure 2 contained

74 tools. The original spatial analysis of the distribution patterns (Hood 1986) was complicated by artifact

provenience problems related to missing records.

During re-analysis only 53 of the 74 tools could be

point-plotted with certainty; most of the missing items

are microblades. Additionally, some of the point-plotted microblades could not be related back to specific

192 CHAPTER 10
1 28/ Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2, view towards the southwest.

catalogued implements, which made it difficult to distinguish reliably between utilized and unutilized

microblades. Although the missing information could skew the analysis somewhat, it is necessary to work

with what is at hand. A nephrite flake and a slate flake

7x1 Oy J L. lOxlOy

1 29/ Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 tool distribution and k-means cluster analysis

were also included in the analysis, bringing the numbers to 76 total, and 55 plotted items. The point-plot of tools (Figure 129) indicates

that most were concentrated within a 1-1.5 m distance of the axial feature. Following the bilateral

organization model, a simple

cross-tabulation analysis was

presented in the original site

description (Hood 1986:64),

dividing the provenienced

tools into spatial units associated with the feature or lying

to the east or west of it. A

revised version of this table is

presented in Table 45. Most of

the tools are located close to

the feature or on its eastern

flank. There is little clear patterning in tool class distributions besides the limitation of

Biface A Endblade

Endblade preform

• Microblade * Nephrite flake B Side-nolched biface

Slate bitace • Slate flal>e ^ Soapstone vessel sfierd

f& Tip-fluting spall + Utilized nake

NUKASUSUTOK-1 2: EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 193
Table 45. Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 Tool Classes in Relation to the Bilateral Axial Feature Model.

iviia tdSl west Prov. N (%) No Prov. TOTAL N (%)

Triangular endblades z

")Z 4 (7 3^ 4

Endblade preforms 3 (5.5) 3 (3.9)

Side-notched bifaces 11 1 (1.8) 1 (1.3)

Slate bifaces 1

1 1 (1.8) 1 (1.3) Ramah chert bifaces 1 1 (1.8) /I 5 (6.6)

Tip-fluting spalls 1

1 -)c 3 (5.5) D 6 (7.9) M icroblades 1 3

1 7 D 36 (65.5) 1 D

1 D 49 (64.5)

utiiizeo TiaKes 1

1 1 (1.8) 1 2 (2.6)

Slate flakes 1 1 (1.8) 1 (1.3)

Nephrite flakes 1 1 (1.8) 1 (1.3) Soapstone vessels 3 3 (5.5) 3 (3.9) TOTAL 22 24 9 55 21 76

Table 46. Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 Tool Classes by Front/Back Divisions.

Front Back Middle TOTAL N (%)

Triangular endblades 4 4 (7.3) Endblade preforms 3 3 (5.5)

Side-notched bifaces 1 1 (1.8)

Slate bifaces 1 1 (1.8) Ramah chert bifaces 1 1 (1.8)

Tip-fluting spalls 1 2 3 (5.5)

Microblades 20 16 36 (65.5)

Utilized flakes 1 1 (1.8)

Slate flakes 1 1 (1.8)

Nephrite flakes 1 1 (1.8) Soapstone vessels 2 1 3 (5.5) TOTAL 31 23 1 55

endblade preforms to the eastern flank and soapstone vessels to the axial feature. A division between

front (north), back (south) and middle subareas in

Table 46 indicates that the only clear difference is

the presence of all endblades and endblade preforms

in the front subarea. In neither case are there indications of gender-based activity variation.

/(-means cluster analysis was used for a model

independent analysis of the point plotted tools; a five

cluster solution seemed most reasonable (Figure

129). Two of the clusters (1 and 3) have centroids

closely associated with the hearths at opposite ends

of the axial feature in what might be termed hearthtending positions. Cluster 2 lies slightly back from

194 CHAPTER 1
Table 47. Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 Tool Classes by K-Means Cluster.

C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C 5 TOTAL

Endblades 3 1 4

Endblade preforms 2 1 3

Side-notched bifaces 1 1 Ramah chert bifaces 1 1

Slate Bifaces 1 1

Tip-fluting spalls 1 2 3

Microblades 7 12 4 8 5 36

Utilized flakes 1 1

Slate flakes 1 1

Nephrite flakes 1 1

Soapstone vessels 1 1 1 3 TOTAL 14 1 5 8 10 8 55

7x10y lOxlOy

5x9y

Sx4y

RCW8_

S=1

GM= 2 RC= 3

RC= 18 CR= 1

_ o

RC=4

Q= 1 N= 1

^0

12x8y

CR Crystal quartz GM Green Mugford chert N Nephrite O Quartz RC Ramah chert S Slate

9x4y

1 30/ Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 flake distribution.

the northernmost hearth, but seems positioned in

relation to that feature. Clusters 3 and 4 lie in similar

positions on opposite sides of the middle of the axial

feature where there was uncertain evidence for a

third hearth. Each of these clusters is located equidistant from, and thus equally accessible to, the hearths

at the ends of the axial alignment. From a different perspective, clusters 3 and 4 could

be arm's length discard areas

associated with the hearthtending positions at each end

of the axial alignment. Overall,

there is a hint of behavioral

symmetry at the two hearths. The tool associations for

each cluster are compared in

Table 47. Given the low frequencies in each cell the distribution is difficult to evaluate,

but there is a slight over-representation of microblades in

cluster 2, adjacent to the northern hearth. Inspection of individual tool type distributions provides little to supplement the foregoing

observations other than revealing a tendency for endblades and endblade preforms to be located towards

the south and tip-fluting spalls towards the north. In

other words, deposition of the preforms and finished

NUKASUSUTOK-1 2 EARLY/IVIIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 195
tools is not associated witln deposition of the by-products of tine manufacturing process. Tlie refits of a tipfluting spall and a soapstone vessel are spatially proximate, providing little information on material move- ments at Structure 2.

In contrast to the relatively large tool assemblage,

only 55 flakes were found, almost exclusively small

secondary retouch flakes of Ramah chert. Their distribution by 1 m^ units is displayed in Figure 1 30 (some

flakes are missing because of uncertain provenience).

The majority of flakes are distributed outside the axial

feature, but within a 1 m distance from it. Their concentrations correspond well with the clusters identified

in the tool analysis.

Tool and flake raw materials are outlined by fre- quency in Table 48 and by weight in Table 49. By frequency, Ramah chert dominates both tools and flakes. The weight figures for tools are distorted by soapstone, but if the latter Is excluded then Ramah chert

constitutes 86% of the flaked tool materials. The

weight figures for flakes are misleading; what seems to

be a dominance of quartz is mostly the result of a single quartz nodule that is heavier than the 48 small Ramah chert flakes. The single flake of white chert is

fossiliferous with a carbonate cortex and is not from

the Newfoundland west coast. It appears to be of

northern Quebec or Eastern Arctic origin.

Table 48. Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 Tool and Flake Raw Material Frequencies.

Tools N (%) Flakes N (%)

Ramah chert 65 (87.8) 48 (87.3)

Gray Mugford chert 1 (1.8)

Crystal quartz 5 (6.8) 1 (1.8) Quartz 2 (3.6)

Slate 1 (1.4) 1 (1.8)

White chert 1 (1.8)

Nephrite 1 (1.8) Soapstone 3 (4.1)

Table 49. Nukasusutok-1 2: Structure 2 Tool

and Flake Raw Material Weights. In Crams.

Tools g(%) Flakes g (%> TOTAL g (%) Ramah chert 107.9 (23.2) 9.9 (34.1) 1 17.8 (23.8)

Gray Mugford chert 0.1 (0.3) 0.1 (0.0)

Crystal quartz 2.9 (0.6) 0.03 (0.1) 2.93 (0.6)

Quartz 14.0 (48.2) 14.0 (2.8)

Slate 14.6 (3.1) 0.5 (1.7) 15.1 (3.1)

White chert n.a.

Nephrite 4.5 (1 5.5) 4.5 (0.9)

Soapstone 340.0 (73.1) 340.0 (68.8)

Tool Assemblage

Endblades All but one of the four Ramah chert endblades are fragments. The single complete specimen

(Figure 131:c) is small (L=19.6 mm, W= 14.2, TH= 2.9)

with a very slight basal concavity and tiny tip-fluting

spalls (L= 2.5, 3.5 mm) on the dorsal surface. A proximal fragment (Figure 1 31 :d) is only slightly larger, with

a straight base (W = 1 7.1 mm, TH = 3.1 ). The other two specimens are distal fragments of larger endblades (L

= >28, >35 mm). One (Figure 1 31 :e) has two tip-fluting

spalls (L = 14.0, 16.0 mm) on its dorsal surface while

the other broke during removal of the first spall.

Endblade Preforms The three preforms are made

of Ramah chert. One is complete, triangular and

straight-based (Figure 131:a), with fine retouch on its

ventral side and large flake scars on its dorsal side

(L = 35.5 mm, W = 24.9, TH = 5.5). The blunt tip was

retouched ventrally to form a platform from which two

tip-fluting spalls were removed dorsally (L = 1 6.8, 1 9.0 mm). The other two preforms are distal fragments.

One (Figure 1 31 :b) has a distal platform from which a

single flute was removed down the center of the dorsal side (L= 26.8 mm), probably a production failure,

while the other (Figure 1 31 :f) has a convex distal end

with faint retouch for platform preparation.

Side-notched bifaces: The single example (Figure

131:h) is the proximal fragment of a Ramah chert

biface with broad side-notches positioned towards the

196 CHAPTER 10
1 31 / Nukasusutok-1 2: implements from Structure 2.

a, b, f: endblade preforms: c-e: endblades, g: biface blank;

h: side-notched biface: i: ground slate biface: j-o: microblades.

medial portion of the tool such that the implement

resembles a "box-based" biface. The basal edge is bifacially flaked and convex in form. There is slight grinding on the base as well as in one of the notches (W=

24.7 mm, TH= 5.7, notch HT= 12.0, 14.6, notch L=

7.1 , 7.5, notch W= 2.2, 2.0).

Slate Bifaces: The distal fragment of a black slate

biface is either the tip of a lance or a large knife (Figure

1 31 :i). Each face of the tool has a flat medial surface,

but only one face is polished. The lateral edges are

bevelled for a width of 6-9 mm on each face, but there

is also fine secondary bevelling ca. 0.7 mm wide

extending along the immediate working edge.

Bifaces: All five of the bifaces are made of Ramah

chert. One (Figure 131:g) is a complete asymmetric

blank (L= 82.0 mm, W= 42.6, TH= 16.4). Two are distal fragments, of which one convex-tipped implement

might be an endblade preform while the other might

be a tip-fluted endblade fragment. The remaining two specimens are lateral and proximal fragments.

Tip-fluting spalls: All five tip-fluting spalls are made of Ramah chert and all are primary removal

spalls. Three of them could be considered relatively

large (>25 mm in length). Metrics for the three complete specimens: L= 16. 4, 27.1, 27.5 mm, W= 15. 6,

1 1 .2, 9.3, TH = 1 .3, 3.1 , 1 .8.

Microblades: The raw materials of the 49 microblades (MNI = 24, based on proximal ends) are over- whelmingly Ramah chert (n = 44, 89.8%), with five examples made of crystal quartz (1 0.2%). Retouched or

utilized microblades constitute 40.4% of the total. Of

these, only three items exhibit traces of hafting: one

crystal quartz specimen has bilateral notching (Figure

128:o), while another has a constricted stem, and one Ramah chert implement has a bilateral constriction. Two microblades may have been the result of coretrimming. Using only proximal portions and specimens

from which reliable measurements could be taken

(n=l 5), the average width of the Ramah chert microblades was 1 2.3 mm. Platform angles were measured to

the nearest 5", resulting in a range from 75-90 (n=23),

with a distribution across the four angle classes as follows: 75 = 4 (1 7.4%), 80 = 1 2 (52.2%), 85 = 1 (4.3%),

90" = 5 (26.1%). Of the 22 proximal specimens upon

which platform preparation technique could be identified, 17 (77.3%) had plain platforms, four (18.2%)

retouched platforms, and one (4.5%) had a crushed

platform.

The size of microblade fragments may be the

result of random breakage patterns, but in some

cases microblades might have been snapped deliberately for use in particular tasks. For the Ramah chert

specimens, length measurements of proximal frag- ments (n=22) cluster into two groups, ca. 1116 mm

and 21-31 mm, while the medial fragments (n=l 3)

exhibit a marked clustering between 14-20 mm. The

distal fragments are relatively few (n=7) and exhibit a wide range of values. These groupings may simply

result from the mechanics of tool breakage, but they

NUKASUSUTOK 12 EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 197
seem consistent enough that deliberate action should

also be considered.

Utilized flakes: The two examples are both made

of Ramah chert.

Soapstone vessels: Three vessels were identified

from a total of 5 sherds. One vessel is '/< complete

(Figure 1 32), shallow (depth= 31 .5 mm), with one long

side slightly curved and the other markedly bowed out

so as to produce an asymmetric form with a length

over 103 mm and a width ca. 66 mm. Wall thickness

varies from 2.7 mm at the rim to 7.1 mm near the

base. The rim is flattened with slightly rounded edges.

The interior bottom exhibits striations and gouge

marks indicative of an attempt to thin the vessel, a

process that produced a small hole in one corner of the

vessel bottom. The vessel weighs 71 g. A second vessel (Figure 133:a) is represented by a wall fragment

with a small rim portion (TH= 3.1-5.7 mm). The third specimen is a wall sherd (TH= 3.3-5.7 mm) from a fairly deep vessel (>70 mm) featuring a flattened rim with

round edges and an encrustation of burned fat on both

the mner and outer surfaces (Figure 1 33:b).

Discussion

Structure-2 is a double or perhaps triple-hearth

axial feature. The distribution of lithic material and

rocks indicate the feature was associated with a relatively large tent (ca. 5m long by 5-5 m wide). The lithic materials were concentrated within 1 .0-1 .5 m of the

axial feature, suggesting sleeping areas further out

towards the tent walls. Cluster analysis of the tools

suggests a degree of behavioral symmetry in the use

of space at each end of the axial feature, with hearthrelated activities or deposition, although most of the

lithics occur on the west side of the feature. A slight

front/back distinction noted in the clustering of all endblades and endblade preforms at the front (north

end) of the axial feature is the only hint of spatial differentiation by gender, if one invokes the stereotype of male association with harpoon technology. This weak

inference need not contradict the possibility that the

1 32/ Nukasusutok-1 2: soapstone vessel from Structure 2.

133/ Nukasusutok-1 2: soapstone vessel fragments from

Structure 2.

behavioral symmetry between the hearths, in combination with the assumed size of the dwelling, might indicate the presence of two domestic units within the

structure.

Seen in terms of what did and did not "fall out" of

the technological organization system, the tool and

debitage samples suggest a relatively short duration of

occupation and a limited range of activities. Most

prominent among what fell out of the system were: (1

)

a substantial rate of microblade production and (2) a modest deposition of endblades, endblade preforms

and tip-fluting spalls. The former may be related to

various expedient tasks while the latter indicates

198 CHAPTER 1
a b c

1 34/ Nukasusutok-1 2 implements from Structures 3 and 4. a: side-notched biface, Structure 3, b: endblade,

Structure 3; c: burin-like-tool preform, Structure 3;

d, e: side-notched bifaces, Structure 4, f: endblade

preform, Structure 4; g: microblade, Structure 4.

preparation for and/or implementation of sea mammal

hunting activities. What did not fall out of the system were flakes and domestic processing tools. The small

quantity of Ramah chert debitage and its near-exclusive secondary retouch flake character suggests limited modification of curated implements such as the endblade preforms and the biface blank. The scarcity

or absence of domestic processing tools such as bifacial knives, scrapers and burin-like tools indicates that

either activities associated with these implements were

not undertaken or that such items were less likely to

enter into the archaeological record at this locality.

STRUCTURE 3

A 1 m^ test pit 25 m south of Structure 1 (Figure 1 24)

revealed the probable remains of a third axial feature

consisting of cobbles and flat slabs. The test pit and

later surface collection in the area produced nine tools:

a tip-fluted endblade, a tip-fluting spall, a side-notched

biface, a burin-like tool preform and four microblades.

A total of 17 flakes was collected, of which 15 were Ramah chert, one crystal quartz and one schist. The Ramah chert endblade (Figure 1 34:b) is complete, with a fairly straight base and some medial basal

thinning (L= 42.7 mm, W= 1 8.2, TH= 5.6). The tip-fluting was placed dorsally and the scars are relatively

short (L= 13.0, 16.5 mm). The single side-notched

biface of Ramah chert (Figure 134:a) is also complete

and displays a slightly asymmetric blade, a biconvex

cross-section, a straight bifacially thinned base and

slight edge grinding above one of the notches (L= 57.6 mm, W= 30.5, TH= 5.8, notch HT= 9.2, 9.0, notch L=

5.4, 6.6, notch W= 2.2, 2.1). The burin-like tool preform (Figure 1 34:c) is complete and made on a long flake of nephrite. One lateral edge has a bifacially flaked wide notch or stem while

the opposite edge bears a slight trace of a notch

formed by dorsal retouch. The implement has a slight

basal concavity and it is unground (L= 48.5 mm, W=

1 9.8, TH= 5.8, notch L= 1 3.4, notch W= 1 .9).

All four microblades are made of Ramah chert; two are retouched distal fragments while the other two

are uncertain proximal fragments.

STRUCTURE 4

Ten meters north of Structure 1 , adjacent to a rock-fall

beside the north hill-face, a 1.5 by 1.0 m test pit

revealed part of a fourth axial feature (Figure 124).

Several thick flat-topped rocks and a flat slab were

associated with burned sand, charcoal, red ocher

patches and a considerable quantity of Ramah chert

debitage, some of which was thermally altered. Tools

recovered from the test unit Include two side-notched

biface bases, one primary tip-fluting spall, one tip-fluted endblade preform, three microblades and two utilized flakes. The debitage collection consists of 253

unaltered Ramah chert flakes (78.3 g by weight), 77

thermally altered Ramah chert flakes (29.5 g), one

quartz flake (0.6 g), and one schist flake (0.4 g).

NUKASUSUTOK-l 2: EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 199
Table 50. Nukasusutok-1 2: Test Pits 1-3 Tool Class Frequencies.

TPl TP2 TP3 Surface TOTAL

Triangular endblades 1 z 3 (4.3)

Side-notched bifaces

->

1 4 (5.8)

Bifaces 1 1 2 (2.9)

Burin-like tools 1 1 (1 .4)

Tip-fluting spalls 1 z

oO 1 12(1 7.4)

Microblades, unutilized I 7 zU 29 (42.0)

Microblades, utilized i. 1

-7/ 1 (1 4.5)

Microblade cores

1

1 1 (1 .4)

Utilized flakes 1 2 3 (4.3) Ground schist flakes 2 2 (2.9) Ground nephrite flakes 2 2 (2.9) TOTAL 7 14 46 2 69

Both the side-notched biface bases are made of Ramah chert. One (Figure 1 34;d) has a single pair of

wide notches and a slightly concave base (W= 30.4 mm, TH= 8.2, basal depth= 3.0, notch HT= 6.0, notch

L= 13.1, notch W= 3.0). The other (Figure 1 34:e) has two pairs of notches and a straight base (edge A notch

HT= 6.0, 1 4.6 mm, edge B notch HT= 5.9, 13.1, edge

A notch L= 2.9, 4.2, edge B notch L= 3.6, edge A notch

W= 1 .6, 1 .8, edge B notch W= 1 .6) The endblade preform (Figure 1 34:f) is made on a

flake of thermally altered Ramah chert and appears to be

a production failure (L= 55.3 mm, W= 22.9, TH= 5.8). It

retains a striking platform proximally, has bifacial

retouch limited to its margins and a single ventral tipflute that encompasses the entire tip of the implement

and terminates in a step fracture. The margins of the fluting scar were retouched slightly subsequent to spalling.

All three microblades are made of Ramah chert and are medial fragments. One is retouched. A large

specimen is illustrated in Figure 1 34:g. The two utilized flakes are both made of Ramah chert. Two radiocarbon dates were run from a sample of

conifer charcoal associated with the structural rocks. The first assay produced a date of 930±64 B.P. (Sl5536). Since this result indicated a Late Dorset dating,

which seemed inconsistent with the tool collection,

the sample was resubmitted and subjected to nitration pre-treatment to remove uncharred cellulose. The

second date was 1110±80 B.P. (SI-5822), marginally

older than the first and equally inconsistent with the

tool collection.

TEST PITS 1 3

Seven meters south of Structure 3 was a vegetated

area that was probed with three 1 m^ test pits (Figure

1 24). Test Pits 2 and 3 adjoined each other while Test

Pit 1 lay 1 m to the northwest. Test Pits 2 and 3 pro- duced a surprisingly dense concentration of Ramah

chert debitage and tools in a matrix of brown sand and

cobbles superimposed on a soft clay deposit lying 1 5 cm below ground surface. No features could be discerned in the morass of cobbles and clay. The area

might have contained a midden or structure that was

badly disturbed by severe clay movement. Table 50

provides an overview of tool frequencies, distributed

across the three test pits. The tool collection from these test units is marked by a large number of microblades (56.5%) and

200 CHAPTER 10
contains a microblade core fragment. Altliough triangular endblades are only modestly represented, a fairly large number of tip-fluting spalls are present,

including eight primary removal spalls. The latter

might indicate a focus on endblade production from

curated preforms. Tool and flake raw materials are summarized by frequency in Table 51 and by weight

in Table 52. Both tool and flake materials are dominated by Ramah chert.

Table 51. Nukasusutok-1 2: Test Pits 13 Tool

and Flake Raw Materials by Frequency.

Tools N (%) Flakes N (%) Ramah chert 62 (89.9) 21 1 (87.2)

Crystal quartz 1 (1 .4) 1 (0.4)

Cray Mugford chert 1 (0.4)

Creen chert 1 (1 .4)

Nephrite 3 (4.3) 2 (0.8)

Schist 2 (2.9) 27(11.2)

Table 52. Nukasusutok 1 2: Test Pits 13 Tool

and Flake Raw Materials by Weight. In Grams.

Tools g (%) Flakes g ( %) TOTAL g(%) Ramah chert 128.5(91.3) 107.3(76.0) 235.8 (83.7)

Cp/stal quartz 0.6 (0.4) 0.5 (0.4) 1.1 (0.4)

Cray Mugford chert 1.7(1.2) 1.7 (0.6)

Green chert 2.8 (2.0) 2.8 (1.0)

Nephrite 6.8(4.8) 11.7(8.3) 18.5 (6.6)

Schist 2.0(1.4) 19.9(14.1) 21.9 (7.8)

Tool Assemblage

Endblades: All three triangular endblades are made of Ramah chert. A complete tip-fluted specimen (Figure

136:a) has a slightly concave base and appears to be

fluted on its dorsal side (L= 21.1 mm, W= 14.6, TH=

3.2, basal depth= 1.0, tip-fluting L= 10.6, 14.0). A

proximal fragment (Figure 136:b) is bifacially flaked

with a slightly asymmetrical concave base; it is impossible to determine if it was tip-fluted (W= 13.1 mm,

3 5

135/ Nukasusutok-1 2 implements from test pits, surface and Structure 1 . a: biface, TP- 1 . b: endblade, TP- 1

, c: endblade preform, TP-4, d-e: utilized flakes, TP-4, f: ground slate point/knife base, surface; g: microblade,

surface; h) microblade. Structure I

.

TH= 2.8, basal depth= 1.0). Another proximal fragment (Figure 1 35:b) is bifacially flaked (completely on

the dorsal side, marginally on the ventral side) and has

a straight to slightly convex base with slight basal thinning (W= 22.9 mm, TH= 3.5).

Tip-fluting spalls; All of the 12 tip-fluting spalls

are made of Ramah chert. The seven whole or near

complete specimens range in length from 12.3-36.4 mm and two size groups are represented: 12.3-13.6 mm and 21.5-36.4 mm. Four of the five fragmentary

specimens clearly fall into the larger size class. These

large and small classes may indicate the tip-fluting of

different sizes of preforms or endblades (cf., Plumet

and Lebel 1 998). None of the intact finished endblades

NUKASUSUTOK 1 2 EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 201
a b c d

1 36/ Nukasusutok-1 2: implements from test pits,

a, b: endblades, TP-3; c-e: side-notched bifaces, TP-3; f: burin-like-tool, TP-3: g: ground schist, TP-3;

h: microblade core fragment, TP-2; i-l: microblades,

all TP-3.

from Nukasusutok-1 2 exhibit tip-flutes with a length

corresponding to the larger group, although one pre- form from Structure 2 does. Eight of the spalls are primary, four are secondary.

Side-notched bifaces All four bifaces are proximal

fragments and all exhibit a single set of notches.

Three of the four are made from Ramah chert while the

fourth is made from a green chert (either Mugford or

Newfoundland). One of the Ramah chert implements

(Figure 1 36:c) is from a fairly large biface and displays

wide side-notches and a slightly concave bifacially

thinned base (W = 33.4 mm, TH = 6.9, notch HT = 5.3,

9.5, notch L = 13.0, 12.6, notch W = 3.0, 3.0, basal

depth = 2.0). A second Ramah chert example (Figure

136:e) lacks one basal corner and has a biconvex

cross-section and a slightly concave base with basal

thinning (W = 20.3 mm, TH = 4.4, notch HT = 7.3,

notch L = 5.4, notch W = 1.2). The third Ramah chert specimen was missing when the collection was reanalysed in the early 1990s but it is illustrated else- where (Hood 1 986:Figure 5:1). The implement is smaller and narrower than the other bifaces and exhibits

predominantly unifacial dorsal retouch and a straight

base (base W = 1 3.8 mm, TH = 2.8, notch HT = 3.2,

3.4). It roughly resembles a Croswater "box-based"

endblade, although it has a bifacially thinned base in

contrast to the abrupt unifacially retouched bases of

the latter. The green chert specimen (Figure 1 36:d) has

a straight bifacially thinned base (base W = 30.0 mm,

TH = 6.2, notch HT = 5.4, 5.1).

Bifaces Both examples are made of Ramah chert. One is the distal portion of a large implement over 78

mm long and at least 37 mm wide, presumably a large

knife or lance point (Figure 1 35:a). The other is a small

distal fragment.

Burin-like tools: The single specimen of nephrite

is complete but for a portion of its proximal end

(Figure 1 36:f). Polishing traces on the proximal edges

suggest a bilateral slightly constricted stem with a

unilateral notch just below the bevelled portion of one

lateral edge. The distal end is straight and symmetrically bevelled to a cutting edge. The distal lateral edges are ground flat and the dorsal and ventral surfaces are flat and fully ground and polished (L = >

29.0 mm, W max = 16.3, W distal = 12.7, TH = 4.3,

notch HT = > 16.0).

Microblades: All but one of the 39 microblades

are made of Ramah chert; the single exception is crystal quartz (a few examples are illustrated in Figure

1 36:i-l). All specimens are fragmentary: 1 8 proximal,

1 5 medial and six distal. Traces of utilization or

retouch are found on 10 (25.6%). An MNI count of 17

can be formulated for the non-utilized specimens and

an MNI of two for the utilized implements. One of the

202 CHAPTER 1
utilized specimens has proximal retouch (unilateral

constriction) that may indicate hafting. In another

case, a medial fragment has bifacial retouch on one of

its snap surfaces that could indicate preliminary

retouch for a projectile base. Additionally, a distal

fragment is completely retouched on its ventral surface, which may also indicate an intended use as a

projectile. The average width of 1 5 proximal fragments is 12.5 mm.

Platform preparation is primarily plain (n= 6) or

retouched (n= 5), while one example each occurs for

grinding, crushing and indeterminate. Platform angles

were distributed as follows; 60° = 1 , 65° = 3, 70' = 1

,

75° = 2, 80° = 5, 85 = 1 and 90° =1 . A major proportion of the proximal fragments (1 of 1 7) have lengths

in the range of ca. 13-28 mm; the medial fragment

lengths exhibit greater spread, but eight of 1 7 range between ca. 1 2-25 mm. This is broadly consistent with

the pattern observed at Structure 2. Microblade cores: The single Ramah chert

microblade core (Figure 136:h) is a core-face fragment that bears negative scars of five long (ca. 75 mm) microblades. Three of these microblades were

struck from a core platform that was broken off when

the core face was detached. This detachment

occurred when the core was turned over and struck

on a flat basal surface used as a platform for the

attempted removal of microblades from the opposite

direction. Secondary retouch on the edges of the core fragment suggest it may have been re-used as an

expedient scraper.

Utilized flakes: All three specimens are made on

large (52-62 mm diameter) flakes of Ramah chert. In one case virtually all edges of the flake exhibit fine

utilization retouch combined with blunting of exposed facets; the implement may be an expedient

scraper. Ground schist flakes: The two specimens are both

small (ca. 17 and 28 mm long); one is illustrated in

Figure 1 36:g. Schist was likely used to grind nephrite

burin-like tools and perhaps slate implements.

Ground nephrite flakes: Two of the three flakes

are small (L= 1 5.0, 24.6 mm) with limited areas of distinct grinding. A third specimen is a larger linear flake

(L= 72.9 mm) with faint traces of polishing on its

facets but no obvious grinding.

Discussion

These three test pits provide little indication as to the

function of this part of the site. Any features once

present were obliterated by fluctuating movements of

the underlying clay deposit. Nonetheless, the large

quantity of tools and flakes recovered from these units

suggests the presence of a dwelling structure or midden. The most striking aspect of the assemblage is the

high frequency of microblades and tip-fluting spalls. The former suggest a high rate of expedient tool production while the latter suggest an emphasis on endblade production— a "gearing-up" for hunting. The

lack of scrapers is notable.

TEST PITS 4 AND 5 Two other 1 m^ test pits were excavated within in situ

deposits 1 m east of Structure 1 . Test Pit 5 was sterile but the central portion of Test Pit 4 contained part

of a shallow depression, measuring 45 by 60 cm,

which contained red ocher stains and charcoal. A small

notched schist slab with adhering burned fat was

recovered from the deposit. A second small charcoal

patch lay beside the north wall of the test unit.

Charcoal from the central depression was submitted

for radiocarbon dating. A first run produced a date of

1 000±75 B.P. (SI-5535), which seemed much too late in

relation to the tool material from the site. The sample was re-run following nitration pre-treatment, resulting

in a date of 1 660±90 B.P. (SI-5821).

Test Pit 4 produced 10 tools, all of Ramah chert;

an endblade preform, a tip-fluting spall, six microblades, and two utilized flakes. The endblade preform

(Figure 135:c) is made on a crudely retouched Ramah

chert flake and is only retouched marginally— bifacially at the tip, mostly dorsally on the lateral edges—

NUKASUSUTOK-1 2: EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 203
while the base is thinned dorsally from a snap edge (L=

36.4 mm, W= 19.3, TH= 4.0). The tip-fluting spall is a

large medial fragment (L >30.0 mm) of a primary spall. The six microblades are comprised of four medial and two proximal fragments. Two medial fragments are

completely retouched on their ventral surfaces, possibly for use as projectiles. One of the utilized flakes has

unifacial dorsal retouch along all its margins and a

slight stem at one end (Figure 135:e), while the other

has unifacial dorsal retouch along two lateral edges

(Figure 135:d). A total of 50 flakes was collected, of

which 47 (94.0%) were of Ramah chert, one (2.0%) of

crystal quartz, one (2.0%) of black chert, and one

(2.0%) of nephrite.

SURFACE COLLECTIONS

Two implements not directly associated with structures were surface collected. A complete retouched

microblade (L= 47.9 mm, W= 13.1, TH= 3.7) lay 3 m

west of the 1 xl y marker at Structure 1 (Figure 1 35:g).

The proximal portion of a ground slate point or knife

(Figure 1 35:f) was found 6 m south of the 5x5y marker at Structure 2. The tool is made of green slate and

has a constricted stem formed by a pair of wide sidenotches. The base is straight with narrow, symmetrically ground bevelling. Above each notch is a slight

trace of edge bevelling with surfaces running in slightly different directions. The medial faces of the implement are largely unground (TH= 4.9 mm, notch HT=

4.5, 3.5, notch L= 14.2, 1 5.5, notch W= 3.5, 2.5).

OVERALL ASSEMBLAGE

CHARACTERISTICS AND

TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION

Consideration of technological organization at

Nukasusutok-1 2 is complicated by rather divergent

tool and debitage sample sizes and differences in the

representativeness of the samples. As far as tools are concerned, only Structure 2 and

Test Pits 1-3 have sufficient numbers to work with.

Although Structure 2 has very little debitage, the complete excavation of the feature constitutes a fairly representative sample. The material from Test Pits 1-3 has

a reasonable number of tools and flakes, but is a limited area sample from an uncertain context. The test

unit at Structure 4 produced a few tools and a modest

debitage collection, but the sample cannot be considered representative. Given these limitations the discussion can only hope to point out some tentative dimensions of technological organization at the site. The most striking characteristic of the

Nukasusutok-1 2 assemblage is the absence of processing tools common in other Dorset sites: endscrapers and sidescrapers. This absence implies that either

the activities in which these tools were used (skin

scraping and wood working) were not conducted at the

site or that the implements were highly curated as part

of a hafted tool kit. Instead, microblades are the pre- dominant implement type, suggesting a high frequency of production for use in expedient tasks. The proportion of microblades with traces of utilization varies from 25% at Test Pits 1-3 to 40% at Structure 2.

Structure 2 had a modest number of endblades, endblade preforms and tip-fluting spalls, while Test Pits 1-

3 had a substantial number of tip-fluting spalls, including several primary removal spalls (but no endblade

preforms). In both cases a focus on endblade production is suggested. As far as the debitage is concerned,

Structure 2 was notable for a very small amount of

flakes (and thus a high toolTlake ratio), while Structure

4 and Test Pits 1-3 had a relatively larger quantity of

flakes suggestive of more emphasis on tool production

and maintenance.

Considered in isolation these observations are

perhaps not that significant, but their relevance is

clearer when placed in a comparative context with

other Dorset lithic assemblages. The only available

material for such a comparison is Nagle's (1 984, 1 986)

analysis of Dorset Ramah chert use. Nagle concluded

that distance-decay processes associated with "downthe-line" exchange from the Ramah chert sources had

a significant effect on the nature of Dorset lithic

204 CHAPTER 10
assemblages, particularly with regard to tool size and

frequency. Preforms for bifaces and endblades are

both smaller and less frequent with distance from the

source areas and debitage also decreases in size and

frequency. But frequency and size may also respond to

other variables. Microblade production can generate

either a few or many implements in a single production

sequence, so the frequency of microblades may be more closely linked to the situational factors behind

individual production events than to the raw material

supply. The same could be said for the frequency of

tip-fluting spalls. Size differences in endblades may

have more to do with intended functions— such as seal

versus walrus hunting— than with raw material availability (Nagle 1986:98).

One of the questions Nagle (1984:295, 315-316,

434) addressed using Nain Middle Dorset material was

whether winter semi-subterranean houses were "gearing-up" sites where tools were produced for use during

other periods of the annual round while sites from

other seasons were marked by strategies of tool maintenance and conservation (i.e., curation behavior). He

concluded that the evidence supported his general line

of reasoning, but that inter-assemblage differences were not substantial:

While sites occupied in the late fall and

winter may have been the focus of the

majority of flaked stone manufacturing

activities in preparation for the ensuing

year, it appears that for the most part

Dorset knappers were routinely making

many new tools throughout their entire

seasonal round. Yearly lithic needs were

evidently planned carefully, and supplies budgeted reasonably well (Nagle

1 984:434).

How does the material from Nukasusutok- 1 2 fit

into this picture? Table 53 compares the tool assemblages from Structure 2 and Test Pits 1-3 at

Nukasusutok-1 2 with five of the Nain region Dorset assemblages analysed by Nagle (1 984:Appendix A).

Koliktalik-1 (highlighted in the table) consists of two

semi-subterranean winter houses (Cox 1978:107,

110-111; Fitzhugh 1976:138-140; Nagle 1984:217-

228; Spiess 1978), St. John's lsland-3, L-4, is an outer

island mid-winter hunting camp containing a tent ring

with an axial pavement (Nagle 1984:228-230; Spiess

1 978:55), Black Island ! A has a possible tent structure (Nagle 1984:230-232), and Dog Bight L-3 lacked

a discernable structure but is assumed to be a tent

site (Fitzhugh 1976:138; Nagle 1984:209-210). Dog

Bight L-3 is Early Dorset, while the rest are Middle

Dorset. The proportions of tool types at Nukasusutok12 are most similar to Dog Bight L-3, with high percentages of microblades and tip-fluting spalls, except

that endscrapers and burin-like tools are better represented at Dog Bight. The other two tent-dwelling sites

have very different profiles. St John's lsland-3 has high

proportions of endblades, endscrapers and burin-like

tools, but relatively few microblades. This emphasis

on sea mammal hunting and processing activities is

consistent with the location of the site near the ice- edge and traces of walrus hunting in the small faunal assemblage (Spiess 1978:55). Black Island-IA is dominated by tip-fluting spalls, suggesting final-stage

"gearing-up" for hunting. The variation in these tent

dwelling assemblages probably reflects differences in

the situational variables affecting lithic use in each

case. In contrast, the winter house assemblages from

Koliktalik are heavily loaded with processing/maintenance tools such as bifaces, endscrapers and burinlike tools. Given the frequency of endblade preform

production at Koliktalik and their scarcity at all the

tent dwelling sites, it seems likely there was a spatial

staging in production, final retouch and use in a

chaine operatoire marked by a high degree of curation. But it should be kept in mind that there are significant formational differences between the tent and

house assemblages, since the latter are accumulations

resulting from multiple occupation phases ("coarseNUKASUSUTOK 1 2 EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 205
Table 53. Comparison of Main Region Dorset Lithic Assemblages.

Semi-Subterranean Houses Highlighted in Gray.

Nukasusutok-1

2

Nukasusutok-1

2

Dog Bight St. John's lsl.-3 Black IsL-la Koliktalik-1 Koiiktalik-1

S-2 TP 1-3 L-3 L-4 H-1 H-2

Bifaces 6 (8.7) D \y.o) 11 '?\

1 U VO. 334 \L£..Z>) 1 7 tr ri 7\

1 / J

Biface Preforms 1 (1.4) 1 \j \\J. 1

)

Endblades 4 (5.8) 11 ?\ ^.Hj \ 1 D.^J or HA Q^

Endblade Preforms 3 (4.3) -7A {A Q\ Z 1 (3./)

Tip-Fluting Spalls 6 (8.7) 1 2 (1 9.7) 45 (1 3.0) 15 (12.7) 33 (55.9) 252 (16.8) 43 (7.5)

Endscrapers 4 (1.2) 1 1 (9.3) 3 (5.1) 66 (4.4) 46 (8.1)

Microblades 49 (71 .0) 39 (63.9) 266 (76.7) 41 (34.7) 1 1 (18.6) 419 (28.0) 165 (28.9)

Burin-Like Tools 1 (1.6) 8 (2.3) 9 (7.6) 98 (6.5) 35 (6.1) TOTAL 69 61 347 118 59 1498 570

grained" assemblages in Binford's [1980:17] sense)

and the former are probably the result of more discrete events ("fine-grained" assemblages). Organizational dynamics are difficult to infer from coarsegrained assemblages.

Another dimension of variability is debitage

characteristics. Table 54 outlines the Ramah chert

toohflake ratio for the Nain area sites (derived from

Nagle 1984; Appendix A). Although the Nukasusutok test pits cannot be considered a representative sample, their ratio is consistent with the

other Dorset sites, whether tent sites or the semisubterranean houses at Koliktalik. Structure 2, on

the other hand, stands out for its unusually high

ratio of tools to flakes. Compared with the other

localities. Structure 2 reflects an extremely low rate

of lithic reduction combined with a high rate of tool

discard. This ratio suggests little emphasis on tool replenishment or "gearing up" strategies, presumably related either to an anticipated ease of tool replacement or the absence of domestic processing

and maintenance activities which might place higher demands on raw material use.

The organization of lithic reduction may also be

reflected in flake size distributions and the frequency

of biface-thinning flakes. Although the Nukasusutok12 assemblages are not ideal for size analysis given

small samples (Structure 2) and samples of uncertain

representativeness (test pits), size distribution data

for Structure 2 (completely excavated). Structure 4

(test-pitted) and Test Pits 1-3 are presented in Figure

137. Table 55 displays the frequency of biface-thinning flakes. Structure 2, which had only 48 Ramah

chert flakes, is distinguished by a high proportion of

flakes in the <1 5 mm and <1 mm categories and low

frequencies in the <20 mm and larger categories, suggesting emphasis on late stage retouch rather than

multi-stage reduction. The low frequency of bifacethinning flakes suggests limited reduction of preforms. Structure 4 and Test Pits 1-3 have slightly higher percentages of flakes in the <20 to <30 mm range and both have relatively large numbers of biface-thinning flakes, indicating greater reduction of preforms

than at Structure 2. Although the sampling problems

need to be kept in mind, these data suggest spatial

differences in reduction patterns at Nukasusutok-1 2.

206 CHAPTER 1
Nukasusutok-12 Ramah Chert Flake Size

Distribution

-S2 \ -S4

-TP1-3

<5 <10 <15 <20 <25 <30

5 mm classes

<35 <40 <45

13// Nukasusutok-1 2: Ramah chert flake size distribution.

Table 54. Ramah Chert ToohFlake Ratios for Dorset Sites in the Nain Area

Tools Flakes ToohFlake Ratio

Nukasusutok-1 2 S-2 63 38 1.66 Nukasusutok-12 TPl-3 62 210 0.3 Dog Bight L-3 339 1021 0.33

St. John's lsland-3 L-4 127 669 0.19

Black Island 1

A

51 479 0.1 1

Koliktalik-1 H-1 2536 16281 0.16

Koliktalik-1 H-2 1038 7712 0.1 3

Table 55. Distribution of Biface-Thinning

Flakes at Nukasusutok-12.

Biface-Thinning Flakes

Structure 2 4

Structure 4 30

Test Pits 1-3 53

The Ramah chert debitage size distribution has

greater value when compared with other Dorset sites

in the Nain region. Comparison necessitated re-sorting

the Nukasusutok-12 debitage in accordance with the

size category system used by

Nagle (1984:261-262): category

4 (>% < '/j inch), category 3

(>'/: inch, < 1 inch), category 2

(>1 inch, < 2 inches). Nagle

eliminated a fifth category

(<'/i inch) as unreliable, so the same was done for Nukasusutok-12. Four of the previously

discussed Dorset components

were used in the comparison;

Koliktalik-1 houses 1 and 2, St.

John's lsland-3, L-4, and Dog

Bight L3 (data from Nagle 1 984: Appendix B). In the comparison

by frequency (Figure 1 38),

Structure 2 at Nukasusutok-12

has a profile similar to all the

other Dorset sites, being dominated by category 4 debitage

(>% inch <'/j inch). In contrast,

Structure 4 and Test Pits 1 -3 are

distinctly different from all the

other components in their high

proportions of larger category 3

flakes (>'/j inch, < 1 inch). When

the proportions from the three Nukasusutok-12 components

are averaged, the site has a

deviant profile with a high proportion of class 3 flakes.

In the comparison by weight (Figure 1 39), Structure 2's

profile of balanced classes 4 and 3 most closely resembles Koliktalik House 2, while Structure 4 and Test Pits

1-3's profiles with high class 3 proportions are most

similar to St. John's Island. The averaged Nukasusutok

profile is also very close to St. John's Island. Although

the intra-site variation at Nukasusutok-12 should be

kept in mind, it is interesting that its greatest similarities are with St. John's Island, since both sites are seasonal hunting camps associated with axial structures.

NUKASUSUTOK-12: EARtY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 207
Ramah chert size distribution by frequency,

Nagie categories and Nain Region Sites

10090 -

8070

60 % 50

40

30

20

10 tL I

Cat4

Cats m Cat2

S2 S4 TP1-3 KKH1 KKH2 DBL3

Component/Site

StJI N12av

1 38/ Nain region Dorset site Ramah chert size distributions by frequency, using

Nagle's (1984) categories.

The preceding discussion positions Nukasusutok12 relative to other Nain area Dorset assemblages,

drawing out some general similarities and differences, but it is confined by the vagaries of the Nukasusutok sample and by the limited comparative

base. Nonetheless, the Nukasusutok- 1 2 assemblage

might be characterized as representing a hunting

camp marked by a high production of expedient

microblades, the final stage reduction of harpoon

endblades, as indicated by tip-fluting spalls and endblade preforms, and the reduction of biface preforms, as implied by the biface-thinning flakes. The

size/weight distribution of the Ramah chert debitage

suggests that Nukasusutok-1 2 reduction patterns

are most similar to another outer island hunting

camp, St. John's lsland-3, L-4, although the tool assemblages

of the two sites differ in that Nukasusutok-1 2 has a higher

rate of microblade production

but a lower rate of endblade

discard. If, as Nagle (1 986:98)

observed, variation in microblade frequency is conditioned

by highly contingent individual

production decisions, then it may be that the contrasts in endblade discard are the

only significant differences

between the sites. To conclude, partly following Nagle's (1984, 1986) observations one might say the nature of any individual

Dorset assemblage is a product of the articulation of

three dimensions: (1) general constraints imposed by

the structure of the Ramah chert delivery system on

the form and quantity of raw materials circulating within different regions, (2) production decisions linked to

specific situations, and (3) social and symbolic context. At this point we have a strong set of inferences

concerning the first point, a good start on but still

inadequate understanding of the second, and rather

little penetration of the third.

CHRONOLOGY

Table 56 outlines the radiocarbon dates from Structure

4 and Test Pit 4. As noted previously, the first run

Table 56. Radiocarbon Dates from Nukasusutok-1 2.

Location First Run Second Run Lab Nos. 1 6 Calibration of Second Run

(nitration pre-treatment) (OxCal 3.10)

Structure 4 930±64 B.P. 1 1 10+80 B.P. SI-5536, 5822 AD 780-1020

Test Pit 4 1000±75 B.P. 1660±90 B.P. SI-5535, 5821 AD 250-540

(both samples of conifer charcoal)

208 CHAPTER 10
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

S2

dates did not correspond with

what was expected on the basis

of tool typology (2200-2000

B.P.), so the samples were run a

second time with nitration pretreatment to remove uncharred

cellulose. Although this resulted in a significantly earlier

assay for the sample from Test

Pit 4, the result for Structure 4 was little different. Regrettably,

neither of these samples was

associated with clearly diagnostic tools. The material from

Structure 4 included two sidenotched bifaces (one with a single pair of notches, the other

multiple notched), three microblades, a tip-fluted point

preform, a tip-fluting spall, and a utilized flake.

Typologically, the bifaces seem inconsistent with the

1 1 10±80 B.P. Late Dorset dating. Test Pit 4 contained

an endblade preform, a tip-fluting spall, a possible

scraper fragment, six microblades (two of which were

completely retouched on their ventral surfaces), a utilized flake and a schist fragment with adhering burned

fat. The best that can be said is that this material is not

inconsistent with a 1 660±90 B.P. Middle Dorset dating.

Given the ambiguity of the radiocarbon dating the

remainder of the chronological discussion must be

based on typological comparisons. Since very little

Labrador Dorset material has been reported in full, the

discussion will be somewhat impressionistic.

Typologically, Nukasusutok-1 2 appears to be intermediate between Early Dorset material such as Dog

Bight L-3 from the Nain region, dated 2455±75 B.P. and

2400±70 B.P. (Cox 1978:99, illustrated in Fitzhugh

1976, Figure 12, m-s), and lluvektalik-1 from Okak Bay,

dated 2845±60 B.P. on charcoal mixed with burned fat

(Cox 1977:152-1 64, illustrated in Cox 1978:108), and

Middle Dorset material from Koliktalik-1 in the Nain

area (Cox 1 978:99; illustrated in Fitzhugh 1 976, Figure

Ramah chert size distribution by weight, Nagle

categories and Nain region sites

£1

eacat4

Eacats

S4 TP1-3 KKH1 KKH2 DBL3

Component/Site

StJ I N12av

1 39/ Nain region Dorset site Ramah chert size distributions by weight, using Nagle's

(1984) categories.

1 2 a-l, and Cox 1 978: 1 09). The Nukasustok-1 2 material bears some resemblance to the few tools illustrated from Avayalik-7 in northernmost Labrador, originally

believed to date to the Early/Middle Dorset boundary,

ca. 2200-1800 B.P. (R. Jordan 1980:609-610), but

which produced a later than expected date of 1 395±70

B.P. (Morlan 2001-2005).

Several Nukasustok-1 2 assemblage attributes

reflect this Early/Middle Dorset character. First, there

is a high frequency of microblades, which is regarded

as typical of Early Dorset sites (Cox 1978:107). In a correspondence analysis (not shown here) of Labrador

Dorset assemblages based on data from Nagle (1984;

Appendix A), Nukasusutok-1 2 was grouped together

with all the Early Dorset sites on the basis of their

shared high frequency of microblades. As observed

above, however, microblade production was probably

situationally conditioned such that one should be wary

of using it as a chrono-typological indicator. Second,

the triangular endblades are straight-based or only

slightly concave and four of them (from Structure 2,

Structure 3 and Test Pits 1 -3) appear to be tip-fluted on

their dorsal surfaces, as are two endblade preforms

(Structure 2). Dorsal tip-fluting is thought to be an

NUKASUSUTOK-1 2: EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES 209
early Dorset trait. There is no trace of unifacial endblades or basal thinning on the dorsal surface of endblades as found in IVliddle Dorset (Cox 1978:107).

Third, a high side-notched or quasi "box-based" biface

(Figure 131:h) from Structure 2 and a small unifacial

notched biface resembling Croswater style (Hood

1 986:Figure 5:1) from Test Pits 1 -3 have an Early Dorset

stamp, although the latter may simply be an expedient

tool (cf., Nagle 1 984:347-348). Fourth, a burin-like tool

preform from Structure 3 that was destined to be relatively long and have broad side-notching (Figure 1 34:c) seems more similar to the Early Dorset forms from

lluvektalik-1 (Cox 1978:108) than the narrow-notched

Middle Dorset forms from Koliktalik-1 (Cox 1 978:1 09). A fully ground tabular nephrite burin-like tool with a

"squared" working end from Test Pit 3, however,

exhibits the remnants of a proximal stem and traces of

a small notch on a lateral margin, similar to Middle

Dorset forms (Figure 1 36:0- The single and multiple

side-notched bifaces from Nukasusutok-1 2 could be found in either Early or Middle Dorset contexts. To conclude, on typological grounds we might

propose that Structure 2, Test Pits 1-3 and probably

Structure 3 are Early/Middle Dorset, perhaps dating

2200-2000 B.P.. On the basis of the radiocarbon dates,

unsupported by typological data. Structure 4 and Test

Pit 4 may be Middle Dorset or later.

STRUCTURAL COMPARISONS

A major difficulty in providing a broader view of the

Nukasusutok-1 2 structural remains is the lack of published accounts of Dorset structures in Labrador or elsewhere. Three semi-subterranean houses have been given some preliminary documentation: one of the two Middle

Dorset houses from Koliktalik-1 in the Nain region

(Fitzhugh 1976:130-131; Cox 1978:107-111),

Iglusuaktalialuk lsland-4 West, a Middle Dorset house in

the Okak region (Cox 1 977:1 37-1 38), and Okak-3, a Late

Dorset house in the Okak region (Cox 1977:195-196,

1 978:1 10-111). Koliktalik-1 House 1 lacked an axial feature, but there were a series of central pits associated

with a partial pavement. The other two houses had welldefined stone axial features.

Dorset surface structures are described as consisting of rectangular tent rings with central cobble or slab pavements lacking clear borders, or more ephemeral

rock and pavement features (Cox 1978:11). The only

published example is a tent ring from Avayalik-2 in northernmost Labrador, typologically dated to the

Early/Middle Dorset "transition" (2200-1800 B.P.). This was a rectangular structure with a central boulder align- ment but without box hearths, slab pavements or vertical boundary rocks (R.Jordan 1980:612, Figure 4). One

of the two radiocarbon dates from the structure is consistent with the typological dating (2000±75 B.P.,

1 345±70 B.P.;). In the Nain area, tent ring features of

broadly similar character are known from an Early Dorset component at the Dog Island West Spur site and the

Middle Dorset St. John's lsland-3, L-4 site. The Nukasusutok-1 2 structures are clearly of a different character than the previously mentioned surface

structures in that they consist of long axial features with

hearth areas and they lack distinct tent rings. These contrasts may indicate functional or seasonal differences. The lack of ring rocks may indicate the tents were

anchored in snow and perhaps used in the early spring

or late fall. As discussed in the spatial analysis of

Structure 2, the presence of hearth-related pairs of tool

clusters at each end of the mid-passage hints at behavioral symmetry, possibly indicative of two domestic units

within a large dwelling. This inference can be compared

with R.Jordan's (1980:612) preliminary conclusion that

the tent ring at Avayalik-2 was used by two family units.

Structures 1 and 2 at Nukasusutok-1 2 bear a strong

resemblance to each other. Although slightly different in

size, each had a well defined axial feature, clear evidence

for a hearth at each end of the passage, possible traces

of a third central hearth, notched schist slabs and traces

of large terminus rocks at one or both ends of the passage. These structural and organizational similarities

might indicate proximity in time, but the almost total lack

of lithics at Structure 1 hinders chronological inferences.

210 CHAPTER 1
SETTLEMENT PATTERN AND

SEASONALITY

Drawing together the discussion so far, the

Nukasusutok-1 2 lithic assemblage gives the impression of a focus on sea mammal hunting with minimal

evidence for a wider range of domestic activities. In the

case of Structure 2, the high toohflake ratio indicates a

high rate of tool discard with minimal tool production

and maintenance, suggesting a social unit arrived with

a limited tool kit prepared at another locality, perhaps

a winter house, and functioned with low replacement

requirements. The latter may not hold for the other

features at the site, the sampling of which revealed

larger quantities of debitage. The excavated axial features point to the use of large tents (perhaps family

pairs?) and the presence of additional structures indicate the site was used repeatedly by small social units,

probably around the Early to Middle Dorset "transition," but possibly later as well. The potential seasonal use of the site can be considered with reference to century Labrador Inuit

settlement. According to Taylor (1974:51), Contact

Period house sites were typically located with good

access to fall harp seal hunting. There is an 18*^^ cgp.

tury communal house complex just west of

Nukasusutok-1 2 (Nukasusutok-8, Chapter 1 1 ) and east

of Wyatt Harbour the narrow passage between a rocky

islet and Nukasusutok Island is said to be a good place

for intercepting harp seals. The area between

Nukasusutok and Nochalik Island to the southwest has

reasonably good open water sealing during the summer. Mid-winter ice-edge sealing is not likely from the

site since the usual position of the sina is off Humby's

Island, over 20 km to the east (Figure 1 40). The area to

the southeast between Satok Island and Humby's

Island can be good for hunting seals basking on the ice

in the spring. This area often has thin ice (visible as a

darker shading in Figure 4), so open water areas may

develop early in the spring. Given these considerations, the optimal periods for site occupation are during the harp seal migrations in the fall or the spring,

basking seal hunting in the spring, or open water sealing during the summer.

If we consider the Nain region Dorset site distribution as a whole (Figure 140), it is clear that Dorset

activity was concentrated in a 30 km wide band in the

mid-outer island zone. Only a handful of sites are situated at inner bay locations. Four of the five Middle

Dorset semi-subterranean house sites^ are located

within 7-8 km of the sina (as judged from Figure 4);

Koliktalik-1 (Fitzhugh 1976:131, 140; Nagle 1984:217-

228; Spiess 1 978), Ford Harbour-4 (Fitzhugh 1 981 :37), jonathon lsland-3 (site files. Cultural Heritage Division)

and Drawbucket Tickle-2 (site files. Cultural Heritage

Division). Spiess' (1978) interpretation of the faunal

remains from the houses at Koliktalik-1 suggests the

site was occupied October to December to exploit the southward harp seal migration and from March to June

for hunting basking seals and the northward migrating

harps. Cox and Spiess (1 980:660-661 ) hypothesize the

site was abandoned January through March and postulate movement to camps on more seaward islands near

the ice-edge due to a lack of breathing hole sealing

techniques. An axial pavement structure at St. John's

lsland-3, L-4, is proposed as such a camp, oriented

towards open water seal and walrus hunting.

A possible variation on this pattern may be

inferred from the fifth semi-subterranean house site

located 8 km east of Nukasusutok-1 2: No-Name Island2 (Sutton et al. 1981). This locality has two houses,

with House 1 radiocarbon dated at 1285±75 B.P., 1260±60 B.P. and 915±100 B.P. and House 2 dated

1450±65 B.P. (Fitzhugh, personal communication); in

other words late Middle Dorset to Late Dorset.

''Middle Dorset sod houses have also been registered at Skull Island (Fitzhugh 1981:37), but subsequent investigation led Susan Kaplan to suggest they may actually be Thule houses on top of a Dorset component (site files. Cultural Heritage

Division). This locality is located ca. 2-3 km from the sina.

NUKASUSUTOK 1 2 EARLY/MIDDLE DORSET AXIAL STRUCTURES
140/ Nain region Dorset site distribution. Original map © 2004 produced under licence from Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, with permission of Natural Resources Canada.

Excavations in a poorly preserved midden revealed the

presence of walrus, but mid-winter hunting seems

unlikely since the site is located 10-12 km distant from

the sina. Given the tendency for thin ice and early open

water in the area to the south between Satok and

Humby's Island, it is possible walrus were hunted there

in the first open leads of the late winter/early spring.

They could also have been taken later in the open

water period when the eastern end of the small island would serve as an excellent haul-out locale.

With these winter sites as anchor points we

could postulate that Dorset settlement patterns

involved relatively short distance "lateral" (east-west)

shifts on the scale of 1 5-30 km between fall-winterspring semi-subterranean house sites located near

the outer coastal fringe and spring-summer-fall tent

dwellings at outer and mid-island locations, with

similar or longer distance movements also possible

on a north-south axis. Periodic shifts between alternative winter house locations may have occurred primarily as "longitudinal" (north-south) movements.

However, if the Nukasusutok-1 2 occupation, or at

least part of it, pre-dated the documented Middle

Dorset winter houses it could very well have been

part of a different settlement pattern configuration

than the one outlined here.

212 CHAPTER 10
Post-Contact Inuit

Settlement on N u lea susutok Isia

As noted in Chapter 4, there are several localities with

traces of Post-Contact Period inuit activity on Nukasusutok Island. These were not central to the

fieldwork conducted in 1 979-80 or 1 992-93, although

the midden at the 18'^*^ century communal house site

Nukasusutok-8 (HcCh-10) was tested. Subsequent to

this testing, the Robert S. Peabody Museum at Phillips

Academy, Andover, Massachusetts, was visited in

order to inspect collections made on Nukasusutok

Island in 1928 by William Duncan Strong, anthropologist with the Rawson-MacMillan Subarctic expedition.

Strong's field notes and photographs were consulted

at the National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington D.C.

Strong excavated some of the house structures at Nukasusutok-8 and collected skeletal material and artifacts from graves at various places on the island. He

never published this or other Inuit material he collected between Nain and Hopedale, although the skeletal

material was used in a physical anthropological study

by T. D. Stewart (1939). The artifact material was first housed at the Field Museum in Chicago, but was eventually transferred through an exchange agreement to

the Peabody Museum, Andover. The value of the collection is limited because Strong's cursory field notes lack

critical provenience details, but the material is sufficiently interesting to justify an overview here, although

the short time available for documentation did not

permit a full analysis. Strong's material is supplemented by a small test-pit collection derived from

Nukasusutok-8 in 1992 and a brief survey of Nukasusutok-7 in 2004.

Offsetting the problematic archaeological data is a

relatively rich ethnohistoric record for the Nukasusutok-8 settlement. J. Garth Taylor's research on the Moravian missionary diaries uncovered references to the settlement between 1772-1794 and the

Moravian Periodical Accounts (abbreviated as P. A.)

contain passing references to later settlement on Nukasusutok Island. Some of the documentary information pertains to well-known Inuit individuals, so the

usually anonymous archaeological context can be connected with the agency of real people and the social

organization of the community can be specified. These

ethnohistoric data are marshaled to construct a composite settlement history from the late 18^^^ to early

1 9*^*^ centuries, which is followed by a consideration of

the archaeological data. But a brief sketch of post-contact Inuit society and settlement patterns is first presented to set the scene.

POST-CONTACT INUIT SOCIETY

AND SETTLEMENT

PATTERNS IN LABRADOR

The Thule ancestors of the Labrador Inuit colonized

northern Labrador by AD 1250-1 300 (Fitzhugh 1 994).

At the lglosiatik-1 site in the Nain area, Thule-style sod

houses with traces of metal apparently date to the

early 16^^ century (Fitzhugh 1994:258; Kaplan

1983:216, 455-462). During the 16^^ century Inuit

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 213
expanded southwards to Hamilton Inlet, the Strait of

Belie Isle and the Quebec North Shore. Documentary

information and archaeological data suggest the Inuit

presence in southern Labrador was a year-round occupation that lasted until the mid-1 700s, when the

increasing scale of European activity may have led to a

contraction of Inuit occupancy towards Hamilton Inlet.

During the 1 gth and ]7^^ centuries the southern Inuit were in contact with a variety of Europeans who conducted whaling and fishing in the area: Basques,

French, English, Portugese, Spanish and Dutch (Martijn

and Clermont 1980: Stopp 2002:75-76). Inuit both

traded for and plundered European goods (Stopp

2002:83; Trudel 1980). Although some European

wares made their way northwards along the Labrador

coast through Inuit social networks, the degree of culture change in the north was limited. Change accelerated during the 18'-'^ century. In

1 702 the French Sieur de Courtemanche was granted a

concession in southern and central Labrador and he

established a base of operations at Bradore on the Quebec North Shore. In 1 735 the Quebec trader

Marsal received a concession for sealing and trading at Cape Charles and in 1737 Louis Fornel was one of

three partners who acquired a similar concession at Chateau Bay. In 1 743 Fornel established a post for

trading with the Innu at Northwest River in Hamilton

Inlet; after his death in 1 745 this post and another at

Rigolet were run by his wife until ca. 1 755. French relations with the Inuit in southern Labrador were generally marked by considerable conflict (Kennedy 1995:20-

23; Stopp 2002:82-83, personal communication;

Zimmerly 1 975:36-40).

Britain acquired control of the Labrador coast in

1 763 after the end of the Seven Years War. British merchants overtook operations at Chateau Bay and a

defensive blockhouse called Fort York was constructed there in 1 766. In 1 770 George Cartwright overtook

the trading post at Cape Charles and founded additional posts, including his northernmost establishment at Sandwich Bay in 1 775. Cartwright ceased operations in

1 786. Other English merchants competed within the same area and by 1 784 Quebec traders were established in Hamilton Inlet (Kennedy 1995:25-41;

Zimmerly 1975:42-44). During the 1760s and early

1 770s large numbers of Inuit from the central coastperhaps mostly from Hamilton Inlet, but also parties

from Hopedale and Nain— made trips to the English

trading centers at Cape Charles and Chateau Bay. George Cartwright's diary indicates that large groups

of Inuit did not appear south of Hamilton Inlet after

1 773 (Stopp, personal communication), but major Inuit

traders were still making trips to Chateau Bay until ca.

1 790 (see below). The establishment of Moravian missions in central and northern Labrador after 1 771 provided northern Inuit with closer trading options, which

became more advantageous in the late 1780s and

1 790s when Moravian trade policies were liberalized.

During the course of the 1 7^^ and 1 8'^'^ centuries,

Inuit tools traditionally made from stone were replaced

by metals and a wide array of European goods was

incorporated into Inuit life. Dwelling forms changed

from the earlier small single-family sod houses to large

multi-family communal houses (Kaplan 1983, 1985).

The first Moravian missionary settlement was established at Main in 1771, followed by Okak (1776),

Hopedale (1 782) and Hebron in 1 830 (and several others later in the 1 9^*^ century). Eventually, the previously dispersed Inuit settlement became concentrated

at the mission stations, where systematic

Christianization and incorporation into European

material culture systems occurred. But this process did

not transpire rapidly. Moravian letters from the late

18^*^ century repeatedly express frustration at the difficulties of acquiring and retaining converts and

bemoan the negative influences of "heathens." A

poignant note is struck by a comment in the Hopedale

diary for 1 795 that "...their hearts be as hard as rocks and as cold as the ice of their country" (P. A. 1:

1795:351 ). Christianity was not consolidated until 1804-1805 when a "revival" spread through the mission settlement areas (Hiller 1971:86). Nonetheless,

214 CHAPTER 1 1
"heathen" Inuit still dominated northernmost Labrador

for many years thereafter (Loring 1998).

Communal Houses and "Big-Men" Traders

Much of the research on Post-Contact Inuit settlement

has focused on the so-called "communal house phase"

of the 18'^^ century. These semi-subterranean winter

houses were rectangular, 7-16 m long and 6 m wide,

with long entrance passages and generally three sleeping platforms (Kaplan 1983:238). Taylor's (1974:71)

ethnohistorical data indicate the dwellings were occupied by an average of 20 people. The household was

generally composed of several closely related families,

often fathers and their married sons or brothers

(Taylor 1 974:74-75) and polygyny was frequent (Taylor

1974:67). Winter settlements consisted of 1-8 houses

(average= 2.4; calculated from Taylor 1974:71).

Information on the social relationships between households is more limited than for within households, but

Taylor (1974:77-78) suggested kinship sometimes

played a role, either links between brothers or uxorilocal ties. Certain males had leadership positions within

the households by virtue of their kinship positions

(father/son or father/son-in-law), but leadership

authority at the settlement level was less marked and was tied to personal qualities, shamanist power and

success in trading for European goods. There were few

mechanisms for solving disputes above the household

level and authority conflicts between brothers were common (Taylor 1974:80-84). The latter resonates in

the translation of Nukasusutok (NaKasetjutok) as "the

place where the brothers quarreled" (Wheeler 1 953:62)

and in a story recounted by Manase Fox (1979) concerning conflict between brothers, one a leader at Nukasusutok.

The shift from single-family to multi-family communal dwellings has been discussed from different

perspectives. Schledermann (1976) offered an environmental determinist proposal: climatic cooling and the concomitant decline of whale hunting decreased

resource availability, resulting in Inuit co-residential

arrangements to facilitate sharing and fuel conservation. An unpublished paper by Taylor (1 976) attributed

the development to social aggregation around individuals prominent in trading baleen for European goods,

a position adopted by R. Jordan (1978) and Kaplan

(1983:351-359; also Jordan and Kaplan 1980) and

clearly analogous to Sahlins' (1963) "big-man" model

and the north Alaskan umealik, a man of wealth and

boat owner (Spencer 1 959). Kaplan went further, suggesting these high profile individuals and their eco- nomic and political activities indicate "...that a form of

hierarchical organization was in operation in 18'^'^ century Neo-Eskimo society" (Kaplan 1 983:352). Inuit middlemen from the central coast acquired baleen, whalebone, seal oil and furs from groups in the north and

then traveled to southern Labrador trading centers

such as Cape Charles and Chateau Bay. There they

acquired European goods that later were circulated

northwards, either down-the-line along existing social

networks or by the traders transporting them north- wards themselves (Kaplan 1983:351-353). A well- known trader from the Main region, Tuglavina, facilitated this activity by acquiring a two-masted sloop (P. A.

1 : 1 794:251).

Kaplan (1 983:355-359) saw these processes in

terms of the emergence of new "entrepreneurial" social

roles, increased competition for resources and family

rivalries. Multi-family households headed by boat owners constituted expanded production units and created

social dependencies. Household heads could use these

production units to generate the resources needed for

participation in regional trade, which in turn provided

the economic tools and symbols of status needed to

retain followers and recruit multiple wives, who sup- plemented the household's labour power, served as

prestige symbols and extended kinship-based eco- nomic networks. Shamanist power could also be used

to reinforce social influence. The Jordan-Kaplan model was challenged by

Richling (1993), who drew quite different conclusions

from the connection between trade goods and multiPOST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 215
family households. Richling saw the 18'^'' century not

as a period of radical shift towards hierarchy, but as a

time when Inuit adjusted to changes by intensifying

traditional egalitarian social practices. He questioned

R. Jordan's (1978:184) assumption that trade goods

were regarded as private property and thus not subject

to sharing beyond the household. Instead, Richling

(1993:74) suggested intensified communalism

through sharing was a traditional Inuit means for dealing with economic scarcity and that access to scarce European goods would also have been handled

through sharing relationships. Although Richling was

probably right in questioning the relevance of private

property concepts, his invocation of a blanket communal social ethic as sufficient explanation for the devel- opment of multi-family houses leaves much of the dynamics of 18^'^ century Inuit society unaccounted

for. It seems more productive to theorize household

heads as active agents whose strategies drew on traditional internal social resources such as personal characteristics, hunting skill, generosity and shamanist

power, and who had varying degrees of ability to

exploit the new external resources that became available through engagement with the expanding periphery of the European world system. This leaves open the

possibility for varied sets of local outcomes, some

marked by a degree of social inequality, others marked

by equality maintenance mechanisms.

In order to put human faces on the abstract category of Inuit agents, a short historical narrative derived from Moravian missionary sources is presented in the

next section. The late 18'^'^ century Moravian accounts

provide an interesting glimpse of the prevailing social

dynamics, albeit from a Moravian point of view. This

story of two well-known Inuit highlights some of the

processes outlined above.

An Ethnohistoric Vignette: Tuglavina

and Mikak

One individual whose life intersected with the Nukasusutok settlement for a time was the "big-man"

trader Tuglavina, frequently referred to in the late 1 8'^''

century Moravian accounts. His sometime wife Mikak

also has a high profile in the historical records,

although there is no indication that she resided on Nukasusutok with Tuglavina. The following is a brief

biographical synopsis, culled from J. Garth Taylor's

publications and the Moravian Periodical Accounts. It

provides a sketch of important aspects of Inuit social and economic life during the late 18*^^ century, but it

should be emphasized that neither individual can be

taken as representative of a "typical" Inuk of the time. Mikak was the daughter of the Inuit leader

Nerkingoak. After an initial 1765 encounter with

Moravian missionaries on an exploratory trip, Mikak was captured in 1 767 near Cape Charles in southern

Labrador. In 1 768 she was taken to England where she

resided until her return to Labrador in 1769. She

moved within London society and helped promote the

Moravian cause; the mission eventually received a land

grant in 1769. When the Moravian missionaries

returned in 1 770 on another exploratory trip to find a

location to establish a mission they met Mikak and her new husband Tuglavina near Byron Bay (north of

Hamilton Inlet). Mikak clothed herself in a goldtrimmed gown given to her by the Dowager Princess of

Wales, and a king's medal. The couple accompanied

the Moravians northwards to Nain, Tuglavina serving

as guide (Taylor 1979:740, 1984:18-19; Whiteley

1 979:536-537). One might speculate as to whether

Tuglavina's forming a partnership with a woman who

had such close ties with the English was a deliberate

strategy on his part to facilitate access to European

goods and acquire status. The Moravians regarded Tuglavina as "...a man of

vast authority among his countrymen" (P. A. 3:

1799:435) "...and his word was absolute law" (P. A. 1:

1 794:251 ). His prominence was based partly on hunting success, physical strength and cleverness, but also

on the widespread belief that he possessed exceptional powers of sorcery that were given to him by Torngak

(a spirit). If, after consulting with Torngak, he stated

216 CHAPTER 1 1
that someone should be killed, the declaration was

implemented. Tugiavina himself allegedly killed several people and his shamanist exhortations resulted in many additional killings by others. During the early

years of the mission Tugiavina was a thorn in the side

of the Moravians, "seducing" their converts (P. A. 1

:

1794:251). He and Mikak did not live at the mission

(Whiteley 1 979:537); as noted below, we know that he was resident at the Nukasusutok settlement in 1 776-

77. Despite his activities, Tugiavina maintained a "submissive" tone in the vicinity of the missionaries (P. A. 1

:

1 794:25 1 ) and assisted them in various ways. In 1 775

he used a boat constructed for him by the Moravians

to transport some missionaries scouting for a new mission site to the Hopedale area. In 1 780 a missionary

accompanied him into the interior on a caribou hunting trip (Taylor 1969, 1979:740, 1984:21).

Mikak and Tugiavina had a difficult relationship.

Prior to Mikak's return from England Tugiavina had

been married to Mikak's younger sister. Tugiavina

took possession of the sister again in 1772, which

alienated the group she had been with and displeased

Mikak. Mikak was also displeased when Tugiavina temporarily exchanged her for another man's spouse. A

feud was brewing with another group in the Nain

region because of complaints that Mikak's family did

not share the goods they had accumulated. In 1 774-75

Tugiavina and Mikak wintered in the interior, subsisting off stored caribou meat. In the fall of 1 775 the

couple went to northern Labrador on a trading expedition, collecting baleen at Nachvak, among other

places. In the spring of 1 776 Tugiavina abandoned

Mikak in favour of her two sisters. Mikak then lived

with another man who lacked resources and social status (Taylor 1984:21-22). By 1782 Tugiavina had four

wives (Taylor 1979:740, 1984:23).

In 1 782 Tugiavina went to Chateau Bay in southern Labrador where he traded at European establish- ments. Mikak and her new husband followed.

Tuglavina's southern trading continued until ca. 1 790.

At the outset he acquired a two masted sloop in the

south (P. A. 1: 1794:251), which was instrumental for

his ability to gather baleen from Inuit in northern

Labrador. The baleen was exchanged for European

goods at Chateau Bay and the goods were then transported to the north. Tugiavina also acquired firearms,

which the Moravians had been unwilling to supply, and

he solicited Inuit to accompany him on his trading

trips, which did not please the missionaries (Taylor

1 979:740). On his return to Nain in 1 784 he appeared

at the mission wearing a European officer's outfit consisting of a coat, wig, laced hat and sword (P. A. 1:

1794:251). In 1783 Tugiavina was baptized in the

south and given the Christian name William, but he

returned to Nain in 1784 "as sinful as ever," although

he assisted the mission in various ways (P. A. 3:

1 799:435-437).

Mikak lived mostly in the Hamilton Inlet area until

1 795 when she returned to the mission at Nain, where

she died about the age of 55 (Whiteley 1 979:536-537).

Tuglavina's life as a trader ended by 1 790 "...when his

sloop became unseaworthy and he had only a single

dog to pull his sled" (Taylor 1979:740). In 1790 he

joined the mission settlement in Nain, now with only one wife. He was not accepted as a full member of the

Nain congregation until 1 793, since he had difficulty

conforming to Moravian expectations. In 1 793 the

missionaries wrote that Tugiavina and Sikfigak's families departed the mission for other places "...where

they spent the winter in many wicked ways. ..Tugiavina

is often very uneasy in his conscience and promises to

return, but cannot put his good intentions into execution" (P.A. 1: 1793:21 5). But by 1795-96 Tugiavina

began to "testify" to other Inuit and remained a convert

despite "harassment" from "heathen" Inuit (P.A. 1:

1 795:354, 2:60). He died of pleurisy in 1 798 at ca. 60

years old, a few days after returning from a caribou

hunt (P.A. 3: 1 799:328, 435).

18^*^ Century Subsistence-Settlement Systems

The 18'^'^ century Inuit communal house economy

must also be situated in terms of subsistence-settlePOST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 217
ment systems. The following is a short summary of

central points.

Semi-subterranean sod house settlements were

occupied during the winter, beginning in mid-October

when Inuit moved into their houses prior to the fall

hunt for southward migrating harp seals (Taylor

1974:51). According to Taylor (1974:51), all the late

18'^'^ century winter house settlements in the Nain- Okak regions were located in areas with access to

migrating harp seals. Harps and other seals were hunted by kayak until the formation of sea-ice. Fall sealing was highly productive such that seals were first cached

near the hunting sites then transported by sled to the

settlements later in the winter (Taylor 1974:35, 51 ). Bowhead whales were hunted in November by umiak

crews of 1 1 -1 5 men (Taylor 1 988: 123, 125). Moravian

records from 1771-1784 indicate the most productive

whaling areas (in descending order) were Hebron,

Nachvak, Sagiek, Okak, and Hopedale, with a total of

63 whales reported taken during this time span. No

whales were reported as captured in the Nain area,

probably because of the unfavorable bathymetric conditions of the island-studded archipelago (Taylor

1988:125), but stranded drift whales were exploited

when available (Taylor 1988:127).

After freeze-up in mid-December, Inuit activities were centered on breathing hole sealing through new

thin ice, especially along the sJna or at tidal "rattles."

This was often undertaken by male hunting parties

based in temporary snow-house camps. But January

through April was a relatively low productivity period

for sealing. Caribou meat taken on fall hunts in the

interior might be retrieved from distant inland caches

(Taylor 1 969:1 57, 1974:51-55). March and April were marked by sealing and walrus hunting at the sina and

rock cod could be jigged through the sea-ice and char through the ice on inland lakes. The sod house settlements were abandoned in

late April when households established tent camps on

the outer islands for spring sealing. Both basking seal

(ottuk) techniques and open water kayak hunting were

employed, with bearded and harbor seals as primary

prey. In June the northward migration of the harp seals would be exploited by open water hunting, occasionally walrus and beluga could be had, and sea birds were

hunted and their eggs collected (Taylor 1974:55-56).

After the ice break-up in mid-June people moved to the

inner bays where large regional gatherings occurred at

aggregation sites. In the Nain area this was at Amitok

(Pardy Island), where 200-300 people participated.

Kayak-based sealing was conducted in the bays and

char and salmon were fished on their seaward runs

(Taylor 1974:18, 56).

In late August and until October, some families went inland to hunt caribou for their skins and to

cache meat for the winter. Those remaining on the

coast engaged in sealing, fished char and salmon on

their landward migrations, caching them for future

use, and fished cod (Taylor 1974:57-58).

On the Cusp of Change: Into the Early

19*^1 Century

During the late 1 8'^'^ and early 1 9*^*^ centuries a series

of changes occurred as central coast Inuit gradually

abandoned their communal houses and resettled at

the Moravian mission centers. Although the missions

at Nain, Okak and Hopedale were established between

1 771 and 1 782, it was not until the early 1 9th century that the majority of Inuit resided in these settlements. In 1 793 the Moravians reported four houses

with a total of 60 Inuit at Nain (P.A.I :1 793:21 5). In

1 795 the Nain mission reported a congregation of 28

plus 40 others who were permitted to live at the settlement (P. A. 1 :1 795:354). In 1 806, after the "revival"

episode, there were 42 baptized and 22 unbaptized

Inuit (P.A. 4:1 806:1 25). By 1810 there were 91 in the

congregation (P.A. 5:1810:55) and in 1819 there were 146 congregants and a total of 1 75 inhabitants in the

Nain settlement (P. A. 7: 1 81 9: 1 66). The slow recruit- ment rate well into the early 19'^'^ century suggests

that Inuit assessed the costs and benefits of affiliating

themselves with the missions and initially found few

218 CHAPTER 1 1
advantages in doing so. Yet by the second decade of

the 19*^^ century the dynamics of autonomy/dependence relations had shifted to the extent that autonomy

was no longer a viable strategy on the central coast. The primary attraction of settling at a mission station was close and reliable access to European goods

since, as noted above, the Moravians' frustration with

a low conversion rate indicates that religious enthusi- asm was not a central factor (Kaplan 1983:365).

Initially, the Moravians tried to deal with this problem

through a strategy of handling economic transactions and religious conversion as separate spheres. Goods

and services had to be paid for and food was not dispensed freely except in times of dire need. Since the

mission store was accessible to both converts and

"heathen," conversion had no direct economic benefits

and residence at mission settlements might incur subsistence disadvantages because of the non-optimal

placement of the missions relative to game resources

(Hiller 1971:84-85). Thus, until the early 1800s Inuit

retained their autonomy in the hinterlands of the mission settlements, leaders attempted to lure converts away from the missions and traders continued their

travels to southern Labrador.

In the late 1780s and 1790s the Moravian strategy of separating the spiritual realm from utilitarian

rewards was undermined by organizational changes

involving closer links between mission policy and eco- nomic practices, such as providing firearms to compete with southern traders and allowing credit (Hiller

1971:94-95). These practices increased the potential

benefits of mission affiliation and subverted the ability

of independent Inuit traders to sustain their activities and retain followers. Increased economic engagement

with the Moravians impacted social relations and material culture. The availability of guns for caribou hunting

eliminated the use of drive systems and large group

cooperation, while sealing and fishing with nets provided larger immediate returns with minimal cooperation. In the 19'^'^ century, fox trapping drew Inuit into

credit/debt relations and greater dependence on

European goods since trapping did not generate direct

subsistence rewards (Kaplan 1983:361-363).

Those Inuit who settled at the missions not only

underwent religious conversion but also significant

social transformations. The missionaries abhorred the

multi-family houses and their associated "heathen"

practices so mission Inuit were required to live in single-family dwellings. The Moravians were concerned

about the potential bad influence of "heathens" outside

the settlements, so converts were encouraged to hunt

and fish close to the missions in order to minimize

contacts with "heathens" and to permit Moravian monitoring of the converts' behavior. This tethering was

problematic for a traditional economy requiring mobility and opportunism, especially at Nain, where the mission was established at an inner bay location many

kilometers distant from the best winter hunting areas on the outer islands. The Moravians therefore had to

accept a degree of residential flexibility and seasonal

mission occupation on the part of their converts (Hiller

1971:89-9;, Kaplan 1983:365). An important shift in

subsistence practices encouraged by the Moravians was an intensification of cod fishing in the fall to lay in

a stored food supply to offset frequent winter shortages. But as late as 1814 the Moravians reported difficulties in establishing a storage-oriented cod fishery

because Inuit were satisified with 1 00-200 fish and did

not like that type of work (P. A. 6:1 81 4:54). An important aspect of mission-related social

transformation concerns women's roles. The status of women in Inuit society in general has been the subject

of considerable discussion (e.g., Briggs 1974; Ciffen

1930; Cuemple 1986). A strong division of labor by

gender is evident in the ethnography, but the functional complementarity of roles is generally stressed. At

the same time, however, accounts of violence towards women abound, wife-stealing is a recurrent theme and

the symmetry or asymmetry of spousal exchange has been debated. The ethnohistorical material from

Labrador is no different. Taylor (1974:80) refers to

accounts of runaway wives and spousal violence, and

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 219
the politics of polygyny (Taylor 1 974:67-70) were open

to abuse as well. From one perspective, multiple wives

provided the male household leader with more labor power and higher prestige, while from another perspective co-wives provided each other with labor assistance (Cabak 1 991 :42). The distribution of these costs and benefits is hard to determine from the published

sources and there is no information on the ranking of

co-wives within households. Women could also be shamans (Taylor 1974:87, 1989) and thus possess

spiritual power. Taylor (1974:87) refers to a joint per- formance of seal hunting prediction by Sattugana

(woman) and Millik (her husband) at Nukasusutok in

1774, commenting: "...it is interesting to consider the

indirect control Millik would have over the economic

activities in his camp through his wife's reputation as

a shaman." But Sattugana seems to have had direct

influence over her husband as well, forbidding him to

undertake actions on advice from spirits (Taylor

1 974:88). The history of Mikak and Tuglavina is a complex mixture of a strong woman as social agent, conflict and spousal abandonment.

Whatever the conflicting evidence, there are

strong grounds for assuming that in many cases an

Inuit woman's status in 1 8^^ century Labrador was not

enviable. Perhaps this is an important reason why women were the core converts when the Moravian missions began to attract residents towards the end of the 18^^ century. In 1799 the Nain mission observed that

"...in general, the men do not seem so determined in

their resolution to abide faithful as the women" (P. A.

2:1799:328) and it appears that women were important catalysts in the religious revival of 1804-1805

(Brice-Bennett [1981], cited in Cabak 1991:58). Cabak

(1991:62-67) suggests that Inuit women affiliated

themselves with the missions out of an interest in

Christianity as a source of hope and security, a desire

to change the unhappy or abusive circumstances of

their lives, to take advantage of educational opportunities and childcare possibilities within a larger community, to extract themselves from the marginality of widowhood and old age, and to acquire European goods. As far as the latter is concerned, archaeological materials from 19'^'^ century middens at the Nain mission

settlement suggest that Inuit women were active in

integrating European goods into household contexts and that the use of these goods may have contributed

to women's prestige (Cabak 1991:181; Cabak and

Loring 2000).

AN ETH NOH ISTORIC SKETCH OF

THE NUKASUSUTOK SETTLEMENT

References to Nukasusutok in the ethnohistoric

sources have been patched together to form a sketchy

settlement history. The synopsis is derived primarily

from J. Garth Taylor's and Helga Taylor's published

research, which draws on the mostly German language

Moravian mission diaries and letters. Also consulted were the Moravian Periodical Accounts (P. A.), which are

annually published English summaries of mission diary

entries and letters. Most of these accounts probably

refer to Nukasusutok-8, but it is possible that some of

the early 19'^'^ century references to Nukasusutok

might refer to a dwelling at Nukasusutok-7.

The demographic data pertaining to the Nukasusutok-8 settlement are outlined in Table 57. In

the following account the settlement history is broken

down according to the years for which relevant information is available. References to other localities are

included when the information is relevant to understanding the Nukasusutok settlement.

Table 57. Demographic Data for the Nukasusutok

Settlement from Moravian Sources (Taylor 1974:16).

No. of Houses Population

1 773-74 23 6

1 774-75 (3) (60)

1 776-77 4 62

1 779-80 2 33

1 781-82 2 50

Parentheses indicate estimates

220 CHAPTER 1 1
1772-73

The brothers Millik and Pattiguk, who would winter the

next year on Nukasusutok, each had a winter house on

Niatak Island (7 km northwest of the Nukasusutok settlement). Each household contained 20 people (Taylor

1974:77). Millik's wife Sattugana was an eminent

shaman and performed a ceremony during the winter

(Taylor 1974:87, 1985:123, 1989:300).

1 773-74

The Nukasusutok settlement consisted of two houses

containing a total population of 36 people (Taylor

1974:16, 71). Millik (father-in-law) and Okarloak II

(son-in-law) shared a household (Taylor 1974:75).

Millik's wife Sattugana gave a shamanist performance

concerning the weather and seal hunting possibilities

(Taylor 1974:87, 1989:301). Taylor (1974:87) suggests that Sattugana's reputation as a shaman may

have contributed indirectly to Millik's control over community economic activities. Sikkuliak (father) and

Kigluana (son), who would later reside at Nukasusutok,

shared a house at Satosoak Island (30 km west of

Nukasusutok).

1774-75

Millik ordered his sled and 1 2 dogs to be prepared for

the missionaries when they left the Nukasusutok settlement. He sent his eldest son Aumarak and Akbik

with them. Taylor (1974:80) cites this incident as one

of the few documented examples of authority assertion by a household head.

1776-77

In December 1 776 a stranded whale was towed to the Nukasusutok settlement just before freeze-up (Taylor

1974:76-77, 1988:128, 1990:52). The baleen was

described as "marketable," the meat as "spoiled, " but

the skin was still edible (Taylor 1988:128, 1990:59).

Given this bonanza of whale skin, people from all over

the Nain region converged on Nukasusutok to feast and celebrate. The community consisted of four sod

houses with a total of 62 people and eight snow houses that probably contained at least 38 visitors, for a

total of 1 00-1 50 people (Taylor 1 974:1 6, 1 990:60). In

January 1 777 the Inuit built a kagglk (festival house)

of snow, 5.3 m high and 8.3 m in diameter, with an

entrance passage. The kaggik activities mostly

involved men, and included the nullutak game (in which a bone with holes is suspended from the ceiling

and participants attempt to skewer the holes with

sticks) and boxing (Taylor 1990:53-54). Taylor

(1 974:78) was able to use the Moravian census data to

reconstruct the kinship relations among the sod house

inhabitants (Figure 141).

Household 1 : Sikkuliak was the head. The unit consisted of 10 people, including Sikkuliak's two wives,

six children, and the married son Kigluana (Taylor

1974:75).

Household 2 Millik was the head. The unit consisted of 1 6 people, including Millik's three wives. Millik's second wife was Sikkuliak's daughter, therefore Millik was Sikkuliak's son-in-law. This provides evidence for

an uxorilocal relationship. The household also included five of Millik's children, two of whom were married

with their own families.

Household 3: Pattiguk was the head. The unit consisted of six people, including Pattiguk's three wives

and two children. Note that the brothers Pattiguk and

Millik had lived in the same settlement at Niatak in

1 772-73. Household 4: Tuglavina was the head. The unit

consisted of 1 1 people, including Tuglavina's three

wives (not Mikak, who had been abandoned the previous spring) and Tuglavina's brother, with his two wives

and three offspring.

Taylor (1974:81) assumes the 1777 Beck census

ordered the houses in terms of importance, implying

that Sikkuliak (household 1) was most prominent.

Taylor goes on to suggest that Sikkuliak's pre-eminence was due to his kinship tie as Tuglavina's brother (possibly elder), as well as being Millik's father-inlaw. Additionally, we know that the brothers Sikkuliak

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 221
AtOtO 1=o

AST)

=0=0

Household 4

(Tuglavina)

o=A A A 6 6 6

Household 1 (Sikkuliak)

"Z)f1tOtO

Household 2

(Millik)

1= = = 6^

Household 3

(Pattiguk)

141/ Kinship relations of households at the Nukasusutok settlement, winter I 776-1 777. After Taylor (1 974:78): reproduced

by permission of the Canadian Museum of Civilization.

and Tuglavina quarreled periodically (Taylor 1974:82)

and that they probably never shared a household,

although in this case they were co-resident at the settlement. Parenthetically, this fraternal relationship is

interesting in light of the etymology of Nukasusutok

given by Wheeler (1953:62-63): "the place where the

brothers quarreled."

1777-78

Sikkuliak and his son-in-law Millik began to build a house together at Okak (Taylor 1 974:74).

1 779-80

This winter the Nukasusutok settlement consisted of two houses and a total of 33 people (Taylor 1974:16).

Pattiguk resided here and his nephew Kapik left the

mission settlement at Nain to live in Pattiguk's household (Taylor 1974:74). Sikkuliak and his son Kigluana

shared the other household (Taylor 1974:75).

1780-81

Sikkuliak and his son Kigluana shared a household at

Kheovik, at Voisey's Bay (Taylor 1 974:75).

1781-82

Two households with a total of 50 people resided at

the Nukasusutok settlement (Taylor 1974:16, 71). A

stranded 1 8-20 foot minke whale was towed to the settlement (Taylor 1974:32, 1988:128). Three families moved away from Nukasusutok: Millik, his married son Aumarak and Naksuk (Taylor 1974:74). Sikkuliak and

Ketornek shared a household at Nain (Sikkuliak was

the uncle of Ketornek's wife: Taylor 1 974:74). A spring

camp was established seaward from Nukasusutok. On

May 26 it consisted of three tents (22.5 people estimated) and on May 27 four tents (30 people estimated: Taylor 1974:18).

1783

The Nukasusutok Inuit found "...a hole in the ice with two sled-loads of sea birds," probably dovekies (Taylor

1974:54). In other words, there was an open water

area that attracted a large number of birds, which were

hunted rather thoroughly.

1784

Millik and his eldest son Aumarak were killed by

Tuglavina and others while trading at Cape Charles in

southern Labrador (Taylor 1974:92).

1794

Apkajunna, his family and two others visited Okak in

February from Nukasusutok. He was instrumental in

organizing the construction of a festival house at

222 CHAPTER 1 1
Okak. A 1 783 Moravian account states that Apkajunna was originally from Sagiek and a 1 784 account mentions him as a whale harpooner at Okak. According to

accounts from 1 787 and 1 794, he later became a middleman in the trade with Europeans, acquiring a wooden boat and wintering in the Hamilton Inlet region

(Taylor 1990:62).

1800

Only a few "heathen" families remained in the Nain

area. It appeared that the "heathen" were: "...more than

ever convinced of the necessity for conversion" (P. A. 2:

1800:472). In December the angakok (shaman)

Sigsikak went from Nukasusutok to Nain with his

"whole numerous family" (P. A. 3: 1801:12). Two

Englishmen arrived unexpectedly and came to the Nukasusutok settlement to catch seals in nets and winter there, but the Inuit "...didn't seek the company of

the strangers." (P.A. 2: 1800:472)

1805-6

A group of "heathen" were reported at Nukasusutok.

They maintained relations with traders and settlers in

Hamilton Inlet (P.A. 3: 1805:489). At Hopedale in

1806, Siksigak was baptized and re-named Mark,

which the Moravians regarded as a "striking conversion" (P.A. 4: 1806:87).

1809

The missionaries in Nain reported: "We have heard with much concern, that a man, who had lived two winters on our land, and even last winter gave good hopes that

he would be converted, has been seduced by the heathens at Nokkasusuktok to change his mind, and no more intend[s] to live on our land" (P.A. 4: 1809:453).

181 1

During the winter Inuit from Nukasusutok came frequently to the mission at Nain to trade. Their "principle leader" moved to Nain in February, seemingly ready

for conversion (P.A. 5:1811 :1 30).

Discussion

One of the major points emerging from this short set- tlement history is that Nukasusutok-8 represents

repeated occupations by many different household

units. These households circulated among several settlement locations over the years, some close by in the

Nain area, others further afield in Okak, Sagiek and

Hamilton Inlet. Nonetheless, there appears to have

been a degree of consistency in the social composition

of the settlement during the 1 year period of 1 772-82,

with the families of Sikkuliak, Millik and Pattiguk being

mentioned frequently. This is probably a consequence

of the fraternal relationship between Millik and Pattiguk

and Millik's marriage to one of Sikkuliak's daughters

(see Figure 1 38). But although some settlements may

have been associated with specific families or kin units

for a time, residential mobility was high and structured

by both kinship and opportunistic factors. Another point is that despite considerable contact

with the Moravians in the early years after the establishment of the Nain mission in 1771, the inhabitants

of the Nukasusutok settlement remained unconverted.

By the early 1800s Nukasusutok was regarded by the

missionaries as an outpost of recalcitrant "heathens."

Not only did they still resist conversion, but they

encouraged converts residing at the Nain mission to abandon their new beliefs. Furthermore, the Nukasusutok Inuit maintained contacts with traders and European settlers in Hamilton Inlet, an undesirable

link in Moravian eyes, since it undercut Moravian influence and control. This, along with the residence of several prominent traders and shamans at the settlement,

suggests that Nukasusutok was a prominent site of

resistance to European domination.

There are two obvious archaeological conse- quences of this settlement history. First, the sod houses at Nukasusutok-8 were probably cleaned out or renovated periodically, thus it is unlikely that the house

and midden contents can be related to any of the doc- umented individuals and the house floor contents will

mostly represent the last occupation phase. Second,

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 223
we might expect that a settlement composed of Inuit

resisting control by the IVloravians might contain a

combination of traditional Inuit and European goods,

but unusual quantities of European goods might be

present, particularly if prominent traders such as

Tuglavina and the nascent middleman Apkajunna were

resident there for extended periods. Another possibility might be the presence of artifacts related to

shamanist practices, since Sattugana, Tuglavina and

Sigsikak all were believed to possess special powers.

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF

NUKASUSUTOK-7 (HcCI-8)

Nukasusutok-7 is a Contact to post-Contact Period site

located on Pumialuk Point on the southwestern portion

of Nukasusutok Island (Figure 16). The area was traversed by a Smithsonian associate in 1 973 but was not

revisited until contract and provincial government

archaeologists passed by on a mineral explorationrelated survey in 1 997 (Penney 1 997; K. Reynolds, personal communication). The author conducted a brief

reconnaissance in 2004. The site designation lumps

together five separate localities that are distributed

along a 700 m stretch of the point. Each locality is

described separately, proceeding westwards.

L-1 On an extensive flat area near the base of the point

were a large oval tent ring (5 by 5 m) and a small stone

grave or fox trap.

L-2 A large stone grave was located in a narrow beach

pass. Constructed of boulders, the grave was 3.5 by

1 .5 m in size and was oriented east-west. A gift cache

(1 by 1 m) directly adjoined its western end. This feature might be Strong's Grave 3 (see below), which had

a gift cache and skeletal remains oriented with the head towards the east, but his description is so

sketchy it is impossible to be sure. Strong mentioned

that the chamber of Grave 3 contained broken brass

and iron objects and the cache had broken metal

objects.

L-3 Two oval tent rings (both 4 m in diameter) and one

square tent ring (4 by 4 m).

L-4

Four square tent rings (two 5 by 5 m, one 5 by 4 m, one

4 by 4 m); one contained a probable internal hearth. A

clay pipestem was noted on the surface of the beach

crest. At the western side of the beach pass was a wood cache positioned under a bedrock overhang.

L 5 A broad beach pass contained four features. On the

western side of the pass was a semi-subterranean

house. Ten meters east of the house was a small rectangular stone "frame" and 20 m east of this were two more such frames.

Semi-Subterranean House

This feature was square, 5 by 4.5 m in size. Its wellpreserved back and side walls (30-50 cm wide) were

built up with sod to a height of 25 cm above the external ground surface and 50 cm above the internal floor

level. The front of the house lacked a distinct abovesurface wall; it was simply dug down ca. 20 cm from

the turf surface. There was no clear entrance passage,

only a shallow depression 1.5 m wide by 2.5 m long

that extended from the center of the front wall. The

entrance faced south. There was a single rear sleeping

platform that encompassed the entire rear wall and was 1.3 m wide.

Three small shovel tests were excavated in an

attempt to find diagnostic materials to date the structure. Test Pit 1 was placed 1 .4 m from the front wall of

the house, just east of the entrance depression. It

revealed a 20 cm thick and extremely compact peat

layer on top of beach gravel. About 10 cm below the

peat surface was a charcoal layer that contained two

224 CHAPTER 1 1
well preserved seal bones. Test Pit 2 was excavated in

the center of the house floor, 1 m from the front wall.

Here there was a 10 cm deep peat layer on top of

beach gravel. Towards the bottom of the peat were two

small iron fragments, a poorly preserved seal bone

and a piece of wood embedded vertically into the floor.

Little charcoal was encountered. Test Pit 3 was placed

2 m from the front wall, on the western side of the

entrance depression. It contained 25 cm of peat on top

of beach gravel; no cultural material was observed.

This semi-subterranean structure is notable for its

"light" construction, exhibiting a form more similar to

a transitional season qarmat than a winter house. The

relatively small size of the dwelling, plus its lack of a

well-defined entrance passage, is suggestive of a 19'^^

century structure. Unfortunately, no datable finds were

recovered. The paucity of cultural material suggests the

dwelling was occupied for only a short period of time.

Stone "frames" The three stone "frames" were rectangular alignments

of small rocks, similar in size (1 .3 by 0.80 m) and oriented approximately north-south. They may mark early

Christian graves.

THE ARCHAEOLOGY

OF NUKASUSUTOK-8 AND W. D.

STRONG'S GRAVE COLLECTION

The sod-house village Nukasusutok-8 (HcCh-10) is

located towards the southwest portion of the island at

the base of a steep spruce-clad valley (Figures 16, 1 42,

143). W. D. Strong was informed about the Nukasusutok house structures by an Inuk from Main. In 1928 Strong and an expedition companion spent the

period of August 1-7 on the island investigating

Nukasusutok-8 and several Inuit graves. This occurred

at the tail-end of the Rawson-MacMillan expedition and

it is evident from Strong's diary entries that he was

fed-up and looking forward to heading home. Kaplan's

(1 983:469) visit in 1 980 identified five sod houses, but

Strong's field notes indicate seven dwellings, two of which may be tentative. Since the two "missing" structures could be obscured beneath today's heavy vegetation cover. Strong's sketch map is used as the basis

for Figure 142 and his numbering sequence for the houses^ is retained. Also present at the site are a tent

ring and the remains of a kayak stand or cache. A

grave lies near the shore ca. 200 m west of the site.

Besides Kaplan's brief visit in 1980, more recent investigations of the site include the author's 1 992 test-pitting of the midden in front of House 5 and a reconnaissance by J. Garth Taylor in 1966 (Taylor 1966).

Strong excavated much of House 1 , part of House

5, and tested Houses 4, 6 and 7. He found relatively

little artifact material within the houses. Much of his

interest seems to have been directed towards graves

located in several places on the island, some of which

contained considerable quantities of artifacts.

Unfortunately, the Peabody Museum collection is simply registered as from "Nukasujuktok Island," with no

indication as to which parts of the material derive from the house excavations versus the graves, or to which graves the material belongs. Strong's fieldnotes and photographs can be used to associate a very few

artifacts with specific graves, but over 90% of the

material must be regarded as of uncertain provenience. Nonetheless, given his comments on the

paucity of artifacts within the excavated houses it is

likely that much of the museum collection is derived

from the graves. Strong's fieldnotes suggest some

items excavated by him are either not present in the Peabody Museum material or were never collected and

brought south, possibly because they were regarded

as too "modern" (e.g., European ceramics and an iron

shovel). The seven sod houses at Nukasusutok-8 are

^Strong's and Kaplan's (1983:470) house numbering is identical for Houses 1 and 2, but Kaplan's Houses 3, 4, and 5 correspond to Strong's Houses 5, 6, and 7, respectively.

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 225
sea

1 42/ Nukasusutok-8 site map. Based on W. D. Strong's 1928 field notes, with modifications. Used by permission, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution.

arranged in two different groups (Figure 142). Houses 1 , 2 and 3 lie furthest from the modern shoreline and are built into the side of a steep slope, while Houses 4, 5, 6 and 7 are excavated into a relatively

flat beach surface closer to the contemporary shoreline. Two house types are present. Houses 1, 2 and 5

are large rectangular communal houses with long

straight entrance passages; this form was common in

the 1 8^^ century. They measure about 8 m along their

rear walls and 7 m along their side walls. Houses 1 and 5 have prominent midden deposits. Houses 6 and

7 are smaller. House 6 measures 5 m along its side,

while House 7 measures 6 m along its rear wall and 5 m along its side walls, both have short entrances

rather than long entrance passages. Kaplan

(1 983:469) dates these structures to the 1 9^'^ century

and Strong's field notes confirm this in referring to them as "regular board houses," in which were found

an iron shovel and "pink plates." No size data are

available for the currently "invisible" Houses 3 and 4.

Strong's sketch map and his field note comments that

iron and porcelain from House 4 indicate it is the same age as House 5 suggest that the former may

have had communal house dimensions. This would

increase the total of communal houses to at least

four, which would be consistent with Moravian observations of four occupied sod houses in the winter of

1 776-77. House 3 was not tested by Strong so there

are no chronological indicators.

House 1

Strong began the excavation of House 1 by digging a

trench up the long entrance passage towards the front

of the house. He refers to a thin and scattered midden

deposit full of iron, brick, china, porcelain and chamber pot handles. These European objects were domi226 CHAPTER 1 1
1 43/ Nukasusutok-8: overview towards the southwest, August 1928. W. D. Strong

Collection, © Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives, Negative No. 99-10590.

144/ Nukasusutok-8: House 5 overview towards the southwest, August 1928. W. D

Strong collection, © Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives,

Negative No. 99-10591.

nant to a depth of two or three feet (60-90 cm), at

which point a frozen layer containing bone fragments was encountered. Strong's rough sl<etches and

description suggest he exposed most of the house, but

it is unclear if the back wall was completely excavated. The inside measurements of the long walls were 6.2 m

and 6.6 m while the inside lengths of the short walls were 3.1 m and 3.8 m. The height of the stone walls was 60 cm while the depth of the house from the center of the floor to the top of the wall mound was 1 .2

m. The entrance passage was 5.8 m long and up to 1 .0 m deep. Near the center of the floor was a "pillar" of

stones that Strong regarded as

part of the roof support system.

There was a stone sleeping plat- form on the rear-left side of the house (1.68 m wide, 15 cm

high) and another platform of wood (1.2 m wide) on the rearright side; between the two was

a wooden flooring. The well-preserved wooden superstructure

(mostly spruce) collapsed onto

the floor such that Strong

reconstructs the roof supports

as consisting of a hewed beam

(1 5 by 1 5 cm) laid from back to

front across the center of the house that provided support for

smaller beams extending in from the wall tops. He also hints

at traces of wooden walls.

Strong provides only minimal descriptions of the artifacts

found in the house. Half of a

large soapstone lamp lay

upside-down on the right hand

platform. He notes a possible

hammerstone ca. 30 cm deep in

the midden near the end of the

entrance passage, although his

sketch maps do not indicate any excavation units

there. From uncertain locations were: a few pieces of

cut whalebone, at least three fragments of soapstone

vessels, an ivory harpoon socket, a bone knife handle,

a stone "chisel," chinaware fragments, nails, an iron

axe and a gun butt-plate. Strong refers to the layers as

"quite modern," noting there were more European

goods here than at Hopedale, suggesting the Nukasusutok material was more recent. The hammerstone, stone chisel, most of the ceramics and nails, the

axe and the gun butt-plate are all missing from the Peabody Museum collection.

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 227
House 5 House 5 is the largest and most

prominent house at the site

(Figures 144 and 145). The

structure was hastily and only

partially excavated over a two

day period. Strong records wall measurements of 8.2 m for the

south wall, 8.0 m for the west,

7.1 m for the north and 7.0 m

for the east, and he measured

the house depth at center as 1 .5

m. The entrance passage is ca.

7 m long. A raised wall mound

up to 1 .2 m wide surrounds the

structure. Sleeping platforms

are visible along the back and

one side wall. As in House 1 there is a central rock

cluster. Strong reports very few finds in the front portion of the house.

In 1992 a 70 by 70 cm test pit was placed in the midden near the end of the entrance passage. The test

pit was excavated to a depth of ca. 50 cm below

ground surface, using three naturally defined collection levels. Level 1 (0-23 cm) was a highly humified soil zone with poorly preserved bone. Level 2 (23-36 cm)

began where the deposit took on a more sandy/gravelly texture, which coincided with better bone preservation and included mussel shell remains and wood fragments. Level 3 (36-50 cm) commenced with a clear

stratigraphic break in the form of a thin (1 cm) contin- uous layer of fibrous peat. Beneath the peat was 3 cm

of dark-stained beach gravel and sand with poorly preserved bone, mussel shells and wood fragments. The

excavation terminated at 50 cm within the basal yellow

sand/gravel.

The total thickness of the well-defined bone-bearing deposit was only 25 cm (somewhat thicker if the

poorly preserved material in the humus-root zone is

included). This relatively thin deposit suggests an

intensive but short-lived occupation.

1 45/ Nukcisusutok-8: House 5 excavation towards the west, August 1928. W. D. Strong

collection, © Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives, Negative No. 99-10593.

Artifacts recovered from the midden test pit consisted of:

Level 1 : one hand wrought nail

Level 2: • 26 fragments of earthenware ceramic

• two hand wrought nails one round iron shaft one iron knife tip with adhering baleen

Level 3: one soapstone vessel sherd The fragments of earthenware ceramic are difficult to identify, but small remnants of green glaze and

microscopic examination of the paste indicated similarities to French St. Onge earthenware, as classified in

the Parks Canada comparative collection housed at the

Archaeology Unit, Memorial University. According to Auger (1991:40), St. Onge earthenware was manufactured between 1700 and 1750. The three hand

wrought nails, round iron shaft and iron knife tip are

illustrated in Figure 146. These few finds suggest an

18th century dating, but there is not much to go on. The thin Level 3 deposit under the peat raises the possibility of an earlier component.

Faunal material from the midden test pit was identified by Ann Rick of the National Museum of Nature,

Ottawa. Table 58 lists the number of identified speci228 CHAPTER 1 1
b c d e

o / Z

1 46/ Nukasusutok-8: House 5, 1992 midden test pit collection, a: iron l<nife tip: b: round iron shaft; c-e: nails.

mens (NISP) and minimum numbers of individuals

(MNI) for each taxon. These data cannot be considered

to be particularly representative given the limited

scope of the testing and the hand-picking collection

technique, but they are broadly consistent with

Strong's observation that there were considerable

amounts of seal bone at Nukasusutok-8. Relatively few

of the seal bones were identifiable as to species, but

harp seal is represented less than one might expect,

considering Taylor's (1974:51) observation that com- munal houses were generally situated near fall harp

sealing locations. The inability to distinguish clearly

between harbor and ringed seal is a problem, but the

frequency of possible harbor seals is interesting in

relation to Wollett's (1999:380) observation that the

1 S'^'^ century communal houses in Hamilton Inlet have

high harbor seal to ringed seal ratios, which he attributes to more moderate sea ice conditions. The relative

lack of caribou is not surprising, given the distance to

inner bay and interior caribou wintering areas. One

might have expected more bird material given the abundance of wildfowl among the small islands

east/southeast of Nukasusutok during the spring and

fall, but birds may have been exploited mostly from

spring to fall tent camps. The occurrence of fox is consistent with the presence of several large stone fox

traps elsewhere on the island.

Table 58. Fauna from the House 5 Midden at Nukasusutok-8.

TAXON NISP MNI

Seal 144 9 Phoca sp. 4 2

harp seal (Phoca groenlandica) 1 1

ringed seal (Phoca hispida) 9 2

harp/ringed seal 1 1

harbor (Phoca vitLilina)/nnged seal 1 1 5

Artiodactyl 1 1

Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) 1 1

Canis sp. 3 1 Dog (Canis familiaris) 1 1

Wolf (Canis lupus) 1 1 Red Fox 3 1

Arctic fox/red fox 1 1

Unidentified mammal 49

Unidentified mammal fragments 114

Bird

Murre/Razorbill (Uria sp./AIca sp.) 1 1

Unidentified bird 1

Unidentified bird/mammal 4 Unknown (possibly baleen) 4 TOTAL 354

Strong's Grave Collections

Strong investigated six graves on Nukasusutok Island. Of these, only one is located relatively close to the sod

house village at Nukasusutok-8. Some of the others

can be located approximately using Strong's descriptions and photographs.

Grave 1 Strong reports this as a rock cairn near the

shore, 200 m west of Nukasusutok-8. The individual was an adult whose head was positioned towards the

north, but the bones were too decayed to save. The

only other grave contents were a few boards.

Grave 2 Crave 2 was situated on a high ridge 800 m

north of Nukasusutok-8; Figure 147 probably illustrates this feature. The cairn was almost round and

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 229
was well-constructed of slabs placed over the grave chamber with counterbalanced boulders on top. The

chamber was 2 m long, 25-50 cm wide, with the head

positioned towards the northwest. The skeletal material consisted of a broken skull and mandible, which

Strong assumed to be female. Two meters to the

southeast lay a gift cache covering a decayed round

wooden box containing "many" glass beads and a

small (32 mm long) perforated soapstone model of a

polar bear.

Grave 3 Strong specifies the location of this grave as

lying on a narrow neck between two small bays on the

northwest end of Nukasusutok Island. This may be L-2

at Nukasusutok-7 on Pumialuk Point (Figure 16). The

grave chamber was 1.6 m long and the head of the

individual was oriented to the east. The human

remains consisted of a broken skull and long bones.

Broken brass and iron objects lay in the chamber. A

gift cache connected with the foot of the grave contained only broken metal objects.

Crave 4 This feature was situated on a ridge 200 m

north of Crave 3, the location providing a good view up

The Bridges Passage and towards Paul Island. The

grave consisted of boulders piled alongside an even

larger boulder. The head was oriented towards the

north or northwest. The skull was large and accompanied by a mandible and unusually massive long bones;

Strong assumes the individual was male. Crave goods

were piled at the foot of the cairn and along its east

side. They included the remains of a kayak, a complete

wooden kayak paddle with one bone paddle tip, a wooden harpoon shaft with an ivory socket, bone foreshafts, many iron points and bird darts, a crooked iron

knife, a metal jigger, two sheet iron pieces, a box, a

kettle and a whetstone.

Grave 5 Crave 5 was located on a ridge parallel with

that upon which Crave 4 was placed. It was a small

stone cairn with an inner chamber 1.6 m long, 45-80 cm wide, with the head positioned towards the southsoutheast. Skeletal remains consisted of a fragmented

skull, mandible and long bones; Strong considered this

to be a woman's grave. A gift cache near the head contained a "considerable" amount of metal, including an

ulu and "many" glass beads. If the cataloging sequence

can be taken to indicate things found together, as

147/ Nukasusutok Island: probably Crave 2, August 1928. W. D. Strong collection, © Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives, Negative No. 99- 1 0592.

230 CHAPTER 1 1
seems to be the case for Crave

4, then many or all of the brass headbands and pendants as well

as the perforated and unperforated pewter spoons may have

been derived from Grave 5.

Grave 6 There is little locational information for this grave

other than it lay up the hill

behind Nukasusutok-8 and near two sliding door fox traps. The

grave consisted of a large, wellbuilt cairn with an inner chamber 2 m long, 30-60 cm wide. The skeleton was badly

decayed except for the skull and a fragmentary

mandible; the head was oriented towards the north. A

gift cache positioned 2 m to the south contained the

rim of a kayak, a board, an iron ulu and iron pyrites.

One meter west of the grave were three small rocks in

a line, beyond which was a small cache containing a

beaten iron spearhead.

Description of the Artifact Material

Given the uncertainties regarding the find-contexts of

Strong's artifact collection, a general description of the

material in terms of activity categories will be presented. Assessment of the Peabody Museum catalog in

relation to the Grave 4 goods photographed in the field

by Strong suggests that at least some of the items

associated with an individual grave feature were cataloged sequentially. Although it is impossible to draw

reliable boundaries within the catalog sequence, this

hint will be used to suggest some possible contextual

associations.

Hunting-Fishing Tools Table 59 outlines the range of

hunting-fishing tools in the collection. Many of the implements associated with hunting-fishing activity were probably derived from Crave 4, apparently a male

interment. Only a short fragment of the harpoon shaft

————— —'—^^^^^ -la^e^^^

-~ J

a

b

148/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutol< collection hunting and transportation implements,

a: kayak paddle tip (Grave 4), b: harpoon foreshaft. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

remains, consisting of the distal end of the wooden

shaft to which is affixed a weathered ivory socket

piece. Three bone foreshafts might be among those

attributed to Grave 4 by Strong. One of the them

(Figure 148:b) is a composite harpoon foreshaft made

on a walrus rib that has been sawed in two to create a tongue and groove flange; the two components were

then fastened with iron rivets. Another is a lance foreshaft made on a walrus rib (Figure 149:b) that has a

distal slot for an endblade and a conical base with two

drill holes for lashing to a wooden shaft. The third example is also a lance foreshaft made on a walrus rib

(Figure 1 50:a); it retains a fragment of an iron endblade riveted into its distal slot.

Table 59. Hunting-Fishing Tools from

the Strong Collection.

Harpoon foreshafts 1

Lance foreshafts Harpoon sockets

Iron arrow points

Iron bird dart points

Iron lance points

Wound pins

Spools (bladder inflation?)

Jiggers

Gunflints

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 231
Almost certainly from Crave 4 are seven Iron birddart points (Figure 151:b-h). These are thin (5 mm)

hammered square iron shafts, some of which have a

single small barb. The points are similar to those illustrated in the well-known 1 724 painting of Creenlandic

Inuit Pooq and Qiperoq (Cullov 1997:356). Probably

from Grave 4 are four iron arrow points (Figure 1 52:ad), all with flat blades, a squarish hammered shaft and

pointed proximal ends. R. Jordan (1978:182) illustrates a similar arrow point, but with a longer stem,

from an 18*^^ century context at Eskimo Island in

Hamilton Inlet. A long (40 cm) lance point made on a hammered square iron bar (8 mm thick) may also

149/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting

implements, a iron lance point, b bone lance foreshaft. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

1 50/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting, trans- portation and household implements, a: bone lance fore- shaft with iron point fragment; b: bone paddle tip; c: ivory

harpoon socket: d: wooden wound pin: e: wood and bone

ulu handle, f: whalebone sled shoe. © R. S. Peabody

Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover,

Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

belong to this grave (Figure 149:a). Definitely from

Crave 4 is a jigger consisting of three iron hooks

weighted with lead (Figure 1 53:b). Among the remainder of the material for which

find-context is uncertain there are two harpoon shaft

sockets. One (Figure 1 50:c) is made of heavily weathered ivory, while the other is a composite implement of

bone, consisting of two halves fastened with four iron

rivets. One of these could be from Strong's excavation

at House 1 . The wound pin (Figure 1 50:d) is made of wood. An iron triangular point with a central rivet

(Figure 1 52:e) is probably a lance tip intended to be

mounted in foreshafts such as those illustrated in

Figures 149:b and 1 50:a. A wooden spool (Figure

1 54:a) may be of European origin, but perhaps it could

have been used as a bladder inflation nozzle, since it

is pierced through the middle. The single gunflint is a

dark gray specimen made on a blade (Figure 1 61 :a). Its

square shape and trapezoidal cross-section suggest it

is of English manufacture, from the late 1 700s

onwards (Luedtke 1999:37-39). Since the gunflint is

232 CHAPTER 1 1
1 51/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting and

liouseliold implements, a: iron saw. b-h: iron bird dart

points (probably Crave 4); i: iron curved knife (Crave 4);

j: iron knife blade. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts.

All Rights Reserved.

cataloged in the middle of a sequence running from

soapstone vessel sherds to cut whalebone fragments it may be from one of the houses.

Household Tools The category household tools

includes a mix of traditional Inuit and European

forms, listed in Table 60. Among the traditional implements are a probable snow-beater made on a

walrus rib. Of the four iron knives, two consist of bone handles with fragments of inset iron blades

(one is illustrated in Figure 1 53:a); one of these could

be from House 1. The third is a 35 cm long, 2 cm

wide blade (Figure 1 5 1 :j). The fourth is the blade of a

curved knife together with an iron ring for fastening

1 52/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: hunting and

household implements, a-d: arrow points (probably Crave 4); e: iron lance point with rivet, f iron ulu blade. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy. Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

it to a European-style handle (Figure 1 51 :i); this spec- imen is definitely from Grave 4. There are three ulu

handles in the collection. One of these (Figure 1 51 :e)

has a wooden palm element and a bone stem, another consists of a bone stem element with iron rivets and an iron blade fragment, while the third is made

of wood. Three items might be considered to be

wood and bone-working tools: an iron saw blade

(Figure 151:a), an iron drill bit and a small iron wedge. An iron hook (Figure 1 53:c) could be kettle

hook. Eight pieces of pyrite are present: although

Strong mentions their occurrence in Crave 6 it is

uncertain whether all were associated with the burial.

Presumably, they were used as strike-a lights. At least one of the three schist whetstones was associated

with a grave. A small brass ring with a knurled outer

surface is probably a tailor's ring thimble. A single

unmodified pewter spoon is included in the domestic

tool category; the modified spoons are discussed

below in the decorative category.

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 233
liOBERTS. I'EABODV MLSEL'M

/ 53/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: fishing and

household implements, a bone knife handle with iron blade fragment, b iron and lead jigger (Crave 4); c: iron kettle hook. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

Table 60. Household Tools from

the Strong Collection.

Snow beaters 1

Iron knives 4

Ulu handles 3

Iron ulu blades 1

Iron saw blades 1

Iron drill bits 1

Iron wedges 1

Iron hooks 1

Pyrites 8 Whetstones 3

Brass thimble 1

Pewter spoons (unmodified) 1 Wooden platters 1 Soapstone vessels 1 2 European ceramics 7

Different types of containers are represented. A

large, partially preserved, oval wooden platter (Figure

1 55) bears a scarf-joint with small nail holes around its

outer edge, indicating the platter was the top or bot154/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: wooden imple- ments, a: wooden spool; b: drilled wood with baleen lashing; c: curved wooden slat. © R. S. Peabody Museum of

Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts.

All Rights Reserved.

/ 55/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: wooden box

component. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology,

Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

234 CHAPTER 1 1
torn of a wooden box. Quite speculatively, it might be

a remnant of the wooden box containing glass beads

and the small soapstone polar bear found in the gift

cache associated with Crave 2. On the other hand, it

could have served a more mundane function as a meat

platter. There are 12 fragments of soapstone vessels.

Since Strong does not refer to any in the Nukasusutok

grave material while he does so for graves elsewhere in

the Main area, it is likely that all of them were derived

from the house excavations. As noted previously, half

of a large lamp was found on the platform of House 1

;

this is probably the specimen illustrated in Figure

1 56:b. The latter has a rim up to 25 mm thick and a

drilled repair hole on the bottom/middle of the vessel.

There is also most of a small oval lamp, at least 1 3 cm

in diameter (Figure 1 56:a). Neither of the lamp frag- ments has a wick stand. The rest of the vessel frag- ments range from 1 1-20 mm thick; two are illustrated

in Figure 157.

Given Strong's field note comments on the fre- quency of European ceramics in his house excavations,

it is strange that only seven fragments of European

ceramics are present in the collection. Six of these are

coarse reddish earthenware with white carbonate

inclusions, some pieces with a curved surface bearing

convolutions. The remaining specimen is a lump of

brick-like material.

Transportation-Related Items Transportation related

items consist of one kayak paddle blade fragment, two kayak paddle tips and seven sled runners. All

that remains of the Grave 4 kayak paddle is the broken wooden paddle blade illustrated in Figure 148:a. The two kayak paddle tips are made of bone; one is shown in Figure 1 50:b. One of these two implements

must be from Grave 4. The seven sled runners (one

illustrated in Figure 1 50:0 are all made of whalebone,

are mostly 39-56 mm wide and display varying numbers of drill holes; two were curved for use at the

front of a sled. It is possible the runners are from one

or more of the houses or middens.

1 56/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok Collection: soapstone

lamps. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

157/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection soapstone

vessel rim fragments. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts.

All Rights Reserved.

Decorative Items A significant number of items in the

collection could be considered decorative; these are

listed in Table 61. It is unclear from Strong's fieldnotes, but the copper/brass head bands and pendants

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 235
1 58/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: copper/brass

decorative items, a-b: headbands; c-f pendants. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy,

Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

111 in s- n.Anonv MustLM

1 59/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: decorative

items, a: 86 glass beads and soapstone polar bear sculpture, b: 58 lead pendants, c: 672 glass beads (probably Grave 5): d-e: perforated pewter spoons. © R. S. Peabody

Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover,

Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

may have been derived from Crave 3 and/or Crave 5. The collection contains what are probably two complete headbands (Figure 1 58:a,b) as well as three large

\

f g h i j

R.S Ptjbcdv Muscu

/ 60/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection: bone decorative

items, a: ivory pins: b: bone comb: c: bird bone beads. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy,

Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

portions thereof and two probable fragments. The

headbands range between 20-29 mm wide; one has

four small perforations along one edge while another

has two perforations. The pendants are made on very

thin copper/brass sheets; two of these are circular with

perforations (a trace of baleen twine is present on

one), while two others are fish-shaped (Figure 1 58:c-0. The headbands and pendants, together with glass

beads, formed a decorative headdress for Inuit women. A perfect illustration of this arrangement is

provided in a 1 773 drawing by English artist Nathaniel Dance of a Labrador Inuit woman, Caubvick (Figure

162), made during her stay in England (Lysaght

1971:83). Caubvick is portrayed wearing a headband

236 CHAPTER 1 1
and fish-shaped pendants are attached to her hair near

her ears, with strings of beads extending down from

the pendants.

Table 61. Decorative Items from the Strong

Collection.

Copper/brass headbands 5

Copper/brass band fragment 2

Copper/brass pendants 6

Glass trade beads 767

Polar bear bead 1

Lead pendants 80

Pewter spoons, modified 12 Bone beads 49

Combs 2 Bone pins 4

Strong's collection also contains 80 small cast

lead pendants, 58 of which are strung as a "bracelet"

in the Peabody collection (Figure 1 59:b). Most of these

exhibit either two or three globular segments, some

have two perforations, others only one, others none. In

the 1880s these items were used by Ungava Inuit as

part of the front fringe on parkas (Turner 1894:21 1),

but combined with glass beads they were also used as components of amulets attached to shaman dolls

(Turner 1894:196-198; see also Karklins 1992:195-

1 99). According to Hawkes (191 6:39) these ornaments

were made by melting down pewter spoons and pouring the molten material into steatite moulds. But

pewter spoons were themselves used as ornaments for

parkas. Their handles were removed and the remaining

handle stub was perforated such that the spoons could

be sewn onto the front of coats (Turner 1894:211,

Karklins 1992:195-198). Twelve modified spoons are found in the Strong collection; two are illustrated in

Figure 1 59:d, e. The glass trade beads in Strong's collection were

derived from Craves 2 and 5, both of which Strong

considered to be women's graves. Besides their use in

decorative headdresses and amulets, beads were also

R.S. pL'.ibody Museum

161/ W. D. Strong Nukasusutok collection lithic imple- ments, a: English gun flint, b Ramah chert stemmed point. © R. S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy,

Andover, Massachusetts. All Rights Reserved.

used extensively to decorate skin coats (Karklins

1992:195-199, Turner 1894:211; see Caubvick in

Figure 162). The beads were described following the

typology developed by Kidd and Kidd (1970), but lacking their color diagrams and a formal color code chart,

the color designations provided here are "best guess"

matches with their system. Where relevant the type

designations below include reference to Brain's (1979)

modification of the Kidd typology (e.g., Ilal4/IIA1,

Kidd/Brain). Of the total 873 beads, only 4 or 5 are

wire wound, the rest are drawn.

It seems likely that the 672 beads cataloged as

1 7.1 51 4 (Figure 1 59:c) are derived from Crave 5. They

are all circular tube beads (class lla) and several colors

are represented:

• opaque white (Hal 4/IIAl ): small= 395,

medium= 22

• clear brite navy (Ila56/IIA6): small= 78

clear light blue (Ila41 7/IIA7?): small= 83

opaque black (Ila7/IIA5): small= 35

• opaque red (Ila2^): small= 26

• clear emerald green (Ila27/IIA1 5): small=l 5

• translucent sea green (lla): small= 9

• opaque amber (Hal 9): small= 6, medium= 1

• opaque dark burgundy red (lla): small= 1

• clear rose red (lla): small= 1

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 237
162/ A 1 773 drawing of Caubvick by Nathaniel Dance. Note headband, fish-shaped pendants and glass beads on

pendants. From the Knatchbull Portrait Collection. Photograph © Photographic Survey, Courtauld Institute of

Art, London.

Catalog number 1 7.1 51 3, from either Crave 2 or

5, consists of 52 beads, some of which are found on

their original strings in blue/white bead groups. All are

small, circular, monochrome tube beads (class lla): opaque white (Ilal4/IIA1) = 25, translucent brite navy

blue = 16, uncertain colour (probably white) = 8, clear

emerald green (Ila27/IIA1 5) = 2, and opaque red = 1.

Catalog number 17.1531, from either Crave 2 or 5,

includes four groups of beads on their original string,

also ordered in blue and white groups (suggesting they

are from the same context as 1 7.1 51 3) as well as loose

beads. There are 60 small, circular, monochrome tube

beads (class lla), of which 26 are opaque white

(Hal 4/IIAl )and 34 clear Brite navy (Ila56/IIA6). There is

also one large, round, monochrome, opaque black

tube bead (Ila6/W1A6), as well as two large monochrome ground beads. Of the latter, one is clear amber

(resembles Wllc5/WIIA4) and the other opaque black

(resembles Wild /WIIA7).

The small (32 mm long) soapstone model of a

polar bear is perforated and strung on a museum fabricated bracelet consisting of 86 glass beads (Figure

1 59:a). Strong makes no mention of a bracelet in his

fieldnotes, so it is unclear whether this was their original arrangement or a post-facto museum interpretation. The beads consist of two large-sized round tube

beads, one black opaque (Ila6/W1A6), one amber

translucent, two medium-sized circular tube beads

(class lla), both light blue, and 82 small-to-mediumsized circular tube beads (class lla), of which 76 are

white (Ilal4/IIA1), six dark blue and two light blue.

Dating these beads is difficult because they are virtually all common "seed beads" that were in use for extended periods of time. Brain's (1979) dating of the bead types mentioned above ranges from 1600-1890,

with slightly more restricted dates for types

WIIC5/WIIA4 (1680-1833), Ila41/IIA7 (1600-1836),

Ilal4/IIA1 (1600-1836) and Ila6/W1A6 (1700-1890).

Some of these bead types were present in 18th century

Inuit houses in west Creenland (Cullov 1997:278-291),

but the Nukasusutok material is more restricted in its

representation of types, completely lacking polychrome

specimens and with only 0.4-0.5% wire wound types.

The collection also contains decorative items of

bone. There are 49 beads made of small bird bones,

mostly in the range of 1.8-2.0 cm long (Figure 160:ej). There are two combs, one a near complete specimen

of bone with two opposed tooth rows (Figure 160:d),

the other a fragment made of wood. Finally, the collection contains four small (4.5 cm) spoon-shaped ivory

pins of uncertain function (Figure 160:a-c), possibly

amulets to be attached to clothing.

Miscellaneous Metal The collection contains metal frag- ments not identifiable to specific implement types. These include 14 iron fragments, an iron bar, two lead

fragments, a pewter fragment and a copper/brass sheet.

238 CHAPTER 1 1
Miscellaneous Organic Materials Table 62 outlines the

miscellaneous organic materials in the collection. Most

of the bone is modified whalebone. Modification consists of cutting, sawing and drilling; a major desired

end product was sled runners. Most of this material was probably derived from the house or midden excavations. The five fragments of animal skin are not identifiable as to their functional origin as clothing or

equipment. One piece exhibits hair on one side and

has stitching perforations.

Table 62. Miscellaneous Organic Materials from

the Strong Collection. Bone

Modified bone 2

Unmodified bone 1

Modified antler 3

Modified whale bone 19

Unmodified whale bone 1

Unmodified baleen 4 Animal skin fragments 5

Wood

Modified wood 1 3

Modified birch bark 6 Unmodified birch bark 1

There are two main types of modified wood. One

consists of flat pieces with drill holes, sometimes

countersunk in grooves. Figure 1 54:b shows two

connected pieces of flat wood; the upper portion has

a line of ten drill holes, the middle portion has eight

drill holes through which run remnants of baleen

twine. The other type consists of curved slats (ca. 4 cm wide) with nail holes, resembling barrel hoops

(Figure 1 54:c). Of the six pieces of modified birchbark, four are perforated and sewn together with

thin (3.5 mm) birchbark strips. Another piece has been cut into a curious "wrench" shape with a circular hole at each end.

Other Items Not included within the previous categories are three flakes of quartz and one of Ramah

chert. There is also a Ramah chert projectile point of stemmed or wide side-notched form with a completely flaked dorsal surface, but ventral retouch limited to

the margins (Figure 161:b). It bears a general resemblance to Late Dorset forms, but the Point Revenge

component at Koliktalik-5, north of Nukasusutok

Island, has a somewhat similar specimen (Fitzhugh

1978b:161, Figure 10c). There are also two natural

stones, including an iron-rich concretion and a waterrolled pebble, as well as two scallop shells.

Dating Nukasusutok-8 and the Strong Grave

Collection

Taylor's documentary sources indicate the Nukasusutok-8 village was occupied from 1772-1782

and passing references in the Moravian Periodical Accounts to "heathen" Inuit residing on the island continue until 1811. The two smaller structures at

Nukasusutok-8, houses 6 and 7, might pertain to the

early 19^^ century occupation, but the later written

sources could also refer to the small sod house at

Nukasusutok-7. Archaeological confirmation of such

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 239
dating is difficult given an inability to specify find-contexts for much of the Strong collection and Strong's

apparent neglect in collecting European ceramics and

other "recent" artifacts from the houses. If the fragmentary earthenware ceramics from a test pit in the House 5 midden actually are French St. Onge ware, this would imply a production date from 1 700-1 750 (Auger

1 991 AO). Strong's field notes mention that a gun buttplate was found in House-1 , but it is missing from the

collection. If this item represents the presence of

firearms, as opposed to a purloined piece of metal, it may indicate a date later than 1 782, since it was at that

time that guns were first purchased from a trader at Chateau Bay in southern Labrador and then distributed

northwards (Hiller 1971:93). The presence of a gun

flint might support this. If the House 5 midden test pit

stratigraphy is considered, the thin Level 3 deposit

underneath a peat layer raises the possibility of a component that considerably pre-dates the mission period

(i.e., pre-1 771).

The contextual information from the graves is marginally better, at least for Craves 4 and 5. The glass

beads from Craves 2 and 5 are generally consistent with

1 8'^'^ century types, but a more precise chronological

reckoning is problematic. It is possible that some of the Nukasusutok graves pre-date the historically documented communal houses. The head bands and pendants of

copper/brass and the lead pendants are similar to those

reported by Bird (1945:1 75-1 77) from a grave at

Iglosoataligarsuk near Hopedale, which also contained a

French copper coin dated 1 643. The coin provides a ter- minus post quern date for the grave. Crave 4 at Nukasusutok was associated with kayak remains and a

large quantity of metal items was placed alongside the

grave. A kayak burial found at Kikkertavak-1 , ca. 25 km

west of Nukasusutok Island, included a wooden tool box

containing 1 50 items, among them harpoons and knives

with iron blades. Kaplan (1 983:235) dated Kikkertavak

to the 1 7^^ century. At Rose Island in Sagiek Bay, graves

containing copper/brass headbands and pendants,

glass trade beads, European iron and other goods, as

240

well as kayak parts, were dated to the 18'^'' and early

1 9^*^ centuries (Way 1 978: 1 34). With these slim comparative data and the poor contextual information for

Strong's collection, the Nukasusutok graves might simply be time-bracketed between ca. 1650 and 1810.

Graves and Society

Civen the paucity of contextual information for the Nukasusutok graves the possibilities of assemblage

analysis are minimal, either for comparisons between

the Nukasusutok graves themselves or for comparisons with graves from elsewhere in Labrador. Be that

as it may, the question of the social context must still

be addressed, if only in a rudimentary fashion. The male kayak burial at Crave 4 with its substantial quantity of metal goods suggests either a relatively high status individual involved in the circulation sys- tem for European goods or a prominent hunter with

easy access to a metal tool kit. Nearby was Crave 5, a woman's burial with a substantial amount of decorative metal and glass trade beads. This grave signals a woman with access to quantities of European goods

and a status broadly equivalent to the male grave.

Crave 2, also a woman's burial, was situated in a prominent location on the hill north of the communal

house settlement at Nukasusutok-8 and had a gift

cache containing many glass trade beads and a small

perforated soapstone polar bear sculpture. The grave

goods, as well as the prominent positioning of the burial and its independence from a male grave, suggest a form of social recognition.

Information on grave associations from other

parts of Labrador is limited, but it underlines the

impression that certain individuals were marked by

special treatment involving the deposition of unusual

amounts of European goods. As noted previously,

Junius Bird (1945:175-177) reported a grave at

Iglosoataligarsuk near Hopedale that contained a copper/brass head band fragment along with a lance

foreshaft and socket, 27 flat lead pendants, 75 globular lead pendants, glass beads, a pipe stem fragment,

CHAPTER 1 1
pyrites and a French copper coin dated 1 643. A grave

collection purchased by Bird in Hopedale contained

three or four copper/brass headbands (the most complete specimen virtually identical to those from

Nukasusutok), six copper/brass pendants, a harpoon

or lance foreshaft, bone handles, seal teeth, a beaver

incisor, a wooden dish fragment, worked ivory pieces,

part of an ivory needle case, an iron harpoon point,

pyrites and a quartz fragment. Also noted earlier was

the presumed 17'^'^ century kayak burial at

Kikkertavak-1 , west of Nukasusutok Island, that

included a wooden tool box containing 1 50 items,

among them harpoons and knives with iron blades

(Kaplan 1983:235).

The largest sample of Inuit grave material from

Labrador comes from SagIek Bay. A total of 78 graves was investigated on Rose Island and another two on

Upernavik Island (Way 1978). Of these, 78 were pre- modern, presumably dating ca. 1725-1850 (Way

1978:134). They consisted of 29 female graves, 22

male graves, 7 with both sexes and 19 of indeterminate sex. A total of 21 graves had no burial goods;

there is no particular sex/age association to this and

looting cannot be discounted. For the purposes of the

present discussion, single male and female graves were coded for the presence/absence of individual

grave good types and subjected to quantitative analyses, but no clear patterns were apparent. This was

partly attributable to the high diversity of items

deposited in the graves (60 types were coded) and the

resulting infrequent occurrence of individual item

types, but it was also a consequence of item types

being associated with both sexes. Male exclusive

associations included: kayak parts, bow drill parts and

wooden dolls (four male figures, one female). Female

exclusive items included ulus, copper/brass head- bands and copper/brass pendants. Female graves also

contained most of the glass trade beads and tended

to have most of the animal bone deposits.

Overall, 18 of the SagIek graves contained

European metal objects or traces thereof, totaling 51

pieces and ranging from 1-10 items per grave. Class

trade beads were present in seven graves, totaling

1 78 items, but 1 1 8 of these were from a single grave. Of the other graves, one had 44 beads, another 12,

while the remaining four had only one each (summarized from Way 1978:322-32 7). These figures suggest the frequency of European items deposited in

the graves was not particularly high overall and that

they were concentrated with a small number of individuals. Schledermann's (1976:28-29) excavation of

1 8'^'^ to 1 9'^^ century communal houses at the nearby

Ikkusik site produced a range of European goods, but

also not in great quantity.

If the SagIek graves are ranked in terms of total numbers of grave goods and the amount of European

items present, one burial stands out clearly. Crave 24 was a woman's burial containing a whalebone comb,

four copper/brass head bands, a copper/brass pendant, two copper/brass disks, a copper/brass ring, a

copper/brass strip, 3 ivory pendants, 29 lead pendants, 118 glass beads, 49 shell beads, 9 wooden

beads and 11 stone beads (Way 1 978:85-86, 323-

324). Assuming the large sample of graves is fairly

representative (though it may not be). Crave 24 suggests that certain women had roles that enabled them

to access significant quantities of European goods

and that this access was associated with some form

of status distinction. These comparative data indicate the Nukasusutok graves are similar in pattern to others in

central and northern Labrador, but that Craves 4 and

5, and to a lesser extent Crave 2, are particularly rich

in their deposits of European goods. The inhabitants

of Nukasusutok Island seem to have had better

access to European materials than was the case in

SagIek Bay. Both Craves 2 and 5 at Nukasusutok and

Crave 24 at Rose Island suggest that the contact period was not just a story of big-man traders; as illustrated in the narrative of Tuglavina and Mikak, Inuit women may also have attained distinctive social identities and statuses.

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 241
Conclusion: Big-Men, Big-Women and Negotiating

the 1 8^*^ Century European World System

The ethnohistoric information presented at the beginning of this chapter provides a narrative of Inuit life in

18'^^ century Labrador. Households were organized as

multi-family units and in some cases settlements were composed of several households. Certain males had

authority within households, but in multi-house settle- ments there was conflict between household leaders

concerning lines of authority. The most prominent of

these household leaders were involved in the baleen

trade with Europeans, which involved long-distance

travel between baleen supply areas in the north and

the trade centers in southern Labrador. Some of these

leaders, such as Tuglavina, were able to amass a

degree of personal wealth and influence. It is unclear

to what extent the social networks in which the Inuit

leaders were embedded had effective mechanisms to

redistribute that wealth and limit authority. After the

establishment of the Moravian missions along the central coast of Labrador these leaders were prominent in

resisting Christianization and Moravian attempts to draw the Inuit into church-controlled settlements and

economic transactions. Inuit "big-men" continued to

travel south to trade and local leaders attempted to

lure converts away from the missions. In the Main

region the inhabitants of the Nukasusutok settlement were prominent among these recalcitrant "heathens" and they remained a thorn in the side of the Moravians

until about 1810. But beginning in the late 1780s

changes in the mission economy that linked mission

policy more closely with economic affairs, such as supplying firearms to compete with southern traders and

allowing credit, may have undercut the ability of inde- pendent Inuit traders to sustain their activities and

maintain followers.

Inuit women have a more ambiguous role in this

narrative. They were frequently drawn Into polygynous

households where their labor could be exploited by the household leader and their presence as co-wives could

symbolize the leader's status. Co-wives constituted

cooperative labour sharing units, with potential for

both household solidarity and schisms. Frequent references to wife stealing and abuse suggest that women's

roles were often unenviable. On the other hand, some women were able to exert significant influence

through shamanist power. The story of Mikak reveals

both the strengths and limitations of Inuit women as

agents as she careened from being the daughter of a prominent leader, to experiencing English high society, to accompanying Tuglavina on trading journeys, to

being abandoned and ending up as the partner of a

low status man. During the early 1 9^*^ century it appears that Inuit women were catalysts in the

Christianization process and played important roles in

incorporating European goods into domestic contexts. What little information can be gleaned from

Strong's excavations of the 1 8'-'^ and early 1 9^'^ century houses at Nukasusutok-8 indicates households

engaged in the traditional hunting economy, but with

a material culture strongly marked by the use of iron and other European goods. The graves provide a different perspective on these processes. The male kayak

burial at Grave 4, with its substantial quantity of metal

goods, suggests a relatively high status individual

involved in the circulation system for European goods.

Nearby Grave 5, a female burial with a substantial amount of decorative metal and glass trade beads,

suggests a woman with access to quantities of European goods and a status broadly equivalent to the

male grave. Grave 2, a woman's burial associated with many trade beads and situated prominently on a hill,

implies a form of social recognition. In each case many

European goods with both high use and symbolic values were removed from circulation.

Although Strong's archaeological investigations of

1 928 do not provide a strong source of inferences concerning the nature of IS*^*^ century Inuit society, the

grave material at least supplements the ethnohistory by

hinting at how the agency of Inuit men and women was

valued and represented when individuals passed beyond

active involvement in the life of their households.

242 CHAPTER 1 1
At a more general level, the Nukasusutok material

points to several dimensions of change experienced by

Labrador Inuit people during their incorporation into

the late 1 8^*^ century European world system. Most

obvious in the archaeological finds is the marked shift

in their material culture towards greater reliance on

European goods, a reliance that over time undermined

household self-sufficiency, at least in the more

southerly regions of Inuit settlement. Equipping households with these goods entailed either direct dependence on an influential middle-man, indirect acquisition

through kin-ties, or long-distance movements to

southern Labrador for direct access to the European

suppliers. Although inter-regional mobility was probably a normal practice during the Pre-Contact Period,

the wide scale of the movements documented during

the late 18*^^ century "stretched" Inuit social relations

over space and involved Inuit in transactions that opened up a series of new social strategies. These

strategies had important spatial dimensions.

Middlemen were highly dependent upon an ability to

extend and maintain their spatial range; goods such as

baleen had to be collected in the north and transported south to the trading locales and European wares had to be transported northwards and distributed to

those who had invested baleen. Consequently, differences in geographical location and access to transport

resources generated spatial inequalities that contributed to social differentiation. The establishment of

the Moravian missions eventually transformed these

spatial relations by creating seasonal population centers and by bringing supply points closer to the Inuit,

thereby subverting the middlemen strategies that were

based on exploiting spatial inequalities in access to European goods.

The growth of the missions during the late 1 8*^*^

and early 1 9*^*^ centuries also resulted in more localized changes in landscape use and understanding.

The Moravians attempted to keep converted Inuit tethered to the mission centers to prevent undesirable

contact with "heathens" living in traditional settlements spread over the landscape. This proved difficult

at Nain, where the inner bay location of the mission was not well-suited for year-round settlement; Inuit

had to maintain a seasonal dispersal to hunting and

fishing areas considerably distant from the mission. As long as the Moravians refused to tie economic

rewards to conversion there would be a strong incentive for Inuit to maintain their autonomy by opting for

traditional settlements such as Nukasusutok-8 and by

aligning themselves with "big-man" traders who could

supply goods without the subsistence inconvenience

and the ideological pressure of living at a mission center. But the late 18^^^ century Moravian shift towards

combining economic rewards with conversion

increased the attractiveness of mission affiliation and

undermined the ability of autonomous Inuit traders to

retain followers. The settlement history of Nukasusutok-8 provides

a partial illustration of these changes in landscape

organization and the meaning of places. Prior and subsequent to the establishment of the Nain mission in

1771, the Nukasusutok settlement was a fall-spring

residence for prominent "big-man" traders and their

kin. The settlement was just one in a network of places

through which Inuit circulated within the Nain region.

It was a place where brothers had quarreled. Although

the recruitment of converts to the mission center initially was slow, by 1800 relatively few "heathen" families remained in the Nain region. The Nukasusutok settlement was no longer one winter residence within a network of settlement options, but an isolated "heathen" outpost on a landscape that increasingly was

defined in relation to the mission center. Nukasusutok's meaning in this landscape was now as

a symbol of "heathen" resistance to Moravian hegemony, a resistance that continued until about 1811, when

the last "heathen" Inuit may have abandoned the island and settled at the Nain mission. Today, settlements

such as Nukasusutok are simply "old cabins" in the collective memory of oral history, or merely sites on a heritage management inventory.

POST-CONTACT INUIT SETTLEMENT ON NUKASUSUTOK ISLAND 243
163/ Webb Bay and inner Port Manvers Run with sites mentioned in the text. (1= Port Manvers Run-1 , 2= Double Island Cove

L-l , 3= Attu's Bight, 4= Attu's Point, 5= Sunset Point, 6= Webb Point). Precise locations withheld by request. Original map ©

2004 produced under licence from Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, with permission of Natural Resources Canada.

244 CHAPTER 1 2
Webb Baij-Port Manvers Run:

Small Scale Investigations

9

As outlined in Chapter 2, Port Manvers Run is a fjordlike inner passage that provides a protected travel

route from its seaward outlet at Thalia Point Inland to Webb Bay (Figure 3). Smithsonian Institution fieldwork

in the 1 970s and early 1 980s identified a considerable

number of archaeological sites along the Run. PreDorset localities were particularly well-represented and

an extensive Late Maritime Archaic site was identified

on Webb Bay, just west of the southern entrance to the

Run. Additional portions of Webb Bay were surveyed by

the author in 1992 and 1993, focusing on the PreDorset/Maritime Archaic boundary problem. The surveys included parts of the northern shoreline of Webb

Bay, up to ca. 10 km west of the entrance to the Run,

Webb Point on the southern side of the bay, as well as

selected areas on South Aulatsivik Island between Red

Point and Cleat Point (Figure 163). The portion of the

north shore around Attu's Brook (5 km west of the Run)

contains raised beaches, but extensive foreshore flats

prevented access. The innermost portion of Webb Bay

and most of its southern shore have not been surveyed.

This chapter summarizes the small scale investigations undertaken at Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset

sites between 1992 and 1994. A detailed analysis of

Attu's Point-1 (HeCk-5), a major Pre-Dorset locality, is

presented separately in Chapter 13. Background information on the environmental aspects of the area were

discussed in Chapter 2. Chapter 14 ties together the

information on Pre-Dorset and Late Maritime Archaic

localities and presents a broader discussion of settlement patterns and the social boundary relations between the two cultures.

PORT MANVERS RUN-1 (HfCj-5)

Port Manvers Run-1 is a Pre-Dorset locality situated

roughly 10 km north of the Webb Bay entrance to the Run (Figure 163). The site lies on top of a windy,

exposed anorthosite knoll, 10-12.5 m asl. Discovered

by the Smithsonian Institution in 1 980, the site was reinvestigated in 1993. Pre-Dorset material was associated with gravel pockets in bedrock clefts and there were

also caches and cairns of uncertain cultural affiliation. A large quartz vein cut across the north end of the site;

a considerable amount of shattered material was present, but it was probably frost-cracked. L-1 was located

centrally on the knoll; the Smithsonian survey identified what seemed to be four structures. S-1 was a vague cobble feature within a gravel pocket. Measuring

3.0-3.5 m long and 1 .25 m wide, the feature was associated with flakes of Mugford chert and slate. In a nearby linear gravel pocket were what the Smithsonian survey recorded as two rock structures, S-2 and S-3. This

area was excavated in 1993, revealing a linear alignment of hearths rather than two structures (described

below). S-4 was also located in a gravel pocket; the 1993 observations suggested it was a 6 m long alignment of four hearth-like cobble clusters, each associated with flakes of Mugford chert and slate.

L-2 was located at the northern edge of the rock

outcrop. It consisted of the remnants of a small cache

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 245
164/ Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: view towards the northwest.

or shelter, 1.25 by 1.0 m, constructed against the

north side of a boulder. Slightly to the west was L-3, a

gravel pocket containing naturally shattered vein

quartz and flakes of slate and crystal quartz. A burin made of dark gray IVlugford chert was surface-collected here (Figure 169:n). It retains a striking platform at

its proximal end and its left lateral edge is lightly

retouched and bears a notch that served as a spall terminator. The right lateral margin is minimally

retouched. The distal end is spalled dihedrally with a

total of eight spall removals; one of the last transverse

spalls crosscuts an earlier spall removed parallel to the

right lateral margin. There is no hafting modification

or facial grinding (L=30.0 mm, W= 21 .9, TH= 3.9).

Feature S-2/3

The rock features identified by the Smithsonian survey

as S-2 and S-3 were located in a long, narrow, northsouth oriented gravel pocket in a bedrock cleft (Figures

164 and 165). Surface inspection did not reveal obvious hearths or structural alignments. A small excavation was conducted because the features seemed

unusual and were associated with a moderate amount

of flakes and some tools. Given the linear distribution

of rocks, the grid was aligned with a baseline running up the middle of the gravel pocket. A total of 14 m^

was excavated, in the form of a 7 by 2 m field. Tools

and flakes were point-plotted, while the flakes were

collected in 1 m^ units.

At first glance the feature appeared to be a continuous 7 m long distribution of rocks, but closer

inspection suggested there were actually four cobble

concentrations (here considered from south to north).

The centers of the first three concentrations were

spaced at 1 .5 m intervals while the centers of the third

and fourth were spaced 2 m apart. Three of the concentrations are fairly nondescript, but the second

seemed slightly larger and contained two flat slabs

246 CHAPTER 1 2
positioned near each other and adjacent to other

rocl<s in a manner vaguely suggestive of a disturbed

hearth. No charcoal was observed. Figure 166 plots

the distribution of all flakes and clearly indicates four

discrete clusters, each associated with one of the cobble concentrations. The tool distribution (Figures 167

and 1 68) is broadly consistent with the flake and rock

concentrations. /C-means cluster analysis distinguishes five tiny clusters, two on opposite sides of the sec- ond hearth-like rock feature, one at the center of rock

concentration three and two small clusters are associated with concentration four. Rock concentration one

entirely lacks tools. Since virtually all the lithic material was confined to the narrow gravel pocket the possibility that it accumulated there after having been

washed in from the surrounding bedrock might be

considered as a formational factor. The discrete spatial clustering of the flakes is so distinct, however,

that it seems unlikely to have been a result of geological processes.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 247
1x1y 1x8y

+ + + + + + + +

1

I I m

Biface Endblade preform

Burin + Microblade

Burin spall • Utilized flake

A Endblade

167/ Port Mamers Run-1 , S-2/3: tool distribution and k-means clusters.

1x1y 1x8y

EB= 2 BN 1 EB= 1 BU= 1 UF= 1 EBP= 1 BS= 1 EBP= 1 BS= 1 Bl=2 M= 3 BU= 2 BS=2 M= 1 BU= 1 M=2 UF=3

M= 1 UF= 1

EB= 1 EBP= 1 EBP= 1 UF= 1 Bl= 1 BS= 3 M= 1 UF= 1 UF= 1

3x1 y

EB Endblade BS Burin spall

EBP Endblade preform M Microblade

Bl Biface UF Utilized flake

BU Burin

3x8y

168/ Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: tool distribution by quadrat.

Table 63 summarizes the distribution of tool

classes across the five /(-means clusters and includes

several non-point provenienced implements that can

probably be assigned to the clusters. Given the small

sample size little can be said about the distribution

except for the concentration of four burin spalls and

248 CHAPTER 1 2
Table 63. Port Manvers Run-1 Tool Classes by K-Means Cluster.

C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C 5 Quadrat

Provenience

TOTAL N (%)

Endblades 1 (1) 1 1 4 (10.3)

Endblade preforms 1 2 1 4 (10.3)

Bifaces 1 (1) 1 1 4 (10.3)

Burins 1 2 1 4 (10.3)

Burin spalls 4 (1) 1 1 7 (17.9)

Microblades 1 2.5 0.5 1 3 8 (20.5)

Utilized flakes 2 3 2 1 8 (20.5)

TOTAL 5 (2) 13.5 (1) 5.5 2 4 639

Parentheses indicate items lacl<ing point provenience, but are pr obabiy cluster-related.

two burins in cluster 2, associated with the third rock

concentration. On the other hand, the distribution of

flake raw materials (see below) exhibits some differences between the rock concentrations associated with

clusters 1 and 5 versus clusters 2, 3 and 4. If we attribute possible behavioral significance to the flake raw

material distinctions and group the tool clusters

accordingly— dividing the linear rock feature in the

middle near the 5y line— then differences are apparent

between the northern and southern halves of the feature. The southern half (clusters 1 and 5) has slightly

more bifaces (three versus one) whereas the northern

half (clusters 2, 3 and 4) has slightly more burins

(three versus one), contains all the burin spalls and the

majority of the utilized flakes (seven versus one). The

distribution of microblades is ambiguous given the

uncertain cluster association of several non-provenienced implements. Overall, the assemblage is dominated by microblades, utilized flakes, endblades and

endblade preforms, as well as burin spalls. Scrapers

and axes/adzes are absent.

Table 64. Port Manvers Run-1 Tool Raw Material Frequencies by K-Means Cluster.

CI C 2 C 3 C-4 C 5 Quadrat

Provenience

TOTAL N (%)

Cray Mugford chert 1 7.5 (1) 2.5 2 2 3 19 (48.7)

Dark gray Mugford 2 2 1 1 6 (15.4)

Cray-speckled Mugford 1 (1) 1 1 1 5 (12.8)

Cray-banded Mugford 2 1 3 (7.7)

Black chert 1 1 (2.6)

Crystal quartz 1 1 1 1 4 (10.3)

Ramah chert (1) 1 (2.6) TOTAL 5(2) 13.5 (1) 5.5 2 4 6 39

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 249
m

Crystal quartz Gray banded Mugford chert

A Dark gray Mugford chert + Gray speckled Mugford chert

• Gray Mugford chert

1 69/ Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3: tool raw material distributions.

The spatial distribution of tool raw materials is presented in Table 64 and Figure 169. There is little meaningful variation besides a considerable number of gray Mugford chert implements associated with cluster 2. The absence of slate tools should be noted, however,

particularly in contrast with the abundance of slate debitage (see below). As noted earlier, the total distribution of flakes shows a marked tendency for clusters associated with

each of the four rock concentrations (Figure 166).

Unfortunately, the field plots of individual flake raw

materials proved to be unreliable because of the ten- dency of slate to grade into a silicified material resembling Mugford chert, thus exacerbating the problems

of distinguishing raw material types in the field.

Consequently, only quadrat distribution diagrams

based on lab identifications are presented here (Figure

170). Overall, the various Mugford cherts comprise

56% of the total, while slate constitutes 40%. Black

chert, Ramah chert and crystal quartz are only represented by a few flakes each. The quadrat counts suggest that the distribution of some raw materials varies

relative to the northern and southern sides of the linear rock feature, roughly corresponding to the 5y grid

line. Table 65 outlines the frequency of flake raw material types structured by this north-south distinction. The vast majority of gray-banded Mugford chert lies on

the north side of the feature, while there is a slight tendency for gray-speckled Mugford chert to lie on the

south side. Additionally, patinated chert, black chert, Ramah chert and crystal quartz mostly occur on the

south side. Slate is evenly distributed. If the table is

collapsed to combine low frequency cells (dark gray Mugford with gray Mugford, patinated, black and

Ramah cherts plus crystal quartz in an "other" category), a chi-square test is significant at the .05 level

(x^ = 56.45), indicating these contrasting north-south

distributions are unlikely to be fortuitous.

250 CHAPTER 1 2
1x1y 1x8y 1x1y 1x8y

3 3 1 1 1

3

3x1 y Black chert 3x8y 3x1 y

Crystal quartz

3x8y

1x1y 1x8y 1x1y 1x8y

1 3 24 14 15 12 4

1 4 5 10 2 6

3x1 y Dark gray Mugford chert

3x8y 3x1 y Gray Mugford chert 3x8y

1x1y 1x8y Ixly 1x8y

6 4 12 21 13 2 2 10 15 5 6

3 4 5 13 1 1 8 5 1

3x1 y Gray banded Mugford chert 3x8y 3x1 y Gray speckled Mugford chert 3x8y

Ixly 1x8y 1x1y 1x8y

2

3 1

3x1y Patinated chert 3x8y 3x1y Ramah chert 3x8y

Ixly 1x8y

1 4 14 26 32 19 2

3 38 21 11 1

3x1 y Slate

3x8y

1 70/ Port Manvers Run-1 , S-2/3 flake raw material distributions.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 251
Table 65. Port Manvers Run-1

Flake Raw Material Frequencies.

North South TOTAL N (%)

Gray Mugford chert 49 51 100 (23.4)

Dark gray Mugford 1 1 (0.2) Gray-banded Mugford 68 1 3 81 (18.9)

Gray-speckled Mugford 1 7 39 56 (13.1)

Patinated chert 3 3 (0.7)

Black chert 6 6 (1.4) Ramah chert 1 2 3 (0.7)

Crystal quartz 1 5 6 (1.4)

Slate 86 86 1 72 (40.2)

TOTAL 222 206 428

Table 66 portrays the total weights of the lithic

raw material types present, combining tools and

flakes. There are some major differences in the tool

versus flake weight proportions for some of the raw

materials, but Mugford cherts and slate dominate overall. As noted above, though, slate is represented only

as flakes. The size distribution (maximum length) of Mugford chert (generic) and slate flakes is graphed in

Figure 1 71 . The materials exhibit similar size profiles,

although a greater proportion of Mugford chert is found in the <10 mm class while slate is slightly more

abundant in the larger size classes. The Mugford chert

size profile is similar to those from other Pre-Dorset

localities at Attu's Point (Chapter 1 3, Figure 226), but

the slate proportions are low in the <30 to <35 mm

classes that are better represented at Attu's Point

(Chapter 13, Figure 227). This might indicate a lesser

significance for the earlier rough-out reduction stages

at Port Manvers Run-1, but a more detailed study of

slate reduction systems is necessary to clarify this

point.

Only one tool refit was identified: two fragments

of a microblade that conjoined over a short distance of

34 cm (Figure 167). None of the burin spalls could be

refitted with the burins, but both items were discarded

close to each other, mostly in a tight cluster at the third

rock concentration (Figure 167). Two burin spalls of

dark gray Mugford chert could not have been produced

from any of the four burins recovered from the locality, suggesting the operation of curation processes.

Discussion

The distribution of tools and flakes at S-2/3 gives the

impression that each rock concentration was the focus

of somewhat discrete activity. Spatial variations in the

flake raw materials and tool types, however, suggest

behavioral differences between the northern and

Table 66. Port Manvers Run-1 Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes). In Grams.

Tools g (%) Flakes g (%) TOTAL g (%)

Gray Mugford chert 12.5 (43.1) 56.1 (17.1) 68.6 (19.2)

Dark gray Mugford 4.8 (16.6) 2.6 (0.8) 7.4 (2.1) Gray-banded Mugford 3.9 (13.4) 74.3 (22.7) 78.2 (21.9)

Gray-speckled Mugford 4.6 (15.9) 37.9 (1 1.6) 42.5 (11.9)

Patinated chert 4.4 (1.3) 4.4 (1.2)

Black chert 0.4 (1.4) 12.1 (3.7) 12.5 (3.5) Ramah chert 0.6 (2.1) 0.5 (0.2) 1.1 (0.3)

Crystal quartz 2.2 (7.6) 3.1 (0.9) 5.3 (1.5)

Slate 1 37.0 (41.8) 137.0 (38.4)

252 CHAPTER 1 2
<5 <10

southern halves of the linear

feature, each half centered on a

linked pair of rock concentrations. The southern half has

slightly more bifaces whereas

the northern half has slightly more burins as well as containing all the burin spalls and the

majority of the utilized flakes. Most of the gray-banded

Mugford chert flakes lie on the

north side of the feature while

there is a tendency for grayspeckled Mugford chert to lie

on the south side. Although no

charcoal was observed during

the excavation, a single flake of gray-speckled

Mugford chert from unit 1 x6y (associated with the

third rock concentration) exhibited a pot-lid fracture

characteristic of thermal stress and a small biface fragment of Ramah chert from unit lx3y (associated with

the second rock concentration with more evident

hearth features) bore traces of heat patination.

This linear arrangement of rocks does not represent a known form of Labrador Pre-Dorset dwelling. At

this point it seems most credible to interpret the feature as a line of external hearths, each associated with

a discrete lithic deposit. A similar linear rock cluster

feature was found nearby at the same site (S-4). The

pattern of possible hearths spaced 1.5-2.0 m apart

might also be present at L-5 at the Attu's Point PreDorset site (Chapter 1 3), although in that case a disturbed axial feature seems a more likely interpretation.

On the other hand, the feature could be the remains of

an as-yet undocumented dwelling form, such as a 7 m

long tent structure with a central line of hearths.

Unconventional models should be considered given

the shifting interpretations of Maritime Archaic site

structure (Chapter 3) and reports of a Pre-Dorset "longhouse" on the Melville Peninsula in the central arctic (S.

Port Manvers Run-1: Flake Size Distributions

Mugford chert

Slate

<15 <20 <25

5 mm classes

<30 <35

1/1/ Port Manvers Run-1, S-2/3: flake size distributions.

Rowley, cited in Ramsden and Murray 1995:106;

Rowley and Rowley 1997:274).

Dating

No charcoal was recovered from the excavation, so the

site can only be dated by relative means. Height above

sea level (1 0-12.5 m) corresponds to that of other PreDorset sites in the area, but does not help much otherwise. The small tool collection does not provide

much typological basis for dating besides exhibiting a

general Early Pre-Dorset stamp.

Tool Assemblage

Endblades All four of the endblades (Figure 172:d-0

are fragmentary: three medial portions, one proximal.

Two implements are made of gray-speckled Mugford

chert, one of dark gray Mugford chert, and one of crystal quartz. The proximal specimen (Figure 172:f) is made of gray-speckled Mugford chert and has a

straight base, a biconvex cross-section and slightly

serrated edges (W= 9.5 mm, TH= 2.0). The three medial fragments have very fine flaking; a tiny dark gray Mugford chert example (not illustrated) has medial

polish on one face.

WEBB BAY PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 253
1 72/ Port Manvers Run-l , 5-2/3: tools, a, b: endblade preforms; c-f: endblades;

g, h: bifaces, i: endblade preform, j-n: burins, o-q. microblades.

Endblade Preforms Of the four endblade preforms, two are distal fragments and two are proximal fragments. The two distal fragments, one made of gray Mugford chert, the other of dark gray Mugford chert, were made on flakes of roughly triangular form that were modified with fine bifacial retouch around their

margins (Figure 172:a, b). One of the proximal frag- ments is made of crystal quartz (Figure 1 72:c) and has

a plano-convex cross-section, two long basal thinning

flakes on its ventral side and a slight shoulder formed

by incomplete bifacial retouch on one edge (W= 13.2 mm, TH= 2.7). The other is made of gray Mugford

chert (Figure 1 72:i) and has a straight base as well as

fine flaking primarily on one face. Final edge retouch

began at the distal end but did

not go very far before the tip

broke off and the implement was discarded.

Bifaces All four of the bifaces

are small fragments, two made

of gray Mugford chert, one of

gray- speckled Mugford, one of Ramah chert and one of black

chert. Three of them are probably fragments of bifacial points

or knives rather than endblades; two of these are illustrated in Figure 172:g, h. Their

widths are probably in the 16-

1 9 mm range.

Burins Three of the four burins

are whole, while one is a distal

fragment. Two are made from

gray-banded Mugford chert and

one each from gray-speckled

and gray Mugford chert. None

exhibit facial grinding or sidenotching, although all bear

traces of lateral edge grinding.

The specimen illustrated in Figure 172:j has unifacial

dorsal retouch on one lateral edge, mostly ventral and

relatively rough retouch on the other lateral edge, and

minimal bifacial retouch on its base (L= 27.4 mm, W=

15.3, TH= 5.4). The distal end is spalled dihedrally

with the shorter left-side spall terminated by a distinct

notch just below the tip; a total of seven spalls were

removed. Figure 1 72;k shows a burin made on a minimally retouched flake with slight unifacial distal notching from which a single spall was removed (L= 19.2 mm, W= 16.3, TH= 7.4). The item shown in Figure

172:1 is a distal fragment with a right lateral edge

retouched mostly on the ventral side from the surface

of an earlier spall (W=14.0 mm, TH=4.8). The distal

254 CHAPTER 1 2
/ 73/ Double Island Cove- 1

,

towards the southwest.

end is spalled dihedrally with two additional spalls. Figure

172:m has very minimal dorsal

retouch on its lateral edges, a remnant striking platform at its

base, and slight ventral thinning

of the bulb of percussion (L=

30.1 mm, W= 15.3, TH= 6.2). The distal end is spalled dihedrally with two spall removals,

one of which removed most of

one lateral edge of the flake.

Burin Spalls Of the seven burin

spalls, three are made of dark

gray Mugford chert, three of

gray Mugford chert and one of gray-speckled

Mugford chert. One is complete, three are proximal

fragments, and one each are medial and distal fragments. All are secondary spalls and none exhibit evi- dence for facial grinding.

Microblades Of the eight microblades (MNI= 3), six are

fashioned from gray Mugford chert, one from gray- banded Mugford chert and one from crystal quartz.

One is nearly complete while five are medial fragments, one a distal fragment and one a proximal portion. Seven of the eight exhibit use-wear, the only

exception being the nearly complete specimen (L =

35.1 mm, W = 6.6, TH = 2.7). The widths of the proximal and medial fragments range between 5.3-8.7 mm.

Examples are shown in Figure 1 72:o-q.

Utilized Flakes Five of the eight utilized flakes are made of gray Mugford chert, two of dark gray Mugford

chert and one of crystal quartz.

Conclusions

Port Manvers Run-1 , L-1 , is most likely a small hunting

stand (cf., Binford's [1 978] Mask site). The site location

provides an excellent look-out for spotting sea mamStructure 1 . Approximate pit boundaries indicated. View

mals moving through the Run. The inferred linear

hearth feature at S-2/3, as well as the similar but unexcavated S-4 area, suggest hearth complexes used by

small groups while staging hunting activities. The tool assemblage is small and functionally limited, mostly to endblades and endblade preforms, burin spalls,

microblades and utilized flakes. Scrapers are conspicuous by their absence. Although slate flakes indicative

of tool reduction were present, there were no axes or

adzes. There is little basis to determine site seasonality, but an open water season seems most likely given

the site's look-out character and its location ca. 6 km

south of the modern polynya at the "Second Rattle,"

which was probably the most optimal winter hunting

location in the area.

DOUBLE ISLAND COVE-1, L-1 (HeCj-1)

Double Island Cove lies on the western side of the

southern entrance to Port Manvers Run (Figure 1 63). L1, a Pre-Dorset occupation, was registered in 1 985 by

the Smithsonian Institution and revisited in 1992 and

1993 since it lay near our field camp. The site is situated on a small sloping terrace on the south side of the

cove, directly backed by a rocky knoll. Two possible

structures were exposed in small blow-outs. The clearWEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 255
8x1 5y 9x15y > N

A /-y' 0/

(7 O

8x1 2y

F Flat rock

Outer pit edge

I I Inner pit

Burin spall

* Endblade

+ Microblade

• Utilized flake

11x12y

lOxlOy llxlOy

/ 74/ Double Island Cove- 1

, Structure 1 : tool distribution.

8x1 5y 9x1 5y > N

H /-y' D <? /

^ o

8x1 2y

F Flat rock

Outer pit edge

I I Inner pit

11x12y

B Black chiert

* Crystal quartz lOxiOy

* Gray Mugford ctiert

+ Gray speckled Mugford ctiert

* Ramah ctiert

llxlOy

1 75/ Double Island Cove- 1, Structure I : flake distribution.

est of these, Structure 1 , was partially excavated in

1 992. Structure 2 was located 1 0.4 m northeast of S-1 and 0.5-1.0 m lower in elevation. A small excavation was begun at S-2 in 1993 but was not completed

because of a hasty departure necessitated by strong

winds and boat problems.

Structure 1

At first glance Structure 1 consisted of a small rock

alignment and a minimal amount of lithic material exposed on the surface, altogether covering an area of

1 5 m^. A total of 7.5 m^ was excavated (Figures 1 73 and 1 74), exposing a central feature but incompletely

documenting its periphery. The excavation indicated

that this was not an axial structure. The most prominent feature was a roughly oval depression, the outer

limits of which measured 2.0 by 1 .0 m, with a long axis

running NE-SW. The depression was bordered on the

north by a cluster of large seemingly "structural" rocks embedded in the surrounding sand/gravel and on the

south by a smaller cluster of rocks. The base of the

depression was 1 5-20 cm below ground surface on the

north side, 35 cm below the surface of the higher

south side. The entire depression was filled with black

humus-rich soil and charcoal flecks. It was partially

covered by a thin layer of yellow sand/gravel, possibly

slope wash.

The lower portion of the southern and western

sides of the depression contained a smaller pit, 2.0 by

0.5 m. This second pit was bordered by flat rock slabs

256 CHAPTER 1 2
LGM= 1

BC= 2 RC= 1 GNS= 1 GYS= 1

LGM=4

QZ= 1

CR= 1

BC Black chert CR Crystal quartz GNS Green slate GYS Gray slate LGM Light gray Mugford chert QZ Quartz RC Ramah chert SP Speckled gray Mugford

SP= 1 CR= 5

LGM= 1 SP= 2 RC= 1 CR= 23

1 76/ Double Island Cove- 1, Structure I: flake distribution by quadrat.

that extended towards the cluster of "structural" rocks.

Perhaps these slabs once lined the depression and

were thrown out after use, but some of them seem to

be arranged deliberately between the large "structural"

rocks. Alternatively, the "structural" rocks may have

been removed when the depression was constructed.

At the center of the secondary pit was a small inclined

flat slab and three or four small fire-cracked rocks.

Directly associated with this inclined slab was charcoal, a few tiny retouch flakes of Mugford chert and a

large burin spall. Another inclined flat slab was positioned at the extreme eastern end of the depression.

Very little lithic material was recovered. Thirteen

tools were collected: a triangular endblade fragment, two burin spalls, two biface fragments, five possible

microblade fragments and three utilized flakes. With

the exception of the burin spall from the base of the

pit, all the tools were found either around the rim of

the depression or in a small cluster 1 .4 m to the east.

In contrast, most of the flakes were clustered in the latter area, 1 .4 m east of the pit (Figures 1 75 and 1 75).

Flake raw material frequencies are listed in Table 67. The modest total of 59 flakes is dominated by crystal

quartz and gray Mugford chert. All but one of the crystal quartz flakes were found in the cluster east of the

depression while gray Mugford and black cherts seem

to have a stronger association with the pit. The concentration of flakes and tools associated with several

rocks in the excavation area east of the depression

might indicate the presence of another structure.

Table 67. Double Island Cove-1, L-1, S-1: Flake Raw Material Frequencies.

N %

Crystal quartz 29 (64.4)

Light gray Mugford chert 6 (13.3)

Black chert 2 (4.4)

Cray-speckled chert 3 (6.7) Ramah chert 2 (4.4)

Quartz 1 (2.2) Green slate 1 (2.2)

Cray slate 1 (2.2) TOTAL 45

The tool assemblage contains little chronologically diagnostic material. The small triangular endblade is

a proximal fragment made of gray Mugford chert

(Figure 179:b). It is extremely thin, slightly serrated

and has a straight base modified by basal thinning

flakes on both faces (W= 10.0 mm, TH= 1.8). The two

biface fragments are made of gray Mugford chert and

gray-speckled Mugford chert; one is a proximal portion, the other a lateral edge fragment (Figure 1 79:a,c).

Both have nearly plano-convex cross-sections, fine parallel flaking and slightly serrated edges. The two burin

spalls are both made of gray Mugford chert; one is

complete, the other is a proximal fragment, and both

are secondary spalls. Of the five possible microblades.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN; SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 257
four are made of crystal quartz, one of gray-white silicified siltstone. The single complete specimen is made

of crystal quartz, although it is poorly formed (L= 1 8.8 mm, W= 8.3, TH= 3.1), while three are small proximal

fragments and one is a medial portion. Two of the

three utilized flakes are made of gray Mugford chert,

the other of patinated chert. A sample of charcoal from the depression was

radiocarbon dated to 3640±70 B.P. (Beta-571 25). The

tool collection provides minimal basis for evaluating

this result. The endblade basal form and slight serration, the serrated bifaces, and the unground burin

spalls, are all attributes that are at least consistent

with the Early Pre-Dorset radiocarbon date.

Several seeds and tiny bone fragments were

retrieved when soil samples from the depression were

wet-sieved. The seeds were identified by Michael Deal

(Archaeology Unit, Memorial University). All identifiable elements were of crowberry (Empetrum nigrum)

and they consisted of: 1 5 single seeds, another in two

sections, 2 seeds with partial coats, two complete clusters (9 seeds each) and 2 partial clusters (3 and 6

seeds respectively). Given the presence of seed clusters, Deal suggests that the seeds may have been

green when burned, otherwise they might not have

stuck together. If so, that might suggest they were

burned during the summer. This need not indicate human consumption of the berries, though, since the

plant as a whole could have been burned in a smudge

pit to discourage flies or to smoke fish. Additionally,

since crowberries survive intact over the winter when

covered with snow, their use in other seasons cannot

be eliminated.

Structure 2

Structure 2 was visible on the surface as a cluster of

flat rock slabs and Mugford chert flakes. Given the

interesting results from the Structure 1 investigation, a

258 CHAPTER 1 2
test excavation was begun in 1993. Unfortunately, the work was terminated early by a hasty departure, at

which point only 2.5 had been excavated (Figure

177). Several possible "structural" rocks were uncovered, as well as some flat slabs, one with a trace of

notching. A patch of charcoal was present in the center of the excavation, but there was no clear indication

of a hearth structure. Charcoal from this concentration was radiocarbon dated to 3320±70 B.P. (Beta-71 476).

Minimal lithic material was recovered. Only seven

tools were collected, mostly from a tight cluster beside

a large rock (Figure 1 77): a burin spall of gray Mugford

chert, two microblade core fragments of crystal quartz

(Figure 1 79:e, 0, a microblade fragment of crystal

quartz (Figure 1 79;d) and three utilized flakes (two of

crystal quartz, one of gray Mugford chert). Flake material consisted of crystal quartz (n=31), gray Mugford

chert (n=l 0), patinated chert (n=2) and slate (n=l ). The

crystal quartz flakes were tightly concentrated beside

the same large rock where most of the tools were

found (Figure 1 78).

Discussion

The material from Double Island Cove-1 is so limited

it is difficult to draw substantive conclusions. The

slightly lower elevation of Structure 2 might fit with its

radiocarbon dating 300 years later than Structure 1,

but nothing in the scanty lithic assemblage from

Structure 2 points to a Late Pre-Dorset dating. The raw

material patterns of the two structures are similar: a predominance of crystal quartz, which seems to be

spatially concentrated. Consequently, there are no grounds to support or reject the radiocarbon datings.

If the 3300 B.P. date is reasonable, however, it is one

of relatively few indications of a Late Pre-Dorset presence in the Main area. The other is Nukasusutok-2,

discussed briefly in Chapter 4 and presented in detail

by Fitzhugh (2002).

Double Island Cove-1 seems to be a minor camp,

possibly used on a couple of occasions widely separated in time. Its main value, apart from yielding some

I i % i

a b c ^

/ 79/ Tools from Double Island Cove, Sunset Point and

Webb Point, a-c: biface, endblade, biface (Double Island Cove S-l), d-f microblade, core fragment, core fragment

(Double Island Cove S-2); g, h: burin, microblade (Sunset

Point), i-n: microblade, endblade (Pre-Dorset), biface stem,

biface (Maritime Archaic), stemmed point (Maritime

Archaic), flake point (Maritime Archaic) (all Webb Point).

additional radiocarbon dates, is that Structure 1 provides evidence for a feature type unknown from else- where in Labrador. The depression and its association

with burned crowberry seeds and bone fragments indicates a function different from that of documented PreDorset axial structures and tent rings. If the crowberry

seeds imply use during the summer, this would be the

first direct evidence for seasonality at a Pre-Dorset site

in Labrador. Today, summer is not a period of optimum resource availability in the Webb Bay/Port Manvers Run area, although the cove sometimes offers

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 259
180/ Attu's Bight overview towards the southwest.

good char fishing. With a higher sea level at the time

of Pre-Dorset occupation, however, Double Island Cove

would have been a much larger embayment, perhaps

with a slightly different mix of resources than today. A

minor Pre-Dorset locality on the north side of the cove

(Double Island Point-2, HeCj-4) indicates additional

Pre-Dorset activity in the area, but overall the use of

the cove was more limited than at Port Manvers-Run-1

or certainly Attu's Point (Chapter 1 3).

SUNSET POINT

(HeCj-8)

Sunset Point is a neo-toponym

for a small rocky crag between

Red Point and Cleat Point on

South Aulatsivik Island (Figure

163). The site consists of two

lithic scatters in gravel deposits

on top of an exposed bedrock

knoll, a form and placement

typical of several small PreDorset sites in the Port Manvers Run area. Two implements were

surface-collected: a burin and a

microblade. The burin (Figure

1 79;g) is made on a large flake of gray-speckled

Mugford chert (L= 38.4 mm, W= 20.0, TH= 6.3). The

implement bears a remnant striking platform on its

base. The distal and medial margins of the left lateral edge are bifacially retouched while the proximal edge

margin is unifacially retouched ventrally. The right lateral margin bears a bifacial notch, possibly for spall

termination. The flake facets and lateral edges of the

basal area are slightly polished. The distal burination

\W\ Flake scatter H L-3/6 excavation

Trees

Webb Bay

20

1 81 / Attu's Bight site map. Based on field sketch by W. Fitzhugh, with modifications,

jc-n CHAPTER 12
is transverse with five spall removals and the distal tip

is heavily rounded by wear. The microblade (Figure

1 79:h) is made of gray-speckled Mugford chert and is

relatively large (L= > 40.0 mm, W= 1 1 .0, TH= 2.7), with

fine use retouch along part of one edge.

ATTU'S BIGHT-1 (HeCk-4)

Attu's Bight-1 is a large Rattler's Bight Phase (4200-

3500 B.P.) Maritime Archaic site, located on the north

side of Webb Bay, just west of the entrance to Port

Manvers Run (Figure 163). It was discovered and surface collected by the Smithsonian Institution in 1985

(Fitzhugh 1 986:57) and revisited by the author in 1 992

and 1 993. The site consists of cultural remains extending for about 350 m along a set of sand and gravel terraces 19-21 m as I. (Figure 1 80, 1 81 ). Smithsonian field

notes identify three different beach levels (A, B, C);

that were suggested to be indicative of chronological

differences within the site. However, the vertical distance between these terraces is minimal (0.5-1.0 m)

and the slope is very gradual, so the levels may have

little relevance for relative dating the site contents.

Indeed, according to the general uplift regime for the

Main inner bay area (Figure 5) the 19 m terrace emerged 6000-5500 B.P., well prior to the Rattlers

Bight phase. Since the terrace front is an erosion face

that plunges steeply from 1 9 m to the modern shoreline, during the Rattlers Bight Phase there were probably no lower beaches suitable for habitation. In any

event, the large horizontal extent of the 19-21 m surface was ideal for longhouse placement and it provided a broad field of view over Webb Bay. Most of the site is completely deflated by wind

erosion. The little surface vegetation present consists

of moss-lichen and isolated stands of spruce trees.

Thicker spruce growth is found immediately north of

the site, downslope to the south, and to the west.

Flakes and implements of Ramah chert and other

materials lie exposed on the sand/gravel surface, distributed in linear patterns parallel to the beach levels. The 1985 Smithsonian survey identified nine separate

loci and the 1992-93 investigations added three more. These 1 2 loci (Figure 181) are described briefly below,

based on Smithsonian field notes and later observations. Test excavations conducted at L-3/6 in 1 992-93

are described thereafter.

Overview of Localities

L-l: At the extreme eastern end of the terrace was a Ramah chert scatter. The 1992 surface collection

included three biface fragments of thermally altered Ramah chert, of which two are probably point pre- forms (Figure 1 90;j, k), while the third is an edge fragment from a larger bifacial implement (Figure 190:i).

Also recovered was a large green slate flake (Figure

191:a) with a slightly polished medial surface and

scraper-like retouch along one edge (L= 79.6 mm, W=

64.4, TH= 7.7).

L-2 Parallel to the southeastern terrace front was a

scatter of Ramah chert flakes, 60 m long, 6 m wide.

Just north of this was a packed cobble feature, sub-rectangular in shape and 2.5 by 1.0 m in size. The

Smithsonian surface collection consisted of two Ramah

chert micropoints, a ground slate preform and two utilized flakes (one of Ramah chert the other of "chert").

L-3 and L-6: Located on the middle beach level near the

eastern end of the terrace, these loci contained the

only in situ portion of the site. The Smithsonian registered two separate loci here, but they probably constitute a single occupation area, of which perhaps twothirds is deflated. L-3/6 was marked by a scatter of Ramah chert flakes 40 m long and at least 5-6 m wide,

the easternmost portion of which extended into the in

situ deposit. At L-3 the Smithsonian collected a Ramah

chert stemmed point, three flake points (two of Ramah

chert, one of unspecified material), four Ramah chert

biface fragments and a slate celt fragment, while at L6 they collected two Ramah chert biface fragments and

a slate celt fragment. The 1 992-93 test excavations are

described below.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 261
182/ Attu's Bight L-3/6: view towards the east.

L-4 Positioned on the highest beach level, L-4 consisted of a small scatter of quartz flakes, from which the

Smithsonian collected two quartz biface fragments and

a Ramah chert flake knife. In 1992 a Ramah chert

biface preform (Figure 190;c) was collected 7 m north

of L-4. The implement is fully flaked dorsally but only

partially flaked ventrally, and it bears a striking plat- form distally (L= 43.5 mm, W= 21.9, TH= 9.2).

L-5 Situated on the upper portion of the middle beach

level and adjacent to L-3/6, L-5 was a lithic scatter containing flakes of Ramah chert, Mugford chert and slate. The Smithsonian collected two stemmed points, a single-shouldered biface and a biface fragment, all of Ramah chert.

L-7: Located on the central portion of the highest

beach level, L-7 was a 120 m long scatter of Ramah

chert flakes. The Smithsonian surface collected four

flake points, three of Ramah chert, one of quartz. In 1992 a complete Ramah chert stemmed point was

recovered (Figure 190:a). The implement is "typical" of

the Rattlers Bight phase, with bifacial flaking, a biconvex cross-section, a slightly tapering stem and a slightly convex base (L= 47.0 mm, W= 21.2, TH= 6.2, stem

L= 16.4, stem W[shoulder/base] = 14.1/1 1.3).

L-8: Near the center of the site,

slightly back from the eroded

terrace front, was an oval ring of

cobbles, 4 m in diameter. The

feature was associated with large

chunks of Ramah chert, banded

slate and quartz flakes. The

Smithsonian surface collected a stemmed point preform, two

biface preforms and a

sidescraper, all of Ramah chert.

L-9: Near the western end of the

site, on the highest beach level, was a 50 m linear scatter of Ramah chert flakes. Smithsonian field notes mention the

presence of a stemmed point resembling Sandy Cove

Complex form.

L-]0: Lying between L-7 and L-9, but slightly lower, was a 1 m diameter cluster of about 10 head-sized

rocks associated with smaller cobbles. A couple of Ramah chert flakes lay on top of the feature, which

may be a burial cairn. West of the feature was a 1 by

1 m scatter of Ramah chert flakes.

L-11: This was the westernmost cultural feature

observed at the site, lying in an isolated area 40 m

south of some sand dunes. It consisted of a cluster of

about 1 head-sized or smaller rocks, 1 m in diameter,

without associated lithic material. The feature may be

a burial cairn.

L-12: Located on the highest beach level and

towards the northeast corner of the site, L-1 2 was a

small scatter of Ramah chert flakes. A Ramah chert

flake point was surface collected (Figure 190:b); it

has bifacial retouch limited to the edge margins, a

slight shoulder on one lateral edge, and slight basal

thinning (L= 23.9 mm, W= 11.6, TH= 3.7, shoulder

HT= 9.3).

262 CHAPTER 12
46x62y 49x52y

deflated § in situ

46x47y

*/

in situ

49x47y

Feature 2

53x50y

/ Edge of deflatii

Charcoal

^ Bone fragments

1 m

183/ Attu's Bight L-3/6: excavation with flake distribution.

Test Excavations at L-3/6

In 1992 and 1993 small scale test excavations were undertaken in the />? s/Tw deposits at L-3/6 (Figure

182) to acquire material for radiocarbon dating and to

determine if there was much likelihood of identifying

traces of dwelling structures or other features. In 1 992

a small grid system was set up on the western edge of

the in situ deposit, including part of the deflated area. A total of 1 7.8 m^ was investigated, of which only 3 m^ was excavated in situ, the rest was simply a trowel-through of the exposed sand and gravel. Tools and

flakes were point-plotted, while flakes were collected

in 1 m^ units. A profile from the in situ deposit indicated possible traces of two occupation layers, so in 1993 two 1 m^ test pits were excavated further east- ward in the m situ deposit to provide additional stratigraphic information (Figure 183). The sediments in the vicinity of L-3/5 consisted of

coarse sand and pea-size gravel. The depth of deflation varied from 10-40 cm. A stratigraphic profile

(50x51 y/50x50y) taken from the edge of the in situ

deposit exhibited some interesting details (Figures

1 84 and 1 85). A total of 1 1 separate stratigraphic units were identified, including at least four buried humus

layers that indicate a repetitive cycle of temporarily

stable vegetation surfaces followed by eolian deposition. The main cultural level was unit 9, 35 cm below

the surface, a sand layer that exhibited a shallow

basin-like feature excavated slightly into the underlying sand/gravel. Unit 9 contained flakes, tools, red

ocher and oxidized sand, and charcoal flecks.

Immediately above unit 9 was unit 8, a humus layer

containing charcoal flecks. The other stratigraphic

units were culturally sterile, except for unit 2, a faint

buried humus layer 1 5 cm below the surface that contained two Ramah chert flakes. In other parts of the in

situ deposit Ramah chert flakes were exposed in a

shallow deflated area 1 0-1 2 cm below the surface, suggesting there may have been an occupation at roughly

that depth. But given the instability of sand surfaces.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 263
- 'A-

/84/4ffM'5 6;g/7f L-3/6 excavation at the edge of the in situ deposit.

redeposition by deflation and eolian processes cannot

be ruled out.

In 1 993, test pit 50x50y was excavated adjacent

to the 1 992 profile. At the 1 cm level, seven Ramah

chert flakes were encountered, as well as one flake of

50x5 1y

1 . Gray sand

2. Buried humus, Ramah chert flake

3, 5, 7. Yellow-brown sand

4, 6. Buried humus

8. Buried humus with charcoal flecks

9, Red-yellow sand, charcoal, Ramah chert flakes

9a, Basin feature, oxidized sand, minimal charcoal

9b Charcoal beneath cultural layer

10, Yellow-brown sand/gravel

11. Gravel lens

50x50y

185/ Attu's Bight L-3/6: profile.

greenstone and a split cobble

with a faint trace of red ocher on its surface. An extremely

faint spot of red ocher was

observed in the sand. Given the

paucity of material it is difficult

to conclude there was a distinct occupation floor at this

level, but the split cobble and

red ocher might counter the

redeposition argument, since

the former would be resistant

to wind action and the latter would have been erased by it. No flakes were observed at a corresponding level in test pit 53x50y, further to

the east. In both 1993 test pits, however, a distinct occupation floor was found corresponding to the

lower unit 9 level in the 1992 test, although this

floor lay somewhat deeper (45 cm) than in the 1 992

units (35 cm).

Two features were identified in the basal unit 9

deposits, both of which appeared to be small hearths

(Figure 1 83). Feature 1 was located near the edge of

the deflated area. It was a 60-70 cm in diameter oval

patch of red-yellow oxidized sand mixed with charcoal and faint red ocher stains, accompanied by a 55

by 35 cm oval concentration of 38 small burned bone

fragments. None of the bone fragments were identifiable, although one might be a rib fragment. There were no distinct hearth border or other "functional"

rocks associated with the feature. The slightly basin- shaped profile of the feature suggests a fire was simply kindled in the upper portion of the ground surface. A sample of charcoal from this concentration was radiocarbon dated to 4080±100 B.P. (Beta571 26). Within and adjacent to the feature were small Ramah chert retouch flakes and a few tools: a slate

celt fragment, a utilized flake of Ramah chert, a ground slate flake and a small mica fragment.

Feature 2 was found at the bottom of test pit 53x50y,

264 CHAPTER 1 2
3.5 m east of Feature 1. It consisted of a 60 cm in

diameter oval cluster of fist-sized cobbles associated

with a considerable amount of charcoal and a few

Ramah chert flakes. Two small red ocher stains

occurred nearby. Charcoal from this feature was

radiocarbon dated to 4080±90 B.P. (Beta-7 1 477).

Figure 186 depicts the spatial distribution of

tools while the tool classes are listed by frequency in

Table 68. The implements lay in two elongated

east/west distributions separated by 1.0-1.5 m, one

extending out from the Feature 1 hearth, the other

along the southern edge of the excavation. These

distributions parallel that of the flakes (see below).

The small collection is dominated by utilized flakes

of Ramah chert. Also collected were two small mica

fragments and 1 1 schist fragments.

Table 68. Attu's Bight L-3/6

Tool Class Frequencies.

N (%)

Stemmed points 3 (1 5.0)

Bifaces 2 (10.0)

Flake points 1 (5.0) Stemmed flakes 1 (5.0)

Utilized flakes 10 (50.0)

Celts 1 (5.0) Ground slate flakes 1 (5.0)

Split cobbles 1 (5.0) TOTAL 20

The flake distribution is shown in Figure 187. The plotted distribution of flakes in the deflated

areas is probably misleading since eolian processes

have doubtless smeared the spatial distributions and

the material could represent a palimpsest of different occupation levels. Nonetheless, the frequencies

of Ramah chert flakes indicate a distribution about

4-5 m wide (north/south) with two dense concentrations: one associated with the Feature 1 hearth area

near the center and another ca. 1.0-1.5 m to the

south. Thermally altered patinated Ramah chert is

found in most of the excavation units, but is most

frequent in the hearth area. Table 69 indicates the

flake raw material frequencies are almost totally

dominated by Ramah chert, typical of Rattlers Bight

Phase localities. A fairly high percentage of the Ramah chert is patinated. Figure 188 portrays the

size distribution of Ramah chert flakes. A total of 78.4% of the flakes measure < 20 mm and 61.7% <

1 5 mm, suggestive of an emphasis on secondary

retouch. Additionally, a total of 1 34 biface-thinning

flakes (BTFs) was identified (Figure 189). BTFs were

distributed over most of the excavated area,

although units with the largest quantities tended to

be those with the most flakes overall. Additionally,

42 (3 1 .3%) of the BTFs were >30 mm in size, suggestive of the reduction of large quarry blanks or preforms. This percentage is much higher than those

recorded for the Middle Maritime Archaic site Nukasusutok 5 (Area 2A = 1 3.5%, 2B = 5.4% and 2C

= 12.3%). The large BTFs were also distributed fairly

evenly across the units.

Table 69. Attu's Bight L-3/6 Flake Raw Material Frequencies.

Excavation Surface TOTAL N (%)

Ramah chert 674 31 1 985 (88.2)

Patinated Ramah 76 48 1 24 (11.1)

Cray slate 2 1 3 (0.3) Creenstone 2 1 3 (0.3) Cray Mugford chert 1 1 (0.1)

Quartz 1 1 (0.1) TOTAL 754 363 1117

The total weights of the lithic raw materials

(tools and flakes) are given in Table 70. Ramah chert

is clearly dominant; together, patinated and unpatinated Ramah account for 89.2% of the material.

Patinated Ramah chert constitutes a larger proportion

of the Ramah chert flakes by weight (21 .7%) than by

frequency (1 0.1%).

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 265
46x47y 49x47y

186/ Attu's Bight L3/6: tool distribution.

46x52y

46x47y

49x52y

RC=3 RC= 32

RC= 20

PAT=4

RC=4

PAT= 1 GR= 1 GM= 1

RC= 28

PAT=9

RC= 55

PAT= 14

RC= 16

PAT=2

SL= 1 Q= 1

RC=8

RC= 21 RC= 43

PAT= 6

RC= 257

PAT= 8

RC= 28

PAT= 7

missing

data

RC= 139

PAT= 1

Deflated portion

RC=84

PAT=4

/

RC= 172

PAT= 65

SL=2

RC= 45

PAT=2

GR= 1 RC= 20

50x50y 53x50y

L-1 (10 cm)

RC=7

GR= 1 GM= Gray Mugford chert GR= Greenstone

PAT= Patinated Ramah chert Q= Quartz

RC= Ramah chert SL= Slate 49x47y

187/ Attu's Bight L-3/6: flake distribution.

266 CHAPTER 1 2
L-3/6 Ramah Chert Flake Size Distribution

35

30

25

20

I 15

10

5

<5 <15 <20 <25 <30 <35 <40 <45 <50 <55

5 mm classes

1 88/ Attu's Bight L-3/6: Ramah chert flake size distribution.

Table 70. Attu's Bight L-3/6 Total Lithic Raw

Material Weights (Flakes and Tools). In Grams.

Flakes g Tools g TOTAL g (%)

Ramah chert 434.0 66.2 500.2 (71.6)

Patinated Ramah 120.0 3.0 123.0 (17.6)

Gray slate 0.8 0.8 (0.1) Green slate 3.0 3.0 (0.4) Red slate 68.0 68.0 (9.7) Greenstone 2.4 2.4 (0.3) Gray Mugford chert 0.5 0.5 (0.1) Quartz 0.5 0.5 (0.1) TOTAL 629.2 143.6 624.0

Tool Assemblage

Stemmed points: The three stemmed points are all made of Ramah chert. Two are stem fragments of similar dimensions that retain striking platforms on their

bases (Figure 190:e, f). The third is a marginally

retouched flake fragment with a striking platform or

break at the base of a slight stem (Figure 190:1); it is

unclear if this is a finished product or a preform.

Bifaces: Two Ramah chert biface fragments were recovered, one a medial portion the other a distal element

bearing an impact fracture

(Figure 1 90:d, h). Both are probably from stemmed points.

Flake points: The single example, made of Ramah chert, is a

medial fragment with dorsal

marginal retouch on opposite

lateral edges (Figure 190:g).

Stemmed flakes: This Ramah

chert implement (Figure 190:m)

exhibits limited marginal

retouch on opposite edges that

creates a stem-like constriction;

the stem base was thinned to remove the striking platform. It could be a point pre- form or simply a utilized flake.

Utilized flakes: All of the 1 utilized flakes are made of Ramah chert. One fragment has fine bifacial marginal

retouch on opposite edges, possibly indicative of

intended use as a flake point. Two implements are made on large biface-thinning flakes, probably derived from quarry blanks.

Celts: The implement identified as a celt is a medial

fragment made on a plate of red slate (Figure 191:b).

The only grinding occurs on two opposite edges that

are ground perpendicular to the plate surface (W= 70.0 mm, TH= 14.7).

Ground slate flakes: The single example is made of

green slate.

Split cobbles: A water-rolled flat cobble is split transversely and bears a faint trace of red ocher on its edge.

It may have functioned as a hammerstone, red ocher

crusher, or both.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 267
46x52y

46x47y

49x52y

1/1 6/2

9/3 3 4/1

5/3 6/3 1/1

7/5 3/2 17/4

10/2

missing

data 21/6

deflated portion

/ 11/1

12/6 11 7/2

50x50y 53x50y

Ramah chert biface-thinning flakes

total/large

49x47y

1 89/ Attu's Bight L-3/6 distribution of Ramah chert biface-thmning flakes.

Discussion

The excavation of L-3/6 suggests that two components

may be present. The earlier component is the floor

buried 35-45 cm below the modern surface. It contains two hearth features with virtually identical radiocarbon

dates (4080±100 B.P. and 4080±90 B.P.). The charcoal

comprising these samples was not identified to wood

species, so it is possible that if spruce trees were used

the dates could be somewhat older than the occupation. The later component is a trace layer 1 cm below

the modern surface, inferred from a few in situ flakes,

a split cobble, a small red ochre stain and deflated Ramah chert flakes lying near the same level. There are no clear chronological indicators for the later component, but enough time elapsed for at least two humus

layers to have developed and been covered by drifting

sand. This two component interpretation falls if the upper layer is composed of redeposited material.

Smithsonian field notes suggested a Sandy Cove-like

point from L-9 could indicate occupations pre-dating

4500 B.P.. However, nothing else in the artifactual

material suggests anything other than a Rattler's Bight

Phase dating and the slight differences in beach terrace elevation do not provide much basis for relative

dating within the site. Consequently, the vast majority

of the material probably pertains to repeated occupation during the Rattler's Bight Phase.

Linear scatters of Ramah chert such as those

found at Attu's Bight have been interpreted as traces

of Maritime Archaic longhouse structures (Fitzhugh

1981, 1984). While this may have been the case here, we should not assume that flake scatters ranging from

40-1 20 m long necessarily represent single continuous

structures. Besides the possibility of non-contempora- neous overlap, the stratigraphic situation at L-3/6 raises the possibility that some of the flake scatters in

deflated parts of the site could be palimpsests of more

than one occupation.

Two aspects of Attu's Bight seem significant in

comparison with some other Rattler's Bight Phase

268 CHAPTER 1 2
190/ Attu's Bight Tools, a stemmed point, L-7: b: flal<e point, L-12, c: biface preform, north of L-4: d: biface mid-section, L-3/6: e, f: point stems, L-3/6: g: flal<e point

fragment, L-3/6: h: biface tip, L-3/6: i: biface edge, L-1:

j: biface tip, L-1: k: biface base, L-1: I stemmed pomt

preform, L-3/6, m: stemmed flake (point preform), L-3/6.

sites. First, considering how much of the site has been

exposed on the surface there are very few visible features, such as stone-lined hearths. This may reflect

either the lack of readily available rocks in the sandgravel deposits, or a lack of investment in hearth construction. Excavation of the in situ deposit at L-3/6

indicates that hearths there were kindled on the ground surface or merely consisted of a cluster of

small cobbles. There are, however, two possible burial

cairns (L-10, L-1 1), an oval cobble ring {L-8) and a subrectangular rock feature of uncertain function (L-2). The lack of investment in features is paralleled by the

b

1 91 / Attu's Bight Tools, a: polished slate flake, L-1, b: celt fragment, L-3/6.

second significant aspect of the site: a low rate of tool

discard. Although a considerable amount of debitage

is present, there are relatively few tools on the surface.

Such a pattern suggests time spent "gearing up"

(Binford 1979:268), producing or repairing tools to be

used and discarded elsewhere. This inference is supported by the presence of many biface-thinning flakes and especially the high frequency of large flakes likely

derived from the reduction of quarry blanks. Thus, in

terms of these depositional patterns and their implied

curation processes, Attu's Bight seems to be a shortterm aggregation site.

In light of the foregoing, Attu's Bight is not a good candidate for the elusive Maritime Archaic

fall/winter sites, postulated to lie in the inner bays

(Fitzhugh 1978:83-84). In terms of (contemporary)

resource availability, the most likely seasons for the

occupation of Attu's Bight would be late spring and

early fall, when seals, waterfowl and caribou could

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 269
be hunted and char and salmon caught. The site is

positioned almost equidistant between the entrance

to Port Manvers Run and the narrow passage

between Igloo Island and the mainland, both of which are constrictions where it might have been

easier to exploit herds of migrating harp seals in the

spring or fall. One might also suggest the area could

have been used for "gearing up" with wood products

prior to moving further north, but the paucity of

slate woodworking tools and slate debitage might

argue against that. On the other hand, it may not be the exploitation of local resources so much as the location of

the site that is most relevant to its interpretation.

Attu's Bight is situated 1 .5 km west of the entrance

to Port Manvers Run and its broad beach terrace was

probably the best location for a large group gathering that could be found in the region between Webb

Bay and Thalia Point on the coast. In this respect

Attu's Bight is physically and topographically similar

to large aggregation sites like Nulliak Cove-1, north

of Hebron (Fitzhugh 1 981 , 1 984, 1 985a). Since it is

likely that the Run was used as a travel corridor to

avoid rough weather on the outer coast, it is reasonable to suggest that the main function of the site was as a temporary staging area for travel towards

the north or south. Although these topographic or

physical attractors may have been the main variables for site location, positioning of the site a

short distance west of the Run could also have been

a response to inter-cultural relations. Given the indications of a strong Pre-Dorset presence in the Run,

placement of the site slightly back from the

entrance to the Run could be seen as spatial distanciation from an area of frequent Pre-Dorset activity.

Alternatively, Attu's Bight might have been selected on the grounds of relative proximity to the PreDorset "central place" at the Attu's Point site, merely 1 .8 km to the west, if a more interactive relationship with Pre-Dorset is postulated. On the other

hand, it is also possible that Attu's Bight was no

longer used after Pre-Dorset colonized the Main

area. The implications of these points will be dis- cussed further in Chapter 14.

WEBB POINT (HeCk-6)

At the southern entrance to Webb Bay is a prominent

tombolo beach that forms the spine of Webb Point. The beach runs roughly north-south, is bounded at each end by a rock outcrop, and has steep eastern and western edges. Its surface is almost entirely

deflated. Since this seemed like an ideal location for

a Maritime Archaic site the point was surveyed

briefly in 1993, with another short follow-up visit in

1 994. No elevation was recorded for the Webb Point

terrace, but it seems higher than Attu's Bight (i.e., >19-21 m). Five small localities (L-1 to L-5) were

identified on the primary beach surface, two more (L6 and L-7) were recorded slightly down-slope of the northwestern corner of the beach, while one (L-8) was observed down-slope to the northeast.

L-1 was located near the rock outcrop at the

northern end of the main beach terrace and consisted of a few Ramah chert flakes and tools. A stemmed

point and a flake point of Ramah chert were surfacecollected. The stemmed point is similar to Rattlers

Bight styles (Figure 1 79:m). The dorsal side of the implement is completely flaked but the ventral side

is retouched only on the lateral margins. A remnant

striking platform runs oblique to the stem base and

although the shoulders and upper stem are

retouched the basal portion is unmodified, presumably unfinished (L = 47.9 mm, W = 26.4, TH = 6.1). The flake point (Figure 1 79:n) is formed by unifacial

dorsal retouch limited to the edge margins (L = 33.1 mm, W = 13.8, TH = 2.7, stem L = 10.6, stem W [shoulder] = 9.2, stem W (base) = 7.7).

L-2 was situated near the southeastern corner of

the terrace and consisted of a small rock mound,

1 m in diameter, with no visible lithic association.

It resembled the cobble features at Attu's Bight (L-1 and L-1 1) and may be a burial cairn. L-3, L-4 and L-5

270 CHAPTER 1 2
were all located towards the southern end of the terrace and all consisted of small scatters of Ramah

chert flakes. L-6 was a gently sloping beach surface

situated 40-50 m northwest of, and several meters

below, the rock outcrop at the northwest end of the

beach. L-5 contained a blow-out with exposed flakes

of Ramah and Mugford chert and a Ramah chert

biface stem, possibly Maritime Archaic (Figure

179:k). Small cobbles and charcoal flecks were also

visible on the surface. A 50 by 50 cm test pit adjacent to the blow-out produced some charcoal, but no

associated cultural material. Systematic shovel tests were conducted up and down the L-6 beach, but they

did not reveal additional traces of occupation.

L-7 was a lithic scatter in a deflated sandy cleft

beside the bedrock knoll at the north end of the main terrace and up-slope from L-6. Flake material

exposed on the surface consisted of Mugford chert,

crystal quartz and slate. A surface collection pro- duced a few Pre-Dorset tools and a biface of either

Pre-Dorset or Maritime Archaic origin. The PreDorset implements include a medial fragment of a

Pre-Dorset crystal quartz biface with fine parallel

pressure flaking (Figure 1 79:j), two small microblade fragments of dark gray Mugford chert, a complete burin spall of gray Mugford chert and a utilized flake of patinated Mugford chert. The medial

portion of a burned Ramah chert biface (Figure

1 79:1) might be Maritime Archaic, but a Ramah chert

biface of similar width (ca. 40 mm) was found in a

Pre-Dorset context at Attu's Point (Figure 201 ;a. Chapter 1 3). A blow-out 1 5 m north of L-7 contained

a dark gray Mugford chert microblade fragment. A

test pit excavated beside the blow-out did not reveal

additional cultural material. Finally, L-8 was located downslope from the northeast corner of the main

beach terrace. Yellowish-green slate flakes similar

to those found in Pre-Dorset sites in the area were

observed on the surface.

Discussion

Webb Point provides evidence for limited Maritime

Archaic and Pre-Dorset activity. The most definite

traces of Maritime Archaic presence were found on

the prominent terrace, where evidence for PreDorset was lacking. The stemmed point and flake

point found at L-1 might indicate a Rattlers Bight

phase or slightly earlier occupation. Pre-Dorset appears restricted to the lower beach levels,

although possible Maritime Archaic implements

were found at L-6 and L-7. The varying beach elevations may indicate chronological differences in occupation period, but the material is so scanty that no reliable conclusions can be drawn. The minimal

occupation of the main beach terrace was surprising

given its topographic prominence and its physical

similarities with the beach terrace at Attu's Bight.

Indeed, the limited use of Webb Point contrasts

strongly with the amount of Maritime Archaic and

Pre-Dorset activity on the north shore of Webb Bay. The next chapter (13) describes Attu's Point, a major Pre-Dorset locality on the north shore of Webb Bay. Following that, Chapter 14 integrates the

material presented in Chapters 1 2 and 1 3 and welds

it into a more comprehensive discussion of Maritime

Archaic/Pre-Dorset social relations in northern

Labrador.

WEBB BAY-PORT MANVERS RUN: SMALL SCALE INVESTIGATIONS 271
Northern entrance to Port Manvers Run, Thalia Point on right. July 1997. (Photo B. Hood)

272 CHAPTER 1 3
Attu's Point: A Pre-Dorset

Centra! Place'' on Webb Baij

In 1993 surveys were undertaken west of the

entrance to Port Manvers Run along the north

shore of Webb Bay. A Pre-Dorset locality dubbed

Attu's Point (HeCk-5) was discovered near a rocky

point overlooking the narrow tickle between Igloo

Island and the mainland (Figure 163). In the middle

of a raised beach was an extremely well-preserved

axial structure containing a box-hearth filled with

thermoliths.^

The initial survey identified at least a dozen

loci of Pre-Dorset activity, of which five had traces

of dwelling structures, as well as a locus with

Maritime Archaic material. Since Attu's Point lay

only 1.8 km west of the Late Maritime Archaic

occupation at Attu's Bight, and since Attu's Point is

the only major Pre-Dorset inner bay locality in the

Main region, the site was deemed high priority and was investigated further in 1994. The 1994 work

identified several additional loci, for a total of 21

find spots. These substantial traces of occupation

suggest that Attu's Point was a "central place" in

the Nain region Pre-Dorset settlement system: a

repeatedly used seasonal site that contrasts with

the scattered and ephemeral small localities that

otherwise characterize Pre-Dorset landscape use.

OVERVIEW

The Attu's Point site is spread out along two west-facing raised beach terraces ranging between 10-12 m

asl. (Figures 1 92 and 1 93). The beach deposits consist

of medium-sized gravel and they are bordered on the

southeast and west by eroded outcrops of anorthosite

bedrock. Some portions of the beaches are deflated

while other parts are covered with a thin layer of crowberry or moss. Open spruce forest begins immediately

east of the site. The 21 loci were arranged in three linear distributions on different beach levels. L-1 to L-5, L-20 and L21 lay near the edge of the 1 m beach terrace, L-6 to

L-8 and L-1 7 were in a line slightly higher up and L-9

to L-1 6, L-1 8 and L-1 9 lay on the uppermost terrace between 11-12 m. At least one structure from each of

these three levels was excavated or tested (L-1 , L-5, L7 and L-9) and surface collections were made at some

of the other loci. All but one locus exhibited evidence

of Pre-Dorset material; L-1 2 produced traces of Late

Maritime Archaic.

Each of the excavated features will be described in

turn, along with a spatial analysis and descriptive sum- mary of the tools. The surface collected loci will then

be described briefly. A summary of the significant spatial patterns and a general culture-historical conclusion

is presented at the end of the chapter.

^Thermolith is a generic descriptor for rocks heated within a box-hearth for uncertain intended function (heating, cooking

or other practices); it denotes both fire-cracked and non-thermally altered specimens.

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 273
1 92/ Attu's Point overview towards the northeast.

EXCAVATION AND COLLECTION

METHODS

Excavation of the structures involved removal of the

thin crowberry vegetation mat and troweling through

the upper few centimeters of the beach gravel. Given

time constraints, the size of the excavation areas at

each structure was relatively small. Although most of

the structurally relevant space was excavated at L-1 , L5 and L-7, a better picture would be available if a larger area around the periphery of the features had been

exposed. All tools were point-plotted. Flakes were

point-plotted by raw material types, then bagged by

1 m^ units. The gravel was not screened, so small implements such as burin spalls and retouch flakes may be somewhat under-represented.

L-1 Excavation

L-l was located on the lowest beach ridge, 10 m asl.

(Figure 193). Because the 1993 survey produced an

interesting surface collection and suggested the

presence of structural remains, a 14 m^ area was

excavated in 1 994, revealing a cluster of rocks associated with hearth remnants (Figures 194 and 195).

The presumed structural feature consisted of a

north-south oriented concentration of rocks covering

an area of 3.5 by 2.0 m. A hearth area composed of

three flat slabs and a charcoal concentration was

identifiable at the northern end of the concentration.

A small charcoal sample from the hearth was radiocarbon dated to 3750±60 B.P. (Beta-7761 1 ; ^ ^c/l

ratio -26.1). A line of three rocks extending northwest from the hearth to a small boulder gave the

impression of perimeter delineation, but it was otherwise difficult to discern an internal order in the

associated scatter of rocks. The feature may have

been disturbed, but it is possible that it was oriented differently from our expectations, or that it is not

of the anticipated axial form.

274 CHAPTER 1 3
Tool Distribution Table 71. Attu's Point L-1: A total of 49 tools was recovered. Figure 196 shows Tool Classes by K-Means Cluster.

the tool distribution and the results of a /c-means cluster analysis. A five cluster solution seemed best, definC-1 C-2 C 3 C 4 C 5 TOTAL

N (%)

ing a hearth-centered group (cluster 5), another im- Endblades 4 4 (8.2)

mediately west of the hearth (cluster 3), a small cluster Endblade preforms 1 1 2 4 (8.2)

near the western boundary of the excavation (cluster Bifaces 1 1 2 (4.1)

1), and two diffuse clusters on the southern side of the Burin spalls 1 1 5 4 11 (22.5)

excavation (clusters 2 and 4). Table 71 compares the Microblades 3 2 4 1 3 1 3 (26.4)

tool contents of these clusters. Although it is difficult Scrapers 1 1 2 (4.1)

to draw inferences from such low frequencies there is Scraper/burins 1 1 (2.0)

a contrast between the prevalence of burin spalls, Utilized flakes 2 1 6 1 10 (20.4)

microblades and utilized flakes in cluster 3 adjacent to Adzes/celts 1 1 2 (4.1)

the hearth, and the concentration of endblades in clus- TOTAL 13 5 17 5 9 49

ter 1 , 2 m west of the hearth.

1 93/ Attu's Point site map.

ATTU'S POINT; A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY
In the absence of a clearly

defined axial feature, the spatial divisions used for the bilateral model-based tool distribution analysis are association

with the central rock feature,

or placement on its east or west flanks (Table 72). The

majority of tools (55.1%) lie in

the vicinity of the rock feature. Although the frequencies are

rather low, there are slight dif- ferences in where the tool

types were discarded. Most of

the endblades and preforms

occur on the flanks of the rock

feature, including a cluster of

five implements deposited

together on the west side (possibly a cache), while the majority of the burin spalls, microblades and utilized flakes are

closely associated with the feature. Table 73 breaks down the

tool distribution along a north- south division (front/back)

running along the 6y grid line.

In this case, nearly 80% of the

tools lie on the northern (seaward) end of the rock feature,

with endblades, burin spalls,

microblades and utilized

flakes being particularly well

represented.

4x8v 6x8y

N

F Flat rock Q Charcoal

3x4y 6x4y

/94/Afru's Point L-1 : rock feature and total flake distribution.

195/ Attu's Point L-1 : overview towards the east.

276 CHAPTER 1 3
3x4y 6x4y

1 96/ Attu's Point L-1 : tool distribution with k-means dusters.

Table 72. Attu's Point L-1: Table 73. Attu's Point L-1: Tool Classes by

Tool Classes by Bilateral Position. North-South (Front/Back) Position.

Central

(Axial)

East West TOTAL

N (%)

North

(Front)

South

(Back)

TOTAL

N (%)

Endblades 4 4 (8.2) Endblades 4 4 (8.2) Endblade prefo rms 1 2 1 4 (8.2) Endblade preforms 2 2 4 (8.2)

Bifaces 1 2 2 (4.1) Bifaces 1 1 2 (4.1)

Burin spalls 9 1 1 1 1 (22.5) Burin spalls 10 1 1 1 (22.4)

Microblades 7 3 3 1 3 (26.4) Microblades 10 3 1 3 (26.5)

Scrapers 1 1 2 (4.1) Scrapers 1 1 2 (4.1)

Scraper/burins 1 1 (2.0) Scraper/burins 1 1 (2.0)

Utilized flakes 7 1 2 10 (20.4) Utilized flakes 9 1 10 (20.4)

Celts/adzes 1 1 2 (4.1) Celts/adzes 1 1 2 (4.1) TOTAL 27 9 13 49 TOTAL 39 10 49

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 277
Tool raw material distribution patterns can be

evaluated visually in Figure 197. Mugford chert tools

tend to lie near the central rock feature, although they

are also found on its flanks. Crystal quartz tools are

clustered near the hearth (similar to the flake distribution, see below). The other materials are too few to

indicate a pattern, but the two implements of Ramah

chert are located some distance away from the central

rock feature. Quantitatively, the distributions can first

be evaluated by their location relative to east-west

bilaterality (Table 74). The only clear pattern is the

exclusive association of crystal quartz with the rock

feature. When broken down by the north-south

(front/back) division (Table 75) there is little clear patterning other than the exclusive association of crystal

quartz and gray-speckled chert with the northern

(hearth-related) division. Tool raw materials can also

be seen in relation to the /(-means clusters (Table 76),

but the numbers are too low for the comparison to be

worth much.

Table 74. Attu's Point L-1: Tool Raw Material

Frequencies by Bilateral Position.

Central

(Axial)

East West TOTAL

N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 1 2 2 4 18(36.7)

Light gray Mugford chert 6 4 6 16(32.7)

Cray-speckled chert 2 1 3 (6.1)

Black chert 1 1 (2.0) Ramah chert 1 1 2 (4.1)

Crystal quartz 6 6(12.3)

Gray silicified slate 1 1 (2.0)

Slate 1 1 2 (4.1) TOTAL 27 9 13 49

278 CHAPTER 1 3
4x8y 6x8y

3x4y

3x4y

o

oo.

0^

Mugford chert flakes

(all variants)

4x8y

6x4y

6x8y

3x4y

6

^ oo

6x4y 3x4y Black chert flakes

1 98/ Attu's Point L-1 flake raw material distributions.

3x4y

r^/—? I !

Patinated chert flakes

4x8y

Crystal quartz flakes

4x8y 6x8y

O

oo'O u

Ramah chert flakes

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 279
Table 75. Attu's Point L-1: Tool Raw Materials by

North-South (Front-Back) Position.

North South TOTAL

N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 1 5 3 18 (36.7)

Light gray Mugford chert 12 4 16 (32.7)

Cray-speckled chert 3 3 (6.1)

Black chert 1 1 (2.0) Ramah chert 1 1 2 (4.1)

Crystal quartz 6 6 (12.3)

Cray silicified slate 1 1 (2.0)

Slate 1 1 2 (4.1) TOTAL 39 10 49

Flake Distribution

The total flake distribution (Figure 194) parallels the

tool groupings identified by the cluster analysis (Figure

196). There are concentrations on either side of the

hearth (similar to tool clusters 3 and 5), a tight concentration west of the hearth (cluster 1 ) and a diffuse concentration in the southeast corner of the excavation

(cluster 2). Figure 198 presents point-plots for each

flake raw material type while Figure 199 displays

quadrat counts. The Mugford and patinated chert distributions are very similar, which is not surprising since

the latter is probably a weathered version of Mugford

chert. They are spread in a roughly linear east-west distribution centered on the hearth area at the northern

end of the rock feature. The marked concentration of Mugford chert on the western side of the excavation

lies only a few centimeters distant from the tight tool

concentration of cluster 1, which included a cache of

four endblades and an endblade preform (all of Mugford chert), two microblades, a scraper and two utilized flakes. In the absence of refitting data, one might

speculate as to the relation between the Mugford flake

concentration and production of the endblades. The distributions of slate and Mugford chert are

almost mutually exclusive. Slate clusters in the southeast corner of the excavation (with over 70% in a single

unit), although a few flakes are present near the center. A slate adze bit was found 1 m west of the slate

concentration. Mugford cherts have a more diffuse distribution, but are mostly associated with the hearth

area and the northwestern portion of the excavation.

This placement broadly parallels the tool distribution.

Crystal quartz occurs in a small cluster immediately

west of the hearth, virtually in the center of the crystal

quartz tool distribution, which was also hearth related

(Figure 197). Black chert has a diffuse distribution, but

occurs almost exclusively west of the rock feature; the

single tool of this material lay west of the rock feature

(Figure 197). The two Ramah chert flakes are found

towards the north end of the rock feature.

Table 77 outlines the distribution of flake raw

materials according to their east-west bilateral position, tabulated by Im^ quadrats (unit 6x5y missing).

Overall, the flakes are dominated by Mugford chert and slate; 61 .1% of the debitage was deposited on the

west side of the structure, consistent with, though not

as marked, as the tool distribution. A chi-square test

(x^ = 85.80) indicates a statistically significant difference between the two areas at the .05 level of significance. This difference is based on a marked tendency

for light gray Mugford chert and crystal quartz to be

found on the west side, while slate is associated primarily with the east side. Variation can also be seen in the

north-south (front/back) direction, with a not entirely

artificial division imposed along the 6y line. Table 78

indicates that 64.6% of the debitage is found on the

north side of the rock feature. A chi-square test ("2 =

103.59) indicates a statistically significant difference

between the two areas. The pattern is linked to the

high frequency of light gray Mugford chert (and to a much lesser extent, patinated chert and crystal quartz)

on the north side versus a preponderance of slate on

the south.

Integration

The distribution of Mugford chert and crystal quartz

tools and flakes is largely coterminus, while the slate,

black chert and Ramah chert implements are found

280 CHAPTER 1

3
1

1

3

Black chert flakes

4 2

2 5 2

5 14 16

1 5 10 33

Light gray Mugford chert flakes

41 4

6

3 2

1

2

2 14

Crystal quartz flakes

6

2 6 6

1 4 7

Patinated chert flakes

1

1 3

Dark gray Mugford chert flakes

Ramah chert flakes

Slate flakes Gray speckled Mugford chert flakes

1 99/ Attu's Point L-1 : flake raw materials by quadrat.

outside the distributions of their debitage. An

attempt to refit burin spalls to the single

scraper/burin was unsuccessful. While the spalls

mostly cluster towards the north end of the rock feature, generally associated with the hearth, the burinated implement lies on the western periphery of the

excavation.

Table 79 tabulates tool and flake raw materials

by weight for L-1 as a whole. Slate is the dominant

material (54.2%), with gray Mugford cherts ranked

second (22.6%). Several observations can be made if

Table 79 is used in conjunction with Tables 74 and

77 (tool and flake frequencies). The high proportion

of dark gray Mugford chert among the tools by both

weight and frequency is not parallelled by a high proportion of such flakes; in fact, light Mugford chert dominates the debitage. This suggests most of the

tools made of dark gray Mugford were manufactured

elsewhere (either at Attu's Point or another site) and

curated into the locus. The opposite pattern is seen

with patinated chert; no tools were present but a modest amount of debitage was, indicating the

ATTU'S POINT A PRE DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 281
Table 76. Attu's Point L-1: Tool Raw Material Frequencies by K-Means Cluster.

V. 1 C-2

Dark gray Mugford chert 4 2 6 1 5 18

Light gray Mugford chert 6 2 5 2 1 16

Cray-speckled chert 1 2 3

Black chert 1 1 Ramah chert 1 1 2

Crystal quartz 3 3 6 Cray silicified slate 1 1

Slate 1 1 2 TOTAL 13 5 17 5 9 49

Table 77. Attu's Point L-1 Flake Raw Material Frequencies by East-West Bilateral Position.

East West TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 7 (5.9) 4 (3.6) 1 1 (4.8)

Light gray Mugford chert 33 (27.9) 66 (59.5) 99 (43.2)

Cray-speckled chert 1 (0.8) 4 (3.6) 5 (2.2)

Patinated chert 14 (11 .9) 18 (16.2) 32 (13.9)

Black chert 5 (4.3) 5 (2.2) Ramah chert 2 (1.8) 2 (0.9)

Crystal quartz 4 (3.4) 14 (12.6) 18 (6.8)

Slate 54 (45.8) 3 (2.7) 57 (25.6)

TOTAL 94 140 229

removal of tools from the locus. Ramah chert is better represented by tools than by flakes.

Having presented the lithic distribution patterns

along several dimensions, the overall spatial configuration at L-1 can be evaluated. The initial assumption was that the central rock feature could indicate a disturbed axial structure running roughly north-south,

oblique to the beach front. Inspection of the individual

distributions in relation to the feature suggests an

alternative interpretation. If the more numerous item

classes are considered (e.g., microblades, utilized

flakes, Mugford chert tools, crystal quartz tools and

flakes), there is a strong tendency for them to display

a roughly northeast-west linear distribution ranging

from the hearth to the edge of the excavation on the

7x line. The clustering of slate flakes and some

microblades in the southeast corner of the excavation

is the primary deviation from this pattern. In light of

these tendencies one can postulate an axial feature

running parallel with the beach front and consisting of

a hearth at its northeastern end and a small, roughly

rectangular feature 1 by 2 m in size that extends westwards. The presence of a similar configuration at L-5

(see below) might support this interpretation. It is also

instructive to compare the small concentration of

Mugford chert flakes in the northwest corner of the L282 CHAPTER 1 3
Table 78. Attu's Point L-1: Flake Raw Material Frequencies by North-South (Front-Back) Position

North (Front) South (Back) TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert b (4.U) 5 (6.2) 1 1 (4.8)

Light gray Mugford chert OA tec O \ o4 (5b. o) 15 (18.5) 99 (43.2)

Cray-speckled chert C to A\ 5 (3.4) 5 (2.2)

Patinated chert -) C / 1 "7 C \ (1 /.d) 6 (7.4) 32 (1 3.9)

Black chert i U.O) 2 (2.5) 5 (2.2) Ramah chert 2 (1.3) 2 (0.9)

Crystal quartz 16 (10.8) 2 (2.5) 18 (6.8)

Slate 6 (4.1) 51 (62.9) 57 (25.6)

TOTAL 148 81 229

Table 79. Attu's Point L-1: Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes). In Grams.

Tools g (%) Flakes g (%) TOTAL g (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 32.5 (10.8) 16.1 (9.0) 48.6 (10.1)

Light gray Mugford chert 21.3 (7.1) 38.6 (21.6) 59.9 (12.5)

Cray-speckled chert 19.1 (6.4) 4.9 (2.7) 24.0 (5.0)

Patinated chert 13.2 (7.4) 13.2 (2.8)

Black chert 1.0 (0.3) 2.1 (1.2) 3.1 (0.6) Ramah chert 41.7 (1 3.9) 0.8 (0.4) 42.5 (8.9)

Crystal quartz 1 1 .7 (3.9) 16.6 (9.3) 28.3 (5.9)

Slate 173.0 (57.6) 86.8 (48.5) 259.8 (54.2)

1 excavation— which would lie at the western end of a

beach-parallel axial feature— with the concentration of Mugford chert flakes at the foot of the axial structure

at L-7 (see below). In any event, it appears that the L1 hearth is located at the terminal end of a feature

rather than in the middle, as expected from a classic

axial structure. Another possibility is that the scatter of

rocks in the southwestern portion of the excavation

may represent a second overlapping feature.

L-1 Tool Assemblage

Endblades: Three of the four endblades are complete, one is a distal fragment (Figure 200:a-d). Three are made of dark gray Mugford chert, one of light gray

Mugford chert. The complete specimens are triangular

and two have straight bases and biconvex cross-sections (L= 25.1, 16.1, 21.4 mm, W= 9.5, 7.7, 9.2, TH=

2.2, 1.5, 1.9). One implement has a plano-convex

cross-section and a concave base (depth= 1 .3 mm); its

dorsal face is completely retouched, but ventrally only

the edge margins are retouched (Figure 200:d). The

lateral edges of the latter specimen are distinctly serrated; the other three endblades also have slightly serrated edges.

Endblade preforms: Of the four endblade preforms (Figure 200:e-h), one is complete, two are proximal fragments and one a distal fragment. Two are made of light gray Mugford chert, one of dark gray

ATTU'S POINT A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 283
f g h

200/ Attu's Point L-1 tools, a-d endblades; e-h: endblade

preforms.

Mugford chert and one of crystal quartz. Two of the

three specimens with a proximal portion exhibit

straight bases while the third is straight-based with an

eared basal corner (Figure 200:f). The complete implement of crystal quartz (Figure 200:e) has near-final

retouch completed from its tip to its medial region and

an unfinished basal portion, indicating a distal to proximal flaking sequence (L= 23.8 mm, W= 1 6.1 , TH= 8.6). The two proximal fragments differ somewhat in width

(W= 1 3.4, 1 9.9 mm, TH= 2.8, 3.4). One of these frag- ments (Figure 200:g) is flaked mostly on its dorsal

face, upon which two long parallel basal-thinning

flakes were removed medially.

Bifaces: Two biface fragments were recovered, one made of Ramah chert, one of crystal quartz. The

Ramah chert specimen (Figure 201 :a) is the proximal

end of a biface that originally must have been ca. 10 cm long (W= 39.3 mm, TH= 6.9). There is a remnant

striking platform near the base, which seems less finished than the rest of the implement. The crystal

quartz specimen is a small lateral edge fragment.

Combination scraper/burins: The single speci- men of a combination scraper/burin (Figure 201 :c) is made on a blade-like flake of dark gray Mugford chert

(L= 70.5 mm, W= 20.6, TH= 8.1). It consists of a cond f

^!!!B5il^S!Siiiai^!? CM.

O I £ J •? 5

201 / Attu's Point L-1 tools, a biface, b sidescraper; c: burm/sidescraper , d-e microblades.

202/ Attu's Point L-1 tools, a: adze; b: celt/adze preform

or proximal fragment.

cave scraper running distally-medially on one lateral edge and a burination plane along the other lateral

edge, with removals from a platform on the slightly

convex, unifacially retouched distal end. The scraper

284 CHAPTER 1 3
4x7y 7x7y

2x6y

) 0' o

oo

,^0

o

—1

2x3y

F Flat rock ® Charcoal

203/ Attu's Point L-5: features and total flake distribution.

edge angle is 50 and there are three burin spall

removals. Slightly below the mid-portion of each lateral edge there is a faint shoulder, which creates a slight stem effect proximally. A striking platform is present

proximally and both the platform and bulb of percussion are highly polished, presumably by hafting wear.

There is no facial grinding. The middle of the scraper

204/ Attu's Point L-5: possible axial structure, view towards the southwest.

edge and the distal end of the

tool exhibit wear polish; the

first burination scar has polished edges and small fractures

while the third burination scar

has clear striations on the adjacent ventral surface, perpendicular to the scar edge.

Scrapers: Two implements were collected. A complete

sidescraper (Figure 201 :b) is made of dark gray Mugford

chert and has a slightly concave

working edge (L= 43.8 mm, W=

23.9, TH= 8.2). The tool is dorsally retouched on all lateral

edges while on the ventral side

the proximal end has been

flaked to thin out the bulb of

percussion, although the striking platform remains at

the base. The concave working edge and distal end are

distinctly polished by wear. Seen alongside the combination scraper/burin (Figure 201 ;c), it is likely that the

sidescraper is a reworked and perhaps exhausted version of the latter, since both have very similar basal

forms and dimensions. Rather than representing different "types," they may indicate

start and end points in a reduction sequence. The second

implement is an edge fragment

made of black chert.

Burin spalls: Of the 1 1

burin spalls (MNI=10), seven were complete, three were

proximal fragments and one a

distal fragment. All were made

of gray Mugford chert variants. None bore traces of

grinding and all were secondary spalls. Their metrics can

be summarized as follows:

ATTU'S POINT A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 285
xL = 1 5.9, r = 9.2-21 .8, xW = 3.3, r= 2.2-4.3, xTH =

1 .7, r = 1 .1 -2.4.

Microblades: Of the 1 3 microblades, three are

complete, six are medial fragments, three are proximal

fragments and one is a distal portion. Based on proximal elements, MNI=1 0. Nine are made of gray Mugford

cherts and four of crystal quartz. Two specimens

(Figure 201:d,f) are large enough to be considered

"macroblades" (L = 61.0, 56.7 mm, W = 17.7, 20.9,

TH = 5.6, 4.8). Metrics for the others are as follows: xW = 9.4 mm, r = 6.1-15.0, xTH = 2.1, r = 1.4-2.9.

Platform angles: 80* = 3, 75 = 1, 70' = 1. Platform

preparation: retouched= 2, retouched/ground = 1,

plain = 2. Eight specimens exhibit use-wear or light

retouch.

Adzes/Celts: The two specimens are fragmentary

and both are made of green slate. The first is the distal portion of an adze (Figure 202:a); one lateral edge

is bifacially retouched while the other is retouched

abruptly from the dorsal (top) side of the implement,

resulting in an asymmetrical cross-section. A considerable amount of cortex is still present on the dorsal surface. The dorsal edge of the bit is only polished 1-3 mm back from the edge, while the ventral polishing is

mostly limited to an area within 7.5 mm of the bit

edge, although a few facets further back are also polished. Use-wear consists of a slight rounding of the bit

edge, although some rather large step fractures on

one ventral corner may indicate heavier work pressure

or retouch. L = >64 mm, W = 41.8, TH = 16.2, Edge

Angle = 70'. The second specimen (Figure 202: b) is the proximal end of an adze or celt. It is made on a rectangular slate tablet, the lateral edges of which are

retouched with small flakes removed at 90' from both

the dorsal and ventral surfaces of the tablet such that

the squared edge and rectangular cross-section is

maintained. The flake facets on what appears to be

286 CHAPTER 1 3
Table 80. Attu's Point L-5: Tool Classes by K Means Cluster

C-1 N (%) C-2 N (%) C-3 N (%) C-4 N (%) TOTAL N (%)

Endblades 1 (6.7) 3 (8.4) 4 (5.6) Endblade preforms 1 (2.8) 1 (1 .4) Stemmed points 1 (14.3) 1 (1 .4)

Biface fragments 1 (7.7) 3 (8.4) 4 (5.6)

Burins 1 (6.7) 2 (5.6) 3 (4.2)

Burin spalls 2 (1 3.3) 2 (1 5.4) 9 (25.0) 2 (28.5) 1 5 (21.1)

Microblades 4 (26.6) 3 (23.1) 12 (33.3) 1 (14.3) 20 (28.1

)

Microblade cores 1 (6.7) 1 (2.8) 2 (2.8)

Scrapers 2 (1 5.4) 1 (14.3) 3 (4.2)

Scraper/burins 1 (14.3) 1 (1.4)

Utilized flakes 6 (40.0) 4 (30.7) 5 (13.9) 1 (14.3) 16 (22.4)

Celts/adzes 1 (7.7) 1 (2.8) 2 (2.8) TOTAL 15 13 36 7 71

the dorsal surface are polished slightly and one lateral edge is slightly rounded. L = > 62 mm, W = 33.7,

TH = 16.7.

Utilized Flakes: Eight of the ten utilized flakes are made of gray Mugford chert, one of black chert and

one of gray-speckled chert.

L-5 EXCAVATION

L-5 was located on the lowest beach ridge at 1 m asl.

(Figure 193). Initially, L-5 appeared to contain the

remains of a well-preserved axial structure, so an excavation of 21.5 m^ was opened up. Unfortunately, the

structure turned out to be less distinct than anticipated (Figures 203 and 204). Towards the southern end of

the excavation was a hearth composed of a few flat

slabs, a small scatter of charcoal and a number of

small rocks that may have been thermoliths. What

appeared to be the remnants of an axial structure extended out from the hearth, suggesting a feature 2 m long, 0.75-1.0 m wide, oriented N-S, parallel with

the shoreline, but with the hearth placed at one end of

the axial structure rather than in the middle (cf., L-1). A small charcoal sample procured from the hearth area was radiocarbon dated to 3790±70 B.P. (Beta-77612;

]3q/'\2q rgfiQ -24.7). To the north of the axial structure was a cluster of rocks associated with a charcoal

concentration and a substantial quantity of tools and

debitage. This area may represent an outdoor dump or

activity area at the entrance to the axial structure or it

could be the remains of a second, badly disturbed

axial structure with a NW-SE orientation. Finally, in the

southwest corner of the excavation and just outside

the excavation limits was another cluster of rocks,

including a few flat slabs. Although there were no

associated lithics, the rock cluster might indicate the

presence of another feature.

Tool Distribution

A total of 82 tools was recovered; some were scattered around the postulated axial feature, but most (68.7%)

^ Items excluded from the analysis due to lack of point provenience are displayed by quadrats in Figure 206.

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY
Table 81. Attu's Point L-5: Tool Classes by General Spatial Position.

AXiai In (/o) iNOrin In (^; 1 U 1 AL N

Endblades AH (b. !

}

4 (4.y) Endblade preforms 1 ( 1 .3)

1

1 ( 1 -*^)

Endblades/points TL (3.U) c. KlA)

Stemmed points 11 (1.3) 1

1

Biface fragments 3

//I c

(4.b) i (3.7)

Burins (4.5) 3 (3.7)

Burin spalls d. \\ l.^) 1 c (ZZ.O) 1 / (ZU. /)

Microblades 3 ( 1 O.O) 1 D

1 o1 y/ 3 3 3 \ (^3.2)

Microblade cores

~%

L. (3.U) z

/3 /l A

Scrapers ( 1 0.0) 3 (3./)

Scraper/burins 1 (6.2) 1 (1.2)

Utilized flakes 6 (37.5) 18 (27.3) 24 (29.3)

Celts/adzes 1 (6.2) 1 (1.5) 2 (2.4) TOTAL 16 66 82

Table 82. Attu's Point L-5: Tool Raw Material Frequencies by General Spatial Position.

Axial N (%) North N (%)TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 6 (37.6) 30 (45.5) 36 (43.9)

Light gray Mugford chert 3 (4.5) 3 (3.7)

Light gray silicified slate 2 (12.5) 6 (9.2) 8 (9.8)

Patinated chert 2 (3.0) 2 (2.4)

Gray-speckled chert 1 (6.2) 5 (7.6) 6 (7.3)

Crystal Quartz 2 (12.5) 8 (12.1) 10 (12.2)

Ramah chert 3 (18.8) 8 (12.1) 1 1 (13.4)

Black chert 1 (6.2) 3 (4.5) 4 (4.9)

Slate 1 (6.2) 1 (1.5) 2 (2.4) TOTAL 16 66 82

were located to the north in the possible dump/activity area. A bilateral analysis could not be undertaken

given the paucity of tools associated with the axial feature. Instead, k-means cluster analysis was used to

define groupings based on proximity rather than

model-derived spatial categories. The analysis used a

total of 71 tools for which precise point provenience was available; a four cluster solution seemed most

appropriate (Figure 205). One of these clusters (cluster

2) is centered on the hearth area of the axial structure

while two others (clusters 1 and 3) partition the

dump/activity area into two groups. Cluster 4 is a dif288 CHAPTER 1 3
Table 83. Attu's Point L-5: Tool Raw Material Frequencies by K-Means Cluster.

C-1 N (%) C-2 N (%) C-3 N (%) C-4 N (%) TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 6 (40.0) 3 (23.1) 24 (67.7) 2 (28.6) 35 (49.3)

Light gray Mugford chert 1 (6.7) 2 (5.5) 3 (4.2)

Light gray siliclfied slate 2 (13.3) 2 (1 5.4) 4 (5.6)

Patinated chert 1 (2.8) 1 (14.3) 2 (2.8)

Cray-speckled 3 (20.0) 1 (7.7) 1 (2.8) 1 (14.3) 6 (8.5)

Crystal quartz 2 (13.3) 2 (1 5.4) 3 (42.8) 7 (9.9) Ramah chert 1 (6.7) 3 (23.1) 5 (13.9) 9 (12.7)

Black chert 1 (7.7) 2 (5.5) 3 (4.2)

Slate 1 (7.7) 1 (2.8) 2 (2.8) TOTAL 1 5 13 36 7 71

fuse distribution of questionable significance immediately northwest of the axial feature. Table 80 displays

the variation in tool classes between the clusters.

Cluster 3, immediately north of the presumed axial feature, has by far the largest proportion of the tool collection (N = 37, 51 .4%). It also has a tendency towards more endblades, perhaps burins and burin spalls, as

well as microblades and microblade cores. Cluster 2

UF=4 UF= 1

UF= 1 UF= 1 EB= 1

UF= 1 Bl= 1

BS= 1

Utilized flakes (UP)

Endblades (EB)

Bifaces (Bl)

Burin spalls (BS)

206/ Attu's Point L-S no provenience tools by quadrat.

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY

(associated with the hearth) and cluster 1 exhibit some- what higher proportions of utilized flakes. A broader spatial comparison can be made

between the frequency of tool types associated with

the presumed axial feature and the concentration to

the north of the feature using a dividing line running

along 4.30x. Table 81 shows clear differences

between the two subareas. Endblades, points, bifaces,

burins and microblade cores are exclusively associated with the northern subarea, while burin spalls and

microblades are predominantly to the north. Scrapers

and the combination scraper/burin are exclusive to

the southern area associated with the axial feature. The relationship is statistically significant at the .05

level (/^= 22.49).

The first step in evaluating variation in tool raw

materials is to consider their distribution relative to

the axial feature/northern subarea division used in the

tool type analysis (Table 82). There is no significant

difference between the two areas (-/^= 3.26). The distribution of tool raw materials can also be compared

across the cluster groups (Table 83). It is difficult to

evaluate the low frequencies, but higher proportions of

dark gray chert occur in clusters 1 and 3 and crystal

quartz is absent from cluster 1 . Point distributions of

tool raw materials are shown in Figure 207.

289
4x7y 7x7y

2x6y

* A ^ ^ A

2x3y o

B Black chert

Crystal quartz

A Dark gray Mugford chert + Gray speckled Mugford chert

• Light gray Mugford chert

Light gray silicified slate

Patinated chert * Ramah chert

Slate

207/ Attu's Point L-5 tool raw material distribution.

Table 84. Attu's Point L-5: Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Analytical Quadrant.

NW N (%) NE N (%) SW N (%) SE N (%) TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford 9 (10.7) 21 (12.0) 4 (13.8) 3 (10.7) 37 (1 1.7)

Light gray Mugford 1 (1.2) 5 (2.9) 2 (6.9) 2 (7.1) 10 (3.2)

Gray-speckled chert 10 (5.7) 1 (3.6) 1 1 (3.5)

Black chert 2 (1.1) 1 (3.4) 1 (3.6) 4 (1.3) Ramah chert 5 (6.0) 30 (17.1) 2 (6.9) 7 (25.0) 44 (13.9)

Patinated chert 1 (1.2) 12 (6.9) 1 (3.4) 14 (4.4)

Biostrome chert^ ^1 (1.2) 1 (0.3)

Crystal quartz 1 (3.4) 3 (10.7) 4 (1.3)

Slate 17 (20.2) 78 (44.6) 6 (20.7) 8 (28.6) 109 (34.5)

Clastic slate^ ^ 43 (51.2) 1 7 (9.7) 8 (27.6) 2 (7.1) 70 (22.2)

Light gray silicified slate 7 (8.3) 4 (13.8) 1 (3.6) 12 (3.8) TOTAL 84 1 75 29 28 316

^ 1 Biostrome chert denotes possible stromatolite structure.

^ ^ Clastic slate denotes a material containing small rounded clast inclusions.

290 CHAPTER 1 3
o

h

© o

O

Mugford chert flakes

(all variants)

if o Black chert flakes

7x7y

o

oo'- o

G7 o

o'

Go p.

Q o

o o

-JO 30

•

Patinated chert flakes Crystal quartz flakes

o

o .O

O <3

o

Ramah chert flakes o

2

Slate flakes

208/ Attu's Point L-5: flake raw material distributions.

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 291
Table 85. Attu's Point L-5: Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes). In Grams.

TOOLS g (%) FLAKES g (%) TOTAL g (%)

Dark gray Mugford 69.8 (26.8) 1 9.9 (7.8) 89.7 (1 7.4)

Light gray Mugford 8.0 (3.1) 8.5 (3.3) 16.5 (3.2)

Cray-speckled chert 2.3 (0.9) 5.5 (2.2) 7.8 (1.5)

Black chert 5.5 (2.1) 1.5 (0.6) 7.0 (1.4) Ramah chert 1 3.1 (5.0) 1 7.7 (7.0) 30.8 (6.0)

Patlnated chert 0.9 (0.3) 8.5 (3.3) 9.4 (1.8)

Blostrome chert 0.4 (0.2) 0.4 (0.1)

Crystal quartz 7.2 (2.8) 1.1 (0.4) 8.3 (1.6)

Slate 1 10.0 (42.2) 1 1 2.5 (44.2) 222.5 (43.2)

Clastic slate 72.5 (28.5) 72.5 (14.1)

Light gray silicified slate 43.9 (16.8) 6.2 (2.4) 50.1 (9.7)

No refits of broken tools were identified and

attempts to refit burin spalls with the three burins were unsuccessful. The majority of burins and burin

spalls lie clustered together on the north side of the

excavation (Figure 205). Two of the three burins are made of dark gray Mugford chert, as are 1 3 of the 1 6

spalls, while one burin is made of patinated chert, as

is one spall. A single spall of gray-speckled chert lacks

a burin of the same material.

Flake Distribution

The total flake distribution is shown in Figure 203. The

vast majority of flakes (81%) are concentrated on the

northern side of the excavation. This concentration

actually consists of two smaller elongated clusters, one

associated with a small charcoal concentration, the

other running parallel ca. 50 cm to the east. The axial

feature has relatively few flakes, but these seem to be

concentrated in two clusters; one on the southeast

edge of the hearth, the other at the northwest corner

of the axial alignment in the vicinity of three flat slabs.

In sum, the overall debitage distribution tends to parallel the /(-means clusters of tools. The individual flake

raw material distributions are shown as point plots and

quadrat counts in Figures 208 and 209, respectively.

Ceneric Mugford chert, patinated chert and Ramah

chert tend to be found on the east side of the northern

concentration, while generic slate is found on both

sides. Black chert occurs mostly in two small concentrations, one at the northwest corner of the excavation,

the other at the northwest corner of the axial feature.

There are few crystal quartz flakes, but two are located close to the hearth associated with the presumed

axial feature (cf., the hearth-related crystal quartz distribution at L-1). Ramah chert occurs in two clusters, one on the east side of the northern concentration, the

other adjacent to the axial feature hearth.

Given the strong spatial clustering, a quantitative

analysis of the debitage was conducted using four

quadrants, distinguished along an east-west axis by

the 5y line and along the north-south axis by the 4x

line (Table 84). These quadrants separate the two

clusters of the northern concentration and distinguish

the latter from the axial feature, and they are generally consistent with the results of the /c-means analysis

of the tool assemblage. There are several clear tendencies. Most of the Ramah chert is found on the east

side of the excavation, particularly in the northeast

quadrant. Slate is mostly distributed on the north side,

also primarily in the northeast quadrant. Gray-speck292 CHAPTER 1 3
2 1 7 14 1 1

1

1 B= 1 1 2 3 1

C= 1 6

Black chert Crystal quartz (C) Blostrome chert (B) Dark gray Mugford chert

1 4 2 5 5 1 5 7

1 1

1 1 1

Light gray Mugford chert Gray speckled Mugford chert Patinated chert

1

1 29 1 5 14 64 1 7 6 11 2 1

5 1 10 2 2 4 5 26 1

1 5 9 3 7

Ramah chert Slate Clastic slate

1

2 5 1 3

Silicified slate

209/ Attu's Point L-5: flake raw material distributions by quadrat.

led Mugford chert and patinated chert are exclusively

and primarily (respectively) associated with the northeast quadrant. Another noticeable pattern is the ten- dency for "plain" slates to cluster in the northeast

quadrant, while "clastic" slate is mostly found in the

northwest quadrant. The latter pattern suggests in

situ distributions resulting from two separate knapping episodes using slightly different raw materials

rather than dumping behavior resulting from floor

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 293
a b c d e

2 1 0/ Attu's Point L-5 tools, a-d endblades. e: stemmed

point, f: endblade preform, g-i burms, j, k endscrapers. I: burm/endscraper.

cleaning, which would probably mix the two slate

types more thoroughly.

Integration

Comparison of the tool and flake raw material

plots (Figures 207 and 208) indicates the distribution

of Mugford chert flakes and tools largely coincides,

except for a small concentration of tools in the extreme northwest corner of the excavation. Ramah

chert tools and debitage tend to be spatially associated and are fairly tightly clustered around the hearth

area and the northeast portion of the external

dump/activity area. Both black chert and crystal quartz

have a somewhat different distribution pattern than

the other materials, tending to be found towards the more westerly portion of the excavation on the periphery of the other materials' main distributions.

If we compare the frequencies of raw materials

present in the tool assemblage to those among the

flakes (Tables 82 and 84) there are some marked differences. The high percentage of dark gray Mugford

chert tools contrasts with a relatively low percentage of

flakes, suggesting that some of the tools entered the

locus in finished form. The frequency of crystal quartz

debitage also seems low relative to the quantity of

tools, suggesting the same pattern. The frequency of

slate debitage is high compared to the few tools, which

might indicate that some of the finished products or

preforms were removed from the locus. This is underscored by the presence of clastic slate debitage, but

the absence of tools of this material.

Table 85 tabulates tool and flake raw materials by

weight for L-5 as a whole. All materials occur in low

weights, but slates dominate, followed by dark gray Mugford chert. The most striking variations are that

dark gray Mugford chert and light gray silicified slate

are more significant as tools than as flakes; the former

is consistent with the frequency data. The initial assessment of L-5 suggested the locality consisted of an axial feature with a hearth at one

end and an activity area to the north, or that perhaps

the latter was a disturbed structure. Support for the

disturbed structure alternative might be seen in the

clustering of the flake distributions, one concentration

related to a charcoal deposit and rocks, the other concentration lying 50 cm to the east (Figure 203), hinting

at the bilaterality sometimes associated with axial features. On the other hand, a similar pattern could also

be associated with an isolated hearth without an accompanying mid-passage structure. But there may

be a third alternative. We might deconstruct the axial

structure interpretation by pointing out that the feature consists of a hearth on the south side connected

by a single line of rocks to a cluster of rocks and flat

slabs on the north side. These two components could

be separate features, with the small charcoal patch at

the northern cluster of flat slabs representing a second

disturbed hearth. Seen in conjunction with the northern activity area, we might then have a linear series of

three hearths spaced at 1.5 m intervals. Such a linear

294 CHAPTER 1 3
feature, possibly consisting of four hearths, was excavated at Port IVlanvers Run-1 (Chapter 12).

L-5 Tool Assemblage

Endblades: Of the four endblades from L-5 (Figure

210:a-d), one is nearly complete and the others are

proximal, medial and distal fragments. One is made of

dark gray Mugford chert, one of light gray Mugford

chert, one of light gray silicified slate and one of black

chert. The nearly complete example (Figure 210:a) is

triangular with a biconvex cross-section and a straight

base that is thinned on both sides by two parallel

flakes placed medially. It is finely flaked with distinctly

serrated lateral edges and there is a small area of

medial grinding on one face (L= >17.7 mm, W= 10.2,

TH= 1.4). The proximal example (Figure 210:b) has a

slightly concave base (depth= 0.6 mm) with two parallel basal-thinning flakes on one side and one central

basal-thinning flake on the other side. A striking platform remains on one lateral edge. The implement may

be unfinished (W= 14.6 mm, TH= 2.7). The other two examples are small fragments deemed to be endblades by virtue of their size and flaking patterns.

Pomts/endblades: Two distal fragments are difficult to classify as points or endblades. One is made of Ramah chert (Figure 210:d) and has distinct edge serration and a plano-convex cross-section resulting from

near-complete dorsal flaking combined with ventral

retouch limited to the edge margins. The other is made

of dark gray Mugford chert and has fine edge serration, slight medial grinding, a biconvex cross-section and a slight hint of a shoulder (Figure 210:c).

Combined with its slightly greater thickness, these

attributes suggest this specimen may represent a point

rather than an endblade.

Endblade preforms: The single example is a distal fragment made of gray-speckled Mugford chert

(Figure 210 0. It bears minimal lateral retouch limited

to within 2.5 mm of the edge.

Points: The single definite specimen (Figure

210;e) is the proximal/lateral portion of a crystal

21 1/ Attu's Point L-5 tools, a, b: microblade cores; c-j: microblades: /c adze, I: celt/adze preform.

quartz point with a contracting stem and a biconvex

cross-section (TH= 5.7 mm, stem L= 1 1 .4).

Bifaces: Three small biface fragments were

found, all lateral edge fragments, two are made of

crystal quartz, one of Ramah chert. The latter has a

very slight hint of a shoulder, suggesting it was a

lanceolate biface.

Burins: Two of the three burins are fashioned

from flakes, one is made on a microblade. Both of the

flake burins are made of gray Mugford chert while the

microblade burin is made of patinated chert. None of

the implements are ground. One of the flake burins is

relatively large (Figure 210:g) with fine retouch on

both lateral edges, dorsal on the left, ventral on the

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 295
right (L = 37.6 mm, W = 24.1, TH = 4.8). There is a

faint shoulder on each side and a slight notch-like

indentation on the right side, where the retouch is bifacial. The proximal end is thinned bifacially but two

long parallel flakes were used to remove the bulb of

percussion on the ventral side (similar to the technique

used on some endblades). The right distal corner is

bifacially retouched, providing a platform for the

oblique removal of four burin spalls. The other flake

burin (Figure 210:h) exhibits minimal unifacial retouch

on its lateral edges (L= 25.4 mm, W=14.9, TH=6.7). A

single spall removal runs obliquely from a slightly

retouched area on the distal end to a terminus marked

by a steeply retouched notch (65 ) on the opposite lateral edge. The notch might be either a remnant concave scraper edge or a termination control feature. The

retouched edge is wear-polished.

The third burin (Figure 21 0;i) is a very small implement made on the proximal fragment of a microblade

(L= 1 2.6 mm, W= 1 1 .8, TH= 2.8). The left distal corner

has a small notch that may have been made for a controlled snap of the microblade, but the notch also

served as a platform for the oblique removal of four

tiny burin spalls. No other retouch is present.

Combination scraper/bunns The single implement (Figure 210:1) is made on a lozenge-shaped flake

of crystal quartz (L= 35.6, W= 22.4, TH= 6.5). The

medial-distal portion of one lateral edge has abrupt

scraper-like retouch on the dorsal side while on the

other lateral edge the medial-proximal portion is

retouched similarly on the dorsal side. Burinations are

present at both ends of the implement; one end has two spall removals— the first an angle burination, the second oblique across the tip of the implement— while

the other end has a single angle burination.

Burin spalls: Of the 17 burin spalls (MNI = 13),

eight are complete, five are proximal fragments, three

are distal fragments and one is a medial portion. Eight

are made from dark gray Mugford chert, five from gray Mugford chert, one from light gray Mugford chert, two

from light gray silicified slate and one from Ramah

chert (the latter is an uncertain spall). Two spalls are

primary, the rest are secondary. None are ground.

Metrics are as follows; x L = 16.0 mm, r = 9.6-20.5,

X W = 3.8, r = 2.4-5.2, x TH = 1 .9, r = 1 . 1 -3.2.

Scrapers: Three scrapers were recovered. One is

the distal fragment of an endscraper (Figure 210:k)

made on a blade of light gray silicified slate, with a relatively narrow convex "nose" (W = 1 4.9 mm, TH = 3.8, edge angle = 40°). Another is an end/sldescraper

(Figure 2 1 0;j) made on an irregular linear flake of dark

gray Mugford chert. The partially retouched distal end

is convex and half of one lateral margin is also

retouched (L = 33.7 mm, W = 13.5, TH = 9.1, edge

angle = 65 ). The third specimen is a possible medial

fragment of black chert that has shallow dorsal

retouch on opposite edges.

Microblades: Of the 20 microblades (MNI=12),

fourteen are made of Mugford chert, four of crystal

quartz and two of Ramah chert (Figure 211: c-j). Only one is complete; 1 1 are proximal fragments, six are

medial fragments and two are distal fragments.

Metrics are as follows: xW = 8.08 mm, r = 5.1-14.6,

X TH = 2.1, r = 1.1-4.4. Platform angles: 85' = 1,

80' = 7, 75 = 1, 70 = 3. Platform preparation: plain

= 1, ground = 1, plain/ground = 1, retouch = 2, retouch/ground = 3. Four specimens have traces of

deliberate retouch while eight exhibit minor notching

and use-wear.

Microblade cores: The first of the two cores

(Figure 21 1 :b) is made on a sub-rectangular to triangular block of dark gray Mugford chert (L =56.4 mm,

W =33.4, TH = 20.59). A triangular platform is positioned at one of the long ends of the chert block. The

platform surface is fully retouched by shallow flakes and has a platform angle of 80°. Flake scars from six

blade removals run the length of the front and sides

of the core. The blades ranged in size from 37-55

mm long and 5.5-10 mm in width. The back of the

block is not retouched. The second example (Figure

21 1 :a) is a tabular-shaped core of light gray silicified

slate (L = 51.6 mm, W = 32.7, TH = 14.3). The plat296 CHAPTER 1 3
form is located on one of the

long ends of the core. The

edges of the core are

retouched slightly, including some thinning on the long end

opposite the platform. The

platform is long, narrow and

flat, without preparation; a well

defined point of impact indentation is found on the platform

edge. The platform angle is

80". One microblade ca. 29.5 mm long and 10.1 mm wide was removed from the narrow

longtitudinal edge of the core.

Celts/adzes: Both speci- mens are made of green slate. A

definite adze (Figure 211:k) is made on a slate tablet and is

broken longtitudinally (L = >56.7

mm, W = >27.2, TH = 1 2.7). The

implement has a rectangular

cross-section with lateral edges

flaked perpendicular to the tool

faces. On the dorsal side of the

tool polish is mostly limited to

within 4.5 mm of the tool edge,

although it extends up to 1 6 mm

back. The ventral side is almost

completely polished while the

lateral edges are unpolished.

There is little indication of use wear on the bit apart from three

small fractures on the ventral

side and a slight rounding of the

edge. The second implement is a

complete unground preform for

a celt or adze (Figure 21 1 :l). Its

overall form is "pick-like," with a

square cross-section resulting

21 2/ Attu's Point L-7: axial structure, view towards the northeast.

21 3/ Attu's Point L-7: box-hearth with thermoliths. View towards the southeast.

2 1 4/ Attu's Point L-7 box-hearth, thermoliths removed. View towards the northeast.

ATTU'S POINT; A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 297
Table 86. Attu's Point L-7: Tool Classes by K-Means Cluster.

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Other TOTAL N (%)

Endblades 4.5* 1.5 6 (25.0)

Endblade preforms 1 1 (4.2)

Biface fragments 2 2 (8.3)

Burins 2 2 (8.3)

Burin spalls 6 6 (25.0)

Microblades 3 1 4 (1 6.7)

Utilized flakes 2 1 3 (12.5)

TOTAL 20.5 2.5 1 24

half numbers denote refits across units

m

3x7y

3x4y

Gray Mugford chert concentration

F Flat rock

21 5/ Attu's Point L-7: axial structure and total flake distribution.

from perpendicular retouch on all sides (L = 1 1 5.4 mm,

W = 24.9, TH = 24.3).

Utilized flakes: The 24 utilized flakes are made of

a variety of materials: seven of dark gray Mugford

chert, five of light gray Mugford chert, one of light gray

7x7y

silicified slate, one of crystal

quartz, six of Ramah chert and

one of slate. The relatively high

frequency of Ramah chert spec- imens is noteworthy.

L-7 EXCAVATION

L-7 was located in the middle of

the site, just below the edge of

the second beach ridge at 1 1 m

asl (Figure 193). The locality

consisted of a small but perfectly preserved axial feature,

around which a total of 1 2 m^

was excavated (Figures 212 to

215). A debitage concentration

at the foot of the feature extended slightly outside the limits of

the excavation, so it is possible

that an external midden area

remains uninvestigated.

The axial feature was just

under 3 m long, 1 m wide and was oriented northwestsoutheast, perpendicular to the shoreline (Figures 212

and 21 5). A beautifully preserved box-hearth lay at the

center of the feature (Figures 2 1 3 and 2 1 4). It was comprised of four thick inclined rock slabs that created a

7x4y

298 CHAPTER 1 3
Table 87. Attu's Point L-7: Tool Classes by Structural Position.

East Axial West Ax/E Ax/W TOTAL N (%)

Endblades 1.5 3.5 1 6 (25.0)

Endblade preforms 1 1 (4.2)

Biface fragments 2 2 (8.3)

Burins 1 1 2 (8.3)

Burin spalls 1 5 6 (25.0)

IVlicroblades 1 1 2 4 (16.7)

Utilized flakes 2 1 3 (12.5)

TOTAL 2.5 10.5 4 1 6 24

compartment of 60 by 40 cm. The compartment was

filled with tightly packed fist-sized thermoliths (some

fire-cracked) that overlay three small horizontal flat

stone slabs at the base of the feature. The gravel at the bottom of the hearth contained a few flecks of solid

charcoal as well as a faint stain of powdered charcoal.

Two small clusters of probable thermoliths were found

outside the hearth, one immediately to the east of the

hearth within the axial feature, another outside the feature 1 m north of the center of the hearth. There was

also a 1 .7 m long scatter of small rocks 1 .3 m west of

the axial feature that likely represents thermoliths

21 6/ Attu's Point L-7 tool distribution and k-means clusters.

ArrU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 299
Table 88. Attu's Point L-7: Tool Raw Material Frequencies by Structural Position.

East Axial West Ax/E Ax/W TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 2.5 3.5 2 6 14 (58.3)

Light gray Mugford chert 3 3 (12.5)

Cray-speckled chert 1 1 (4.2)

Crystal quartz 1 1 1 3 (12.5)

Ramah chert 3 3 (12.5)

TOTAL 2.5 10.5 4 1 6 24

cached or discarded against the wall of a tent. There was no trace of tent anchor rocks. A tiny charcoal sample collected from beneath the

flat rocks at the bottom of the hearth was submitted to

Isotrace Laboratory, University of Toronto, for AMS

dating. The result was very surprising: 50±50 B.P. (TO4793). Of all the charcoal samples from Attu's Point,

this one seemed to have the strongest contextual association, virtually sealed underneath an undisturbed

hearth feature. The anomalous result might be attributable to recent burning of roots that had penetrated

beneath the hearth or post-excavation contamination.

Tool Distribution

The L-7 tool distribution is plotted in relation to a

/(-means cluster analysis in Figure 216. Cluster 1 is

3x7y 7x7y

3x4y 7x4y

Circle indicates location of 6 dark gray Mugford chert items

lacking point provenience

Crystal quartz

A Dark gray Mugford chert

+ Gray speckled Mugford chert

• Light gray Mugford chert

* Ramah chert

21 7/ Attu's Point L'7: tool raw material distribution.

300 CHAPTER 1 3
3x7y

3x4y S Concentration Gray Mugford chert flakes

7x7y 3x7y

7x4y 3x4y Black chert flakes

3x7y

3x4y

7x7y 3x7y

7x4y 3x4y Crystal quartz flakes Ramah chert flakes

3x7y

3x4y

7x7y

7x4y Slate flakes

2 1 8/ Attu's Point L-7: flake raw material distributions.

ATTU'S POINT; A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY
Table 89. Attu's Point L-7: Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Structural Position.

East N (%) West N (%) TOTAL N (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 18 (12.8) 1 57 (54.5) 1 75 (40.8)

Gray-speckled chert 1 9 (13.5) 54 (18.8) 73 (17.0)

Patinated chert 14 (4.9) 14 (3.3)

Black chert 3 (2.1) 1 (0.3) 4 (0.9) Ramah chert 4 (2.8) 19 (6.6) 23 (5.4)

Crystal quartz 6 (4.3) 1 (0.3) 7 (1.6)

Slate 91 (64.5) 42 (14.6) 1 33 (31.0)

TOTAL 141 288 429

positioned on the northwestern arm of the structure

while Cluster 2 flanks the feature. Six of the seven

quadrat provenienced items (five burin spalls and a

burin) can be associated with Cluster 1, while one

item (utilized flake) lay somewhere between the two

clusters. A refitted endblade connects the two clusters. All the implements are found on the northern

(seaward) side of the excavation and Table 86 indicates almost all the tools belonged to Cluster 1 at

the northwest corner of the axial feature. Although

the distinct structure could facilitate a model-based

bilateral analysis, the paucity of tools limits the value

of such an approach. Nonetheless, Table 87 outlines

the distribution of the tool classes partitioned by

spatial position relative to the feature. Little can be

concluded except that the majority of tools were

associated with the feature and that biface fragments and burin spalls tend to be associated with

the feature.

Spatial distributions of the tool raw materials are shown in Figure 217 and summarized in Table 88.

Given the low frequencies little can be said except that

light gray Mugford chert and Ramah chert tend to be more closely associated with the axial feature than are

the other raw materials. The total flake distribution (Figure 215) indicates

deposition restricted to the north side of the structure,

the same pattern as the tool distribution. Looking at

the distribution of individual flake raw materials

(Figure 218), a major concentration of Mugford chert

Table 90. Attu's Point L-7: Total Lithic Raw Material Weights (Tools and Flakes). In Grams.

Tools g Flakes g TOTAL g (%)

Dark gray Mugford chert 5.9 52.1 58.0 (25.0)

Gray-speckled chert 0.4 10.7 11.1 (4.8)

Patinated chert 7 7.0 (3.0)

Black chert 2.6 2.6 (1.1) Ramah chert 4.3 2.6 6.9 (3.0)

Crystal quartz 3.4 3.3 6.7 (2.9)

Slate 139.3 139.3 (60.1)

302 CHAPTER 1 3
3 1 1

1 15 147 10

Dark Gray Mugford chert flakes

B= 1

B= 1 p= 1

B= 1 p= 11 B= 1 p= 1

Patinated Mugford chert (P)

Black chert (B)

16

4 52 2

Gray speckled Mugford chert

R= 1 C= 1

R= 1 C=2

R= 1 C= 3

R= 19

C=2

C= 1

Ramah chert flakes (R)

Crystal quartz flakes (C)

1 1

60 4 1

8 16 31 9

Slate flakes

219/ Attu's Point L-7: flake raw material distributions by quadrat.

flakes (generic) is found at the northern terminus of

the axial feature. This concentration is strongly suggestive of a restricted l<napping or dumping locale. In

contrast, although some of the slate flakes also occur

at the northern end of the feature, they are clearly concentrated in a small area east of the hearth. For quantitative analysis the debitage was divided into two sub- units— east and west of the axial feature - based on

the 5x grid line that ran through the center of the feature (see Figure 219). This is a somewhat inconvenient

and arbitrary division, but in combination with the

point-plotted debitage, the results are acceptable. As

outlined in Table 89, Mugford cherts clearly dominate

on the west side of the axial feature (mostly in the concentration at the end of the feature), patinated chert

occurs exclusively on the west side and Ramah chert is

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 303
mostly on the west. Slate and crystal quartz are associated mainly with the east side. A chi-square test indicates there is a statistically significant difference in the

distribution of raw materials between the two sides of

the feature (x^ = l 39.65).

Integration

Comparison of the tool and flake raw material distributions (Figures 217 and 218) indicates Mugford chert

tools have a distribution broadly similar to the flakes,

although most of the tools (with the exception of the

non-provenienced burin spalls) were deposited slightly

outside the dense concentration of flakes at the end of

the axial feature. Despite the high frequency of slate

flakes, no slate tools were recovered. Unless some

slate implements are present in the unexcavated area

at the foot of the axial feature, they were either dis- posed of elsewhere on the site or curated to other

localities. The low frequency of the other raw materials makes their distributions hard to evaluate. Neither the

crystal quartz nor the Ramah chert flakes and tools are

precisely associated with each other and there are no

black chert tools to plot against the three flakes. The

total raw material weights (Table 90) are extremely

low. Slate and dark gray Mugford chert are the most

abundant materials by weight, although for slate this is

exclusively flake material and for dark gray Mugford

chert it is primarily flakes. Overall, the paucity of lithic

material suggests a relatively short occupation.

The spatial organization of lithic-related activities at L-7 is strongly oriented towards the seaward

side of the axial feature, leaving the "back" area

almost totally free of lithic material. Within this general tendency is a marked differentiation between a Mugford chert deposit at the "front" of the feature and a slate concentration in the lateral area east of

the hearth, suggesting spatial separation of reduction activities linked to the two materials. On the

other hand, refits between endblade fragments provide a behavioral link between the front of the feature and the lateral area to the east (Figure 216).

L-7 Tool Assemblage

Endblades Of the six endblades, five are complete

and one is a proximal fragment (Figure 220:a-e); four

of the five complete specimens are refits of broken

portions. Two are made of gray Mugford chert, two of

light gray Mugford chert, one of gray-speckled

Mugford chert and one of Ramah chert. All are triangular, but two size classes are represented. Five of

the six are "medium-sized," with lengths ranging

between 21 .2-28.3 mm and widths between 1 1 .9-1 5.4 mm. Figure 220:b has a straight base and a sinusoid

cross-section; it was broken medially (L = 26.2 mm, W

= 14.1, TH = 2.2). Figure 220:c has a straight base, a

biconvex cross-section, slight edge serration and

faint polishing on one basal corner (L = 26.7 mm, W =

1 2.7, TH = 1 .9). It was broken at about 1 /4 of the distance up from its base. Figure 220:d has a straight

base and a biconvex cross-section; one lateral edge is

not completely retouched (L = 28.3 mm, W = 1 5.4, TH

= 2.9). It was broken at about 2/3 of the distance up

from its base. Figure 220:e has a straight base, a sinusoid cross-section and slightly serrated edges (L =

21 .2, W = 1 1 .9, TH = 1 .8); it was broken medially. The

220/ Attu's Point L-7 tools, a-e: endblades; f: endblade

preform; g: biface tip; h-i: burins; J: microblade.

304 CHAPTER 1 3
proximal fragment (not illustrated) has a thinned base

(W = >14.1 mm, TH = 2.3). The sixth specimen is a very small complete

endblade made of Ramah chert (Figure 220:a). It has

a biconvex cross-section, a slightly concave base

(depth= 0.5 mm) and faint edge serration (L= 16.3 mm, W= 8.5, TH=1.7). There is also slight medial

grinding on both faces. Endblade preforms: The single endblade pre- form (Figure 220: f) is a proximal fragment made of

gray Mugford chert. It has a straight base and rough

bifacial flaking (W= 16.8 mm, TH= 2.9).

Points/endblades: The two fragments are so

small it is impossible to determine which tool class

is represented. One of them is a distal element made

of crystal quartz (Figure 220:g) with a biconvex

cross-section and slight edge serration. The other is

a medial fragment made of light gray Mugford chert

with a biconvex cross-section.

Burins: The two burins are both made of gray Mugford chert. One is a small specimen that initially was classed as an endblade fragment (Figure 220: h). The implement is made on a very thin flake with a remnant basal striking platform. It is completely

bifacially flaked and a burination platform was prepared using a small bifacial distal notch. Two spalls were removed obliquely from the notch; the first

sheared off most of one lateral edge of the flake

while the second is very short and runs parallel to

the first. Much of the medial portion of one face is ground while the other face has slight grinding distally (L = 20.6 mm, W = 9.3, TH = 1.6). The second

example is a distal fragment, also made on a small

thin flake (Figure 220:i). Fine retouch towards the

distal end of one lateral edge was used as a platform

to remove a transverse spall. This spall surface was

then employed as a platform to remove two small

spalls from the other lateral edge of the flake. Near

the distal end on both faces there are numerous striations that run 70-80 to the burin spalls; this

appears to be incipient grinding.

5x7y

5x5y -

5x3y

I I Hearth border rock

F Flat rock

Core fragment

+ Microblade

• Utilized flake

A Black chert flake

* Slate flake

6x3y

221/ Attu's Point L-9: axial structure.

Burin Spalls: Of the six burin spalls, three are

complete, two are proximal fragments and one is a

medial fragment. All are made of gray Mugford chert. One IS a primary spall, the rest secondary. The pri- mary spall is long (24.7 mm) while the two complete

secondary spalls are half its length (1 1 .7, 1 3.6 mm).

Additional metrics: xW = 3.5 mm, r = 2.0-4.4, xTH =

2.1 , r = 1 .2-3.3.

Microblades: All four of the microblades (MNI =

2) are medial fragments. Three are made of gray Mugford chert, one of crystal quartz (Figure 220: j,

illustrates a Mugford chert example). Reliable widths

vary between 6.5-8.6 mm. One has retouch on both

lateral edges while two others exhibit slight use-wear on their margins.

Utilized Flakes: Two of the three utilized flakes

are made of Ramah chert, one of crystal quartz.

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 305
222/ Attu's Point L-9 tools, a. core fragment; b: macroblade. c. utilized flake, d macroblade.

L-9 TEST EXCAVATION

L-9 was located on the uppermost beach ridge at 1 2 m

asl. (Figure 193). At first glance it appeared to consist

of a well-preserved axial structure, so a 1 m by 4 m

excavation unit was placed along the length of the feature (Figure 221 ). After exposure, a hearth was clearly

identifiable but other structural elements were less distinct. The axial feature was 3.5 m long, 0.80-1.0 m

wide and was oriented east-west, perpendicular to the

beach front. The slightly disturbed hearth was composed of three thick border rocks and a fourth large

flat rock that surrounded a pair of small horizontal flat

slabs, creating a compartment of 60 by 40 cm. Some

of the fist-sized stones within the hearth area were

likely thermoliths and small fire-cracked rocks were

noted on the eastern edge of the hearth. Small flecks

of charcoal were found in the gravel on the outer

perimeter of the hearth and beneath some of the

hearth and central axial feature rocks. Just outside the

excavation at the western end of the feature was a

small rock cluster that might be part of the L-9 feature,

but it could also represent a separate structure. A

223/ Attu's Point surface collected tools, a, b: bifaces (L-4); c large Ramah chert flake (L-4), d: adze (L-3), e-f: burin, endblade preform (L-15).

small charcoal sample procured from the gravel immediately adjacent to the hearth rocks was submitted to

the Isotrace Laboratory, University of Toronto, for AMS

dating. The result was an unacceptably recent date of 690 ± 60 B.P. (TO-4794). The sample was not from a

sealed context and could conceivably be related to a

post-occupation vegetation burn.

Very little lithic material was found in the L-9 excavation: two "macroblades," one core fragment, a biface

fragment and two utilized flakes. Both macroblades

(Figure 222:b, d) are made of gray Mugford chert; one

is complete (L = 56.8 mm, W = 18.9, TH = 8.9), the

other a proximal fragment. Both have a platform angle

of 80'; one has a unprepared plain platform the other

platform is retouched. Both have slight use-wear on

their edges. The core fragment (Figure 222:a) is made

306 CHAPTER 1 3
a

224/ Attu's Point surface collected tools, a-b Maritime

Archaic biface, Maritime Archaic stemmed point (L-l 2):

c: lanceolate biface (L-6): d: lanceolate biface (east of L5).

of gray Mugford chert. The biface fragment is a tiny,

finely flaked lateral edge element of black chert. One

of the utilized flakes is made of gray Mugford chert,

the other of crystal quartz (Figure 222:c). Eight flakes were collected, five of which are made of black chert, two of slate and one of dark gray Mugford chert.

OTHER LOCI

Throughout the course of the work at Attu's Point the

site surface was scanned for traces of additional structures and artifact concentrations. Surface collections were made at some of these localities. Each is

described briefly below (see Figure 193 for locations).

L-2: Located on the first beach terrace at 1 m

asl., there was a possible axial structure, 3.5 m long,

oriented northwest-southeast. Visible on the surface was a microblade and flakes of Mugford chert, Ramah

chert and slate.

L-3: Situated on the first beach terrace at 1 m

asl., a few rocks and flat slabs were observed, but no

clear structure. A flake scatter measuring 4.5 m northsouth and 2.5 m east-west contained Mugford chert and abundant slate. A complete adze of green slate

(Figure 223: d) was surface collected. The implement is

sub-rectangular in form, with abrupt perpendicular

flaking on one lateral edge and more irregular retouch

on the other lateral edge (L = 78.6 mm, W = 33.2, TH

= 2 1 .6). The dorsal side of the adze bit was formed by

flaking out a concavity, then polishing no more than

4.5 mm back from the edge (edge angle = 75 ). On the

ventral side the bit is mostly polished within 6.0 mm of

the edge, although it extends back to 21.5 mm. Edge wear consists of a few small fractures and a slight

rounding of the edge.

L-4: This locality was situated on the edge of the

lowest beach terrace, just under 1 m asl., so it could

be the youngest locus at the site. Various rocks were

present, but no clear structure. A lithic scatter measuring 4.5 m north-south and 2.5 m east-west contained

Mugford chert, slate and large Ramah chert flakes. A

Ramah chert biface fragment, a biface preform of black

chert and a large Ramah chert flake were surface collected. The Ramah chert biface (Figure 223:b) is broken in the middle and is missing part of its mid-section. It is unfinished, with a slightly convex base bearing traces of grinding and there are three slight notches near the proximal end of one lateral edge (L = ca.

76.5 mm, W = 32.1 , TH = 1 3.7). The black chert biface

preform (Figure 223:a) is leaf-shaped: one face of the

distal end is fairly well flaked but the rest of the implement is only retouched marginally (L = 49.8 mm, W =

26.0, TH = 7.7). The large Ramah chert flake (Figure

223:c) is the largest piece of that material observed at

the site (L = 82.9 mm, W = 32.1 , TH = 1 3.7).

East of L-5: About 4.75 m east of the L-5 excavation the mid-section of a lanceolate biface made of Ramah chert (Figure 224:d) was surface collected. It

is completely retouched bifacially, with a biconvex

cross-section. Weak shoulders occur just below the

mid-section on both lateral edges, but there is more

distinct stemming near the base (L = > 49 mm, W =

23.9, TH = 8.1).

ATTU'S POINT; A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 307
225/ Attu's Point surface collected tools, a stemmed point

(L-14): b-c: biface tip, bunn (L~l 5), d bunn (L-16),

e-f: biface base, sidescraper (L-14).

L-6 Positioned on the upper portion of the first

beach level at 10.5-1 1 m asl., this locality consisted of

an indistinct rock structure, flakes of slate, crystal

quartz and black chert, as well as a lanceolate biface

fragment and a core tablet. The biface fragment

(Figure 224:c) is a proximal specimen made of gray Mugford chert, with a biconvex cross-section and a

slight contraction towards the base (W= 21 .4 mm, TH=

5.6). The core tablet is made of black chert; three linear flakes removed from one end of a flat-flaked plat- form suggest it was a test piece for a microblade core

(L = 76.4 mm, W = 62.3, TH = 22.6).

L-8: Located on the upper portion of the first beach level at 1 1 m asl., an axial structure may be

present in a moss-covered area 3.8 by 3.0 m in size.

Flakes of Mugford and Ramah chert were noted, along

with a large microblade of Mugford chert.

L-IO: This locality was situated in the middle of

the second beach terrace, just under 12 m asl. There

appeared to be a small axial structure, 2.4 m long, 70

cm wide, oriented northwest-southeast. A bifacial implement of Ramah chert was noted nearby.

L-] I: Near the middle of the second beach terrace, at just under 12 m asl., was an indistinct rock

structure associated with flakes of Ramah chert, slate and crystal quartz, as well as a large black chert

microblade.

L-12: This find spot was situated at the extreme

eastern edge of the site, on the uppermost beach level

at 1 2 m asl. It consisted of a Ramah chert stemmed

point of Late Maritime Archaic Rattler's Bight form and

a Ramah chert biface fragment that might also be of

Maritime Archaic origin. A 1 m^ test pit was excavated

in a mossy area 2 m southeast of these surface finds,

since a few rocks suggested the possibility of a feature, but no cultural material was encountered. The

stemmed point is complete except for its tip (Figure

224:b). It has well-defined shoulders and a striking

platform at the base of its stem. The dorsal side of the stem is completely retouched, but the ventral side is

only partially retouched. Only the margins of the blade

element are retouched (L = >40 mm, W = 20.2, TH =

4.9, Stem L = 12.5 Stem W[shoulder]= 11.8, Stem

W[base] = 9.5). The Ramah chert biface is a distal fragment (Figure 224:a). Its dorsal face is almost completely flaked while the ventral retouch is limited to the margins ( W = >45 mm, TH = 6.3).

L-13 This small locality was situated on the uppermost terrace of the beach, near the southwestern

edge of the site at just under 1 2 m asl. It consisted of

a dense concentration of green slate flakes in front of

a boulder, suggestive of a reduction locale for adze/axe production.

L-14 & 15: These two localities seemed continuous with each other and were located on the upper- most beach terrace at the western extremity of the

site, about 1 1 m asl. L-14 contained possible structural rocks and a surface collection procured there consisted of a stemmed point, a biface base, and a large

sidescraper. Slate flakes were also observed. The

stemmed point (Figure 225:a) is a distal fragment

308 CHAPTER 1 3
made of Ramah chert with a biconvex cross-section

and slightly serrated lateral edges (W= 1 1 .2 mm, TH=

2.5). The biface base (Figure 225:e), also made of Ramah chert, exhibits a faint trace of a shoulder 1 7.5 mm above the base; it is probably part of a shouldered lanceolate implement (cf., Figure 224:c, d). The

complete sidescraper (Figure 225:0 is made on a

blade-like flake of dark gray Mugford chert (L = 57.0 mm, W =21 .6, TH =6.3). The working edge is slightly

concave, with a 65" angle. Both lateral edges are

retouched and ground slightly, while the ventral side

of the proximal end exhibits some thinning retouch.

Use-wear in the form of edge rounding and a few

small ventral fractures is present on the screwdriverlike distal tip and the distal portion of the working

edge. The implement is almost identical to the combination burin/scraper from L-1 (Figure 201 :c), minus

the burination.

At L-1 5, 2 m northwest of L-1 4, flakes of Mugford

chert and slate were observed and an endblade preform, biface tip and two burins were surface collected. The endblade preform (Figure 223: f) is triangular,

although missing its tip, and made from crystal quartz.

It has a slightly concave base, which has been thinned

bifacially, and a roughly biconvex cross-section (W =

16.2 mm, TH = 4.0). The biface tip (Figure 225:b) of

patinated chert has a biconvex cross-section. Both

burins are made of gray Mugford chert and are

unground. The first specimen (Figure 225:c) is made

on a large flake with a striking platform at the base (L = 33.4 mm, W =21 .6, TH =6.2). On its dorsal side the

proximal end is retouched with long flakes extending

over the entire surface, while on the ventral side

retouch is limited to the edge margins. One lateral edge has a slight shoulder while the other exhibits a

small notch below the termination of a burin scar. The

distal end platform has unifacial dorsal retouch, from

which eight burin spalls have been removed obliquely.

The second burin (Figure 223:e) is also made on a

flake with a striking platform at its base (L =28.5 mm,

W =1 7.5, TH = 4.3). The proximal portion of one lateral edge has a faint shoulder created by fine ventral

retouch and slight grinding. The other lateral edge

exhibits ventral retouch that thinned the bulb of percussion. The distal end is "beaked" with three burination planes that involved 10 visible spall removals. L16: This small locality was located downslope

from L-1 4/1 5 at 1 1 m asl. It consisted of a lithic scatter of Mugford chert flakes, a burin and an endblade;

only the burin was collected. The burin (Figure 225:d) is made on a flake of gray Mugford chert with a striking platform at the base (L = 28.9 mm, W = 20.9, TH = 6.2). Its lateral edges are

slightly retouched dorsally, producing faint constrictions on each edge. The distal end has oblique dorsal

retouch, including a small notch. Two burin spalls were

removed, slightly obliquely. There is no facial grinding.

L- 1 7. This locality lay between L-7 and L-8 at 1 1 m

asl. Possible structural cobbles were associated with

flakes of Mugford chert and slate.

L-]8. About 1 m south of L-9, on the uppermost

beach terrace at 1 2 m asl., was a rock structure 2 m in

diameter that was associated with Mugford chert, Ramah chert and slate flakes.

L-]9. Positioned near the eastern edge of the site between L-1 1 and L-1 2, at 1 2 m asl., this find spot

contained a few Mugford chert flakes.

L-20. Located between L-1 and a bare rock outcrop to the southwest, at 1 m asl., L-20 consisted of

possible structural remains associated with a Ramah

chert biface base and crystal quartz flakes.

L-2] Southeast of L-1 was a vegetated area between two rock outcrops. A few flakes of Mugford

chert and slate were observed and there is potential for

structural remains beneath the vegetation.

INTER-LOCUS COMPARISONS

The preceding sections explored spatial variation within each locus. Before providing an overall assessment

of the site a comparison between the excavated loci

will be presented, considering variation in tool types,

lithic raw materials and spatial organization. Table 91

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET 'CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 309
Table 91. Attu's Point: Comparison of Tool Classes by Excavated Loci and Other Collections.

L-1 N (%) L-5 N (%) L-7 N (%) Surface, L-9 N (%)

Endblades 4 (8.2) 4 (4.9) 6 (25.0)

Endblade preforms 4 (8.2) 1 (1.2) 1 (4.2) 1 (5.0)

Endblades/points 2 (2.4) 2 (8.3) Stemmed points 1 (1.2) 1 (5.0)

Lanceolate bifaces 2 (10.0)

Bifaces 2 (4.1) 3 (3.7) 5 (25.0)

Burins 3 (3.7) 2 (8.3) 3 (15.0)

Burin spalls 1 1 (22.4) 1 7 (20.7) 6 (25.0)

Microblades 1 3 (26.5) 19 (23.2) 4 (16.7) 2 (10.0)

Microblade cores 2 (2.4)

Other cores 2 (10.0)

Scrapers 2 (4.1) 3 (3.7) 1 (5.0)

Scraper/burins 1 (2.0) 1 (1.2)

Utilized flakes 10 (20.4) 24 (29.3) 3 (12.5) 2 (10.0)

Celts/adzes 2 (4.1) 2 (2.4) 1 (5.0) TOTAL 49 82 24 20

Table 92. Attu's Point: Comparison of Tool Raw Material Frequencies by Excavated Loci and Other Collections.

L-1 N (%) L-5 N (%) L-7 N (%) Surface, L-9 N (%)

Dark gray Mugford 18 (36.7) 36 (43.9) 14 (58.3) 9 (45.0)

Light gray Mugford 16 (32.7) 3 (3.7) 3 (12.5)

Cray-speckled chert 3 (6.1) 6 (7.3) 1 (4.2)

Patinated chert 2 (2.4) 1 (5.0)

Black chert 1 (2.0) 4 (4.9) 3 (15.0)

Ramah chert 2 (4.1) 11 (13.4) 3 (12.5) 4 (20.0)

Crystal quartz 6 (12.3) 10 (12.2) 3 (12.5) 2 (10.0)

Slate 2 (4.1) 2 (2.4) 1 (5.0)

Gray silicified slate 1 (2.0) 8 (9.8) TOTAL 49 82 24 20

outlines the variation in Pre-Dorset tool types between

the three excavated loci and the other localities at the

site. Most notable is the relatively high proportion of endblades and preforms at L-7 (the smallest sample)

versus their low proportion at L-5 (the largest sample),

a trend supported by the expected frequencies calculated for the table. The proportion of burin spalls is

consistent across the loci, although burins themselves

are absent at L-1, aside from a single combination

scraper-burin. L-7 is relatively lacking in implement

310 CHAPTER 1 3
Table 93. Attu's Point: Comparison of Flake Raw Material Frequencies by Excavated Loci.

L-1 N (%) L-5 N (%) L-7 N (%)

Dark gray Mugford 1 1 (4.8) 38 (1 1.9) 175 (40.8)

Light gray Mugford 99 (43.2) 9 (2.8)

Cray-speckled chert 5 (2.2) 1 1 (3.5) 73 (17.0)

Patinated chert 32 (13.9) 16 (5.0) 14 (3.3)

Black chert 5 (2.2) 4 (1.3) 4 (0.9) Ramah chert 2 (0.9) 44 (13.9) 23 (5.4)

Biostrome chert 1 (0.3)

Crystal quartz 1 8 (6.8) 4 (1.3) 7 (1.6)

Slate 57 (25.6) 1 1 5 (36.3) 133 (31.0)

Clastic slate 62 (19.6)

Light gray silicified slate 1 3 (4.1) TOTAL 229 317 429

Table 94. Attu's Point: Comparison of Total Lithic Raw Material Weights by Excavated Loci. In Grams.

L 1 g (%) L-5 g (%) L-7 g (%)

Dark gray Mugford 48.6 (10.1) 89.7 (17.4) 58.0 (25.0)

Light gray Mugford 59.9 (12.5) 16.5 (3.2)

Gray-speckled chert 24.0 (5.0) 7.8 (1.5) 1 1.1 (4.8)

Patinated chert 13.2 (2.8) 9.4 (1.8) 7.0 (3.0)

Black chert 3.1 (0.6) 7.0 (1.4) 2.6 (1.1) Ramah chert 42.5 (8.9) 30.8 (6.0) 6.9 (3.0)

Biostromatic chert 0.4 (0.1)

Crystal quartz 28.3 (5.9) 8.3 (1.6) 6.7 (2.9)

Slate 259.8 (54.2) 222.5 (43.2) 1 39.3 (60.1)

Clastic slate 72.5 (14.1)

Light gray silicified slate 50.1 (9.7)

classes that might be considered "maintenance" tools:

microblades, scrapers, and utilized flakes. Celts/adzes were also absent at L-7, despite the presence of considerable slate debitage. Lanceolate bifaces ("knives")

are lacking from all three loci, with the possible exception of a biface edge fragment from L-5, although they were surface collected elsewhere at the site. The limited excavation areas may contribute to sampling error,

ATTU'S POINT, A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY

but there seem to be functional or depositional differences here. The overall trend in the excavated and surface collected material is towards a high proportion of har- poon endblades and preforms, relatively few stemmed

points or small bipointed bifaces that might be arrow

points, relatively few burins, scrapers and bifacial

knives. There is a fairly high proportion of burin spalls

31 1
relative to burins and a low proportion of microblade

cores relative to microblades, both of which point to

curation processes. The functional significance of this

pattern for the site as a whole will be taken up below.

Table 92 displays the frequency of tool raw materials across the excavated and surface collected loci.

Dark gray Mugford chert dominates overall. The most

notable differences are that tools of light gray Mugford

chert are found primarily at L I, less Ramah chert is

present at L-1 and most of the gray silicified slate

occurs at L-5. When expected frequencies are considered it is clear that the high proportion of light gray Mugford chert at L-1 is the strongest pattern. Table 93

compares the flake raw material frequencies across the

three excavated loci. The clearest patterns are the pre- dominance of dark gray Mugford chert at L-7, light

gray Mugford chert at L-1 , a slightly higher proportion

of gray-speckled chert at L-7, a higher proportion of

patinated chert at L-1, a higher proportion of Ramah

chert at L-5 and the limitation of clastic slate to L-5. These trends are confirmed when expected frequencies are considered. Slate occurs in high proportions

across the board.

If we compare the proportions of tool and flake raw

materials there are several examples of inconsistencies between the two. Both L-1 and L-5 seem to be somewhat

low in debitage of dark gray Mugford chert compared

with their abundance of tools made of this material.

Conversely, L-1 and L-7 are completely lacking in tools made of patinated chert, while each has at least a modest number of flakes of the material, and L-7 lacks tools

of black chert but contains a few flakes of the material.

L-7 also lacks tools made of slate, while it has the highest frequency of slate flakes of the three localities. These inconsistencies point to a technological organization involving asynchronous tool production/retouch

and discard; in other words, curation processes and

locational staging of reduction. Variations in the quantities of raw materials can result from the differential

access of social units to point sources, personal preference, or from households being at different positions on the supply/consumption cycle. Table 94 compares total lithic raw material weights across the loci.

Generic slate is clearly dominant in all cases, followed

by dark gray Mugford chert, but the other materials

vary somewhat in their proportions.

Organizational differences in lithic reduction

between the loci might also be seen in flake size distributions. Figure 226 shows the size distributions of Mugford chert flakes (all variants lumped together) at

each locality.^ ^ L-1 and L-5 have similar profiles, but

L-7 has a much higher percentage of material in the <10 mm category and lower percentages in the categories from <20 mm and larger. While sample size may

be a factor, the L-7 material suggests more intensive

secondary/tertiary reduction. In contrast, the flake size

profiles for slate are very similar for all three loci

(Figure 227). Furthermore, slate flake sizes are significantly larger than Mugford chert flakes, the former

with modes ranging from <20 mm to <25 mm, the latter with modes at <10 mm and <15 mm. Thus, not

only is slate the most abundant material by weight at

all loci, it is also reduced with less secondary/tertiary

retouch than is the case for Mugford chert. This ten- dency may result from larger sized slate raw materials,

the role of grinding rather than fine retouch in creating

the final working edge, or lack of concern for material

conservation.

The ambiguous nature of the structural remains at

L-1 and L-5 render comparisons of spatial organization

somewhat difficult. Nonetheless, a set of similarities and differences can be formulated. At both L-1 and L7 the majority of lithic materials were deposited on the

seaward ("front ") side of the features. At L-7 this might

be a consequence of the feature's orientation perpendicular to the beach front, with most activity being cenGiven the lack of screening the smaller size categories may be underrepresented.

312 CHAPTER 1 3
226/ Attn's Point: Mugford chert flake size distribution.

Slate Flake Size Distribution

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

<10 <15 <20 =25 <30 <35 <40 <45 <50 >50

5 mm classes

227/ Attu's Point: slate flake size distribution.

tered on a dwelling entrance. L-1 is problematic since

the orientation of the apparent structure is uncertain,

possibly oblique to the beach but conceivably parallel.

Also, there may be more than one feature represented.

One interpretation of the L-5 pattern was of an axial

feature oriented parallel to the beach front with a possible "external" activity area positioned along that parallel axis. In the parallel to the beach interpretation of

both L-1 and L-5, a hearth would be positioned at the terminal end of the feature rather

than in the middle. An alternative reading of L-5 as a linear

series of three hearths would

represent a quite different

organization of space than the

other two loci.

At all three localities a high

proportion of the tools tend to

be associated with the axial features (or in the case of L-5 possibly an isolated hearth),

although a few implements

occur on the flanks of the features. Tool frequencies are too

low to identify statistically significant patterns in the spatial

distribution of types, but a few

observations are pertinent. At L7 endblades and preforms lay

close to the axial structure with

a refit leading to a small group

on one flank of the feature. At L1 endblades and preforms were

concentrated in a cache-like

deposit, although this lay some

distance from the hearth.

However, if the L-1 feature was

oriented parallel to the beach

front, then the endblade/preform concentration would lie at

the foot of the structure, a placement similar to L-7. At

both L-1 and L-7 burin spalls were concentrated near

the hearth/axial feature areas. One reason for the limited spatial patterning in

tool types, which has also been observed elsewhere in

the eastern Arctic (e.g., Dekin 1976; McChee 1979:52-

55; Jensen 1 996:1 57; Mikalsen 2001 :86), may simply

be the narrow range of types represented at the Attu's

L-1 L-5 L-7

ATTU'S POINT A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE' ON WEBB BAY 313
Point localities. The paucity of burins, bifaces and

scrapers is probably related to functional or social

aspects of site use (see below). Another variable is

preferential deposition of tools in the vicinity of axial

features after use or rehafting, rather than in the

places they were used— an axial feature "attraction

effect" Oensen 1 996:1 56-1 58).

Jensen's (1996) analysis of the spatial sorting of raw material types at Paleoeskimo sites in east

Greenland observed that: "...each raw material must

therefore have had its own individual depositional history" (Jensen 1996:156; see also Mikalsen 2001).

There are hints of similar patterning at Attu's Point. At

both L-1 and L-7 Mugford chert flakes are generally

associated with the axial features while slate flakes are

concentrated in separate clusters on the flanks, suggesting the reduction activities for these materials were deliberately separated. This does not seem to be

the case at L-5, but there it is possible to discern spatial distinctions in the deposition of "normal" versus

"clastic" slate debitage. At L-1 there is a clear pattern

of crystal quartz tool and flake deposition centered on

the hearth/rock feature, but this does not seem to be

the case at either L-5 or L-7. The frequencies of other

raw materials are either too low or too variable from

locus to locus to draw any conclusions. Nonetheless, it

does seem that some of the more useful behavioral

inferences from Paleoeskimo dwellings will be derived

from raw material distributions, combined with

detailed refitting studies.

Chronology

The 21 loci at the site occur as three separate linear distributions on two main beach terraces, suggesting that

Attu's Point was repeatedly occupied over some length

of time. All loci lie between 10-12 m asl., a typical elevation for Pre-Dorset sites in the Nain region. The two

excavated localities at 10 m asl. on the lowermost

beach terrace, L-1 and L-5, were radiocarbon dated 3750±60 B.P. and 3790±70 B.P., respectively. These

assays provide a fairly good maximum date for the lowest beach level. As noted previously, attempts to

acquire reliable radiocarbon dates from the higher

beach levels were unsuccessful. Although the PreDorset (and Maritime Archaic) material on the upper- most beach level near 12 m asl. could date ca. 4000-

3900 B.P., it is also possible that some of it could date

ca. 3700 B.P. or later. Although the linear distribution of

the Pre-Dorset occupation on three different levels might indicate three periods with several contempora- neous social units, there is no reason to believe that settlement of the gently sloping beach was so closely

bound to the shoreline that the different levels were not

used simultaneously. One might even argue that the

undisturbed condition of the axial feature at L-7, on the

middle beach level at 1 1 m asl., could indicate that it was the last occupation at the site, post-dating the localities on the 10 m level. Consequently, without further

radiocarbon dating, shoreline relations provide little

help in developing an internal chronology for the site.

In the absence of sufficient radiocarbon dates we

are left with tool typology. Unfortunately, it has proved

difficult to seriate Labrador Pre-Dorset sites beyond

Early (4000-3600 B.P.), Middle (3500-3000 B.P.) and

Late (3000-2800 B.P.) phases (Cox 1978); indeed, it

has been particularly difficult to identify sites pertaining to the Middle phase. Cox (n.d.:8) concludes that,

typologically speaking, Pre-Dorset was fairly static

until 3000 B.P., when a series of changes led to the emergence of Croswater. He suggests that "subtle" differences may signal Middle phase material: concave vs

straight based triangular endblades, thicker and less

well-flaked triangular endblades, lack of edge serration

on scrapers and burins, less edge serration on bifaces,

predominantly straight vs tapered stems on bifaces

and the presence of very small burins. One might add

to this an increase in facial grinding on burins.

It is difficult to identify any substantial evidence

for such "later" attributes in the Attu's Point collection.

Typologically, the two loci radiocarbon dated ca. 3800-

3700 B.P. exhibit typical Early Pre-Dorset features such

as straight-based triangular endblades with slight edge

314 CHAPTER 1 3
serration. The only unusual item is a tiny burin on a

microblade at L-5 (Figure 210;i). L-7, however, has a

few implements with a possible later stamp. The two

burins from this locus were both unusual types made

on small flakes, one a very thin bifacially retouched

specimen with partial grinding on both faces, the other

with striations indicative of proto- or incomplete

grinding (Figure 220:h, i). Additionally, a small triangular endblade was slightly ground on both faces and

another triangular endblade had slight grinding on one

basal corner (Figure 220: a, e). These features are the

only support for the suggestion that the undisturbed

nature of the axial structure at this locus may indicate

a late phase in the site occupation. In conclusion, without further excavation and dating of other loci at the

site there are no grounds for supposing that the occupation of Attu's Point extends beyond the 4000-3600

B.P. period.

Structural Comparisons

The well-preserved axial structure at L-7 bears some

resemblance to the partially excavated structure at L9. L-7 is also broadly similar in form to Pre-Dorset

features excavated at Dog Bight L-5, east of Nain

(Fitzhugh 1 976a: 1 30-1 33; Cox 1978:101). The latter

site contained three structures, two of which consisted of well defined axial features measuring 3 m by 1 m in size, with central box-hearths constructed of

thick rocks and partial rings of tent anchor rocks. One of these structures had a number of small thermoliths concentrated within the bounds of the axial

feature, although there were few within the boxhearth itself (Fitzhugh 1 976a:l 33). A third structure,

possibly disturbed, had an axial feature 2 by 1 m in

size. The main difference between these structures and L-7 is the total lack of perimeter anchor rocks at

L-7. Looking further afield, L-7 bears a striking

resemblance to an axial structure at Tuapagssuit

(64V1-I,10) near Nuuk, west Greenland (Gullov

1 983:51; Gullov and Kapel 1988:47). Otherwise, L-7

clearly lies within the broad tradition of Paleoeskimo

axial features with box-hearths and thermoliths that

is well documented from Independence I and Saqqaq

contexts (e.g., Gronnow and Jensen 2003; Gronnow

and Meldgaard 1991; Knuth 1967; Kramer 1996;

McChee 1979; Mikalsen 2001; Mobjerg 1998, 1999;

Olsen 1998; Schlederman 1990).

The features at L-1 and L-5 are more difficult to

evaluate given the likelihood of disturbance, but in

both cases a hearth is positioned at the terminal end

of a rock alignment rather than in the middle. Whether

this signals a functional difference from the more standard axial model at L-7 or individual choice in hearth placement cannot be determined from the present

data. It is also conceivable that the spatial pattern at L5 should not be interpreted within the expectations of

the axial model, but instead as a linear series of

hearths such as at Port Manvers Run-1 (Chapter 12).

Not only might a linear hearth arrangement signal a

functional difference from axial features, it could also

be associated with different socio-spatial practices.

Functional Variability

The term functional variability denotes activityrelated variability attributable to resource extraction practices, the latter being subject to seasonal

differences. As such, functional variability at Attu's

Point is considered along two dimensions: dwelling

structures and lithic assemblages.

Arctic archaeologists have increasingly recognized formal variability in Early Paleoeskimo structures, some of which is probably seasonal in

nature. Yet there are no solid criteria for identifying structures of different seasonality. The most common assumption is that cold weather structures were of more substantial construction and

should exhibit considerable attention to heating

facilities, resulting in emphasis on the hearth/axial

feature arrangement and possibly larger accumulations of charcoal and fire-cracked rock (e.g.. Cox

1978:98; Knuth 1967:45-51; Maxwell 1985:96-98;

Odgaard 2003; Olsen 1998:111-116; Renouf

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 315
1993:191-197). It is also expected that there may

be larger accumulations of tools than at warmweather sites, and that these accumulations will occur primarily inside the structures, whereas

warm-weather dwellings may be associated with

external activity areas. On the other hand, Maxwell (1985:98) suggested that sites lacking structural remains may be

traces of snow house camps. Ramsden and IVIurray

(1 995) provide tentative support for this from faunal

associations that suggest "substantial" structures

represent warm weather tent structures, while features consisting only of small vegetation patches

with rocks indicate snow-walled winter dwellings.

They also note, however, that structural variability

can be expected in "transitional" seasons with variable weather and variable demands on construction

techniques (Ramsden and Murray 1995:115-116).

Although the safest conclusion to draw is that correlating structures and seasonality is highly problematic in the absence of faunal remains, it is by no means the case that the presence of faunal material

will be decisive for interpretation. Cronnow and

Jensen (2003: 337) note significant contradictions

between faunal data and structural and lithic evi- dence from Independence I sites in northernmost

Greenland.

None of the excavated localities at Attu's Point

exhibit structural remains that might be considered

substantial constructions. There is little besides a

hearth and the remains of a small axial feature or

rock alignment. None of the features display a clear

perimeter of anchor rocks. L-7 is unusual in its degree of preservation; its classic box-hearth illustrates the use of thermoliths, but there was minimal

accumulation of fire-cracked rock and very few tools.

At L-5 there were few tools or flakes associated with

the possible axial feature, but larger quantities of

lithics were found a short distance away in a context

that could be interpreted either as a disturbed structure or as an external dump/activity area.

The lack of perimeter rocks might be explained

either by warm season use of wooden pegs to hold down tent skins or cold season use of snow. The lack

of lithic accumulation has dubious relevance to the

seasonality issue, since it is linked to longevity of occupation, group size and staging behavior in technological organization. The location of the Attu's Point features on beaches highly exposed to westerly winds is advantageous for mitigating insect torment during warmer seasons, but disadvantageous for cold seasons. In sum, the structural information is, by itself, of

little value for the interpretation of site seasonality.

As far as lithic assemblage variability is concerned, given the lack of fully published Pre-Dorset collections from other parts of Labrador it is difficult to

provide a concrete assessment of how the Attu's Point assemblage fits into the overall range of functional variation in Pre-Dorset material. The few existing accounts

either provide no information on tool frequencies or lump together material from what are probably different loci, such that intra-site variation is masked (Cox

1977, n.d.; Fitzhugh 1976; Tuck 1976). Inter-site comparisons are of limited value without control over intrasite variation. That said, Attu's Point seems to exhibit a

lower proportion of burins and perhaps scrapers than

elsewhere. Lanceolate bifaces, probably hafted as

knives (Cronnow 1994:206-207), are absent from the

excavated loci (except for a possible fragment at L-5),

although two were surface collected. There is a paucity

of small stemmed or bipointed bifaces, which else- where have been identified as arrow points (Crennow

1994:224; Gr0nnow and Meldgaard 1 991:135), pre- sumably for hunting terrestrial mammals.

On the other hand, Attu's Point exhibits a fairly

high proportion of triangular endblades, which were

used as harpoon tips. Consequently, the excavated

assemblages give the impression of being weighted

towards "procurement" rather than "maintenance"

activities and possibly towards the exploitation of

seals rather than land mammals. This contrasts with

the situation further north at Okak, where inner bay

316 CHAPTER 1 3
sites have relatively few triangular endblades, which

Cox (1 978:1 02) interprets as indicating summer occupation with less emphasis on sea mammal hunting.

However, endblade equipped harpoons could also be

used for hunting caribou, which seems likely at PreDorset inland sites from the Barrenlands of the Northwest Territories (B. Gordon 1 996:1 55-1 59).

Finally, the presence of three slate adzes and two

celt/adze preforms indicates that procurement and

processing of wood products, and/or butchering of

frozen meat, may have been an important activity at

this inner bay settlement. The emphasis in the foregoing was on tool assemblages reflecting different activities. A related dimension is the articulation of activities with social group

composition.

Some of the observed variation in assemblages

could be related to differences in the gender composition of the social units responsible for each occupation.

For example, the high proportion of endblades and

lack of maintenance tools (e.g., L-7) might indicate a

predominantly male hunting party. On the other hand,

there are no compelling grounds to assume strongly

gender-specific tools, and the absence of such tools would not necessarily imply the absence of a gender.

The quantity of Mugford cherts used at Attu's

Point is fairly typical of Labrador Pre-Dorset. Black

chert, on the other hand, seems unusually low in fre- quency for the Nain region. The high frequency of slate

debitage also seems unusual for the Nain area, but a

geographically comparable site from deep within the

inner bay zone of the Okak region, Sipukat Bay-1

(HjCn-1), also has a high frequency of celts/adzes

(n=6) and slate is the dominant raw material (Cox

1 977:230-237).^ The use of large quantities of slate

for celts/adzes in the inner bay zones of Nain and

Okak presumably is related to wood procurement and

processing in forested areas. The quantity of Ramah

chert found at Attu's Point appears to be somewhat

greater than that noted at other Pre-Dorset sites in the

Port Manvers Run area, but it is well below that reported for sites closer to the Ramah chert sources, such as

Tuck's (1975:1 35) localities at Sagiek Bay (5.4-37.2%

of the tools). It is possible that Pre-Dorset people at

Attu's Point procured some of their Ramah chert from

their Maritime Archaic neighbours in the Nain region,

or that they scavenged chert from abandoned Maritime

Archaic sites such as Attu's Bight (see Chapter 12). These superficial observations on functional variation in Pre-Dorset lithic assemblages underline the

importance of more detailed studies of Pre-Dorset

technological organization. More information is needed concerning how Pre-Dorset lithic assemblages were formed and how variability relates to seasonal and situational factors as well as raw material availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Attu's Point was used repeatedly for short seasonal

occupations, presumably over a few hundred years. These occupations were directed towards a relatively

limited range of functions and in some cases might

have involved social units of restricted composition.

But despite the ephemeral nature of individual loci, the

repeated use of the site suggests it played a significant

role in the regional settlement pattern, serving as a

seasonal "central place." Few other Pre-Dorset sites in

the Nain area exhibit such repetitive use. The functional signature of the Attu's Point lithic assemblage points to two main activities: sea mammal

hunting and wood procurement and processing.

Contemporary fauna availability patterns suggest it is most likely Attu's Point was occupied either in the early

spring or the fall. At both these times a variety of seal

species (but especially harps) may be plentiful in Webb

Bay and could have been harpooned close to the site as

they moved through the narrow passage between Igloo

Sipukat Bay-1 was surface collected for tools, so no quantitative information on debitage frequencies is available.

ATTU'S POINT: A PRE-DORSET "CENTRAL PLACE" ON WEBB BAY 317
Island and the mainland (Figure 1 53). Today the passage sometimes may not freeze over until February;

if this was the case in the past, open water sealing

might have been possible during the early winter.

Caribou have wintering areas in the mountains to the

north and west of Webb Bay (Brice-Bennett 1 977:1 58-

1 59), but in some years herds may winter on the

coast, including in the valleys of neighboring South

Aulatsivik Island. Their early spring and early winter

movements over the ice between the mainland and

South Aulatsivik Island^ ^ might be ideal periods to

intercept major herd concentrations. However, the

low frequency of stemmed points and lanceolate

bifaces could indicate this was not a major activity at

Attu's Point. Our own experience in early-middle July was

that relatively little game is available at that time, or

at least it is difficult to find. A shift to coastal settle- ments would be more advantageous during this

period when seals, fish and sea birds are concentrated in the outer island fringe. The situation changes in late summer and early fall when char and

salmon re-enter the inner bays, geese and ducks are

plentiful and black bears come down to the shores

and stream mouths. Later in the fall harp seals move

through Port Manvers Run. Consequently, late summer and fall might provide a mix of resources to draw Pre-Dorset people from the outer coast.

Additionally, given the prominence of slate tools and debitage at Attu's Point, it is likely that fall occupations were used to stock up on needed wood

supplies and to prepare wooden implements for

the winter, while spring occupations could have

replenished supplies exhausted during the winter. How this interpretation of Attu's Point fits into the broader view of Pre-Dorset settlement patterns in

the Nain area and Labrador as a whole is taken up in Chapter 1 4.

A nefarious crew at Immilikulik Island. Left to right: Eric Loring, Dosia Laeyendecker, Susan Rowley, Ben Fitzhugh, Joshua Fitzhugh. (Photo: W. Fitzhugh 1985)

^5 Such a situation was observed in late April 1994, with westward moving animals crossing the ice over the southern

entrance to Port Manvers Run near Double Island Cove.

318 CHAPTER 1 3
The St.ucturat.on of

Maritime Archaic/ Pre- Dorset

Social boundaries in L_ a brad or

One of the recurring themes in Labrador prehistory

and history has been the shifting social boundaries

between Inuit/Pre-lnuit and Innu/Pre-lnnu peoples

(e.g., Fitzhugh 1972, 1977, 1987; Taylor 1979). With

that in mind, it is now time to draw together several

threads that were developed in the previous two chapters and address the question of social boundary relations between the Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset

peoples. Evidence accumulated since the early 1 970s

demonstrates that these two cultures overlapped in

time between 4000-3500 B.P., corresponding to 2500-

1800 BC (calibrated). Despite this lengthy period of

coexistence, the archaeological assemblages of the two cultures exhibit virtually no unambiguous indications of interaction. Up to this point, the Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset

boundary problem has been discussed largely as a

culture-historical problem, using the traditional concepts of contact situations with a cultural-ecology

overlay. This has been useful, certainly, but the importance of this unique situation for understanding the

developmental trajectories of each culture necessitates linking the specific historical context to broader

theoretical issues. This chapter considers frameworks

for doing so, although some new data will also be presented. These frameworks are drawn from different

paradigmatic sources, one emphasizing ecological

causality, the other focusing on culturally constructed

landscapes. Crudely put, they correspond to the theoretical boxes termed, respectively, processual and

post-processual archaeology. The boundaries constructed around these viewpoints originate from

major ontological differences, but their architecture is

also derived partly from the polemics of territorial

defense within theoretical identity politics. Although

the pragmatic approach is to regard the opposed

arguments as representing alternative entry points to

a common problem and work towards some form of

integration, it is difficult to reconcile conceptual structures emanating from divergent ontological first principles. Consequently, one function of this chapter is

to reflect upon the dilemma of working with the conceptual tensions found at the boundaries between different archaeologies. When all is said and done, it is hoped that the chapter can show how a specific problem in Subarctic culture- history can, in a modest way,

illuminate central issues in archaeological knowledge

construction.

CULTURE-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The potential for interaction between the Maritime

Archaic and Pre-Dorset in Labrador was first identified

during James Tuck's 1969-1971 research at Sagiek

Bay (Tuck 1975, 1976). Given virtually contemporaneous radiocarbon dates for the cultures from superimposed strata at Rose Island Site Q, Tuck (1975:195-

A shorter preliminary version of this chapter was published in Hood (2000).

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 319
196) speculated about possible cultural transfers: toggling harpoons from the Maritime Archaic to the PreDorset and the bow and arrow from the Pre-Dorset to

the Maritime Archaic, as suggested by the initial appearance of small projectile points in the Late

Maritime Archaic. More recent research indicates

these proposals are problematic. Toggling harpoons

have been found in early Saqqaq contexts such as

Qeqertassusuk, Greenland (Crannow 1994) and small

"flake points" have been found in Maritime Archaic

sites dated as early as ca. 6000-5500 B.P. (e.g.,

Nukasusutok-5), although these need not indicate the

presence of bows and arrows.

During the 1970s and 1980s, William Fitzhugh

and his colleagues' fieldwork on the north coast of

Labrador expanded the data base for both cultures and

radiocarbon dates confirmed the overlap of the Late

Maritime Archaic Rattlers Bight Phase and Early PreDorset between 3900-3500 B.P. (Cox 1978, 1988;

Fitzhugh 1975, 1976, 1978, 1980, 1984; Thomson

1982, 1983, 1985). Although the two cultures sometimes occupied the same or nearby sites, little indication of contact was seen in their tool assemblages.

Fitzhugh (1978:91, 1984:22) referred to a possible

Maritime Archaic copy of a Pre-Dorset burin, Cox

(1 977:235) pointed to a Maritime Archaic gouge re- worked by the Pre-Dorset and the presence of a

Maritime Archaic sandstone plummet at a Pre-Dorset

site (Cox 1988:3), and Chapter 13 in the present vol- ume reported a Late Maritime Archaic stemmed point

and possible biface on the upper terrace of the Attu's

Point Pre-Dorset site. Each culture used a distinct set of

lithic raw materials. The Maritime Archaic focussed

almost exclusively on translucent Ramah chert for their

flaked stone tools; this had to be procured from the Ramah Bay region at the northernmost periphery of the

Maritime Archaic world (Cramly 1978; Lazenby 1980).

The Pre-Dorset used a varied set of colored cherts,

most of which were obtained in the Cape Mugford

area, north of Okak (Cramly 1978; Lazenby 1980),

although varying amounts of Ramah chert also appear

in their assemblages. The organization of their lithic

technologies was therefore anchored at different

points in the landscape.

Much of the 1980s' fieldwork focussed on interpreting Maritime Archaic social organization and community structure. Late Maritime Archaic people used

longhouse structures— presumably interconnected

tent dwellings— ranging in size from 15 to 100 m

long. The individual segments of the longhouses were

interpreted as the floor spaces of individual families,

which suggested co-residential group sizes ranging

from 50 to 100 people. The northern Labrador site of

Nulliak Cove, situated between Hebron and Sagiek Bay,

contained up to 27 longhouses and was interpreted as

a short-term seasonal staging camp for accessing the Ramah chert sources, 50 km to the north (Fitzhugh

1980, 1984, 1985a,b). Maritime Archaic longhouse

community organization, combined with mortuary cer- emonialism and exchange systems, suggested some

degree of social elaboration or "complexity" (Fitzhugh

1981, 1984; Hood 1993, 1995).

In contrast, Pre-Dorset usually maintained small group sizes of perhaps one to three co-residential families housed in independent tent dwellings. There are,

however, a number of Pre-Dorset sites with multiple

occupation locales indicating either seasonal aggregation or regular re-occupation. In contrast to the

Maritime Archaic, Pre-Dorset exhibits no evidence for

social "complexity," at least if one considers the most

frequently used indicator variables. The spatial distribution of Maritime Archaic and

Pre-Dorset sites from Nain to the Torngat Mountains

suggested that the two cultures partitioned their settlement space. Fitzhugh (1984:21-23) proposed an

"enclave model" that consisted of a Maritime Archaic

"core area" along the central coast south of Nain and a

Pre-Dorset core area in the northern Torngat mountains and the Nain-Okak regions. The Pre-Dorset core

areas encompassed both the sources of their preferred

cherts near Cape Mugford as well as the Ramah chert

sources preferred by the Maritime Archaic (Figure

320 CHAPTER 1

4
Ramah chert Sagiek

Hebron

Mugford chert

100 km

I I Pre-Dorset core area

\^//\ Maritime Archaic core area

Exx^ Overlap

Hamilton Inlet

228/ Distribution of Late Maritime Arcliaic and Pre-Dorset settlement in Labrador: the macro-territorial model (after Fitzhugh 1984).

228). The Hebron-Sagiek area was an overlap zone

since it contained Maritime Archaic seasonal staging

camps for accessing the Ramah chert sources.

Fitzhugh (1984:21-23) identified a local Maritime

Archaic enclave at Nulliak Cove, situated between

Hebron and Sagiek, and a local Pre-Dorset enclave at

Harp Isthmus on the south side of the entrance to Hebron Fjord. In later years, the find of a substantial

Late Maritime Archaic Rattlers Bight Phase site at

Attu's Bight in the Main region (see Chapter 12) led

Fitzhugh (1986:57) to suggest the enclave model

might have to be modified.

One implication of the enclave model is that the

Maritime Archaic need to maintain seasonal bases in

northern Labrador in order to

acquire Ramah chert, the

stress of maintaining a long

distance chert delivery system,

and territorial behavior in the

overlap zone, may all have

contributed to the cultural

elaboration seen during the

Rattlers Bight Phase (Fitzhugh

1984:23-24). Ultimately, however, these features may have

overloaded Maritime Archaic

organizational capacities and

contributed to the apparent

disappearance of the culture

as a recognizable entity in the

archaeological record after 3500 B.P. (Hood 1993:179).

Although the situation is usually seen from the perspective

of the Maritime Archaic (given

fascination with the puzzling

disappearance of "complexity"), Pre-Dorset was also affected by the inter-cultural dynamic. The visibility of Pre-Dorset

sites also diminishes markedly

after 3500 B.P., although to some extent this might

be attributable to few radiocarbon dates and limited

typological change that masks the presence of sites

post-dating 3500 B.P. (Cox 1988).

With this basic culture-historical framework in mind we can consider the issues involved in theorizing

Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset social boundary relations

using Fitzhugh's (1984) preliminary model as a point

of departure. On the one hand, the model postulates

cultural macro-territoriality: the Maritime Archaic dominating the central coast, Pre-Dorset the Torngats and

the Nain-Okak regions. On the other hand, the model

also postulates micro-territoriality occurring within a zone of seasonal overlap (Hebron-Ramah) in which the

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR

321
Maritime Arclnaic maintained "enclaves, "staging camps

for Ramah chert acquisition expeditions. While useful

as an initial discussion, this image is somewhat static,

implying a degree of boundary equilibrium over several centuries. Additionally, territoriality is a complex

concept that has often been formulated in ecological

terms, but w/hich has intertwined ecological and social components that need to be drawn out. The following

pages will attempt gradually to re-work this preliminary image into something potentially more dynamic.

One issue that needs to be addressed is whether

this "contact" relationship might be formulated in

terms of ethnicity. Over 30 years later, it is still the

case that Barth's (1969) conceptualization of ethnicity

remains fundamental. Summarized briefly, it postulates that ethnicity is a self-ascribed category and a form of social organization used to structure interaction. Ethnicity arises through engagement rather than

isolation, such that "...boundaries persist despite a

flow of personnel across them" (Barth 1969:9). Interethnic relations are ordered by rules that define potential roles and statuses and boundaries are signaled by

a selected range of features, behaviors or values that

agents regard as significant. Fundamental as this definition may be, the conceptualization is inconvenient

for prehistoric archaeologists in that self-ascription

and the persistence of boundaries despite social

mobility render recognition of ethnic boundary

processes highly problematic in the absence of supplemental textual information. Variations in material culture can be related to the formation of social identity groups at different scales (e.g., clans, gender, regional bands, dialect groups, etc.) and it is difficult to

untangle the various threads in archaeological situations. For example, contrasts between the northern and southern branch Maritime Archaic, as exemplified

by the intrusive Black Island Complex (4500-41 00 B.P.)

at Hamilton Inlet (Fitzhugh 1975), suggest the existence of different social identity groups in southern

and central Labrador prior to the Pre-Dorset colonization, but to what extent can those differences be

viewed as "ethnic"? Most archaeologists would agree

that the material culture and behavioral differences between the Pre-Dorset and the Maritime Archaic are

so marked that they were distinct social identity

groups, but it is debatable whether understanding of

their interaction can be enhanced by invoking ethnicity theory. In any event, one could say that pronounced

ethnic differences may not have existed in northern

Labrador prior to the Pre-Dorset colonization ca. 4000

B.P.. Ethnicity only became an emergent relation in a

culture contact situation structured by marked differences in language and behavior, and potentially competitive land-use relations. Whether or not ethnicity concepts are involved,

the interaction situation must be understood in terms

of two main dimensions. First, there must be ecological parameters focusing on the energetics of boundary

maintenance. Population interaction models from evolutionary ecology may direct us towards alternative modes of resource partitioning with different out- comes for inter-cultural relations. Second, there must

be social parameters involving the different organizational and cultural practices used by the two societies

to structure boundary maintenance strategies. Overall, how did the cultural construction and use of the landscape articulate with these two dimensions of human

action? Here we have a set of seemingly incompatible

or incongruent themes— one ecological and materialist, the other social and constructionist— that network

themselves around a common problem. How do we go

about constructing interpretive narratives or theory in

this or similar situations? The next section lays out some of the issues that draw our local problem into

the heart of recent debates in archaeological theory.

WORKING AT THEORETICAL

BOUNDARIES: "LANDSCAPE"

AS A PLATFORM FOR DIALOGUE?

After over 1 5 years of often heated debate and

mutual dismissal tactics between what we have come

to call processual and post-processual archaeologies, a

322 CHAPTER 14
series of statements have appeared that call for some

degree of convergence, reconciliation, or modus Vivendi. Schiffer (2000) for example, advocates "building

bridges" between different conceptual structures.

Following Galison (1996), Wylie (2000) refers to interfield "trading zones." Hodder (2001) and Preucel and

Hodder (1996) argue for a multi-perspectival pluralism, while Schiffer (2000) sees this as resulting in

potentially dangerous fragmentation and eclecticism.

Despite the proliferation of various archaeological

sects since the 1980s and the groping towards some

fusion of interpretive horizons, much of the discipline's discourse still seems to migrate towards poles

defined by "processual" or "post-processual," which

have now become firmly entrenched categories of

research history as well as axes of social organization

within archaeology.

Tendencies towards polarization have been aided

and abetted by clinging to resistant first principles that

are played out as a series of explicit or implicit conceptual dualisms which, when assembled, constitute two competing ontologies of archaeology. One ontology

privileges the view of humans as biological beings and

is founded on adaptation as its central metaphor, from

which a series of more specific causal theories is

derived. The other ontology privileges the view of humans as thoroughly cultural beings, suspended in webs of significance they themselves have constructed. Language is the dominant metaphor, from which

subsidiary interpretive theories of meaning are drawn.

Thus, the Nature/Culture opposition is the eminence

gris lurking behind much of the debate. Attempts to move beyond the sterile processual/

post-processual debates require working at overcoming the troublesome Nature/Culture dualism. A recent

review article by Anschuetz et al. (2001), who write from an American "liberal processual" perspective,

suggests that a "landscape paradigm" can bridge the

great divide between processual and post-processual

views. The authors are careful to define this approach

as a "methodological paradigm": a set of tools that can

be used in solving common puzzles (as perMasterman

1970:70), thereby leading to accommodation or integration between different theoretical frameworks

(Anschuetz et al. 2001:160-164, 191). Besides the

residual odor of "unified science" views (cf., Wylie

2000), which are highly problematic, this "integrative"

methodological approach attempts to insulate practical action from ontological issues and deliberately

skirts the difficulties of bridging radically different

conceptual structures. Research in cognitive history of

science and on conceptual change in general suggests

these issues cannot be ducked so easily (e.g., Chi

1992; Giere 1994; Kuhn 2000; Latour 1993;

Nersessian and Andersen 1997; Thagard 1992).

Writing from a different perspective, Tilley's

(1994) landscape phenomenology has also argued for overcoming the Nature/Culture opposition. It is difficult to quarrel with Tilley's statement that: "...the relationship between people and it [landscape] is a constant dialectic and process of structuration: the landscape is both medium for and outcome of action and

previous histories of action. Landscapes are experienced in practice, in life activities" (Tilley 1 994:23). But

Tilley's landscape phenomenology is positioned in

strategic opposition to adaptationism, so he takes a

thoroughly constructionist view of landscape structuration: "Landscape is a signifying system through

which the social is reproduced and transformed,

explored and structured — process organized.

Landscape, above all, represents a means of conceptual ordering that stresses relations" (Tilley 1994:34).

With Tilley it is the meaningful and symbolic that is

privileged, with practice and life activities exemplified

by Australian hunter-gatherers moving through a landscape of sacred places encoded by Dreamtime mythology, but completely without reference to practices and

environmental knowledge that facilitate subsistence. To adapt a phrase from Tim Ingold, Tilley treats Nature

primarily as "...raw material for imaginative acts of

world-making" (Ingold 1996:1 50). The landscape is so good to think we don't need to worry about eating.

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 323
Ingold's (1996:150) critique of constructionist

thinking argues that constructionism reinforces

rather than challenges the ecological determinist

models because its logic creates separate domains in which such models can be used. With a slice of the

intellectual knife, two conceptual planes are created:

(1 ) Nature, a space inhabited by biological organisms

(animals) that forage to extract resources, and (2)

Society, consisting of persons (thinking subjects) living in a culturally constructed landscape and

engaged in the production and distribution of

resources (Ingold 1996:127, 149). Ingold rejects the

cultural constructionist argument that social relations serve as a model for ecological relations because it requires a disembedding of practical

engagement with the environment from the social

relations that constitute humans as social actors, a

separation of Mind from World, Nature from Society,

Organism from Person and Biological relations from

Social relations (Ingold 1996:126-128). Ingold suggests hunter-gatherers do not make such conceptual

separations; instead, they have similar kinds of relations with both the human and non-human constituents of the environment. In hunter-gatherer

worlds, animals can be persons and humans have

social relations both with other humans and with animals, such that harvesting animal resources is not

just a technical relation (Ingold 1996:127-131).

Consequently, landscapes are not simply "socially

constructed" by imposing a conceptual schema over

Nature. Movement through the landscape involves engagement and learning, discovery rather than

imposition of a predefined mental grid; practice in

the environment constitutes persons and persons

constitute their environments (Ingold 1 996: 1 38- 1 46). There is no radical break between ecological and

social relations and "environments are constituted in

life, not Just in thought, and it is only because we live

in an environment that we can think at all" (Ingold

1996:1 50-1 51).

While Ingold's argument is attractive, it is far from

clear how such ontological reflection can be translated

into research practice. The analysis of concrete archaeological/anthropological problems may be difficult

without some sort of fundamental Nature/Culture conceptual categorizations (Ellen 1996:29-30). Analytical

arguments, as opposed to abstract ontological reflections, require a choice of entry points, each of which

commit the entrant to navigate certain directions along

conceptual networks rather than others. The alternative is eclectic incoherence or a discussion conducted

at such a high level of abstraction that it would lose the

very connection with human practice that Ingold views

as the key issue. One of the hallmarks of "paradigm"

shifts is the emergence of new concepts, changes in

the meaning of old concepts and the shifting of old

concepts into new systems of relations, sometimes by

analogical extension, which involves major changes in

lexical systems and results in incommensurability

problems (e.g., Chi 1992; Kuhn 2000; Nersessian and

Andersen 1997; Thagard 1992). For Ingold's (2000)

perspective to become a viable alternative research program it is necessary to build up a new conceptual

system that embeds his terms— such as "enskillment,"

"affordances" and "taskscapes"— within a semantic

network of greater depth and precision that includes

archaeologically relevant categories. Gamble (1999)

has made a valiant effort in that direction, but the conceptual affordances for steering concrete research problems remam very limited.

All things considered, during the current period

of stalemate between competing ontologies of archaeology there is something to be said for Anschuetz et

al.'s (2001) advocacy of a landscape perspective.

Although their view of landscape as an integrative

methodological paradigm should be rejected, there is

no reason why "landscape" cannot serve as a platform

for dialogue, a point of departure for debating the

problems and commitments that separate contemporary archaeologies.

324 CHAPTER 14
PARTIAL READINGS:

NAVIGATING THE

BOUNDARIES

...tension in theories, as in politics, is a

creative force. ..we may see theories. ..as

articulated within an intertextual field

wherein they derive much of their meaning from what they oppose and thus, in a

sense, confirm the importance of what

they deny. ..Let us call this dissonance,

facetiously, 'hypertension'... (Edwards

1994:261-262).

If there are incommensurable frame- works or conceptual schemes, as

Collingwood, Kuhn and others affirm,

there could be no neutral overarching

standards in virtue of which a rational

adjudication between them could be

made. Yet the mutual non-translatability

of such schemes does not prohibit one

from pursuing each in turn— much as a

bilingual uses one language and then another— all the while constrained by

such practical matters as the seemingly

obvious requirement that one must

speak one language at a time or by the

different aims inherent in each frame- work (Harre and Krausz 1 996:2 1 7).

Arguments that today's competing archaeologies are

irrevocably incommensurate are exaggerated and

serve mostly as a boundary maintenance strategy in

theoretical identity politics. Despite significant conceptual differences, competing "paradigms' must overlap

to some extent, otherwise discussion between their

respective proponents would be impossible (Bernstein

1983:85-93). Paradigms may be compared in various ways by moving back and forth between them in order

to draw out elements of overlap and contrast

(Bernstein 1 983:86, 90); Wylie (1 989) uses C.S. Pierce's

"cables and tacking" metaphor to characterize these

interpretive strategies at the boundaries of different

frameworks. Working at these points of contact and

contrast may help expose the processes through which

intellectual boundaries are constructed. The oppositional tone between processual and post-processual

archaeologies was understandable and perhaps

inevitable, but such "hypertensional" rhetoric may

serve as a cloaking device, disguising the process whereby each side "...derive[s] much of their meaning

from what they oppose and thus, in a sense, confirm

the importance of what they deny" (Edwards

1994:261). Also cloaked is how these conceptual

boxes create artificial closures around what are best

described (metaphorically) as idea networks. Such

polemical closures are ironic for post-processualists

who otherwise write of intertextuality: they ignore the consequences of their own constructionism.

Intertextuality notwithstanding, navigating conceptual structures cannot be a random walk through a

network. Choices of entry point are required and these

choices have consequences for the direction of the

entrants' navigation route. One cognitive-philosophical

approach sees knowledge as structured in type hierarchies, with different type hierarchies implying different

ontologies about how the world is organized (e.g., different type hierarchies for the adaptationist vs cultural

constructionist ontologies). Since concepts at lower

portions of a hierarchy inherit properties from supertypes positioned higher in the hierarchy, activating

concepts at any level of the hierarchy implicitly downloads other properties of the ontological system

(Aronson et al. 1995:27-54). This is not to say that

such structures are governed by rigid necessity; if they

are to function in practice and develop further they must be marked by an "open texture" that permits some flexibility in ordering (Harre 2002:264). But it

does suggest that working at the boundaries of ontologies and attempting to develop new "conceptual

blends" (Fauconnier and Turner 2002) cannot escape

the dilemma of conceptual inheritance that is an automatic consequence of choosing a starting position.

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 325
Considering the multitude of problems attendant

with attempts to build new theory at the boundaries

between current archaeological ontologies, the following discussion of theoretical models is presented in two parts: ecological space and culturally constructed

social and ideological landscapes. Selected aspects of

these models are used to frame the subsequent culture-historical narratives. Although this mode of presentation remains trapped in the Nature/Culture dualism, each model and narrative is considered a partial

reading, using one language at a time, launched from

entry points that activate different conceptual domains

relevant to human practices in the landscape.

ECOLOGICAL SPACE

From the perspective of the humans as adaptive beings

ontology, the landscape is an ecological space with

varying distributions of resources from which foragers must make rational selections in order to reproduce or meet social obligations. Interaction between populations of organisms inhabiting the same ecological

community and engaged in foraging for similar

resources (niche overlap) leads ecologists towards

competition theory. Two main types of competition

have been identified: exploitation and interference

competition. In exploitation competition, foraging by one organism reduces the quantity of a resource needed by another organism. In interference competition, one organism reduces the ability of another to make

use of a common resource, through mechanisms such

as territoriality (Carothers and Jaksic 1984; Keddy

1989). Although the first type is the most traditional

view of competition, the second has become increasingly significant to researchers and seems more relevant for discussing human practice in the environment,

so interference competition will be the focus here. Another approach to niche overlap— mutualism— has

been less theorized in ecology (perhaps for ideological

reasons,^ ^ Keddy 1989), but may have considerable

relevance for human practice (Spielmann 1986).

Competition theory has been marked by the extensive

use of mathematical models. Most of these are concerned with the relationship between resource availability and population dynamics in situations of niche

overlap. The following discussion will not be concerned with this quantitative dimension and population dynamics will play little role in the discussion. Much of the focus will be on spatial dynamics, since

this has the most visible archaeological consequences. The central element in competitive or mutual

relations concerns how organisms partition

resources and habitats. Partitioning can be accomplished by scheduling the use of foraging sites at different points in time, by dispersing foraging sites in

space, or by shifts in foraging behavior towards specialization on different resources. Preventing temporal overlap at foraging sites can minimize the potential for direct conflict in interference competition,

such as fighting over the best fishing or sealing locations, stealing food etc. Temporal partitioning of the same foraging sites may be accomplished by the

potential competitors selecting resource types that

are available at different times, or by exploiting continually renewing resources at different times. An

effective temporal partitioning of activity may not

require or result in the partitioning of other variables,

such as habitat space or particular food resources

(Carothers and Jaksic 1984:405-406). Some highly

desirable resources, however, may be available only

for short time frames (e.g., seasonally), decreasing

the likelihood that temporal partitioning would be an

effective means of limiting competition.

Partitioning of space is perhaps the most frequent means of preventing direct competition. In patchy

' ' "Competition" is a category in need of deconstruction. Its conceptual privileging relative to other relational possibilities- such as mutualism— may reflect its metaphorical role in the intertextual relations between biological and sociopolitical dis- course (Keddy 1989:160-162). Keene (1983) discusses the sociopolitical baggage of evolutionary ecology in archaeology.

326 CHAPTER 14
environments where resources are dispersed, dispersal

of foraging sites in space minimizes competition. Of

course, patches may differ markedly in their quality of

resources such that competition may arise from foraging decisions to prioritize high quality patches. The

likelihood of competition increases if such resources

are also temporally limited in availability. For example,

seasonally migrating harp seals have, in a general

sense, a patchy distribution. But they may have higher

accessibility to human foragers in certain predictable

places, such as narrow inlets and passages that restrict and funnel herd movements. Such places may become

the focus of competition.

One of the central (and traditional) issues in spatial partitioning is territoriality. As humans use such a

wide range of interaction mechanisms it is very simplistic to categorize behavior as either territorial or

non-territorial (Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978). One

might say there is a continuum of territorial behaviour

from highly territorial competitive exclusion, to cooperative interaction as non-territorial behaviour. DysonHudson and Smith (1978) regard territoriality as a

response to interaction situations in which resources

are dense and predictable. The articulation of these two properties promote territoriality by setting conditions of economic defendability. Kelly's (1 995) discussion of territoriality among foragers builds largely

upon their observations. Although he gives lengthy

consideration to the social mechanisms involved a

group's extending permission to others to use their

territories (Kelly 1995:181-189), his arguments turn on the centrality of resources and demography, seen in

terms of cost-benefit analysis: "...for any given case we

should be able to translate the interplay between environmental and population variables into their significance in terms of intragroup variance and intergroup

correlation, and from these predict the specific form of

land tenure" (Kelly 1994:201). Although Kelly is sensitive to the social mechanisms involved in regulating

access to the landscape, his view of "land tenure" is premised on a reductionist attempt to predict social

relations from ecological relations (Ingold [1986:130-

1 33] provides an alternative conceptualization of these

terms, see below). It should be noted, however, that most of Kelly's ethnographic examples pertain to boundary processes between social units within single

ethnic/linguistic units, rather than across such units. To this point the discussion has focused on the

properties of available resources, but variations in the

behavioral properties of the competitors must also be

considered. Competitors may exhibit varying technological capacities for resource extraction or differences

in organizational characteristics, such as labor mobilization or social differentiation. These abilities may

change over time, resulting in either shifts of competitive advantages/disadvantages, or the development of

coexistence. In the ecological literature, the relative

degree of specialization/generalization in resource

exploitation (niche breadth) is a frequently used

dimension of variation.^ ^ In some situations both

competitors may specialize, thereby minimizing niche

overlap and potential competition. If two populations

specialize on different resources we might expect the development of relatively weak territoriality, or perhaps even reciprocal resource exchange in a mutualistic relation between the two populations (cf., Spielmann 1986). In other situations one competitor

may shift to more generalist strategies, exploiting the

resource patches not used by the specialist.

Depending on the degree of niche overlap, this could

be an unstable coexistence marked by some degree of

territoriality. The specialists might be expected to

invest in defending their resources since they have less

alternative resource flexibility than generalists and

'° How such a distinction could actually be measured empirically among human foragers is a serious problem, particularly

in archaeological cases for which we lack zooarchaeological data, and draw subsistence inferences primarily from site location, such as in the Pre-Dorset/Maritime Archaic context.

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 327
thus much to lose. The generalists would be unlikely to

incur defence costs for gaining only a small increase in

resource variety unless the niche overlap with the specialist included resources that were seasonally critical

for the generalist. In all these cases, as long as the

interaction effects are fairly equal for both parties, the

competition could be termed symmetric (Keddy

1989:1 5-16).

But an inability to shift niche breadth or foraging

characteristics may militate against coexistence, leading to exclusion of one of the competitors. Marked

organizational differences between populations raise

the possibility of competitive dominance, or asymmetric competition (Keddy 1 989: 1 6). Asymmetric relations

might involve avoidance strategies on the part of subordinate populations, such as: a) refuging behavior,

with movement to poorer quality habitats or favored

retreat sites, perhaps linked with an increase in specialization, b) a "floating-nomadic" existence, moving

through the interstices between the favoured locations

of the dominant population, perhaps involving a shift

to more generalist strategies, or c) shifts in activity

times, such as the subordinate exploiting a dominant's

favoured resource during a non-optimal period

(Carothers and Jaksic 1984:405; Schoener 1974b;

Smith 1978; the latter two cited in Carothers and

Jaksic 1984:405).

Dominance patterns may also be related to the

temporal dimension of niche relations. Yodzis

(1 978:25) discusses spatial pre-emption resulting from

the history of colonization sequences. It is generally

assumed that already established organisms have a

competitive advantage over new colonizers, resulting

in what Yodzis (1 978:26) calls founder-controlled communities. In such communities, colonization by new

organisms may involve a "reshuffling" of species

among patches, a rearrangement structured by

founder-dominance, which results in re-equilibration.

In some cases, however, repeated colonization events may produce what Yodzis (1978:49) terms "quasicycles": a series of colonizations without equilibrium.

This discussion is important in that it draws attention

to the problem of historical contingency in competitive

relations and highlights the static nature of the standard equilibrium models.

Another dimension that may lead away from simple equilibrium models is temporal variation in the

environment, which may be linked to variable competition over time (Wiens 1 977). In general, there should

be limited competition when resources are abundant

and maximal competition at resource lows. In environ- ments marked by strong spatial variations in resource

availability, periodic resource minimums will lead to

greater competition for the limited high quality

resource patches or extraction locales. Although for

modelling purposes temporal variation in resource

availability has often been depicted using shifting

equilibrium models, cycling between high and low

abundance, more recent non-linear systems ecology

draws in the abrupt and chaotic aspects of environmental change. This puts a premium on the historically contingent in Nature/Culture relations.

For the purposes of further discussion related to

the specifics of the Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset social boundary issue, three aspects of spatial partitioning

are extracted for particular attention. First, "territoriality," involving either: a) symmetric relations or mutualism, or b) asymmetric relations marked by the relegation of one group to less favored patches or refuging

behaviour. Second, "floating" strategies, involving

inter-patch mobility through cultural interstices to

avoid contact. Third, "cycling," involving repeated colonization events on varying time scales within regions,

either as a partial avoidance strategy or simply failure

to colonize permanently.

CONSTRUCTED SOCIAL AND

IDEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES

From the perspective of the humans as intrinsically cultural beings ontology, space is not a neutral resource

foraging arena, but a culturally constructed landscape

imbued with social and ideological meanings. Instead

328 CHAPTER 14
of locations or sites that are the settings or physical

frames for activities— simply utilized spaces— landscapes are actively constructed and experienced by

minds and bodies. Natural spaces become cultural

landscapes by being enveloped in conceptual grids

and a history of practices as well as through the construction of built environments that physically and

conceptually act back upon the humans who experience these places. The central point is that in the

course of social practice, agents "draw on their settings" as resources for action and, in turn, that places

constitute agents as social actors (Giddens 1979:206;

Tilley 1994: 16,19-20, 23). The "existential spaces" in

which agents act are not static, but are continually pro- duced and reproduced through practices involving

movement through the landscape (Tilley 1 994: 1 6-17).

Thus, the biographies and identities of individuals and

groups are constructed in relation to places and in the

course of movement along the paths that tie places

into meaningful networks, and these relations between

place, people and movement are central to the construction of cultural memory (Tilley 1994:27-28). The

mutual structuration of practices and networks of

places gives a spatial dimension to cultural knowledge

and power relations (Hood 1988).

Some of the best examples of this approach

applied to the study of hunter-gatherers come from

Australia (for other examples see Bender 1 993; Hirsch and O'Hanlon 1995; P.Jordan 2003; Tilley 1994; Ucko

and Layton 1999). Morphy's (1995) discussion of the Yolngu makes clear the relationship between landscape, the ancestral past and social reproduction. All

parts of the Yolngu landscape are imbued with the

actions of ancestral beings such that the landscape

consists of ancestral tracks and mythological coordinates anchored to specific places. The ancestral past

becomes part of subjective experience as the individual moves through and experiences the totemically

coded landscape. Kinship relations (moieties and

clans) are mapped onto the landscape and thus integrated with the ancestral grid, and rituals relate

groups and places in relation to ancestral tracks. Thus,

a set of long-term structures encoded in the landscape

constitute a framework for active social structuration

processes:The ancestral past is continuously re-created by the sedimenting of past and present

experiences and political outcomes on preexisting loci. ..In reality places are continually

being reformed into new sets. New divisions

of the landscape are made as clans die out and new ones emerge. ..Thus the articulation

of social groups with the landscape is always

changing, but the mythic screen that covers

the landscape makes the relationship appear

unchanging. ..The acting out of individual

lives ultimately produces the cumulative

changes which force the ancestral screen to

adjust in order to mirror present circumstances. ..The ancestral past, though changed

and reproduced through present human

action, is absorbed as a precedent for future

action (Morphy 1995:204-205).

The aforementioned perspectives provide important analogies for thinking about hunter-gatherer

action in the landscape. Yet, as discussed previously,

they present a rather one-sided cultural constructionist

view that generally ignores resource extraction practices or treats them as epiphenomenal to meaning. The

consequence is an extremely idealist view of human

relationships with the landscape in which Nature is

viewed primarily as a source of raw materials for cultural acts of imagination (Ingold 1996:150). But the

landscape needs to be both good to think and a source

of raw materials for cultural acts of survival.

If we take more seriously the mix of constraints and opportunities afforded by the natural world and

different types of mobility systems, then we might

identify some general patterns or at least some general consequences for cultural construction of the landscape. For example, there is surely a difference in landscape construction practices between populations that

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 329
have been established in an area for many generations

and those which are initially colonizing an area. As in

the Yolgnu example, established populations operate

within a pre-existing network of places and paths that

are implicated deeply in the reproduction of social

relations and cultural memory. The landscape is a

long-term structure that is both the product and precedent of action. Colonizers enter new landscapes for

which there is no pre-existing cognitive map, no precise knowledge of resource distributions, no coded

network of known places or paths to relate to. They

must act without structural precedents, except insofar

as they can extend analogies from previous experiences elsewhere. Consequently, besides engaging in

flexible resource-searching and knowledge-gathering

practices, colonists must actively construct a landscape by building up an archive of experiences with

places and paths. These differing implications for

social action in landscapes have obvious relevance for

the Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset situation.

Another argument relevant to a critique of the

constructionist privileging of Culture is Ingold's

(1 986: 1 30ff.) discussion of the concepts of tenure and

territoriality, which stand in a dialectical relation that

illustrates what is involved in working with the

Nature/Culture dualism. Ingold (1986:131, 136-137)

considers tenure to be the schema and practices

through which the landscape is appropriated, claims

are made on resources and individuals are constituted

as agents. Tenure binds groups into historical relationships with landscapes, which are reproduced as longterm structures. Hunter-gatherer tenure is a relationship with places and paths through the landscape— a

dispersed network— not a partitioning of space into

two-dimensionally bounded patches, which is the

usual thinking with "territoriality." For Ingold (1986:

1 30-1 31, 136, 141-145, 156-157), territoriality \s x.h& schema and practices used in appropriating resources and for communicating about the locations of persons and resources. Although it does involve divisions of

the landscape, it is not about maintaining exclusive

access to resources, but is a set of practices aimed at minimizing interference in resource extraction or the

disturbance of sacred sites. Unlike the structural continuity of tenure over time, however, territoriality is situationally contingent since different modes of territoriality are implemented in response to changes in envi- ronmental (and social) contexts. To summarize:

"...tenure engages nature in a system of social relations, territoriality engages society in a system of natural relations" (Ingold 1986:136).

Such a brief summary does not do complete justice to Ingold's ideas, but in conjunction with the previous discussion it outlines a framework that can be

used to stimulate thinking regarding questions of

landscape and social boundaries in Labrador. Details

of the archaeological context for Maritime Archaic/PreDorset relations are presented in the next section,

which is followed by an interpretative integration of

the archaeological context with the threads cast out in

the theoretical sections.

BACK TO THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL

CONTEXT

We know that the Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset

shared the north-central Labrador coast for several hundred years and preliminary interpretations have

pointed to spatial partitioning as one of the mechanisms by which that coexistence was sustained. The

preceding theoretical discussion established frameworks for understanding that coexistence from different entry points to human use of the landscape. Now,

the empirical aspects of Maritime Archaic and PreDorset settlement need to be considered in greater

depth. The foraging characteristics of the two cultures are difficult to ascertain, since we completely

lack archaeozoological material from Pre-Dorset sites and that from the Maritime Archaic consists mostly of

calcined bone fragments. Subsistence-settlement

inferences are therefore drawn primarily from site

locations, structural information and lithic assemblage variation.

330 CHAPTER 1 4
229/ Distribution of Late Maritime Arclnaic and Pre-Dorset Settlement in the Nain Region. Original map © 2004 produced

under licence from Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, with permission of Natural Resources Canada.

Broad similarities in site location have led to both

cultures being characterized as having "interior-maritime" settlement systems, which involved spring to fall

land-use ranging across the inner and outer coastal

islands and inner bays for sea mammal hunting, fishing and caribou hunting, and winter occupation of the

inner bays or near-interior based on caribou hunting

and fishing (Cox 1978:102; Fitzhugh 1978:83-84). As

of yet, however, none of the inner bay sites known for

either culture provide convincing evidence for winter

occupation. The discussions of the Late Maritime

Archaic site Attu's Bight in Chapter 12 and the PreDorset site Attu's Point in Chapter 1 3, both inner bay

localities, highlighted the difficulties of drawing seasonal inferences. Nonetheless, the settlement data are

sufficient to make the case that there was potential for

resource competition between the two cultures. On the

other hand, the settlement typology is static and insensitive to possible organizational changes over time. As

will be discussed further below, Early/Middle Maritime

Archaic settlement patterns may have differed from

those of the Late Maritime Archaic. For Pre-Dorset, the

paucity of radiocarbon dates makes it impossible to

track temporal shifts in the configuration of their setTHE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 331
tiement patterns, although regional variations can be

considered. The following pages outline the settlement

pattern data on a region-by-region basis.

The Nain Region

Figure 229 depicts the distribution of Late Maritime

Archaic and Pre-Dorset sites in the Nain region.^ ^ One

concentration of Pre-Dorset sites is found in the outer

island area. Most of these outer coast sites are small,

consisting of lithic scatters with and without traces of

dwelling structures. On Natsutuk Island, in the outer

island fringe, the September Harbour-1 site is a relatively large locality with repeated occupations,

although few clear structures (Fitzhugh 1976a:136;

Fitzhugh, personal communication). On Dog Island,

Dog-Bight L-5, dated 3810±75 B.P., contains three

closely spaced axial structures, but very few lithics

(Cox 1978:99, 101; Fitzhugh 1976:130-133). Finally, one of the few late Pre-Dorset sites in the Nain region

is Nukasusutok-2 (Chapter 4), which consists of two

substantially built axial structures, one of which is

dated 3315±85 B.P. (3055±85 with ^^C/'^^C correction; Cox 1978:99, 101; Fitzhugh 2002).

The other concentration of Pre-Dorset sites is

found along Port Manvers Run, the long passage west

of South Aulatsivik Island. The Run can be used as a

protected "inside" travel route to avoid rougher outer

coast waters. In spring and fall, migrating harp seal

herds may be funnelled through the Run and during

the winter strong tidal currents maintain a polynya at

the "Second Rattle" that can be used for open water

sealing. Caribou of the Kingurutik and Kiglapait

Mountain herds may be accessed from the Run and

small herds may move across the Run onto South

Aulatsivik Island during the winter. Three large PreDorset sites with multiple localities indicative of fre- quent re-occupation are found on or near the Run. At

the seaward end of the Run, Thalia Point contains several localities, one dated 3660±140 B.P., which are marked by a high frequency of burins and burin spalls

(Fitzhugh 1 976b:l 06-1 07). About one third of the way

southward along the Run is Approach Point-2, located

adjacent to the polynya. The site consists of at least a dozen localities, some with ambiguous structural

remains, two of which have fairly substantial accumulations of tools. The location is favorable for spring

and fall sealing as well as winter open water sealing in

the polynya. Oddly enough, harpoon endblades are

rare in the surface material; a considerable amount of

slate debitage is present (Smithsonian field notes,

1980). The third site is Attu's Point on Webb Bay,

slightly west of the entrance to Port Manvers Run. As

outlined in Chapter 1 3, Attu's Point contains over 20

small localities, including several dwelling structures, two of which are dated 3750±60 B.P. and 3790±70

B.P.. The lithic assemblage is marked by a fairly high

frequency of endblades, abundant slate materials and

a paucity of scrapers. Its location and assemblage

characteristics suggest a focus on spring and fall seal

hunting at a nearby narrow channel. Most of the other

sites along the Run are small, with single or two or

three localities. Two of these. Port Manvers Run-1 and

Double Island Cove-1 (the latter with dates of 3640±70

B.P. and 3320±70 B.P.), were described in Chapter 12. To summarize, there are two frequently re-used

"central places" on the outer coast, at September

Harbour and Thalia Point. A third central place is found

at an inner bay location, Attu's Point, while a fourth,

' " The site distribution information is derived from the files of the Cultural Heritage Division, Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador. Several caveats must be noted regarding these data. (1) The distribution data are most reliable for the Nain and Sagiek Bay regions, since these areas have been subjected to the most intensive and long-term survey programs. (2) Generally speaking, the inner bay areas have not been surveyed as extensively as the outer coastal regions. (3) There are problems in separating Late Maritime Archaic sites from Early and Middle period sites, since chronological information has

not been entered systematically in the site files. Site selection was based on preliminary reports, personal experience, archaeological oral history, and elevation above sea level.

332 CHAPTER 1 4
Aunospheht diu from Reimer el al i^fX^JjinxCal v3 HI Rroiik R.imvey l2fX)5), ^.iibr S >d ! 2 |iriih iisp|i-hrtiii|

Attu's Bight 408()±1()()BP

Attu's Bight 4080±90BP

Dog Bight L5 3810±75BP

Attu's Point 379()±7()BP

Attu's Point 3750±60BP

Quest Cove- 1 376()±9()BP

ThaHaPoint-2 366()±14()B^

Double Is. Cove 364()±70BP

Double Is. Cove 332()±70BP

Nukasusutol<-2 3055±85BP

1 1 1 1 1 1 i 4000CalBC 3000CalBC 2000CalBC

Calibrated date

lOOOCalBC

230/ Calibrated radiocarbon date probability distributions for Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset sites in the Nain region. From OxCal 3. 1 0.

Approach Point, lies in an intermediate position on

Port IVIanvers Run. As a tentative proposal for a "local"

settlement pattern within the Nain region, one might

treat the Thalia Point, Port Manvers Run, Webb Bay area

as a north-south linear settlement system. The abundance of Pre-Dorset sites along this stretch suggests

the Run was an important "highway" between the outer

coast and the inner bay zone. Winter settlement might

be suggested at the northern seaward end near Thalia

Point, which is close to the sina, and at Approach

Point, near the Second Rattle polynya. In spring, PreDorset people may have shifted to the southern anchor

of the system at Attu's Point, exploiting seals during

and after breakup, hunting caribou moving back to the

mainland from South Aulatsivik Island and replenishing wood supplies. Summer might see a shift back to

the outer coast, then another return to Webb Bay in the

fall for wildfowl, seals, fish, caribou and wood supplies. The concentration of Pre-Dorset sites in the

outer islands might be linked to a similar outer

coast/inner bay movement, perhaps through the area

south of South Aulatsivik Island and west towards Nain

Bay, but multi-season occupation of the outer island region is

also a possibility.

Although Early and Middle

Maritime Archaic sites are abundant in the Nain region, Late

period Rattler's Bight Phase

sites are extremely rare. The

only substantial locality is the

Attu's Bight site on Webb Bay

near the entrance to Port Manvers Run, only 1.8 km east

of the Pre-Dorset central place

at Attu's Point (Chapter 12). Although the Maritime Archaic

site is extensive, the low fre- quency of tools and paucity of

features suggest it was used as

a short term transit camp for movements north and

south along Port Manvers Run. A small Rattlers Bight

locality is located on the outer coast at Ford Harbour

(Paul Island), where there is also a trace of Pre-Dorset

activity. The other late Maritime Archaic site relevant to

the discussion is located south of the Nain region,

slightly inland up the Kogaluk River, which empties

into Voisey's Bay. This locality, Pukutakan Emishshipu-2, has not been investigated in detail, but

appears to be a camp on a portage route into the interior (Labreche et al 1 997:1 35). This site suggests that

in addition to the documented Maritime Archaic move- ments south-north along the coast related to Ramah

chert procurement there was also an east-west coastinterior axis. Recent research in the interior at Lake

Kamistastin indicates that Maritime Archaic activity in

the interior may have begun as early as 7000 B.P., with

possible traces of activity ca. 5000 B.P. (Loring 1999);

this parallels finds from Lake Mushuau Nipi (Indian

House Lake, Samson 1978)

Table 95 summarizes the radiocarbon dates for

Pre-Dorset and Maritime Archaic sites in the Nain

region and Figure 230 presents their calibrated BC

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 333
Table 95. Radiocarbon Dates for Pre-Dorset and Late Maritime Archaic Sites in the Main Region.

SITE (CULTURE) DATE (B.P.) LAB NO. 16 Calibrated BC

OxCal 3.10 REFERENCE

Attu's Bight L-3/6 (MA) 4080±100 Beta-571 26 2860-2490 Chapter 1 2

Attu's Bight L-3/6 (MA) 4080±90 Beta-71477 2860-2490 Chapter 1 2

Attu's Point L-1 (PD) 3750±60'' Beta-7761 1 2280-2030 Chapter 1 3

Attu's Point L-5 (PD) 3790±70' Beta-77612 2350-2050 Chapter 1 3

Structure 1 (PD)

Double Island Cove L-1

3640±70 Beta-571 25 2140-1910 Chapter 1 2

Structure 2 (PD)

Double Island Cove L-1

3320±70' Beta-71476 1690-1 520 Chapter 1 2

Dog Bight L-5 (PD) 3810±75 SI-2521 2440-21 30 Fitzhugh 1 976a: 1 30-1 33; Cox 1978:99

Quest Cove-1 (PD) 3760+90 SI-4826 2340-2030 Clark and Fitzhugh

1990:301

Thalia Point-2-Al 9 (PD) 3660±140 CSC-1264 2280-1 780 Fitzhugh 1976b:107;

Cox 1978:99

Nukasusutok-2 (PD) 3055±85(F) SI-2988 1430-1210 Cox 1978:99

* '-^C corrected

(F) burned fat sample, 331 5±85 prior to '^C correction

probability distributions. At one sigma there is no overlap between the Maritime Archaic dates from Attu's

Bight and the Pre-Dorset sites. A closer look at the

archaeological contexts of the Attu's Bight and Attu's

Point dates at least opens up the possibility of chronological overlap, although it is important not to fall prey

to wishful thinking. At L3/6 of the Attu's Bight Maritime

Archaic site there was a faint trace of an occupation

layer 20 cm above, and therefore possibly later than,

the dated 4000 B.P. component, although deflation and

redeposition processes in the sand matrix have to be

taken into account. At the Pre-Dorset site Attu's Point,

the two 3700 B.P. dates are both from structures on the

lowest 10 m beach level, while additional features are

found up to and including the uppermost 12 m beach,

suggesting that some of these features could be earlier than the radiocarbon dated loci. Additionally, the uppermost 12 m beach of the Pre-Dorset site had surface finds of a Late Maritime Archaic stemmed point

and a possible Maritime Archaic biface. Although these

implements might hint at some form of cultural contacts, they could also be traces of an earlier Maritime

Archaic occupation or items Pre-Dorset people scav- enged from a nearby Maritime Archaic site. In any

event, the stratigraphic factors suggest that chronological overlap between the two sites cannot be ruled out.

If so, we would have two "central places" within a 1.8 km distance of each other. Overall, however, the evidence for contemporaneity is thin.

Although the discussion of Pre-Dorset settlement

patterns assumed a year-round presence in the Main

region, there is no reason to suggest that the sparse

evidence for Late Maritime Archaic occupation should

be interpreted similarly. It is quite conceivable that the

Maritime Archaic sites Attu's Bight and Ford Harbour

may represent only seasonal forays into the Main area

334 CHAPTER 14
23 1/ Distribution of Pre-Dorset sites in the OI<al< region. Original map © 2004 produced under licence from Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, with permission of Natural Resources Canada.

from Maritime Archaic bases further south. Indeed, the

overall distribution of sites in Figure 229 is curious,

with the density of Pre-Dorset locales dropping off

markedly south of Ford Harbour. The pattern is suggestive of a boundary effect, with an area of limited

settlement between the Pre-Dorset "core area" in the

northern part of the Main district and a possible area

of Maritime Archaic dominance in Voisey's Bay and

points south. Furthermore, given the currently limited

evidence for Maritime Archaic activity in the Main

region during the period 5000-4000 B.P., it is possible

the region might have been abandoned by the

Maritime Archaic as a year-round settlement area centuries prior to the Pre-Dorset colonization (see below).

The Okak Region

The Okak region has not been surveyed as intensively

as the Main area, but the site distribution (Figure 231)

shows a broadly similar pattern. Pre-Dorset sites are

rare on the outermost islands, but are frequent on the

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 335
RAMAH BAY

^ SAGLEK BAY

• Pre-Dorset site * Maritime Arcliaic site H Ramah chert sources

10

I I I km

St. John's Harbour

,.5r- Nulliak Cove

Jerusalem Harbour

HEBRON FJORD

a

Harp Isthmus

Nuvotanaluk ^ NAPAKTOK BAY

eg

Cape Mugford

232/ Distribution of Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset sites in the Hebron Fjord, Saglel< Bay and Ramah Bay regions.

Original map © 2004 produced under licence from Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, with permission of Natural Resources Canada.

inner islands and well represented at inner Okak Bay

(Cox 1976, 1978). Frequently re-occupied "central

places" are found on the inner islands at

Iglusuaktalialuk (Cox 1 977:1 30) and Nuasornak-2 (Cox

1988, 2003). At Nuasornak there are up to 40 structures that chronologically span most of the Pre-Dorset

to Groswater sequence. A small inner island Pre-Dorset component at Okak-6 was dated 3475±75 B.P. (Cox

1977:223, 1978:99).

Another relatively large and repeatedly used locality is situated in the inner bay region at Sipukat Bay-1

(Cox 1976:229-237). In contrast to the outer coast

sites, Sipukat Bay contained few triangular endblades

but had a substantial slate component, including

adzes and celts; one of the adzes appears to be a re- worked Maritime Archaic gouge (Cox 1977:235). As at

Attu's Point in the Main region, the frequency of ground slate tools suggest this inner bay location was

used to replenish wood supplies or butcher frozen

meat. The lack of endblades, however, contrasts

strongly with the Attu's Point assemblages. Overall,

like the Nain region, there is a hint of functional differ336 CHAPTER 14
ences between inner bay and coastal localities. Also

similar to the Nain region is a possible pattern of

repeatedly used central places at both coastal and

inner bay locations, which may have been linked by

seasonal settlement mobility. Another important variable in the geographical positioning and assemblage

content of Pre-Dorset sites in the Okak area is the presence of their preferred chert sources in the Cape

Mugford area at the northern edge of the Okak region

(Cramly 1978; Lazenby 1980).

Like the Nain region, there is evidence for Early

and Middle Maritime Archaic sites at Okak (Cox 1 977;

Fitzhugh 1978), but few signs of Late Maritime

Archaic activity. There are no definitive sites, but a

diagnostic Maritime Archaic incised sandstone plummet was found on an upper beach terrace at the PreDorset site Nuasornak-2, an occurrence that Cox

(1988:3) interprets as evidence for culture contact.

Otherwise, Pre-Dorset material is superimposed upon

Maritime Archaic material at the inner island Okak-2

site (Cox 1977:184-195; Fitzhugh 1978:77), but the

Maritime Archaic component is dated 4765±85 B.P. and 4905±80 B.P., a millennium earlier than the PreDorset colonization. Consequently, as with the Nain

region, the Maritime Archaic may have abandoned

year round settlement of the Okak area prior to PreDorset colonization.

The Hebron Fjord Region

Moving north of the tree line (Napaktok Bay) to the Hebron region, we encounter a key area for the formulation of Fitzhugh's enclave model. But it is also an

area in which Smithsonian field surveys have mostly

been limited to the outer fjord. Although the author

conducted a brief reconnaissance deep inside Hebron

Fjord in 1997 (Hood 1998a), most of the mid-inner

fjord area must be regarded as archaeologically

unknown and the overall site distribution (Figure 232)

as unrepresentative.

Be that as it may, Pre-Dorset and Maritime Archaic

settlement in the Hebron region is concentrated in two

central places. Harp Isthmus on the south side of Hebron Fjord has several Pre-Dorset localities, including over 30 visible structures (Fitzhugh 1984:23),

while minor traces of Maritime Archaic occur nearby.

North of Hebron, Nulliak Cove-1 is a repeatedly occupied Late Maritime Archaic site with the remains of 27

longhouses and four burial mounds. The site is

believed to have been used as a seasonal staging area

for expeditions to the Ramah chert sources further

north. Radiocarbon dates for Nulliak range from 4300-

3500 B.P. (Fitzhugh 1981, 1984, 1985a). A Pre-Dorset component is also present. Localities of both cultures

are found at Jerusalem Harbour, between Hebron and

Nulliak. The area between Jerusalem Harbour and Harp

Isthmus lacks distinct sites of both cultures, although

minor surface indications are present. It is possible,

however, that traces of Maritime Archaic and PreDorset occupation are hidden under Inuit and

Moravian settlement accumulations at the abandoned

Hebron mission, a circumstance that may create an

impression of greater spatial partitioning than was

actually the case. Two small Pre-Dorset components

are situated about 40 km inside Hebron fjord, not far from a tunnel valley and lake which lead deep into the

interior. One of these, Nuvotanaluk-1 , contains one or two Pre-Dorset dwelling structures and associated lithic scatters located on the same beach ridge as, and

only 20 m distant from, a 90 m long Ramah chert flake

scatter. The latter did not contain clearly diagnostic

tools, but a probable flake point fragment and some

slate flakes, along with the linear configuration of the

scatter, suggest a Late Maritime Archaic affiliation. The

other site, Siugakuluk-2, contained traces of a PreDorset dwelling along with Early Pre-Dorset tools and a

diagnostic Intermediate Indian Saunders Complex

side-notched biface and a possible Intermediate Indian convex based biface (Hood 1 998a). As noted by Fitzhugh (1984), the concentration of

Pre-Dorset and Maritime Archaic settlement in two

outer coast "enclaves" at Harp Isthmus and Nulliak

Cove, separated by about 25 km, gives the impression

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 337
of micro-territoriality within the overall distributions of

the two cultures. The range of radiocarbon dates from

Nulliak suggest the site was used prior to the PreDorset colonization as well as during most of the period of Early Pre-Dorset occupation of northern

Labrador. Thus, Nulliak was a well-established place

that Pre-Dorset newcomers would have to relate to. On

the other hand, the existence of sites with remains

from both cultures, such as at Jerusalem Harbour and

Nuvotanaluk, raises questions about the territorial

model. Both cultures were inclined to use at least some

of the same sites and probably for the same purposes.

Even if these sites were radiocarbon dated, however,

contemporaneity or lack thereof could not be established given the range of error inherent in current dating techniques.

It is important to point out that in the Hebron area

the Late Maritime Archaic people were operating near

their ecological limit and at the extreme northern end

of their social network. Although they were able to make effective use of the area north of the tree line,

they apparently did so as seasonal visitors rather than

as year-round residents. This limitation has important

consequences for their relations with the Pre-Dorset

people who, we assume, eventually became year-round

inhabitants of the region.

Sagiek Bay to Ramah Bay

Moving further north, Sagiek Bay is probably the best

surveyed portion of northern Labrador besides the

Main region, thanks to several years of survey by Tuck

(1975), Smithsonian researchers (Fitzhugh 1980) and

Thomson (1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986,

1989). Sagiek contains many Pre-Dorset localities but

only a few definite Late Maritime Archaic sites (Figure

232). Nonetheless, there is at least a hint of territorial

enclaves here as well. A major concentration of PreDorset activity at St. John's Harbour on the south side

of Sagiek may represent a central place similar to Harp

Isthmus at Hebron. One locality has seven dwelling

structures while a larger site nearby extends for 300 m

along a terrace. A couple of Maritime Archaic stemmed

point fragments were also collected from these localities (Thomson 1 982:1 6, 1 986:1 9). On the north side of

Sagiek Bay, Sagiek Site A (Tuck 1975:76-81) contains

the remains of a Maritime Archaic longhouse feature

(Fitzhugh 1985b:50). At Rose Island Site Q, a Late

Maritime Archaic component dated 3890±110 B.P. is

stratigraphically overlain by a Pre-Dorset component

dated 3830±115 B.P. (Tuck 1 975:54, 57). Both

Maritime Archaic components were presumably small

staging camps for trips to or from Ramah Bay. Between Sagiek and Ramah Bay there are sporadic

Pre-Dorset sites, but no definitive Late Maritime

Archaic sites. There must be Maritime Archaic quarrying activity in Ramah Bay, but it is difficult to demonstrate directly given the lack of diagnostic tools in the

quarry debitage (Gramly 1978; Lazenby 1980).

PALEOENVIRONMENTAL

CONSIDERATIONS

Paleoenvironmental information from pollen analysis

(Fitzhugh and Lamb 1985; Short 1978) is of insufficient chronological resolution to provide a detailed

context for the cultural boundary situation within the 4000-3500 B.P. period. The treeline, which today lies

at Napaktok Bay (Elliot and Short 1 979), seems to have

been close to its present location during this time period (Fitzhugh and Lamb 1985:363), but it was not a

critical limiting factor for Indian settlement. The shrubtundra of the Hebron-Sagiek district is a more relevant

northern boundary for Maritime Archaic seasonal occupations (Fitzhugh 1985a:88; Fitzhugh and Lamb

1 985:363). If a longer time span is considered, however, there are changes in the pollen record in the 5000-

4000 B.P. range that provide a context for discussing

why Middle/Late Maritime Archaic activity seems limited in the Nain and Okak regions.

Figure 233 presents alder (Alnus) and spruce

(Picea) pollen percentages for the period 6000-2500

B.P. from the Nain Pond core analyzed by Short

(1 978:25-31); the raw data were acquired from the

338 CHAPTER 14
Nain Pond Pollen Core (Short 1978)

60,0

50,0

40,0

% 30,0

20.0

10,0

0,0

-AInus

Picea

rp' ^ ^ <;f # foO? ^ ^

Calibrated BP

233/ Pollen percentages for alder (AInus) and spruce (Picea) in the Nain region from

6800-2500 calBP. Period of Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset overlap marked in gray. Data from Short (1978) via the NOAA database.

GISP2 Bidecadal 6 Record (Logarithmic Smoothing)

-34,5

-34,6

-34,7

6^^0 -34.8

-34,9

-35

-35.1 OOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO irrnt TnTMT niiiii Mrnmir iM iiiT i iiri n irirr ni M i Mniiiirriii n ii nn rrr rM i M i MMnTirr Miiriiri nM rii niiiii n TiiTiriTit n ii mtr nr nni nit Hii'ttnn

.- 1^ CO cn in CMCvjcNjcMconrocococo-^ (X) r- o CNi Ln N. CO

Lf) LD LD lO Lf) iD Calibrated BP

(1978:28) original discussion of

the dating of vegetation

changes in the core was largely

based on extrapolation from

other cores, particularly Ubiik Pond in the Okak region. The

B.P. dates in the NOAA data

base presumably were projected from estimated sediment

accumulation rates, so given

the potential for dating error

the pollen profiles should be

considered as depicting general

time trends rather than precisely dated zones. Note that Figure

233 uses calibrated B.P. dates;

the NOAA uncalibrated dates were converted to enable comparison with the ice core data

presented below.

Short (1978:31) dated the

transition to spruce woodland

in the Nain area as occurring

between 5700-4400 calB.P.,

possibly with an earlier first

stage of spruce colonization of

the inner coastal zone and a

later migration onto the interior plateau. Subsequent reduction in spruce pollen combined

with increases in alder, birch and clubmoss suggest a reduc234/ CISP2 ice core bidecadal oxygen isotope (6180) data from 5800-2500 calBP, with logarithmic smoothing. Period of Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset overlap marked in gray. Stuiver et al. (1995), data from the NOAA database.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration) internet paleoclimatology database. The core has eight radiocarbon dates, but there are

serious problems with date reversals. Short's

tion of forest cover and an

increase in the shrub-tundra

component, related to climatic

cooling (Short 1978:31).

Generally speaking, Figure 233

suggests overall warming and expansion of spruce

forest until ca. 3600 calB.P., followed by a cooling

period with spruce forest reduction and an increase

in the alder component. But looking more closely,

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 339
and taking the B.P. dates for granted, the core suggests a flip-flop sequence with a 5600-5400 calB.P. warming trend marked by a drop in alder and an

increase in spruce, followed by a 5400-4800 calB.P.

cooling marked by an alder peak coupled with a

spruce drop. The latter cooling corresponds with the

period for which we have minimal evidence for

Maritime Archaic presence in the Main and Okak

regions; 5300-4600 calB.P. (4600-4100 uncalibrated

B.P.).

Given the poor chronological resolution in the

pollen data and their insensitivity to short-term climate changes that might have strong impacts on humans, it

is useful to marshall another proxy indicator of climate

variability: the oxygen isotope data from the CISP2 ice

core from Greenland (Stuiver et al. 1995). Figure 234

presents a logarithmic smoothing of bidecadal

isotope data from 6000-2500 calB.P., as derived from

the NOAA internet paleoclimatology database. From

5300-4950 calB.P. there was a relatively warm period,

followed by a cooling from 4950-4670 calB.P., with

particularly sharp cooling ca. 4790 calB.P. and 4670

calB.P.. The pollen data are more or-less consistent

with the latter cooling, but are seemingly contrary to

the former warming period; poor dating resolution in

the pollen core may account for the anomaly. In any

event, the cooling episode partly corresponds with the

lack of Maritime Archaic settlement in the Main and

Okak regions between 5300-4600 calB.P. (4600-4100

uncalibrated B.P.). The ice core shows a warming trend from 4600-4370 calB.P., leading to a warm peak 4370-

4150 calB.P.. This warm period spans most of the

Rattlers Bight Phase (4500-3700 calB.P.; 4100-3500

uncalibrated B.P.). A cooling episode follows from

4150-3810 calB.P., corresponding with the Early PreDorset occupation. After an overall warmer but variable trend from 3810-3330 calB.P., there is a shift to somewhat cooler conditions after 3200 calB.P..

While it is difficult to project how these climatic

cycles would affect important variables such as the distribution of sea ice and game resources, the point is

that the time period discussed in this chapter was marked by significant variations in climate.

Consequently, the lack of Late Maritime Archaic settle- ment in the Nain and Okak regions may not have been

the result of competitive exclusion relations with PreDorset, but instead a consequence of the Maritime

Archaic having withdrawn from year-round habitation

of these regions during the preceding centuries

because of climate-related environmental factors. If so,

Pre-Dorset might have colonized an open habitat,

thereby blocking a Maritime Archaic resettlement of

the Nain and Okak regions.

A NOTE ON OTHER CULTURAL

VARIABLES

Although the focus in this chapter is on the interrelationship between the Late Maritime Archaic and Early

Pre-Dorset in northern Labrador, cultural dynamics in

central and southern Labrador should also be considered. During the centuries preceding the Rattlers Bight

Phase a southern Labrador Maritime Archaic variant—

the Black Island Complex— intruded into the Hamilton

Inlet region. Fitzhugh (1975;125) chooses to date the Complex to ca. 4200 B.P., but most of the radiocarbon

dates span a period of 4900-4100 B.P. (Fitzhugh

1 975;123). The apparent shifts in the geographical

distribution of the northern Labrador Maritime Archaic

in the period 5000-4000 B.P. therefore need to be seen

relative to the cultural intrusion on the central coast,

not simply as a response to environmental change.

A related issue is the sudden disappearance of the

northern Maritime Archaic as a recognizable archaeological entity ca. 3500 B.P. (the latest radiocarbon date

is from a burial mound at Nulliak Cove-1; Fitzhugh

1981) and its replacement in central and northern

Labrador by the so-called Intermediate Indian complexes (Fitzhugh 1 972; Nagle 1 978). The earliest dates

for the Intermediate Indian Saunders Complex are ca. 3500 B.P. (Nagle 1978;142). In central and northern

Labrador, 3500 B.P. is viewed as a time of cultural discontinuity between the Maritime Archaic and

340 CHAPTER 14
Intermediate Indians, with changes in tool typology,

lithic raw materials and settlement patterns. The

Intermediate Indian complexes exhibit less intensive

use of the outer coast and a greater orientation

towards the inner coast and interior, as indicated by

site locations and the use of interior cherts. In southern Labrador, however, the southern branch Late

Maritime Archaic may have developed in situ into the

Intermediate Indian complexes (Madden 1976).

The economic and social demands placed on the

northern Maritime Archaic by their interaction with PreDorset, in conjunction with cultural intrusions along

their southern boundary, may have contracted their

spatial distribution and severely affected their ability

to reproduce their cultural system. Already operating

near their ecological limits and in a potential competitive situation with Pre-Dorset, their maintenance of a

long-distance procurement system for Ramah chert may have led to organizational over-extension, resulting in cultural collapse. The question is whether that

collapse was marked by local extinction or simply a

reduction in social "complexity" and rapid re-organization into a more interior-oriented cultural system that

has remained archaeologically invisible because of the

lack of research in the interior.

Brief mention should also be made of later PreDorset relationships with Intermediate Indians during

the period 3500-3000 B.P., although the empirical

basis for the discussion is considerably weaker. There

are relatively few radiocarbon dates for Late Pre-Dorset

in Labrador and the limited typological changes in

tools make it difficult to recognize change until ca. 3200 B.P., when facial grinding of burins and notching

of endblades and burins became common (Cox 1978,

1988). A few Pre-Dorset sites in the Nain and Okak

regions can be slotted into the 3500-3000 B.P. span

either by radiocarbon dates or typology. In the Nain

region there is Double Island Cove-1, Structure 2

(Chapter 12), and Nukasusutok-2 (Cox 1978:99;

Fitzhugh 2002). At Okak there is Nuasornak-2,

Structures 1 , 3 and 4 (Cox 1988), Okak-4 (Cox

1977:204-206, 1978:104), Okak-6 (Cox 1977:217-

224) and Green lsland-6 (Cox 1 977:125). The overall

impression, though, is of lower site density than in

Early Pre-Dorset. Too few sites are known to evaluate whether Late Pre-Dorset settlement patterns were

essentially the same as Early Pre-Dorset. There are few

Pre-Dorset sites south of Nain, the southernmost being

recorded at Cape Aillik, near Makkovik on the central

coast (Fitzhugh 1981:8). The Cow Head site on the west coast of Newfoundland (Tuck 1978) contains a

small amount of Late Pre-Dorset material stylistically

similar to that from Okak-4 in northern Labrador, pre- sumed to date ca. 3000 B.P.. The Cow Head material

indicates Late Pre-Dorset people made a rapid colonization foray through central and southern Labrador

about that time.

Intermediate Indian Saunders Complex sites

occur along the central coast and as far north as Hebron Fjord (Nagle 1978; Hood 1998). Although

there are relatively few localities, they are more frequent in the Nain and Okak regions than both Late

Maritime Archaic and Late Pre-Dorset sites. Saunders

Complex sites north of Davis Inlet contain mostly

Mugford chert (Nagle 1978:139), which was derived

from sources on the northern edge of the Okak

region. Both settlement distribution and raw material

usage therefore indicate that Intermediate Indian groups moved rather extensively along the north-central coast of Labrador. Although the data are scanty, it

is likely there was some spatial overlap with Late PreDorset and that social boundary questions are also

relevant in this time period.

NAVIGATION 1: AN ECOLOGICAL NARRATIVE

The Pre-Dorset colonization of the northernmost tip of

Labrador occurred into an open habitat, but once they

moved south of Ramah Bay they entered a region that was used seasonally by the Maritime Archaic. South of

the tree-line, Pre-Dorset encountered regions that in

earlier periods were the center of year-round Maritime

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 341
Archaic occupation, but which were only sparsely populated or seasonally exploited by the Indians at the

time of cultural contact. The southern limit of Early

Pre-Dorset settlement in the Nain area suggests further southward colonization was blocked by permanent

Maritime Archaic settlement in the Voisey's Bay/Davis

Inlet region.

Although the two cultures had broadly similar settlement patterns, they probably had different organizational strategies for resource procurement and

mobility. The resident Maritime Archaic populations

had built up detailed knowledge of the Labrador coast and its resources and had regular mobility patterns

along with a repertoire of tested alternatives to cope

with variations in resource availability. Their increasing

technological and social dependence on Ramah chert

during the fifth millennium B.P. was sustained by a raw

material procurement system involving long-distance

forays on the part of large multi-family groups. In contrast, Pre-Dorset colonizers would have been in more

of a "search" mode, moving through a series of new

environments on a "familiarization tour," learning

about resource distributions and natural conditions.

Pre-Dorset might extend by analogy their knowledge

of other areas to Labrador, but their frequent discovery of anomalies would necessitate a flexible foraging

and organizational repertoire.

The general similarities in the two cultures' subsistence-settlement strategies (niche overlap) imply a

significant potential for interference competition on at

least a seasonal basis. The settlement pattern data

indicate that the Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset used

at least some of the same resource patches, sometimes from the same site. The differing organizational

strategies of the two cultures, however, might result in

different rankings of site preference. Maritime Archaic

large group expeditions would require aggregation

sites to be located near places where high resource

return rates could sustain multi-family longhouse

groups, such as good spring/fall harp sealing stations

or predictable caribou hunting locales. Although PreDorset might be drawn to the same high-return locations, their smaller group sizes, exploratory foraging

repertoire and less culturally-anchored relationship

with space would allow them more flexibility in choosing alternative locations if they discovered their topranked locale was already in use by the Maritime

Archaic. In contrast, shifting to lower-ranked locales was not an easy option for large Maritime Archaic groups that found Pre-Dorset people ensconced in traditional Maritime Archaic sites, although the large

Indian groups might have encouraged Pre-Dorset interlopers to reconsider their camping options.

These place selection dynamics may have shifted

over time. Early in the Pre-Dorset colonization process, when they lacked knowledge of resource distributions,

their settlement strategies may have involved "refuging" at less optimal resource locales or "floating"

through the interstices of Maritime Archaic settlement.

This might be considered as asymmetric competition

with Maritime Archaic dominance relegating PreDorset to secondary locations. But as Pre-Dorset

gained knowledge of resource distributions they might

have been able to block Maritime Archaic use of optimal locations in areas where the Maritime Archaic were

only seasonal visitors. Thus the likelihood of interference competition might have increased over time. If

Maritime Archaic settlement was often highly patchselective, then even modest activity by Pre-Dorset groups at key locations could leave the Maritime

Archaic vulnerable to interference effects, while the

smaller scale and more organizationally flexible PreDorset groups may have been less vulnerable.

Potential competitive relations could be mitigated

either by some form of spatial partitioning or non-overlapping temporal scheduling of resource use.

Fitzhugh's (1984) model suggested territorial behavior

on the part of both cultures, organized at both the

macro- and micro-scales. Evaluation of the archaeological and paleoenvironmental data, however, suggests

that tendencies towards macro-territoriality may be

only a partial or indirect consequence of a competitive

342 CHAPTER 14
situation. The southern boundary of Pre-Dorset activity

might be a historic artifact of IVlaritime Archaic aban- donment of year-round settlement in the Nain and Okal<

areas during the fifth millennium B.P., which provided

Pre-Dorset with a relatively open habitat to colonize. Once that colony was established, the southern boundary with the Maritime Archaic was maintained by exclusion while interference competition was a seasonal phe- nomenon in the Nain to Ramah Bay regions. But given

the very limited presence of IVlaritime Archaic in the

Nain and Okak regions the potential for competition

would have been greater in the more northerly areas.

Micro-territoriality was probably the primary

resource partitioning strategy for reducing interference competition. Temporal scheduling seems less

likely since both cultures' subsistence procurement

focused on similar resource peaks, such as the harp

seal migrations, which had relatively limited time win- dows that would require spatial partitioning of access

rather than temporally sequential access. The

strongest evidence for micro-territoriality comes from

the Hebron region, with its marked concentrations of

Pre-Dorset localities at Harp Isthmus and Maritime

Archaic activity at Nulliak Cove. Some sites in both the

outer and inner portions of the Hebron region contain

traces of both cultures, but contemporary versus

sequential use cannot be established given the limits

of existing dating techniques. In Sagiek Bay there is

also a hint of similar micro-territorial concentrations. A somewhat different spatial pattern is found in

the Nain region. Here there are many small Pre-Dorset

settlements, but also three or four localities that might

be considered as repeatedly used central places,

though not on the scale of Harp Isthmus or St. John's

Harbour. The only significant Late Maritime Archaic

site in the region is Attu's Bight, which lies only 1 .8 km

from the Attu's Point Pre-Dorset central place.

Radiocarbon dates for the two sites do not support

contemporaneity, but circumstantial evidence from

stratigraphy and shoreline sequences maintain the remote possibility of temporal overlap. The Attu's

Bight Maritime Archaic site was most likely a seasonal

transit camp used by groups moving north-south along

the coast using the protected inner passage of Port Manvers Run as a travel route. Interestingly, the Run

also contains one of the major concentrations of PreDorset sites in the Nain region and may have channeled Pre-Dorset settlement movements between the

outer coast at Thalia Point and the inner bay region at Webb Bay. Consequently, Late Maritime Archaic

groups, perhaps based south of the Nain region near

Voisey's Bay, "floated" through the interstices of a PreDorset "territory," either on their way to and from

Ramah Bay or on brief seasonal foraging trips to a specific place on Webb Bay. The geographical proximity of the Attu's Point and

Attu's Bight sites has several possible interpretations,

depending on the likelihood of contemporaneity. If

contemporary, proximity could indicate only mild

avoidance behavior or even quasi-mutualism in a lowcompetition situation in which both cultures exploited

virtually the same resource patch. Or, proximity might

be the result of non-simultaneous but broadly-contemporary occupation resulting from temporal scheduling

of occupation in different seasons (e.g.. Maritime

Archaic in the spring, Pre-Dorset in the fall). If the sites

are non-contemporary, and the 4000 B.P. dates from

the Maritime Archaic locality mark its terminal usephase, the proximity of the two sites might indicate

Pre-Dorset usurpation of a previous Maritime Archaic

resource patch and central place. None of these possibilities can be evaluated thoroughly given the currently thin dating situation, but the non-contemporaneous

alternative bears some weight.

The foregoing discussion framed the social boundary problem in somewhat static terms. The Pre-Dorset

colonization of Labrador was treated largely as a single

culture-historical event, implicitly as an en masse

appropriation of a geographical macro-region over a

short period of time. In most accounts of Arctic prehistory, once the culture-historical unit is present in a geographical region colonization is treated as a fait accomTHE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 343
pli and there is little further concern with the dynamics

of the process. Similarly, once the culture contact situation is established, social boundary maintenance comes into play and macro- and micro-territories are formed and maintained. But both colonization and

boundary relations can be understood as more complex and discontinuous spatial and temporal processes. Pre-Dorset movement into and within Labrador

could be seen as consisting of multiple colonization

events on small geographical scales and as not necessarily involving contemporary occupation of contiguous regions or a neat sequential filling of regions from

north to south. Colonization events could include

unstable "cycling" movements involving repeated recolonization episodes in particular regions. These

cycles could represent either failed colonization

attempts or deliberate short term strategies to avoid

Maritime Archaic populations. Likewise, Maritime

Archaic settlement strategies were treated as largely

the same over the period in question, but they could

have involved cycles of greater and lesser activity in the

various regions, responding to shifts in Pre-Dorset

actions. These short-term cycles might be largely

unrecognizable archaeologically, but they would result

in periodic "re-shuffling" of previous spatial relations.

Consequently, the Maritime Archaic/Pre-Dorset boundary relationship might have been one of highly contingent spatial and social relations, marked by continual

re-negotiation rather than static equilibrium.

NAVIGATION 2: A SOCIAL AND IDEOLOGICAL

LANDSCAPE NARRATIVE

The preceding narrative used the ecological relations

of energy extraction and settlement strategies as an

entry point into the boundary problematique. An alternative narrative takes the entry point of landscape as a

cultural construct, an arena for action structured by

social relationships and ideological meanings. Its starting block is the distinction between the Maritime

Archaic as an established population and the PreDorset as colonizers, a contrast previously expressed

in ecological terms but also one with important phenomenological implications. There are probably important differences in landscape practices between populations that have been established in an area for many

generations and those that have newly arrived. The ca. 4000 year Maritime Archaic presence in

northern Labrador was surely marked by the development of a culturally-defined landscape that intertwined

social practices with places and paths. Some of these

places were repeatedly used habitation sites that came

to bear traces of a "built environment" in the form of

pit-houses, longhouses, burial mounds, cemeteries,

caches, slab pavements, etc. These physical traces, perhaps especially the graves, connected cultural memory with place, providing a link with past generations and precedents for contemporary action. In other

words, they constituted part of long-term cultural

structures. Elsewhere it was argued that spatially

anchored practices combined with a high degree of

seasonal mobility were important for structuring

Maritime Archaic social relations; investment in place

sustained "complexity" processes that otherwise tend

to be associated with more sedentary systems (Hood

1995:99).

Other significant places consisted of unmodified

portions of the natural environment that contained

meanings derived from cultural tradition and ongoing

experience. It seems likely that the Ramah chert quarries had meaning beyond simply being a source of lithic material. Located as they were at the extreme northern periphery of the Maritime Archaic world, necessitating long and potentially risky procurement expeditions, the process of acquiring the material and the

places experienced along the paths to and from the

sources may have been associated with an elaborate

set of symbolic meanings and practices. Furthermore,

given that Ramah chert became the exclusive lithic raw

material for the Late Maritime Archaic, was circulated thousands of kilometers to the south and was associated with mortuary rituals, it is likely that the material

344 CHAPTER 14
had a symbolic loading that permeated a wide range of

social practices (cf., Loring 2002).

This social and ideological landscape was not static, but was slowly transformed physically over time as

a result of land uplift and topographic changes as well

as being transformed conceptually and practically during the course of shifts in demography and social relations. Nonetheless, we might posit a set of long-term

structures entwining both landscape and social practices, structures that provided precedents, guidelines

and legitimation for social action.

In contrast to Maritime Archaic engagement with

long-term landscape structures, the Pre-Dorset colonizers experienced movement though what was for them terra incognita. They entered new landscapes for

which they had no pre-existing cognitive maps, no knowledge of resource distributions, no coded net- work of known places or paths to relate to. They had

to act without structural precedents, except insofar as

they could extend analogies from previous experience

elsewhere. Flexible resource-searching practices would

enhance subsistence-related knowledge, but in so

doing the Pre-Dorset were also engaged in constructing a culturally meaningful landscape by building up

an archive of experiences with places and paths. In this

process, Pre-Dorset's consistent use of Mugford cherts would provide a spatial anchor for the process of landscape construction and perhaps a diacritical material

culture contrast with the long-established Maritime

Archaic use of Ramah chert (Fitzhugh 1984:22). Also,

although the establishment of central places for settle- ment may have been premised first and foremost on

resource availability, repeated occupation of certain

places would provide additional reference points for

construction of a network of places and paths in the

landscape.

Pre-Dorset activity in an established Maritime

Archaic landscape would not only interfere with

Maritime Archaic resource extraction, but might hinder

or prevent the enactment of important Maritime

Archaic social practices that were linked to specific

places. As discussed previously, even modest interference effects from Pre-Dorset could have threatened

Maritime Archaic social reproduction, since the latter may already have been operating near their organizational limit in northern Labrador. But the settlement

pattern data suggest the operation of spatial partitioning mechanisms for mitigating interference effects in

the regions of seasonal overlap between the two cultures. In the first narrative these mechanisms were

referred to as "territoriality" in its traditional sense of

geographically defined packages, but here that term

will be nuanced by returning to Ingold's (1986) discussion of the dialectical relationship between tenure and

territoriality. An alternative reading of the micro-territoriality

suggested for northern Labrador is that it was not structured as control of broad blocks of contiguous space so much as by the tenure of specific places along specific

cultural paths. This seems most clear in the case of the

Maritime Archaic, with sites like Nulliak Cove being used

repeatedly over several centuries, resulting in the accumulation of visible features in the landscape, including

ancestral burials. These places were repositories of cultural memories and important prompts for the enact- ment of cultural practices, some of which were crucial

for sustaining the temporary corporate units of co-residential longhouses (Hood 1995:95). In other words, the

places were dispersed nodes in a network that bound

Maritime Archaic groups into a historical relationship

with their landscapes. Maritime Archaic claims to tenure

over these places, perhaps involving intensified ritualization, may have become more crucial when the seasonally-used landscapes in northern Labrador were colonized by year-round Pre-Dorset inhabitants. Tenure of

place might also clarify the proximity of the Maritime

Archaic Attu's Bight and Pre-Dorset Attu's Point sites in

the Nain area (assuming they were at least partly contemporary), in that tenure of these two places could be

maintained by their respective cultures without implying

control over a surrounding two-dimensional geographical package. But contemporary tenure of place would

THE STRUCTURATION OF MARITIME ARCHAIC/PRE-DORSET

SOCIAL BOUNDARIES IN LABRADOR 345
also necessitate a negotiated appropriation of resources

to minimize mutual interference, the process Ingold

(1 986) termed "territoriality." This could also be an alternative reading of the central place patterns at Hebron

and Saglek.

While Maritime Archaic landscape use might have

prioritized the assertion of tenure over well-established

places and ensuring passage along the paths between

these places— reproducing a system of existing relations— Early Pre-Dorset's landscape use was likely marked by a more flexible "place-making" mode.

Without long-term historical linkages to a network of

places and paths, and with a social organization consisting of small, easily dispersed family units, Early PreDorset could more easily establish new places and had

the option of moving to less resource-optimal locations

if faced with direct competition for places with the larger Maritime Archaic residential groups. Consequently,

Early Pre-Dorset boundary maintenance strategies could

be more negotiable than those of the Maritime Archaic.

Such strategies resemble Ingold's (1986) "territoriality":

resource appropriation strategies aimed at minimizing

interference in extraction processes and which are situationally contingent, responding to changes in the natural and social environments. Once a regular network of

Pre-Dorset places became established (on a generational

time scale), territorial resource appropriation practices

would be supplemented by social relations of tenure

based on the assertion of historical connections with the

landscape. These shifts over time in the way resources

were appropriated, and how they were enfolded in social

relations, were fundamental to the dynamics of landscape construction in both cultures.

CONCLUSION

This chapter had two goals. The first was to discuss

the culture-historical problem of Maritime Archaic/PreDorset social boundaries within the context of two different theoretical entry points. It is debatable whether

the problem has been advanced much beyond the preliminary model proposed by Fitzhugh (1984), but it is hoped that a slightly fuller and updated view of the settlement pattern data has been provided and that the

alternative interpretative frameworks will encourage

further assessment of the problem from multiple perspectives. The second goal was to use the culture-historical problem to reflect on the dilemma of working in

the tension area between different archaeological "par- adigms" or ontologies. The two theoretical entry points were formulated as independent interpretative frames

without any explicit effort to build bridges between

them. Although there are clearly domains of overlap

where ecological variables and social strategies slide

together, there is no point-to-point congruence that would permit the development of a coherent "third

way" narrative or conceptual edifice. The needed lan- guage simply does not exist, at least not yet. But using

"landscape" as a common platform for discussion may

further the possibility of a social practice ecology that

has been hinted at in recent attempts to rehabilitate

the role of Nature in the theoretical landscape (e.g., Crumley 1994; Descola and Palsson 1996; Ingold

2000; Scoones 1 999).

346 CHAPTER 1 4
Concludi ne Remarks

This volume binds together a variety of individual site

studies. As noted in the Introduction, the objective was

not to formulate a synthetic culture-history for the Main

region because a large amount of archaeological material remains to be presented by other researchers.

Instead, the goal was to provide a series of analyses

and commentaries that would make the most out of the

material available while being informed by current concerns in archaeological theory and method. The different sections or chapters were to some extent conceived

as separate essays, although the social structuration of

space was an underlying theme that wove its way in and

out. Consequently, the resulting product is not a wellintegrated unity but a quilt of different colored pieces, some of which are stitched in more tightly than others. The chapters that highlighted theory and method were

designed to contrast major contemporary archaeological perspectives in order to illuminate different parts of

the conceptual landscape. No synthesis was attempted

since the tensions between these perspectives resist

resolution in a unified text. Addressing these tensions

will undoubtedly vex some of us for the next archaeological generation or two. In any event, the conclusions

drawn from the studies presented herein were modest

in scope and need to be pursued further with a larger

set of comparative data.

Given the nature of the archaeological data utilized

here, the primary focus was on problems of site structure as seen through studies of spatial patterning. The

major effort was directed towards the Early/Middle

Maritime Archaic site Nukasusutok-5, while other analyses were conducted at the Dorset site Nukasusutok-1 2

and the Pre-Dorset sites Attu's Point and Port Manvers

Run-1 . These analyses were guided by the methodological strategies outlined in Chapter 3, one for Maritime

Archaic sites, another for Paleoeskimo localities. The

strategies attempted to play off model-based interpretation— involving assumptions about longhouses, axial

features and indoor/outdoor hearth patterns— against

model-independent pattern recognition techniques

such as /(-means cluster analysis. Some form of "middle-range theory" was considered to be essential for

justifying behavioral inferences, irrespective of whether

the interpretative goal was functional analysis or the

exploration of social practice and meaning. So how did

this approach succeed in the site studies?

At Nukasusutok-5, the longhouse and inside/outside hearth models provided useful frameworks for

investigating the spatial patterning, suggesting the presence of "behavioral modules" or rectangular structures at

Area 2A, possibly an outside hearth with a concentric

fire-cracked rock distribution at Area 2B, and part of

another behavioral module or rectangular structure at

Area 2C. The model-independent quantitative methods

did not reveal much patterning that would contradict or

amplify the model-based interpretations. Overall,

although it was possible to generate useful insights into

various micro-level behaviors, it proved difficult to link

these together into unambiguous meso/macro-level

interpretations beyond suggesting the presence of

"behavioral modules." The conclusions regarding actions and practices remain distant from a sense of the people

and society that produced them, ending up with the

"faceless blobs" lamented byTringham (1991).

CONCLUDING REMARKS 347
The ambiguous result is a consequence of two factors. First, the formation history of the site involved an

uncertain number of re-occupations that might have generated palimpsest effects and aeolian processes might

have complicated the spatial structure. Second, we do

not know enough about variations in Maritime Archaic

dwelling features and site structure. The "longhouse

model" primes us to look for linear hearth and debitage

distributions and rectangular structures (e.g., Aillik,

Nulliak Cove), but the model has not been elaborated in

sufficient detail to capture the full range of spatial

dynamics. Furthermore, there are other Maritime Archaic

features on the landscape that have not received much

attention, but which may be dwelling related. In sum, a

systematic comparative study of Maritime Archaic

dwelling features and site structure patterns is needed to

provide firm reference points for future analyses.

Spatial analysis of the Paleoeskimo sites was in some cases facilitated by the presence of well-preserved

axial structures (e.g., Attu's Point L-7, Nukasusutok-1 2) and in other cases hindered by obvious disturbance.

Cluster analysis was sometimes helpful in distinguishing

tool groupings that otherwise would be visually ambiguous, but the small tool sample sizes posed difficulties for

understanding activity patterning. The tool distributions

did not indicate much spatial patterning attributable to

activity specialization or gender. The Attu's Point PreDorset site exhibited tendencies toward the spatial separation of Mugford chert and slate reduction, suggesting

deliberately structured social practices. Refitting studies

are needed to better understand how the deposition and

circulation of raw materials relates to individual actions

within and outside of dwellings. One of the Dorset axial

structures at Nukasusutok-1 2 displayed a degree of

behavioral symmetry in the use of hearths at each end of

the feature. Given the relatively large size of the feature, two co-residential domestic units might be inferred. The regional level of spatial structuration was also

addressed in several chapters, although in somewhat

different ways. The Early/Middle Maritime Archaic settle- ment patterns contemporary with Nukasusutok-5 were

not treated systematically. Instead, Nukasusutok-5 was

used to illustrate some of the methodological problems

inherent in inter-site comparison. Nukasusutok-5 provides a good example of the multi-occupation complexity that might be expected on the highly attractive raised tombolo beaches of northern Labrador. Imagine a similar occupation history at a dozen other Early/Middle

Maritime Archaic sites and it is not hard to grasp why it was difficult to sort out the chronology of the Naksak

Complex, These site formation conditions require that

inter-assemblage comparisons conducted either for the

purposes of chronology building or settlement pattern

studies must pay attention to the nature of the units

being compared. It is not only a question of avoiding

chronologically mixed samples; we also must ensure

that we compare meaningful "behavioral modules"

rather than eclectic samples of poorly contextualized

materials. But Nukasustok-5 also shows how difficult it may be to isolate and understand a context. The discussions of Pre-Dorset settlement patterns

in the Main area (Chapters 1 3 and 1 4) were hampered

by a lack of comparable collections and quantitative

data, so inferences regarding site seasonality and function were impressionistic. A combination of geographical location, dwelling remains and lithic assemblage

content was used to suggest that Attu's Point was a

spring/fall site used within a coast/inner bay annual

round. The linear hearths encountered at Port Manvers

Run-1 and the pit structure at Double Island Cove-1

exemplify the need to document a wider range of PreDorset features in order to capture variations in site

structure and function. Interpretation of the lithic assemblages associated with individual Pre-Dorset features must be situated within the regional system of

technological organization. The curation and reduction

staging practices inferred from the Attu's Point lithic

materials were only local segments of a geographically dispersed decision chain in which people responded

to a changing array of seasonal, situational and social

variables, as well as raw material availability. In contrast to the Pre-Dorset context, the treatment of Dorset

348 CHAPTER 1 5
settlement patterns in Chapter 10 was facilitated by

better information on Dorset feature types with different seasonal implications (semi-subterranean houses,

tent dwellings) and quantitative data from several

Dorset lithic assemblages in the Main area. The

Nukasusutok-1 2 Ramah chert materials could therefore be positioned within the overall system of Dorset

technological organization.

In contrast to the rather faceless, primarily behavioral, interpretation of pre-contact site structure, the

1 8*^^-1 9^'^ century Inuit material outlined in Chapter 1 1 opened up the realm of people and agency. The ethnohistoric sources provided a baseline for interpreting

the social strategies used by Inuit men and women to

deal with changing economic and social relations during a critical juncture of the Contact Period. The

Nukasusutok-8 communal house settlement could be

related to real people documented in written sources,

although the archaeological record of the site itself is

sadly deficient. Some of the site inhabitants were well- known "big-men" involved in the baleen trade with

Europeans, and the quantity of European goods found

in two of the graves on Nukasusutok Island may imply

such individuals. However, the graves also indicated

that the Contact Period was not just a story of b\g-man

traders, since considerable quantities of European

goods in two female graves suggested that women

also attained distinctive social identities.

Contact Period settlement patterns in the Main

area were outlined in terms of seasonal and functional

variability. But the settlement history of Nukasusutok8 also points to changes in the meaning of place that

occurred during the late 1 8^'^ and early 1 9*^^ centuries

after the establishment of the Moravian mission.

During this time, the Nukasusutok settlement was

transformed from being one of several winter communities in an Inuit landscape to being an isolated "heathen" outpost that symbolized resistance to

Christianity and Moravian-controlled life at the mission

village of Nain. The case study illustrates the potential

for Contact Period archaeology to explore the structuration of space in all its dimensions: economic,

social and ideological.

Explicitly theoretical interpretation was brought to

bear on Late Maritime Archaic and Pre-Dorset social boundary relations in Chapter 14 because that subject

provides good raw material for illustrating the tensions

between processual and post-processual understandings of adaptation and landscape. These archaeologies

often appear trapped on either side of the

Nature/Culture dualism, with one failing to see beyond

behaviors optimized relative to energy acquisition and

the other entirely ignoring the food quest in preference for interpretation of human actors' experience of

a symbolically meaningful landscape. As things stand

today, we lack a theoretical language to bridge these

differences, but the term "landscape" can serve as a

platform for dialogue between estranged archaeologies. The discussion presented in Chapter 14 presented alternative entry points to the Maritime Archaic and

Pre-Dorset boundary situation based on evolutionary

ecology and a structuration approach. Each narrative was a partial reading that activated different concepts

relevant to human practices in the landscape.

Empirically, the material culture provided rather equivocal information on contact and interaction between

the two cultures, but the site distribution data suggested some degree of spatial partitioning of the landscape. Understanding this interaction must take into

account both potential competition for resources and

cultural differences between the landscape relations

practiced by an established population with an

entrenched network of significant places, and those

practiced by a colonizing population that lacked a

long-term historical relationship with the land.

There are surely many blind spots in this work, some the result of thin or missing data, others undoubtedly self-inflicted. Attentive readers hopefully

will discern these deficits and treat them as challenges

to improve the empirical, methodological and theoretical dimensions of archaeology in the Nain region and

elsewhere in Labrador.

CONCLUDING REMARKS 349
350
References Cited

Anderson, H. A., M. L. Berrow, V. C. Farmer,

A. Hepburn, J. D. Russell, and A. D. Walker

1982 A Reassessment of Podzol Formation Processes. Journal of Soil Science 33:1 25-1 36. Andrefsky, William

1 998 Lithics. Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis.

Cambridge University Press. Anschuetz, Kurt F., Richard H. Wilshusen, and Cherie

L. Scheick

2001 An Archaeology of Landscapes: Perspectives

and Directions. Journal of Archaeological Research

9:1 57-21 1

.

Appelt, Martin, Hans Christian Gullov, and Hans Kapel

1 998 The Gateway to Greenland. Report on the Field Season 1 996. In Man, Culture and Environment in Ancient Greenland, edited by Jette Arneborg and Hans Christian Gullov, pp. 1 36-153. Danish Polar Center Publication No. 4. Danish National IVluseum and Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

Appelt, Martin, and Hans Christian Gullov (editors)

1 999 Late Dorset in High Arctic Greenland. Danish

Polar Center Publication No. 7. Danish National

Museum and Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

Aronson, Jerrold L, Rom Harre, and Eileen Cornell Way

1 995 Realism Rescued. How Scientific Progress is Possible. Open Court, Chicago and Lasalle. Audouze, Fran^oise

1987 Des modeles et des faits: les modeles de A. Leroi-Gourhan et de L. Binford confrontes aux resul- tats recents. Bulletin del la Societe Prehistorique

Fran<;aise 84(1 0-1 2):343-352.

Auger, Reginald

1 991 Labrador Inuit and Europeans in the Strait of

Belle Isle: From the Written Sources to the Archaeological Evidence. Collection Nordicana No. 5 5, Centre d'etudes nordiques, Universite Laval, Quebec . Bamforth, Douglas B. 1991 Technological Organization and Hunter-Gatherer Land Use: A California Example. American

Antiquity 56:216-2 34. Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1983 Ad Hoc Categories. Memory & Cognition

1 1(3):21 1-227.

Barth, Fredrik

1969 Introduction. In Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, edited by Fredrik Barth, pp. 9-38. Little, Brown and Company, Boston.

Bell, Trevor

1 997 Application of Sea Level History and Geomorphology to Historic Resources Mapping in the Voisey's Bay Region, Labrador. Appendix A In Voisey's Bay 1996 Environmental Baseline Technical Data Report Historic Resources, by Yves Labreche, Fred Schwarz and Bryan Hood.

Voisey's Bay Nickel Company, St. John's. Bender, Barbara (editor)

1993 Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Berg, Oxford.

Bernstein, Richard J. 1983 Beyond Objectivism and Relativism:

Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Binford, Lewis R. 1978a Dimensional Analysis of Site Structure: Learning from an Eskimo Hunting Stand. American

Antiquity 43:330-361

.

1978b Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic

Press, New York. 1979 Organization and Formation Processes,

Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of

Anthropological Research 35:255-273.

1 980 Willow Smoke and Dog's Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:4-20. 1981 Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths.

Academic Press, New York. 1982 Objectivity-Explanation-Archaeology, 1981. In Theory and Explanation in Archaeology, edited by

Colin Renfrew, Michael J. Rowlands and Barbara A. Segraves, pp. 1 25-1 38. Academic Press, New York.

1 983 In Pursuit of the Past: Decoding the Archaeological Record. Thames and Hudson, New York. 1987 Researching Ambiguity: Frames of Reference and Site Structure. In Method and Theory for Activity Area Research, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 449-

512. Columbia University Press, New York. 1991 When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Get

Going: Nunamiut Local Groups, Camping Patterns and Economic Organisation. In Ethnoarchaeological

Approaches to Mobile Campsites. Hunter-Gatherer

and Pastoralist Case Studies, edited by C. S. Gamble and W. A. Boismier, pp. 25-1 38. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ethnoarchaeological Series 1 , Ann Arbor.

REFERENCES CITED 351
Bird, Junius B. 1945 Archaeology of the Hopedale Area,

Labrador. Anthropological Papers of the Ameri- can Museum of Natural History, Volume 39:

Part 2. Blanl<holm, Hans Peter 1991 Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Theory and

Practice. Aarhus University Press. Boles, Bruce, Gerald J. Chaput, and Frank R. Phillips

1980 Offshore Labrador Biological Studies 1979:

Seals. A Study and Review of the Distribution and

Ecology of Pinnipeds in Labrador. Atlantic Biological Services, St. John's. Bourdieu, Pierre

1970 La maison Kabyle ou le monde renverse. In Echanges et communications, tome II, edited by

Jean Pouillon and Pierre Maranda, pp. 739-758.

Mouton, The Hague.

Brain, Jeffrey P. 1979 Tunica Treasure. Papers of the Peabody

Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Volume

71 , Cambridge.

Brice-Bennett, Carol

1977 Land Use in the Main and Hopedale Regions.

In Our Footprints are Everywhere, edited by Carol

Brice-Bennett, pp. 97-203. Labrador Inuit Association, Main. 1981 Two Opinions: The Inuit and Moravian Mis- sionaries in Labrador. Unpublished M.A. Thesis,

Department of Anthropology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's. Briggs, Jean L.

1 974 Eskimo Women: Makers of Men. In Many Sis- ters: Women in Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited

by Carolyn J. Matthiasson, pp. 261 -304. The Free

Press, New York. Bronk-Ramsey, Christopher

2005 OxCal Program v3.10. Oxford Radiocarbon

Accelerator Unit. Cabak, Melanie

1991 Inuit Women as Catalysts of Change: An

Archaeological Study of 19^^ Century Northern

Labrador. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department

of Anthropology, University of South Carolina,

Columbia.

Cabak, Melanie, and Stephen Loring

2000 "A Set of Very Fair Cups and Saucers": Stamped Ceramics as an Example of Inuit Incorporation. International Journal of Historical Archaeol- ogy 4:1-34. Callahan, Errett

1 987 An Evaluation of the Lithic Technology in Middle Sweden During the Mesolithic and Neolithic. AUN 8, Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis,

Uppsala.

Callahan, Errett, Lars Forsberg, KJel Knutsson, and

Christina Lindgren

1992 Frakturbilder. Kulturhistoriska kommentarer

till det saregna sonderfallet vid bearbetning av

kvarts. TOR 24:27-63.

Canada Soil Survey Committee, Subcommittee on

Soil Classification

1978 The Canadian System of Soil Classification. Canadian Department of Agriculture Publication

1 646. Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa. Carothers, John H., and Fabian M.Jaksic

1984 Time as a Niche Difference: the Role of Inter- ference Competition. 0/A:os 42:403-406.

Carr, Christopher

1984 The Nature of Organization of Intrasite Archaeological Records and Spatial Analytic

Approaches to their Investigation. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 7:103-222.

1 987 Dissecting Intrasite Artifact Palimpsests Using

Fourier Methods. In Method and Theory for Activity Area Research, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 236-291

.

Columbia University Press, New York. 1991 Left in the Dust: Contextual Information in Model-Focused Archaeology. In The Interpretation of Archaeological Spatial Patterning, edited by Ellen M. Kroll and T. Douglas Price, pp. 221-256. Plenum

Press, New York. Carsten, Janet, and Stephen Hugh-Jones

1995 Introduction: About the House— Levi-Strauss and Beyond. In About the House. Levi-Strauss and

Beyond, edited by Janet Carsten and Stephen HughJones, pp. 1 -46. Cambridge University Press. Chi, Michelene T. H. 1992 Conceptual Change Within and Across Ontological Categories: Examples from Learning and

Discovery in Science. In Cognitive Models of Science, edited by Ronald N. Ciere, pp. 129-186. Minnesota

Studies in the Philosophy of Science Volume 15,

University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

Clark, Peter U., and William W. Fitzhugh

1990 Late Deglaciation of the Central Labrador

Coast and Its Implications for the Age of Glacial Lakes Naskaupi and McLean and for Prehistory.

Quaternary Research 34:296-305.

1992 Postglacial Relative Sea Level History of the Labrador Coast and Interpretation of the Archaeological Record. In Paleoshorelines and Prehistory:

An Investigation of Method, edited by Lucille Lewis

Johnson, pp. 1 89-21 3. CRC Press, Boca Raton. Cox, Steven L.

1 976 Prehistoric Settlement and Culture Change at Okak, Labrador. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,

Department of Anthropology, Harvard University,

Cambridge.

1978 Palaeo-Eskimo Occupations of the North

Labrador Coast. Arctic Anthropology 1 5(2):96-l 1 8. 1988 Pre-Dorset Occupations of Okak Bay,

Labrador. The Northern Raven 7(3): 1-3. n.d. A Pre-Dorset Sequence from Nuasornak

Island, Okak Bay, Labrador. Manuscript on file, Archaeology Section, Culture Heritage Division,

St. John's. 2003 Palaeoeskimo Structures in the Okak Region

of Labrador. Etudes/lnuit/Studies 27(1-2):

41 7-433.

352 REFERENCES CITED
Cox, Steven L, and Arthur Spiess

1980 Dorset Settlement and Subsistence in Northern Labrador. Arctic 33:659-669.

Crumley, Carol L. (editor)

1 994 Historical Ecology. Cultural Knowledge and

Changing Landscapes. School of American

Research Press, Santa Fe. Cziesia, Erwin

1 990 Siedlungsdynamik auf steinzeitlichen Fundpldtzen. Metodische Aspekte zur Analyse latenter Strukturen. Studies in Modern Archaeology Volume

2. Holos, Bonn.

Cziesia, E., S. Eickhoff, N. Arts, and D. Winter

(editors)

1 990 The Big Puzzle. International Symposium on

Refitting Stone Artifacts. Studies in Modern Archaeology I. Holos, Bonn. Damkjar, Eric 2000 A Survey of Late Dorset Longhouses. In Identities and Cultural Contacts in the Arctic, edited by

Martin Appelt, Joel Berglund and Hans Christian

Gull0v, pp. 170-180. Danish National Museum and

Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

Davidson, Donald A. 1987 Podzols: Changing Ideas on their Formation.

Geography 72:1 22-1 28. Davies, H. M. 1974 Geology of Nukasorsuktokh Island. In The

Main Anorthosite Project, Labrador: Field Report

1973, edited by S. A. Morse, pp. 81-95. Contribution No. 13, Geology Department, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Dekin, Albert A. 1976 Elliptical Analysis: An Heuristic Technique

for the Analysis of Artifact Clusters. In Eastern

Arctic Prehistory: Paleoeskimo Problems, edited

by Moreau S. Maxwell, pp. 79-88. Memoirs of the

Society for American Archaeology No. 31

.

Descola, Philippe, and Gisli Palsson (editors)

1 996 Nature and Society. Anthropological Perspectives. Routledge, London.

Desrosiers, Pierre M., and Noura Rahmani

2003 Analyse spatiale et architecture du site dorsetien ChCk-63 (Kuujjuarapik, Nunavik).

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 27(1 -2):1 31 -1 53. Dobres, Marcia-Anne

2000 Technology and Social Agency. Blackwell,

Oxford.

Dyson-Hudson, Rada, and Eric A. Smith

1978 Human Territoriality: An Ecological Reassess- ment. American Anthropologist 80:2 1 -41

.

Edwards, Paul N. 1994 Hyper Text and Hypertension: PostStructuralist Critical Theory, Social Studies of Sci- ence and Software. Social Studies of Science

24:229-278.

Ellen, Roy

1996 Introduction. In Redefining Nature. Ecology,

Culture and Domestication, edited by Roy Ellen and Katsuyoshi Fukui, pp. 1-36. Berg, Oxford.

Elliott, Deborah L., and Susan K. Short

1979 The Northern Limit of Trees in Labrador: A

Discussion. Arctic 32:201-206.

Enloe, James G., Francine David, and Timothy S. Hare

1 994 Patterns of Faunal Processing at Section 27 of Pincevent: The Use of Spatial Analysis and Ethnoar- chaeological Data in the Interpretation of Archaeological Site Structure. Journal of Anthropological

Archaeology 13:105-1 24. Environment Canada

2002 Canadian Climate Normals 1 961 -1 990: Hopedale. Http://www.msc-smc.ec.gc.ca/ climate/climate_normals_l 990/show_normals_e.cfm

Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner

2002 The Way We Think. Conceptual Blending and

the Mind's Hidden Complexities. Basic Books, New

York. Fitzhugh, William W.

1 972 Environmental Archeology and Cultural Sys- tems in Hamilton Inlet, Labrador. A Survey of the Central Labrador Coast from 3000 BC to the Present. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology

Number 16, Washington D.C. 1973 Smithsonian Archaeological Investigations on

the Central Labrador Coast in 1973: A Preliminary

Report. Canadian Archaeological Association Bulletin 5:78-89. 1975 A Maritime Archaic Sequence from Hamilton

Inlet, Labrador. Arctic Anthropology 1 2(2):1 1 7-1 38.

1 976a Preliminary Culture History of Nain, Labrador: Smithsonian Fieldwork, 1975. Journal of Field Archaeology 3:1 23-1 42. 1976b Paleoeskimo Occupations of the Labrador

Coast. In Eastern Arctic Prehistory Paleoeskimo

Problems, edited by Moreau S. Maxwell, pp. 103-

1 1 8. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeol- ogy No. 3 1

.

1977a Population Movement and Culture Change on

the Central Labrador Coast. In Amerinds and Their Paleoenvironments in Northeastern North America,

edited by Walter S. Newman and Bert Salwen, pp. 481-497. Annals of the New York Academy of Sci- ences 288. 1977b Indian and Eskimo/lnuit Settlement History in Labrador: An Archaeological View. In Our Footprints are Everywhere, edited by Carol Brice-Bennett, pp. 1-42. Labrador Inuit Association, Nain. 1978a Maritime Archaic Cultures of the Central and

Northern Labrador Coast. Arctic Anthropology

1 5(2):61-95.

1 978b Winter Cove-4 and the Point Revenge Occupation of the Central Labrador Coast. Arctic Anthropology 1 5(2): 146-1 74. 1980 Preliminary Report on the Torngat Archaeological Project. Arctic 33:585-606.

1981a Boulder Pits to Longhouses: Settlement and

Community Pattern Development in the Labrador

Maritime Archaic. Paper Presented to the Annual

Meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association, Vancouver.

REFERENCES CITED 353
1981b Smithsonian Archaeological Surveys, Central and Northern Labrador, 1980. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1980, edited by Jane

Sproull Thomson and Bernard Ransom, pp. 26-47.

Historic Resources Division, Department of Culture,

Recreation and Youth, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's. 1984 Residence Pattern Development in the Labrador Maritime Archaic: Longhouse Models and

1983 Surveys. In Archaeology In Newfoundland

& Labrador, 1983, edited by Jane Sproull Thomson

and Callum Thomson, pp. 6-47. Historic Resources

Division, Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador, St. John's. 1985a The Nulliak Pendants and Their Relation to

Spiritual Traditions in Northeast Prehistory. Arctic Anthropology 22(2):87-l 09.

1 985b Early Maritime Archaic Settlement Studies and

Central Coast Surveys. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador, 1 984, edited by Jane Sproull

Thomson and Callum Thomson, pp. 48-78. Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador, St. John's. 1986 Maritime Archaic Field Studies in Central Labrador and Notes on Northwest Corners. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador, 1985,

edited by Jane Sproull Thomson and Callum Thomson, pp. 54-65. Historic Resources Division, Gov- ernment of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's.

1 987 Archaeological Ethnicity and the Prehistory of Labrador. In Ethnicity and Culture, edited by

Reginald Auger, Margaret F. Class, Scott MacEachern and Peter H. McCartney, pp. 141-153. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Archaeological Association of the University of

Calgary, Calgary.

1994 Staffe Island 1 and the Northern Labrador

Dorset-Thule Succession. In Threads of Arctic

Prehistory: Papers in Honour of William E. Taylor,

jr., edited by David Morrison and Jean-Luc Pilon, pp. 239-268. Archaeological Survey of Canada Mercury Series Paper 149, Canadian Museum of Civi- lization, Ottawa. 1997 Biogeographical Archaeology in the Eastern North American Arctic. Human Ecology 25:385-4 1 8. 2002 Nukasusutok-2 and the Paleoeskimo Transition in Labrador. In Honoring our Elders. A History

of Eastern Arctic Archaeology, edited by William W.

Fitzhugh, Stephen Loring and Daniel Odess,

pp. 133-1 62. Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology 2, National Museum of Natural

History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. 2006 Settlement, Social and Ceremonial Change in the Labrador Maritime Archaic. The Archaic of the Far

Northeast, edited by David Sanger and M.A.P. Renouf. Pp. 47-82. Orono: University of Maine Press. Fitzhugh, William W., and H. F. Lamb

1985 Vegetation History and Culture Change in Labrador Prehistory. Arctic and Alpine Research

1 7:357-370.

Flenniken, J. Jeffrey

1981 Replicative Systems Analysis: A Model

Applied to the Vein Quartz Artifacts from the Hoko

River Site. Washington State University Laboratory

of An thropology, Reports of Investigations No.

59. Hoko River Archaeological Project Contribution No. 2. Fox, Manasse

1979 Nukagek Unatannigik (The Brother's War).

Them Days 4:14. Galison, Peter

1 996 Computer Simulations and the Trading Zone. In The Disunity of Science. Boundaries, Contexts, and

Power, edited by Peter Galison and David J. Stump,

pp. 118-1 57. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Gamble, Clive

1 999 The Paleolithic Societies of Europe. Cambridge

University Press. Gargett, Rob, and Brian Hayden

1 991 Site Structure, Kinship, and Sharing in Aboriginal Australia: Implications for Archaeology. In The

Interpretation of Archaeological Spatial Patterning, edited by Ellen M. Kroll and T. Douglas Price, pp.

1 1 -32. Plenum Press, New York. Cero, Joan M. 1991 Genderlithics: Women's Roles in Stone Tool

Production. In Engendering Archaeology. Women

and Prehistory, edited by Joan M. Gero and Margaret W. Conkey, pp. 1 63-1 93. Blackwell, Oxford.

Giddens, Anthony

1979 Central Problems in Social Theory. Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis.

University of California Press, Berkeley.

1 984 The Constitution of Society. University of Cali- fornia Press, Berkeley.

Giere, Ronald N.

1 994 The Cognitive Structure of Scientific Theories.

Philosophy of Science 61 :276-296.

Giffen, Naomi Musmaker

1 930 The Roles of Men and Women in Eskimo

Culture. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Golovnev, Andrei V., and Gail Osherenko

1 999 Siberian Survival. The Nenets and Their Story. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Gordon, Bryan C.

1 996 People of Sunlight, People of Starlight. Bar- renland Archaeology in the Northwest Territories of Canada. Archaeological Survey of Canada Mer- cury Series Paper 1 54, Canadian Museum of Civi- lization, Ottawa. Gordon, Diana

1 980 Reflections on Refuse: A Contemporary Example from James Bay, Quebec. Canadian Journal of

Archaeology 4:83-98. Gramly, Richard Michael

1978 Lithic Source Areas in Northern Labrador.

Arctic Anthropology 1 5(2):36-47.

Creenacre, Michael J. 1993 Correspondence Analysis in Practice. Academic Press, London.

354 REFERENCES CITED
Grigor'ev, Gennadii Pavlovich

1967 A New Reconstruction of the Above-Cround

Dwelling of Kostenki. Current Anthropology

8:344-349.

1 993 The Kostenki-Avdeevo Archaeological Culture and the Willendorf-Pavlov-Kostenki-Avdeevo

Cultural Unity. In From Kostenki to Clovis. Upper

Paleolithic—Paleo-lndicin Adaptations, edited by

Olga Soffer and N. D. Praslov, pp. 51-65. Plenum

Press, New York. Gronnow, Bjarne

1994 Qeqertasussuk— The Archaeology of a Frozen Saqqaq Site in Disko Bugt, West Greenland.

In Threads of Arctic Prehistory: Papers in Honour

of William E. Taylor, Jr., edited by David Morrison

and Jean-Luc Pilon, pp. 197-238. Archaeological

Survey of Canada Mercury Series Paper 1 49, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Ottawa. Gronnow, Bjarne, and Jens Fog Jensen 2003 The Northermost Ruins of the Globe. Eigil

Knuth's Archaeological Investigations in Peary

Land and Adjacent Areas of High Arctic Greenland. Meddelelser om Cr0nland, Man & Society 29. Gronnow, Bjarne, and Morten Meldgaard

1991 De forste vestgr0nlaendere. Tidsskriftet

Cr0ji/(3n£/ 39(4-7): 103-1 44. Guemple, Lee 1986 Men and Women, Husbands and Wives: The

Role of Gender in Traditional Inuit Society.

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 1 0(1 -2):9-24. Gullov, Hans Christian

1 983 Fortidsminner i Nuuk kommune— inuit-kul- turens bopladser. Kalaallit Nunaata katersugaasivia

and Nationalmuseet, Nuuk.

1997 From Middle Ages to Colonial Times. Meddelelser om Cronland, Man and Society 23. Gullsv, Hans Christian, and Hans Kapel

1988 De palaeoskimoiske kulturer i Nuuk Kommune. In Palceoeskimoisk Forskning i Gronland,

edited by Tinna Mobjerg, Bjarne Gronnow and

Helge Schultz-Lorentzen, pp. 39-58. Aarhus Universitetsforlag, Aarhus. Harp, Elmer Jr.

1 963 Evidence of Boreal Archaic Culture in South- ern Labrador and Newfoundland. National Museum

of Canada, Bulletin No. 193, Ottawa. 1976 Dorset Settlement Patterns in Newfoundland

and Southeastern Hudson Bay. In Eastern Arctic

Prehistory: Paleoeskimo Problems, edited by Moreau S. Maxwell, pp. 119-138. Memoirs of the Society

for American Archaeology No. 31

.

Harre, Rom

2002 Cognitive Science. A Philosophical Introduction. Sage Publications, London.

Harre, Rom, and Michael Krausz

1996 Varieties of Relativism. Blackwell, Oxford.

Hawkes, E. W. 1916 The Labrador Eskimo. Geological Survey of Canada Memoir 91, Anthropological Series No. 14, Department of Mines, Ottawa.

Haakanson, Sven David, Jr. 2000 Ethnoarchaeology of the Yamal Nenets: Utiliz- ing Emic and Etic Evidence in the Interpretation of

Archaeological Residues. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge.

Hayden, Brian

1980 Confusion in the Bipolar World: Bashed Pebbles and Splintered Pieces. Lithic Technology 9:2-7. Hayden, Brian, Nora Franco, and Jim Spafford

1996 Evaluating Lithic Strategies and Design Criteria. In Stone Tools. Theoretical Insights into Human

Prehistory, edited by George Odell, pp. 9-45. Plenum Press, New York. Henriksen, Georg

1 973 Hunters in the Barrens. The Naskapi on the Edge of the White Man's World. Institute of Social and Economic Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's.

Hietala, Harold J.

1 984 Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology.

Cambridge University Press.

Hiller, James

1971 Early Patrons of the Labrador Eskimos: The

Moravian Mission in Labrador, 1764-1805. In Patrons and Brokers m the Eastern Arctic, edited by

Robert Paine, pp. 74-97. Institute of Social and Eco- nomic Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's. Hirsch, Eric and Michael O'Hanlon (editors)

1995 The Anthropology of Landscape: Between

Space and Place. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Hodder, Ian

1 982 Symbols in Action. Cambridge University Press. 1987 The Meaning of Discard: Ash and Domestic

Space in Baringo. In Method and Theory for Activity Area Research, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 424-448.

Columbia University Press, New York. 1990 The Domestication of Europe. Basil Blackwell,

Oxford.

1 999 The Archaeological Process. An Introduction.

Blackwell, Oxford. 2001 Introduction: A Review of Contemporary

Theoretical Debates in Archaeology. In Archaeological Theory Today, edited by Ian Hodder, pp. 1-1 3. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Hodder, Ian, and Clive Orton

1976 Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. Cambridge

University Press. Hood, Bryan C. 1981 The Maritime Archaic Occupation of Nukasusutok Island, Nain, Labrador. Unpublished M.A.

Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Trent University, Peterborough.

1986 Nukasusutok-1 2: Early/Middle Dorset Axial Structures From the Nain Region, Labrador.

In Palaeo-Eskimo Cultures in Newfoundland,

Labrador and Ungava, pp. 49-64. Reports in Archaeology No.l, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's.

REFERENCES CITED 355
1988 Sacred Pictures, Sacred Rocks: Ideological

and Social Space in the North Norwegian Stone

Age. Norwegian Archaeological Review 21(2):65-

84. 1993 The Maritime Archaic Indians of Labrador:

Investigating Prehistoric Social Organization.

Newfoundland Studies 9:1 63-1 84. 1995 Circumpoiar Comparison Revisited: Hunter- Gatherer Complexity in the North Norwegian

Stone Age and the Labrador Maritime Archaic.

Arctic Anthropology 32(2):75-l 05. 1998a Archaeological Surveys Between the Nain

and Hebron Regions, Northern Labrador, 1997.

Report Submitted to the Cultural Heritage Divi- sion, Department of Tourism and Culture, St. John's, http://nfmuseum.com/9721 Ho. htm.

1998b Theory on Ice: the Discourse of Eastern Canadian Arctic Paleo-Eskimo Archaeology. Acta Boreaha 1 5(2):3-58.

2000 Pre-Dorset/Maritime Archaic Social Boundaries in Labrador. In Identities and Cultural Contacts in the Arctic, edited by Martin Appelt, Joel Berglund and Hans Christian Cull0v, pp. 1 20-1 28. Danish National Museum and Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

Hood, Bryan C, and Gary Baikie

1998 Mineral Resource Development, Archaeolo- gy and Aboriginal Rights in Northern Labrador.

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 2 2 (2): 7-2 9. House, John H., and David L. Ballenger

1976 An Archaeological Survey of the Interstate 77 Route in the South Carolina Piedmont. Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia.

Ingold, Tim

1986 The Appropriation of Nature. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

1993 The Temporality of the Landscape. World

Archaeology 2S{2):] 52-1 74.

1 996 Hunting and Gathering as Ways of Perceiving

the Environment. In Redefining Nature. Ecology,

Culture and Domestication, edited by Roy Ellen and Katsuyoshi Fukui, pp. 1 1 7-1 55. Berg, Oxford.

2000 The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. Routledge, Lon- don.

Jackson, M. L.

1 958 Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. Jensen, Jens Fog

1994 Den to-delte bolig- en rumlig analyse af et midtergangsildsted og dets oldsagsinventar.

Gr0nlandsk kultur og samfunds forskning 94: 66-87. Ilisimatusarfik/Atuakkiorfik, Nuuk.

1996 Paleo-Eskimo Sites and Finds in Skjoldungen

District, South East Greenland. In The Paleo-Eskimo

Cultures of Greenland, edited by Bjarne Gronnow,

pp. 1 43-1 69. Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

Johnson, J. Peter Jr. 1969 Late Glacial Origin of the Sandbanks, Webb

Bay, Labrador. Canadian Geographer 1 3(2): 99-1 12. 1985 Geomorphic Evidence and the Upper Marine

Limit in Northern Labrador. In Our Geographic

Mosaic: Research Essays in Honour of G. C. Merrill, edited by D. B. Knight, pp. 70-91. Carleton University Press, Ottawa. Jordan, Peter 2003 Material Culture and Sacred Landscape. The

Anthropology of the Siberian Khanty. Altamira

Press, Walnut Creek. Jordan, Richard H. 1974 Preliminary Report on Archaeological Investi- gations of the Labrador Eskimo in Hamilton Inlet in

1 973. Man in the Northeast 8:77-89. 1977 Inuit Occupation of the Central Labrador

Coast Since 1600 AD. In Our Footprints are Everywhere, edited by Carol Brice-Bennett, pp. 43-48. Labrador Inuit Association, Nain. 1978 Archaeological Investigations of the Hamilton

Inlet Labrador Eskimo: Social and Economic

Responses to European Contact. Arctic Anthropology 1 5(2):1 75-1 85.

1 980 Preliminary Results from Archaeological Inves- tigations on Avayalik Island, Extreme Northern

Labrador. Arctic 33:607-627.

Jordan, Richard H., and Susan A. Kaplan

1 980 An Archaeological View of the Inuit/European Contact Period in Central Labrador.

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 4(1 -2):35-45.

Julien, Michele, Claudine Karlin, and Pierre Bodu

1987 Pincevent: Ou en est le modele theorique

aujourd'hui? Bulletin de la Societe Prehistorique

Frangaise 84(10-12): 335-342.

Kaplan, Susan A.

1 983 Economic and Social Change in Labrador Neo- Eskimo Culture. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,

Department of Anthropology, Bryn Mawr College,

Bryn Mawr. 1985 European Goods and Socio-Economic Change

in Early Labrador Inuit Society. In Cultures in Contact. The European Impact on Native Cultural Insti- tutions in Eastern North America, A.D. 1 000-1 800,

edited by William W. Fitzhugh, pp. 45-69. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Karklins, Karlis 1992 Trade Ornament Usage Among the Native

Peoples of Canada. A Source Book. Studies in Archaeology, Architecture and History, National

Historic Sites, Canadian Parks Service, Environment

Canada, Ottawa.

Karlin, C, and M. Julien

1 994 Prehistoric Technology: A Cognitive Science? In The Ancient Mind. Elements of a Cognitive Archaeology, edited by Colin Renfrew and Ezra B. W. Zubrow,

pp. 1 52-1 64. Cambridge University Press.

356 REFERENCES CITED
Keddy, Paul A. 1989 Competition. Chapman and Hall, London.

Keene, Arthur S. 1983 Biology, Behavior and Borrowing: A Critical Examination of Optimal Foraging Theory in Archaeology. In Archaeological Hammers and Theories, edited by James A. Moore and Arthur S. Keene, pp.

1 37-1 55. Academic Press, New York.

Kelly, Robert L. 1988 The Three Sides of a Biface. American

Antiquity 53;71 7-734.

1 995 The Foraging Spectrum. Diversity in Hunter- Gatherer Lifeways. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Kennedy, John C. 1995 People of the Bays and Headlands. Anthropological History and the Fate of Communities in the Unknown Labrador. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

Kidd, Kenneth E., and Martha Ann Kidd

1 970 A Classification System for Glass Beads for the Use of Field Archaeologists. Canadian Historic

Sites, Occasional Papers in Archaeology and

History 1 :45-89. Kintigh, Keith W., and Albert Ammerman

1982 Heuristic Approaches to Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. American Antiquity 47:31 -63. Klein, Richard G.

1 969 l^an and Culture in the Late Pleistocene. A

Case Study. Chandler, San Francisco. Knuth, Eigil

1967a Archaeology of the Musk Ox Way. Contributions du Centre d'Etudes Arctiques et Finno-Scandi- naves No. 5. Paris. 1967b The Ruins of the Musk Ox Way. Folk 8-9: 191-219.

1968 The Independence II Bone Artifacts and the Dorset-evidence in North Greenland. Folk 1 0:61 -80. 1983 The Northernmost Ruins of the Globe. Folk 25:5-21

.

Knutsson, Kjel

1998 Convention and Lithic Analysis. In Third Flint Alternatives Conference at Uppsala, edited by Lena Holm and Kjel Knutsson, pp. 71-93. Occasional

Papers in Archaeology 1 6, Department of Archaeol- ogy and Ancient History, Uppsala University.

Koetje, Todd A.

1 987 Spatial Patterns in Magdalenian Open Air

Sites from the Isle Valley, Southwestern France.

B.A.R. International Series 346, Oxford.

1994 Intrasite Spatial Structure in the European

Upper Paleolithic: Evidence and Patterning from the SW of France. Journal of Anthropological Archaeol- ogy ] S:] 6] -] 69. Kramer, Finn Erik

1 996 Akia and Nipisat I: Two Saqqaq Sites in Sisimiut District, West Greenland. In The Paleo-Eskimo

Cultures of Greenland. New Perspectives in Greenlandic Archaeology, edited by Bjarne Gronnow, pp. 65-96. Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

Kuhn, Thomas S. 2000 The Road Since Structure. Philosophical

Essays 1 970-1 993. Edited by James Conant and

John Haugeland. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Kuijt, Ian, William C. Prentiss, and David L. Pokotylo

1995 Bipolar Reduction: An Experimental Study of Debitage Variability. Lithic Technology 20:116-

127. Labreche, Yves, Fred Schwarz, and Bryan Hood

1997 Voisey's Bay 1996 Environmental Baseline

Technical Data Report: Historic Resources. Voisey's

Bay Nickel Company, St. John's.

Lacelles, Bruce, Roland Bol, and David Jenkins

2000 The Role of 1 4C Datmg in Ironpan Formation.

The Holocene 1 0:281-285.

Landes, Ruth

1 968 Ojibwa Religion and the Midewiwin. University

of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Latour, Bruno

1993 We Have Never Been Modern. Translated by

Catherine Porter. Pearson Education, Harlow. Lazenby, M. E. Colleen

1980 Prehistoric Sources of Chert in Northern

Labrador: Field Work and Preliminary Analyses.

Arctic 33:628-645.

1 984 Ramah Chert Use Patterns in the Maritime

Archaic Period in Labrador. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr.

Leacock, Eleanor B., and Nan A. Rothschild (editors)

1 994 Labrador Winter. The Ethnographic journals

of William Duncan Strong, 1927-1928. Smithsonian

Institution Press, Washington D.C. LeBlanc, Raymond

1992 Wedges, Pieces Esquillees, Bipolar Cores and

Other Things: An Alternative to Shott's View of Bipolar

Industries. North American Archaeologist 1 3(1 ):1 -1 4. LeBlanc, Sylvie, and Murielle Nagy (editors)

2003 Architecture paleoesquimaude/Paleoeskimo

Architecture. Etudes/lnuit/Studies 27(1-2). LeMoine, Genevieve, James Helmer, and Bjarne

Gronnow

2003 Late Dorset Architecture on Little Cornwallis

Island, Nunavut. Etudes/lnuit/Studies 27(] -2):2SS-280.

Leroi-Gourhan, Andre, and Michel Brezillion 1972 Fouilles de Pincevent. Essai d'analyse ethno- graphique d'un habitat Magdalenien. Vile supplement a Gallia Prehistoire. CNRS, Paris. Levi-Strauss, Claude

1963 Structural Anthropology. Basic Books,

New York.

Loring, Stephen G. 1983 An Archaeological Survey of the Inner Bay

Region Between Nain and Davis Inlet, Labrador: A

Report of 1982 Fieldwork. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1982, edited by Jane Sproull

Thomson and Galium Thomson, pp. 32-56. Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador, St. John's.

REFERENCES CITED 357
1985 Archaeological Investigations into the Nature of the Late Prehistoric Indian Population in Labrador: A Report on the 1984 Field Season. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1984,

edited by Jane Sproull Thomson and Galium

Thomson, pp. 1 22-1 53. Historic Resources Divi- sion, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,

St. John's. 1989 Tikkoatokak (HdCI-1): A Late Prehistoric Indi- an Site Near Nain. In Archaeology in Newfoundland

& Labrador 1986, edited by Galium Thomson and

Jane Sproull Thomson, pp. 32-56. Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador, St. John's.

1 992 Princes and Princesses of Ragged Fame: Innu Archaeology and Ethnohistory in Labrador. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

1998 The Archaeology of Eskimo Hutte (lkDb-2):

Inuit Sovereignty in the Torngat. Etudes/lnuit/Studles 22(2):53-76.

2001 Archaeology with the Innu at Kamistastin.

Arctic Studies Center Newsletter 9;1 0-1 1

.

2002 "And They Took Away the Stones from

Ramah": Lithic Raw Material Sourcing and Eastern

Arctic Archaeology. In Honoring Our Elders: A His- tory of Eastern Arctic Archaeology, edited by

William W. Fitzhugh, Stephen Loring and Daniel

Odess, pp. 163-185. Gontributions to Gircumpolar

Anthropology 2, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.G. Loring, Stephen, and Steven L. Cox

1986 The Postville Pentacostal Groswater Site, Kaipokok Bay, Labrador. In Palaeo-Eskimo Cultures

in Newfoundland, Labrador and Ungava, pp. 65-

93. Reports in Archaeology No.l , Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's. Lothrop, Jonathan, and Richard Michael Cramly

1982 Piece Esquillee from the Vail Site. Archaeolo- gy of Eastern North America 10.1-22. Luedtke, Barbara E. 1999 Cunflints in the Northeast. Northeast

Anthropology 57:27-43. Lysaght, A.M.

1 971 Joseph Banks in Newfoundland and Labrador,

1 776. His Diary, Manuscripts and Collections. Faber and Faber, London.

MacDonald, George F.

1 968 Debert. A Palaeo-lndian Site in Central Nova

Scotia. Anthropology Papers No.l 6, National Muse- ums of Ganada, Ottawa. Madden, Marcie

1976 A Late Archaic Sequence in Southern

Labrador. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's.

Martijn, Charles A., and Norman Clermont (eds.)

1 980 Les Inuit du Quebec -Labrador meridional. The

Inuit of Southern Quebec -Labrador.

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 4(1 -2). Masterman, Margaret

1 970 The Nature of a Paradigm. In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by Imre Lakatos and

Alan Musgrave, pp. 59-89. Cambridge University

Press. Maxwell, Moreau S. 1985 Prehistory of the Eastern Arctic. Academic

Press, Orlando. McChee, Robert

1971 An Archaeological Survey of Western Victoria

Island, N.W.T., Ganada. National Museum of Cana- da Bulletin 232:1 58-1 91

.

1979 The Palaeoeskimo Occupations at Port

Refuge, High Arctic Canada. Archaeological Survey

of Ganada Paper No. 92, National Museums of Ganada, Ottawa. 1996 Ancient People of the Arctic. UBG Press, Vancouver. McGhee, Robert, and James A. Tuck

1975 An Archaic Sequence from the Strait of Belle

Isle, Labrador. Archaeological Survey of Ganada

Mercury Series Paper No. 34, National Museums of Ganada, Ottawa. Meyer, J., and E. Montague

1 993 Soapstone Reconnaissance Survey in the Okak

Area, Northern Labrador. Newfoundland Department of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey

Branch, Current Research Report 93-1 :357-36l

.

1994 Soapstone in the Hopedale Area. Newfoundland Department of Mines and Energy, Geological

Survey Branch, Current Research Report 94-1: 273-278.

1995 Dimension Stone in Labrador. Newfoundland

Department of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey

Branch, Current Research Report 95-1 :1 53-1 58. Mikalsen, Tor

2001 Teltliv i Gronlands steinalder. Romlig analyse av steinartefakter pa Saqqaqboplasser. Unpublished Hovedfag Thesis, Institute for Archaeology,

University of Troms0.

Moore, T. R.

1 976 Sesquioxide-Gemented Soil Horizons in Northern Quebec: Their Distribution, Properties and Genesis. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 56:333-344.

Morlan, Richard E. 2001 -2005 Canadian Archaeological Association

Radiocarbon Database (CARD). Http://www.canadianarchaeology.ca/radiocarbon/card/card.htm.

Morphy, Howard

1995 Landscape and the Reproduction of the

Ancestral Past. In The Anthropology of Landscape.

Perspectives on Place and Space, edited by Eric Hirsch and Michael O'Hanlon, pp. 184-209.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

358 REFERENCES CITED
Morse, Stearns A. 1971 Operational Report. In The Nain Anorthosite

Project, Labrador: Field Report 1971, edited by

Stearns A. IVlorse, pp. 73-100. Contribution No. 9, Geology Department, University of Massachusetts,

Amherst.

Mobjerg, Tinna

1998 The Saqqaq Culture in the Sisimiut Municipality Elucidated by the Two Sites Nipisat and Asummiut. In Man, Culture and Environment in Ancient

Greenland, edited by Jette Arneborg and Hans

Christian Gullov, pp. 98-118. Danish Polar Center

Publication No. 4. Danish National Museum and

Danish Polar Center, Copenhagen.

1 999 New Adaptive Strategies In the Saqqaq Culture

of Greenland, c. 1600-1400 BC. World Archaeology

30:452-465.

Nagle, Christopher L.

1 978 Indian Occupations of the Intermediate Period on the Central Labrador Coast: A Preliminary Synthesis. Arctic Anthropology 1 5{2):1 1 9-145.

1 984 Lithic Raw Materials Procurement and

Exchange in Dorset Culture Along the Labrador

Coast. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department

of Anthropology, Brandeis University, Waltham.

1986 Flaked Stone Procurement and Distribution

in Dorset Culture Sites Along the Labrador Coast. In Palaeo-Eskimo Culture in Newfoundland, Labrador

and Ungava, pp. 95-110. Reports in Archaeology

No.l, Memorial University of Newfoundland,

St. John's. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA)

2003 WDC for Paleoclimatology. Http://www.ngdc.

noaa.gov/paleo/data.html.

Nelson, Margaret C. 1991 The Study of Technological Organization.

Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 5 7-100. Nersessian, Nancy J., and Hanne Andersen

1997 Conceptual Change and Incommensurability:

A Cognitive-Historical View. Danish Yearbook of

Philosophy 32:1 11-151. O'Connell, James F.

1 987 Alyawara Site Structure and Its Archaeological

implications. American Antiquity 52:74-1 08

Odell, George H. 1996 Economizing Behavior and the Concept of "Cu ration." In Stone Tools. Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, edited by George H. Odell, pp. 51-80. Plenum Press, New York. Odgaard, Ulla 2001 lldstedet som livscentrum. Aspekter af arktiske ildsteders funktion og ideologi. Unpublished

Ph.D. dissertation, Institute for Prehistoric Archaeology, Medieval Archaeology, Ethnography and

Social Anthropology, Aarhus University.

2003 Hearth and Home of the Palaeo-Eskimos.

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 27(1 -2):349-374.

Olsen, BJornar 1998 Saqqaq Housing and Settlement in Southern

Disko Bay, West Greenland. Acta Borealia

1 5(2):81-1 28.

Parry, William J., and Robert L. Kelly

1 987 Expedient Core Technology and Sedentism. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by Jay

K.Johnson and Carol A. Morrow, pp. 285-304. West- view Press, Boulder. Pearson, Michael Parker, and Colin Richards

1994 Ordering the World: Perceptions of Architecture, Space and Time. In Architecture and Order. Approaches to Social Space, edited by Michael

Parker Pearson and Colin Richards, pp. 1 37. Routledge, London.

Penney, Gerald

1997 Historic Resources Overview Assessment of One Diamond Drill Site for NDT Ventures. Manuscript on File, Archaeology Section, Cultural Heritage Division, St. John's. Periodical Accounts (P.A.) 1790-1811 Periodical Accounts Relating to the Missions of the Church of the United Brethren,

Established Among the Heathen. Volumes 1-5. London.

Perles, Catherine

1992 In Search of Lithic Strategies. A Cognitive

Approach to Prehistoric Chipped Stone Assemblages. In Representations in Archaeology, edit- ed by Jean-Claude Gardin and Christopher S. Peebles, pp. 223-247. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis.

Plumet, Patrick

1 985 Archeologiede I'Ungava: le site de la Pointe aux Belougas (Qilalugarsiuvik) et les maisons

tongues Dorsetiennes. Collection Paleo-Quebec

No. 18, Laboratoire d'archeologie de I'Universite du Quebec a Montreal, Montreal.

1989 Le foyer dans I'Arctique. Actes du collogue

de Nemours 1987, Memoires du Musee de prehistoire d'lle de France 2:31 3-325.

Preucel, Robert W., and Ian Hodder

1 996 Communicating Present Pasts. In Contemporary Archaeology in Theory. A Reader, edited by

Robert W. Preucel and Ian Hodder, p. 3-20. Blackwell, Oxford.

Raab, L. Mark, Robert F. Cande, and David W.

Stable

1979 Debitage Graphs and Archaic Settlement

Patterns in the Arkansas Ozarks. Mid-Contmental

Journal of Archaeology 4: 1 67- 1 82. Ramsden, Peter, and Maribeth Murray

1995 Identifying Seasonality in Pre-Dorset Struc- tures in Back Bay, Prince of Wales Island, NWT.

Arctic Anthropology 32(2):1 06-1 1 7. Renfrew, Colin

1989 Comments on Archaeology into the 1990s.

Norwegian Archaeological Review 22(1 ):33-41

.

REFERENCES CITED 359
Renouf, M. A. P.

1 977 A Late Paleo-lndian and Early Archaic Sequence

in Southern Labrador. Man in the Northeast

1 3:35-44. 1993 Palaeoesl<imo Seal Hunters at Port au Choix,

Northwestern Newfoundland. Newfoundland Studies

9:1 85-21 2. Richling, Barnett 1993 Labrador's "Communal House Phase" Reconsidered. Arctic Anthropology 30(1 ):67-78.

Rowley, Graham, and Susan Rowley

1997 Igloolik Island Before and After Jorgen

Meldgaard. In Fifty Years of Arctic Research.

Anthropological Studies from Greenland to Siberia, edited by R. Cilberg and H. C. Cullov, pp. 269-276.

Publications of the National Museum of Denmark,

Ethnographical Series Vol. 18, Copenhagen.

Ryan, B.

1 990 Geological Map of the Nain Plutonic Suite and

Surrounding Rocks (Nain-Nutak, NTS 14Sw). Newfoundland Department of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey Branch, Map 90-44, Scale 1 :500000.

Ryan, B., R. J. Wardle, C. F. Cower, and G. A. G. Nunn

1995 Nickel-Copper-Sulphide Mineralization in Labrador: The Voisey Bay Discovery and Its Exploration Implications. Newfoundland Department of

Mines and Energy, Geological Survey Branch, Current Research Report 95-1 1 77-204.

Sahlins, Marshall D. 1963 Poor Man, Rich Man, Big-Man, Chief: Political Types in Melanesia and Polynesia. Comparative

Studies in Society and History 5:285-303.

Samson, Gilles 1978 Preliminary Cultural Sequence and Palaeo- Environmental Reconstruction of the Indian House

Lake Region, Nouveau-Quebec. Arctic Anthropology

1 5(2):1 86-205.

Savelle, James M.

1 984 Cultural and Natural Formation Processes of a

Historic Inuit Snow Dwelling Site, Somerset Island, Arctic Canada. American Antiquity 49:S08-524.

Sayer, Andrew R.

1 992 Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach.

Second Edition. Routledge, London.

2000 Realism and Social Science. Sage, London.

Schiffer, Michael B.

1 972 Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 37:1 56-1 65.

1 987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological

Record. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

2000 Social Theory in Archaeology: Building

Bridges. In Social Theory in Archaeology, edited

by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 1-13, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Schlanger, Nathan

1994 Mindful Technology: Unleashing the chaine

operatoire for an Archaeology of Mind. In The

Ancient Mind. Elements of Cognitive Archaeology,

edited by Colin Renfrew and Ezra B. W. Zubrow, pp. 143-151. Cambridge University Press.

Schledermann, Peter 1976 Thule Communal Houses in Labrador. Arctic 29:27-37.

1 990 Crossroads to Greenland. Komatik Series No. 2, The Arctic Institute of North America, Calgary.

Schoener, T. W. 1974 The Compression Hypothesis and Temporal

Resource Partitioning. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences USA 71 :41 69-41 72. Scoones, I. 1999 New Ecology and the Social Sciences: What

Prospects for a Fruitful Engagement? Annual Review

of Anthropology 28:479-507.

Seguin, Jocelyne

1 995 La Structuration de I'espace des sites d'habi- tation et des ateliers de taille. Archeologiques

9:33-46.

Short, Susan K. 1978 Palynology: A Holocene Environmental

Perspective for Archaeology in Labrador-Ungava.

Arctic Anthropology 1 5(2):9-35.

Shott, Michael J. 1989 Bipolar Industries; Ethnographic Evidence and

Archaeological Implications. North American

Archaeologist 1 0:1 -24. Simek, Jan F.

1 984 A K-Means Approach to the Analysis of Spatial Structure in Upper Paleolithic Habitation Sites. BAR

International Series 205, Oxford.

Spencer, Robert F. 1959 The North Alaskan Eskimo. A Study in Ecology

and Society. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 171, Washington.

Speth, John D., and Gregory A. Johnson

1 976 Problems in the Use of Correlation for Investi- gation of Tool Kits and Activity Areas. In Cultural Change and Continuity, edited by Charles Cleland,

pp. 35-75. Academic Press, New York. Spielmann, Katherine Ann

1 986 Interdependence Among Egalitarian Societies. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5:279-31 2. Spiess, Arthur

1978 Zooarchaeological Evidence Bearing on the Nain Area Middle Dorset Subsistence-Settlement

Cycle. Arctic Anthropology 1 5(2):48-60.

Stapert, Dick

1989 The Ring and Sector Method: Intrasite Spatial

Analysis of Stone Age Sites, with Special Reference

to Pincevent. Palaeohistoria 31:1-5 7. Stapert, Dick, and Lykke Johansen

1 996 Ring & Sector Analysis, and Site 'IT' on Greenland. Palaeohistoria 37/38:29-69.

StatSoft, Inc. 2002 Electronic Statistics Textbook. StatSoft, Tulsa. http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/stathome.html.

Steinbring, Jack H.

1 981 Saulteaux of Lake Winnipeg. In Handbook of

North American Indians. Volume 6. Subarctic,

edited by June Helm, pp. 244-255. Smithsonian

Institution Press, Washington D.C.

360 REFERENCES CITED
Stevenson, Marc G. 1991 Beyond the Formation of Hearth-Associated

Artifact Assemblages. In The Interpretation of

Archaeological Spatial Patterning, edited by Ellen M. Kroll and T. Douglas Price, pp. 269-299. Plenum

Press, New York. Steward, Julian H.

1 95 5 Theory of Culture Change. The Methodology

of Multilinear Evolution. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Stewart, T. Dale

1939 Anthropometric Observation on the Eskimos

and Indians of Labrador. Field Museum of Natural

History Anthropology Series 31(1):1-163.

Stopp, Marianne P. 1997 Long-Term Coastal Occupancy Between Cape

Charles and Trunmore Bay, Labrador. Arctic

50(2):1 19-1 37. 2002 Reconsidering Inuit Presence in Southern

Labrador. Etudes/lnuit/Studies 26(2):71 -1 06. Strong, William Duncan

1930 A Stone Culture from Northern Labrador and

Its Relation to the Eskimo-Like Cultures of the

Northeast. American Anthropologist 32:1 26-1 44.

Stuiver, Minze, Pieter. M. Crootes, and Thomas F. Braziunas

1995 The CISP2 ^^0 Climate Record of the Past 16,500 Years and the Role of the Sun, Ocean and

Volcanoes. Quaternary Research 44:341 -354. Sutherland, Patricia 2003 Variability and Change in Palaeo-Eskimo

Architecture: A View from the Canadian High Arctic. Etudes/lnuit/Studies 27(1 -2): 1 91 -2 1 2. Sutton, Douglas, Bryan Hood, and William Fitzhugh

1981 In Quest of Dorset Subsistence Strategies:

1980 Excavations at Okak-1 and No-Name Island, Labrador. In Archaeology in Newfoundland &

Labrador 1980, edited by Jane Sproull Thomson

and Bernard Ransom, pp. 48-57. Historic Resources

Division, Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador, St. John's. Tanner, Adrian

1979 Bringing Home Animals. Religious Ideology

and Mode of Production of the Mistassini Cree

Hunters. Institute of Social and Economic Research,

Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's. Tanner, Vaino

1 944 Outlines of the Geography, Life and Customs

of Newfoundland-Labrador. Acta Ceographica

Fenniae 8 (1 , parts 1 ,2). Helsinki. Taylor, J. Garth

1 966 Field Notes. Site Survey in the Nain-Okak Area, Northern Labrador. Manuscript No. 713, Archaeological Survey of Canada Archives. 1969 William Turner's Journeys to the Caribou

Country with the Labrador Eskimos in 1780.

Ethnohistory 1 6(2): 1 4 1 -

1 64.

1 974 Labrador Eskimo Settlements of the Early Contact Period. Publications in Ethnology No. 9, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.

1 976 The Inuit Middleman in the Labrador Baleen

Trade. Unpublished Manuscript.

1979a Tuglavina. In Dictionary of Canadian Biography, Volume 4, edited by F. C. Halpenny, p. 740.

University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 1979b Indian-lnuit Relations in Eastern Labrador,

1 600-1 976. Arctic Anthropology 1 6:49-58. 1983 The Two Worlds of Mikak. Part I. The Beaver,

Outfit 314:3:4-1 3.

1 984 The Two Worlds of Mikak. Part II. The Beaver,

Outfit 314:4:18-25. 1985 The Arctic Whale Cult in Labrador.

Etudes/lnuit/Studies 9(2):1 21-1 32.

1 988 Labrador Inuit Whale Use During the Early Contact Period. Arctic Anthropology 2S{]y.] 20-1 30. 1989 Shamanic Sex Roles in Traditional Labrador

Inuit Society. In Shamanism: Past and Present, edit- ed by M. Hoppal, O.J. von Sadovszky, pp. 297-306. ISTOR Books, Budapest— Los Angeles/Fullerton.

1990 The Labrador Inuit Kashim (Ceremonial

House) Complex. Arctic Anthropology 27(2):5 1 -67. Thagard, Paul

1 992 Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton University

Press, Princeton. Thomson, J. Galium

1981 Preliminary Archaeological Findings From

Shuldham Island, Labrador, 1980. In Archaeology

in Newfoundland & Labrador 1980, edited by Jane

Sproull Thomson and Bernard Ransom, pp. 5-25.

Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's. 1982 Archaeological Findings from Sagiek Bay,

1 981 . In Archaeology in Newfoundland <S Labrador

1981 , edited by Jane Sproull Thomson and Bernard Ransom, pp. 5-31. Historic Resources Division,

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's. 1983 Maritime Archaic Longhouses and Other Sur- vey Results from Outer Sagiek Bay, Northern

Labrador, August 1982. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1982, edited by Jane Sproull

Thomson and Bernard Ransom, pp. 3-31. Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador, St. John's. 1984 Maritime Archaic Occupation of Big Island,

Sagiek Bay: A Preliminary Report. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1983, edited by Jane

Sproull Thomson and Bernard Ransom, pp. 48-54.

Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's. 1985 Caribou Trail Archaeology: 1985 Investiga- tion of Sagiek Bay and Inner Sagiek Fjord. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1985,

edited by Jane Sproull Thomson and Bernard Ran- som, pp. 9-53. Historic Resources Division, Gov- ernment of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's. 1989 The Caribou Trail Continues: A Survey of White Point, Between Sagiek and Hebron. In Archaeology in Newfoundland & Labrador 1986,

REFERENCES CITED 361
edited by Jane Sproull Thomson and Bernard Ran- som, pp. 27-51. Historic Resources Division, Gov- ernment of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's.

Tilley, Christopher

1 994 A Phenomenology of Landscape. Berg, Oxford.

1999 Metaphor and Material Culture. Biacl<well,

Oxford.

Tringham, Ruth E.

1 991 Households with Faces: The Challenge of Cender in Prehistoric Architectural Remains. In Engendering Archaeology. Women and Prehistory, edited by Joan M. Gero and Margaret W. Conkey, pp. 93- 131. Blackwell, Oxford.

Trudel, Francois

1980 Les relations entre les frangais et les Inuit au Labrador meridional, 1 660-1 760. ffw<^e5///iw/f/ Studies A (1 -2): 1 35-145. Tuck, James A. 1971 An Archaic Cemetery at Port au Choix,

Newfoundland. American Antiquity 36:343-358.

1 975 Prehistory of Sagiek Bay, Labrador: Archaic

and Palaeo-Eskimo Occupations. Archaeological

Survey of Canada Mercury Series Paper No. 32, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.

1 976 Ancient People of Port au Choix. The Excavation of an Archaic Indian Cemetery in Newfoundland. Institute of Social And Economic Research,

Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's. Tuck, James A., and Robert McChee

1975 Archaic Cultures in the Strait of Belle Isle Region, Labrador. Arctic Anthropology 1 2(2):76-91

.

Turner, Lucien M.

1 894 Ethnology of the Ungava District, Hudson Bay

Territory. Eleventh Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution, 1 889-1 890:1 59-350. Ucko, Peter J., and Robert Layton (editors)

1 999 The Archaeology and Anthropology of Landscape. Shaping Your Landscape. Routledge, London.

VanStone, James W.

1 985 Material Culture of the Davis Inlet and Barren Ground Naskapi: The William Duncan Strong

Collection. Fieldiana Anthropology, New Series No. 7. Wandsnider, LuAnn

1996 Describing and Comparing Archaeological

Spatial Structures. Journal of Archaeological

Method and Theory 3:31 9-384. Way, Jacob Edson III

1 978 An Osteological Analysis of a Late Thule/Early

Historic Labrador Eskimo Population. Unpublished

Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology,

University of Toronto. Wenner, Carl-Gosta

1947 Pollen Diagrams from Labrador. Ceografiska

Annaler 29:] 37-373. Wheeler, E. P.

1 953 List of Labrador Eskimo Place Names. National Museum of Canada Bulletin No. 131, Ottawa.

Whitelaw, Todd M. 1991 Some Dimensions of Variability in the Social Organisation of Community Space Among For- agers. In Ethnoarchaeological Approaches to Mobile

Campsites. Hunter-Gatherer and Pastoralist Case

Studies, edited by C. S. Gamble and W. A. Boismier,

pp. 1 39-1 88. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ethnoarchaeological Series 1 , Ann Arbor. 1994 Order Without Architecture: Functional, Social and Symbolic Dimensions in Hunter-Gatherer Set- tlement Organization. In Architecture & Order.

Approaches to Social Space, edited by Michael Parker Pearson and Colin Richards, pp. 217-243. Routledge, London.

Whiteley, William H. 1979 Mikak. In Dictionary of Canadian Biography,

Volume 4, edited by F. G. Halpenny, pp. 536-537.

University of Toronto Press, Toronto. Wiens, J. A. 1977 On Competition and Variable Environments.

American Scientist 65:590-597.

Woollett, James M. 1999 Living in the Narrows: Subsistence Economy

and Culture Change in Labrador Inuit Society During

the Contact Period. World Archaeology 3Q):370-3?,7

.

Wyatt, A. C. N.

1 934 Surveying Cruises of H.M.S Challenger off the Coast of Labrador in 1 932 and 1 933. Geographical

journal 84:33-53.

Wylie, Alison

1 989 Archaeological Cables and Tacking: The Impli- cations of Practice for Bernstein's 'Options Beyond

Objectivism and Relativism'. Philosophy of Social Science 1 9:1 -1 8. 2000 Questions of Evidence, Legitimacy, and the

(Dis)Union of Science. American Antiquity 6'h:227-237

.

Yates, Timothy

1989 Habitus and Social Space: Some Suggestions

About Meaning in the Saami (Lapp) Tent ca. 1 700-

1 900. In The Meanings of Things. Material Culture and Symbolic Expression, edited by Ian Hodder,

pp. 249-262. Unwin Hyman, London.

Yellen, John E.

1 977 Archaeological Approaches to the Present: Models for Reconstructing the Past. Academic

Press, New York. Yodzis, Peter

1 978 Competition for Space and the Structure of

Ecological Communities. Lecture Notes in Biomathematics 25. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Zimmerly, David William

1 975 Cain's Land Revisited. Culture Change in Central Labrador I 775-1 972. Institute of Social and

Economic Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's.

362 REFERENCES CITED
Index

a

Aillik, 7, 8, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 119, 341, 348

Anaktalak Bay, 4, 1 6 Anaktalik Brook, 1 8 Anshuetz, Kurt, 323

Apkajunna, 222

Arctic Small Tool Tradition, 9

Attu's Point, 2, 16, 224, 245, 252, 253, 260, 270,

271, 273-318, 320, 331, 332, 333, 334, 336,

343, 345, 347, 348

Aumarak, 222

Australian hunter-gather cultures, 323, 329

b

Ballybrack Mound, 2, 7

Ballybrack-10, 7, 16

Barren Ground Innu, 3 Basque contact, 11, 214

Binford, Lewis R., 24-25, 32, 34, 35, 38, 42-44

Bird, Junius B., 3, 240, 241

Black Island Complex, 6, 7, 322, 340

Black Island Cove, 26

Bradore, Quebec, 214

Brinex Complex, 6, 8 Button Islands, 4 Byron Bay, 216

f"Cabot, W. B., iv Cape Charles region, 1

1

Cape Mugford, 8, 9, 1 78, 1 83, 320, 337

Cartwright, George, 214

Charles Complex, 6, 8 Chateau Bay, 214

Comfort Cove, 5

1

Conrad, Geoff, iv, 3 Courtemanche, Sieur de, 214

Cow Head, 341 Cox, Steven, 3 Cree, 34, 40-41 d

Daniel Rattle Complex, 6, 8, 9 David Michelin Complex, 6 David site, 36, 37, 38

Davis Inlet Innu, 3 Davis Inlet, 4

Disko Bay, West Greenland, 45, 46

Dog Bight L-3, 205, 206, 207, 209, 332

Dog Island, 187, 210, 332

Dorset cultures, iv, 3-5, 9,10, 44, 45, 47, 53, 189-

21 2, 333, 337-338, 340, 341, 348-349

Early Dorset, 10, 45, 54, 59, 189, 205, 209-310

Early/Middle Dorset, 2, 53-54, 189-21 1 Late Dorset, 4, 9-1 1 , 36-38, 47, 113,1 89, 200, 209-

211, 239

Late Pre-Dorset, 8, 9, 53-55, 57, 259, 332, 341 Middle Dorset, 9, 10, 59, 205, 209-212

Pre-Dorset, iv, vi, 2, 3-4, 9-10, 49, 224, 245, 252,

253, 260, 270, 271, 273-318, 320, 331, 332,

333, 334, 336, 343, 345, 347, 348

Dutch contact, 214

p

Early Contact Period Thule (see Thule)

Early Dorset (see Dorset)

Early/Middle Dorset (see Dorset)

Early/Middle Maritime Archaic (see Maritime Archaic) Ellesmere Island, 36

English contact, 11,21 4, 216, 220, 223, 232, 236,

237, 242

"Eskimo," iv, 3, 5, 215

Eskimo Island, 32 f

Field Museum of Natural History, 21 3

'Tirst Rattle," 1 9

Fitzhugh, William, 3, 1 76, 320

Fornel, Louis, 214

Fort York, 214

Eraser River, 13,18

Freestone Harbour, 1 5 French contact, 11,214, 228, 240-141

French Paleolithic, 24

George River, iv Greenland, 17, 36, 38, 44-48, 232, 314, 318, 320,

340

Groswater Phase, 6, 9-10

h

Hamilton Inlet, iv, 3-7, 8, 9-1 0, 1 1 , 1 6, 28, 35, 1 1 9,

1 76, 214, 21 6, 217, 223, 229, 232, 322, 340

Harmony Run, 1 5

INDEX 363
Harp Isthmus, 321 , 337, 338, 33

Harp, Elmer, 3 Hebron Fjord, 4, 7, 8, 27, 321, 336, 337, 341 Hopedale, 3, 9, 1 1 , 1 4, 2 1 3, 2 1 4, 2 1 7, 2 1 8, 22 3, 227, 240

Hubbard, Mina, iv Humby's Island, 1 5, 1 9, 2 1 1 , 2 1 2

Iglosiatik Island, 4, 1 5 Iglusuaktallaluk, 210, 336

Ikkarlussuup, 45

Immllikulik Island, 3 1 8

Indian House Lake (Hutte de la Sauvage), iv, 4, 333

Ingold, Tim, 323-324, 327, 330, 345, 346

Innu, iv, 1, 4, 5, 9, 13, 26, 27, 32, 40, 214

Barren Ground, 3 Davis Inlet, 3 Labrador, 40

Pre-Contact Indian, 5 Pre-lnnu, 319

Intermediate Indian Saunders Complex, 8-9, 1 5, 337,

340-341

Inuit, iv, V, 1-5, 9-1 1 , 1 5, 1 7-1 9, 44, 51 , 53, 54, 58, 21 1 , 21 3-244, 340, 349

Inuit/Paleoeskimo, 5 Inuit/Pre-lnuit Sequence, 9-10, 319

Labrador, 53, 21 1 Post-Contact, 21 3-244

James Bay, Quebec, 34

Jerusalem Harbour, 337, 338

Johnson, Peter, iv, 20

Jordan, Richard, 3,215

Jordan-Kaplan model, 21 5

IfKaipokok Bay, 1 Kaplan, Susan, 4, 21 1 , 21 5 Kiglapait Mountains, iv, 13, 18, 19

Kigluana, 221 , 222

Killinek, iv, 4, 1 3 Kingurutik Lake, 1 8 Kogaluk River, 1 3, 333

Kostenki, 37-38

IL'Anse Amour, 5, 7 Labrador (general), iv-vi, 1-12, 319-346

Late Maritime Archaic (see Maritime Archaic)

Late Dorset (see Dorset)

Late Pre-Dorset (see Dorset)

Little Lake Component, 6

Loring, Stephen C, 4, 34

Makkovik, 4, 7, 8, 27, 1 1 9, 341 Maritime Archaic cultures, v, 2-8, 9, 15,6,1 7, 23-44,

49, 50, 53-1 86

Early, 3, 5, 16, 1 75

Early/Middle, 2, 5, 7, 1 5, 44, 61 -1 86

Late, 7-9, 27, 34, 1 50, 175, 245-271, 273, 308, 320-

321, 331-338, 340, 341, 349

Marsal (French trader), 214

McChee, Robert, 3 Meldgaard, Morten, vii, 22

Middle Dorset (see Dorset)

Mikak, 216-220, 241, 242

Millik, 221

Mistassini Cree, 40

Moravians, iv, 11, 1 , 216-219

Morse, Stearns (Tony), iv Mount Pickle Harbour-1, 53, 54, 58, 59

Mount Thoresby, 1 3

Nachvak Fiord, 1 5 Nachvak, 10, 15, 217, 218

Nain (general), iv, 1 -22 Nain Pond, 16, 338

Naksak Complex, 6, 7, 54, 57-58, 1 75-1 76, 1 83, 348

Napartok Bay, 4,13,15

Naskapi (Innu), iv, 3, 13 Nenets culture, 40-41 Neo-Eskimo, 2 1 5 Newfoundland, vi, 8, 1 0, 1 7, 1 96, 202, 332, 341 "No-Name Island," 1 5, 21 1 Northwest River Phase, 6 Nuasornak, 4, 336, 337, 341 Nukasusutok Island, v, vi, 1- 3, 13-1 5, 1 8-19, 52-244,

349

Nukasusutok-1 , 53-56, 57 Nukasusutok-2, 53-57, 259, 332, 334

Nukasusutok-3, 54 Nukasusutok-4, 54-56

Nukasusutok-5, 2, 5, 16, 22, 49-51, 53, 54, 56, 60,

61-186, 347-348

Nukasusutok-6, 54, 55, 57

Nukasusutok-7, 53, 54, 213, 220, 224, 230, 239

Nukasusutok-8, 53, 43, 21 1 , 21 3, 220, 223, 225-229,

231 , 240-243, 349

Nukasusutok-9, 53, 54, 57

Nukasusutok-1 0, 54, 57, 58

Nukasusutok-1 1 , 54, 58

Nukasusutok-1 2, 53, 54, 1 88, 189-211, 347-349

Nukasusutok-1 3, 54, 55, 58

Nukasusutok-1 4, 54, 55, 58

Nulliak Cove, 7, 8, 27, 28, 30-31, 270, 320, 321,

337, 340, 343, 345, 348

Nuvotanaluk, 337, 338

OJibway, 40

Okak Bay, 8, 1 5, 1 76, 209, 336,

Okak region, 3, 7, 9, 10, 1 3, 1 5-19, 20, 26, 210,

218, 222, 316, 317, 320, 335, 340, 343

Okak-2, 7, 26, 28, 1 76, 337

Okak-3, 47, 210

Okak-4, 341 Okak-6, 336, 341

"Old Stone Culture," 3

364 INDEX
p

Paleoeskimo, v, 1 , 2, 3 5, 8, 9, 23, 26, 36, 41 , 44-49,

52, 314-31 5, 347, 348

Pattiguk, 221

Paul Island, 1 5, 230, 333

Peabody Museum, Phillips Academy, 21 3 Pearyland Independence, 47

Pierce, C. S., 325

Pincevent, France, 24

Point Revenge Complex, 6, 9, 35, 239

Port au Choix, Newfoundland, 3, 8, 1 51 Port Manvers Run, iv, 2, 244, 245-272, 273, 295, 348

Portuguese contact, 11, 214

Postville, 10

Pre-Dorset (see Dorset)

q

Qeqertassusuk, Greenland, 320

Quebec Cree, 40

r

Ramah Bay, 7, 1 5, 31, 1 80, 320,336, 338, 341, 343

Rasmussen, Knud, 48

Rattlers Bight Phase, 3, 6, 7, 8, 26, 28, 30, 31, 68,

1 51, 1 76, 261, 262, 265, 270-271, 320, 321,

335, 340

Rawson-MacMillan Subarctic Expedition, 3, 213, 225

Red Islands, 1 5 Richling, Barnett, 215-216

Rigolet, 214

Road Component, 6 Rose Island Site Q, 240, 241, 319, 338

Russian Upper Paleolithic, 37, 38

Sagiek Bay, 3, 4, 9, 10, 30, 183, 240, 241, 317, 319,

320, 332, 336, 338, 343

Sami culture, 39, 48

Sandy Cove Complex, 6, 7, 63, 1 1 9, 1 75, 1 76, 262,

268

Saqqaq culture, 45, 31 5 Sattugana, 220, 221 Saunders Complex, 6, 8, 9, 337, 340, 341 "Second Rattle," 1 5, 20, 255, 332, 333

Seguin, Jocelyne, 34-35

September Harbour-1 site, 332

Seven Islands Bay, 1 Sikfigak, 217

Sikkuliak, 221

Sipukat Bay, 317, 336

Siugakuluk-2, 337

Skjoldungen District, Greenland, 46

Smithsonian Torngat Archaeological Project, 4 Snyder Bay, 5

1

Soapstone Tickle, 1 5 South Aulatsivik Island, 1 3, 1 5, 1 6, 1 9, 20, 245, 260,

31 8, 332, 333

Spanish contact, 11, 214

Steward, Julian H., 5 Strait of Belle Isle, 3, 5, 1 3, 214

Strathcona Run, 1 5 Strong, William Duncan, v, 2, 3, 21 3, 239

Strong Grave Collection, 239

Sutton, Doug, vii, 22

Tabor Island, 1 5 Tasisuak Lake, 1 8 Tasiuyak Bay, 1 9

Taylor, Helga, 220

Taylor, J. Garth, 3, 53, 225

Thalia Point, iv, 1 9, 20, 245, 270, 272, 332, 333,

334, 343

Thomson, Galium, 4 Thule culture, 4, 9, 1 1 , 38, 2 1 1 , 2 1 3 Early Contact Thule, 1 1 Thule/lnuit sites, 1 1 Tikkoatokak Bay, 1 5 Tilley, Christopher, 323

Torngat Archaeological Project, 27

Torngat Mountain Region, 10

Tuck, James, 3, 31 9 Tuglavina, 216-220, 241 , 242

V

Village Bay, iv Voisey's Bay, 4, 13, 16, 20, 222, 333, 335, 342, 343

Wallace, Dillon, iv Webb Bay, 1 , 2, 1 3, 1 9-20, 245-271 , 273-31 7, 332,

33, 343

Wells, Peter, iv Wheeler, E. P., iv Windy Tickle, 9

Yolngu culture, 329

INDEX 365
OTHER TITLES IN THE SERIES

Contributions to Circumpolar

Anthropology)

Vol. 1: Gateways Exploring the Legacy of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition,] 897-]902. Edited by

Igor Krupnik and William W. Fitzhugh. Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington, DC. 2001. xvi+335 pp.

Vol. 2; Honoring Our Elders: A History of Eastern Arctic Anthropology. Edited by William W. Fitzhugh,

Stephen Loring, and Daniel Odess. Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington, DC. 2002. xvi + 319 pp.

Vol. 3: Al<uzilleput Igaqullghet/Our Words Put to Paper: Sourcebook in St. Lawrence Island Yupik Heritage

and History. Edited by Igor Krupnik, Willis Walunga, and Vera Metcalf. Compiled by Igor Krupnik and Lars Krutak.

Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. 2002. 464 pp.

Vol. 4; Constructing Cultures Then and Now: Celebrating Franz Boas and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition.

Edited by Lauren Kendall and Igor Krupnik. Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington, DC. 2003. xviii+364 pp.

Vol. 5: Taymyr: The Archaeology of Northernmost Eurasia. By Leonid P. Khiobystin. Edited by

William W. Fitzhugh and Vladimir V. Pitulko. Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History,

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. 2005. xxvii+235 pp.

Vol. 6: Northern Ethnographic Landscapes: Perspectives from Circumpolar Nations. Edited by Igor Krupnik,

Rachel Mason, and Tonia Horton. Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian

Institution, Washington, DC. 2004. xvi+446 pp.

366

For information and ordering this or any other volume in the series

Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropologtj

please contact:

Arctic Studies Center

PO Box 3701 2 Anthropology Department, MRC 1 12

National Museum of Natural History

Washington, DC 2001 3-701 2

(202) 633-1 887 phone

(202) 357-2684 fax

www.mnh.si.edu/arctic

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES

9088 01468 8287

Bryan Hood is professor of archaeology at the Institute for Archaeology, University of Tromso, Norway, with

a focus on comparative arctic archaeology, as well as general theory and method. He has participated in archaeological fieldwork in Labrador, northern Norway, Russia's Kola Peninsula, Greenland and Baffin Island. He has written on subjects ranging from the theoretical basis of eastern Arctic Paleoeskimo archaeology, to north Norwegian Stone Age rock art and lithic procurement, to the sociopolitics of resource developmentrelated archaeology in Labrador. His current research includes a cognition theory approach to the early history of North American arctic archaeology and anthropology, the early post-glacial colonization of northern Norway, the prehistory of the interior regions of north Norway, as well as house structures and society during the initial Early Metal Period of north Norway and the Kola Peninsula.

ISBN: 10: 0-9816142-0-5

ISBN 13: 978-0-9816142-0-5

ISBN =17fl-D-1fllLmE-0-5 Smithsonian

National Museum ofNatural History

5 3 49 5

9 I780981II614205