.:.



### THE BIG LAKE ARCHEOLOGICAL PROJECT: REPORT TO THE PASSAMAQUODDY ON THE 1986 SURVEY Steven L. Cox and Bruce 

### J. Bourque Maine State Museum May l, 1987

### INTRODUCTION PROJECT AREA TABLE OF CONTENTS

Limits of Survey . . .. .. .. .. .. .... . ............................. Area Description ........................... . ... . ........ .. .... Previous Archeological Work . .. ... . ......... . ... . ... . .......... SURVEY DESCRIPTION ............... . .... . .... . .... . .... . .. .. .. ... .... Methodology . ........ . .. .. ....................... . ............. Survey Coverage and Summary Site Descriptions.. ... ........... .. SITES ON PASSAMAQUODDY LAND . .. ....... . .... ..... . ................... Site 95.20 .. . ... . ..... .. . .. . ..... . ... . .... . .... . ... . .... . ... .. CONCLUSIONS ..... ... . .. .. .. .. . ....... .. ......... . ................ ... Prehistoric Occupation of the Big Lake Region ................. Summary Findings ... .. ................. ... .. ....... . ... .... .... Recommendations .. ... . ... . .. . ...................... . ... ... ..... REFERENCES ... ... ........... .. .. ...... .. ... .. ... .. . .. ... . .... .. ..... ILLUSTRATIONS 1 2 2 2 4 5 5 7 13 13 

### 15 15 27 

### 28 29

Following page Figure 1: Big Lake Project Area ....... . . ...... ... . ..... ... . .. .. . ... 2 Figure 2: Big Lake Survey Areas ... ........... .... ............. .. . . 7 Figure 3: 95.20 Site Map .... . .. ... .......... .......... .. .. .... . . . .. 13 Plate I : Site 95.8, Gordon Island .. . .. ... . ... . .. . . .. .. ...... . ... ... 29 Plate II: Site 95.20, View to North.... ... .. . .. . . . ..... .. . ....... .. 29 Plate III: Artifacts from Sites 95.11, 95.15 and 95.20 ............. 29 Plate IV: Artifacts from Sonny Sprague Collection . ...... .. . ........ 29

# "\

# ~KX STREAK I 'PLANT·/.TION**~IG** LAK8



### FIGURE II: Big Lake Survey Areas INDIAN TOWNSHIP

PLANTATION NO 21 

# 1

..

# i; P R I N C E T 0 N

# ~~·**·** ' • 0 l l , • JI(......,...and beaches for cultural material. Approximately half of the areas were test pitted. We summarize surveys of previ.ously reported and newly discovered sites below, followed by a full description of the one major prehistoric site found on Passamaquoddy land. 95. 1 - This is a recent campsite just west of Peter Dana Point reported by Dean Snow. Due to a delay in receiving permission to survey Passamaquoddy land, we did not test this site. 95.2 - Another recent campsite reported by Snow, located on the east side of Governor's Point. The location indicated by Snow for the camp is an area with a steep bank, no good boat landing, and low, wet, poorly drained soil behind the bank. There is no indication of a camp here, and we believe the true location of this site is at our site 95. 18, which contains a recent campsite as well as a prehistoric site. We dug two test pits in this area, with negative results.

### ~ 95.3 - A major prehistoric site at Gould Landing on Grand Lake Stream. We excavated 10 square meters on the site, confirming intact cultural deposits and recovering both Archaic and Ceramic period material. This is one of the most important sites in the region, and we have recommended evaluation of the erosional danger to the site and archeological mitigation if necessary. 95.4 - An Archaic site on the property of John and Susan Stevens, this site was reported to Bourque in the mid-1970's. Unfortunately, there is some confusion as to its placement. The recorded location is a very narrow (2-3 meters) strip of land backed by a bog. In our judgement there is no possibility of a site existing there. A survey of the higher land to the south of the reported site along Hold Shore did uncover the remains of 

### a site on the 895.13 - Eddie Brown site at Yates Point on Big Lake. The tip of Yates Point has been extensively disturbed by construction of a camp with associated outbuildings, road, picnic area, etc., and is also heavily eroded. We found only small areas of undisturbed soil, and two test pits in these areas produced nothing. We believe there is no chance of intact site deposits in this area. 95. 14 - Eddie Brown site on the west side of Governor's Point. The indicated location for this site is in a broad, shallow sand-bottomed cove backed by a bouldery, uneven lakeshore. The cove is sufficiently shallow that prior to damming the shore would have been somewhere near the present cove mouth. Although it is possible that Eddie Brown picked up artifacts from the sandy bottom of the cove at low water, we consider it inconceivable that any site deposits still exist within the cove. The information locating the site is not very precise, and we consider it possible that the site is actually at the location of our site 95.19. 95. 15 - This site, reported and extensively dug by Steven Feher, is located along Grand Lake Stream on the opposite bank from 95.3. Our tests, including ten 50 cm. test squares and 25 shovel test pits, confirmed the existence of intact cultural deposits in what is a huge site or series of sites stretching from at least as far upstream as site 95.3 down to the mouth of the stream, a distance of some 500 meters. The site has produced both Archaic and Ceramic period material. We believe this to be a National Register quality site, and have recommended further geological investigation. 95.16 - Steve Feher site near the mouth of Little River on Big Lake. We tested this site with six 50 cm. test squares and 14 shovel test pits, finding only a few flakes. Conversations with the landowner, Ralph Williams, indicated that 11 

### •he and Feher had dug extensively at this site, recovering material identifiable as Susquehanna. It appea.rs that between bank erosion and amateur excavation there are no significant portions of the site remaining. 95.17 - Steve Feher site on Little River Island in Big Lake. The reported site location has very little beach and very bouldery, uneven ground. Five test pits produced nothing, and we believe there are no intact cultural deposits present. 95.18 - Site on Governor's Point discovered during the 1986 survey. We dug eight 50 cm. test squares and five test pits at this site. The site is ca. 80 meters long and contains at minimum a major middle Ceramic component. This is a probable National Register quality site, and we have recommended further investigation. 95.19 - Site on Governor's Point west of site 95.18, discovered during 1986 survey. Seven test squares indicated that the site is a small (ca. 15 meters long) ceramic period station. Due to the small size of the site and low productivity in our tests, we have not recommended further evaluation. 95.20 - Discovered during the 1986 survey, this site lies on the north side of the Narrows between Long and Lewy Lakes on Passamaquoddy land. Tested with five test squares and seven test pits, the site produced abundant flaking material in a thick cultural deposit but no temporally diagnostic artifacts. However, the character and lithic composition of the flaking debitage suggest to us a Middle and/or early Late Archaic occupation, and this impression is strengthened by two full channel gouges recovered from the site by Sonny Sprague of Grand Lake Stream. The site extends from the tip of the point at the narrows northward along the eastern shore at least 80 meters.

12•

SITES ON PASSAMAQUODDY LAND Three sites are known from current Passamaquoddy-owned lands in the Big Lake region. Two of the sites, 95.1 and 95.8, are historic period sites which were not tested. The third site, 95.20, is a major prehistoric site discovered during the course of the survey and described in detail below. Site 95.20 This site is located on the north side of the Narrows between Long and Lewy Lakes (Plate II). We originally learned of the site through amateur Sonny Sprague of Grand Lake Stream, who had collected several artifacts from the site. Unfortunately, delays in receiving permission to test on Passamaquoddy land limited the amount of time we were able to spend on site. We tested the site with a total of five 50 cm. test squares and seven test pits (Figure 3). All of the test squares and three of the test pits 

### (B,C,G) produced cultural material. Soil stratigraphy on the site was as follow s : 10 cm. black A horizon 0-10 cm. discontinuous pale grey E horizon, mixed silt/sand/gravel 10-25 cm. reddish-brown B2, silt/sand/gravel 25+ cm. yellowish-brown B3, silt with light sand, gravel Cultural material extended throughout the deposit from the base of the A horizon, reaching depths of 50-70 cm. below the surface where we struck the water table in most of our squares. The thickest concentrations of cultural material occurred in our test 13

# !**SI~~ 95.2;** **-----·-** 

# ..·- ----- OD 

## : or I OE 

### 03 ·--------.··-··-··--·----77-------

/ / _..,/ ,..// // 

### / / /



# -- UPPER TERRACE ----------- 

# ---- ,..

# ____________ OG



# -----------------

OB 5 

# B 2 _\'\. 

### cS>'"

## s ' s\"<v

## y.<v"'-<v~ ;

# -b~**d~** oc 01 //. ·/:.



# ..

# -~-/i , :'.ACH . . /. ' VI ; 

### ()4

r 0 A



### · ..**BE~** t 

# BANK 

# - j··... 

## I . 

# "' i I I

# I "' "' 

# "' \ti



### ... 

# "' "' ···... -·-··························... VI 

# "' MARSH GRASS 

# "' ....·· 0 \ii O.··



### ... 

# "'**~a °c)**  

### ...····..

### . 

# 4 --·-- 

# "' 0 TEST SQUARE 

# l l

# ~ TEST PITS lO METERS 

# "' ·.·. ····-···

### .... 

# THE NARRD\JS

----------- - -· ·· - ··-----' 

### FIGURE III: Site 95.20 I•

squares 1,2,4 and 5. The land rises behind these squares to a second terracelike area at 1.7 meters above water Level, where our test square 3 produced only small amounts of material. Although our tests were concentrated near the tip of the point, inspection of the beaches around the point revealed cultural material extending from the point north along the eastern side of the point a distance of about 70 meters, at which point the sand and cobble beach ended. Thus, the site is at least 70-80 meters long, and perhaps longer. Unfortunately, our tests produced no diagnostic artifacts. Most of the material recovered consisted of large-to-medium sized primary reduction flakes and a few flake cores, mostly of a relatively poor quality coarse-grained rhyolite. This rhyolite appeared throughout the deposit, and there was no evidence of stratigraphic variation in materials. Although not diagnostic, this rhyolite is very similar to material conunon in Middle Archaic collections in Maine. The two artifacts from the Sprague collection which can be definitely attributed to the site, two full-grooved gouges (Plate IV), also would fit well with a Middle Archaic attribution. Test squares 2,4 and 5 also contained a significant amount of calcined bone, extending throughout the deposit. A total of 66 grams of bone fragments included beaver, muskrat, larger mammal (deer?), snapping turtle, and unidentified bird. Artifacts recovered from the beach include a non-stenuned biface, a celt, and a couple of flake cores. The biface (Plate III:G), which shows no evidence of water wear and must have eroded out of the bank not long before our visit, is most likely a Ceramic period artifact although Archaic cannot be entirely ruled out. The celt or celt preform (Plate III:H) is heavily waterworn, and is undiagnostic but probably Archaic. Erosion appears to be an ongoing threat to this site. The banks of the 14•

site, particularly around the point, are heavily undercut and slumped. A considerable amount of cultural material lying on the beach gives evidence of substantial erosional damage to the site, and the unworn condition of the biface found on the beach near the eastern end of the site indicates that the erosional damage has continued up to the present. This is a major site. potentially one of the most important in the region. The site is a large one with deep cultural deposits. We have reason to believe that the site contains a major Middle Archaic component, and it is likely that other cultural components are present as well. In our judgement the degree of erosional threat to the site is probably greater than for any of the other sites we investigated. We therefore recommend geological evaluation of the erosional danger to the site, and archeological mitigation if necessary. CONCLUSIONS Prehistoric Occupation of the Big Lake Region Based on our own surveys and study of amateur collections, we are beginning to gain a reasonably good understanding of the prehistory of the Big Lake region. The story begins around 13,000 years ago, with Lhe retreat of the massive ice sheets of the late Pleistocene glaciation from the area. The great weight of the glacier had depressed the land surface, so that as the glacier retreated, the sea followed the ice edge, drowning large areas of what is now dry land, including low-lying portions of the Big Lake region. However, the marine transgression was relatively short-lived, because as the land was 15impoverished environments compared to the late Pleistocene park tundra, and a combination of climatic and vegetalional change, perhaps together with increased hunting pressure from man, led to the extinction of many of the Pleistocene big game species. Thus, where previously a great deal of meat was concentrated in large animals (mammoth, mastodon) or in herds (caribou, bison), now animal resources were dispersed in smaller and more solitary species (deer, moose) requiring different hunting techniques. The difficulties faced in adapting to these new conditions appear to be reflected by low population levels in the early stages of the Archaic period, the next of the major periods of Maine prehistory. Evidence for Early Archaic (ca. 9500-7500 years ago) is scarce in the Big Lake region, as it is in Maine as a whole, and is confined to scattered finds of points, now generally side notched for hafting rather than fluted. In general the Archaic period, which lasted until about 2500 years ago, can be seen as a period of gradual cultural adaptation to Maine's post-glacial environment. Although this increasingly sophisticated adaptation took many forms, two of the most important developments were an increased emphasis on fresh water fishing and on coastal resources including fish, shellfish and marine mammals. It is in Middle Archaic (ca. 7500-6000 years ago) that we first see clearly a fresh water fishing adaptation, not so much in food remains which are poorly preserved from this period, but in settlement locations at good fishing spots on rivers and lakes, particularly at relatively constricted portions of drainages. We see this pattern at Big Lake, with Middle Archaic components at Grand Lake Stream and at the Narrows between Long and Lewey Lakes. In general the Middle Archaic economy was probably a broad-based one, 18•

direct relationships between prehistoric populations and contemporary tribes. We have not identified**settlemen~s** from the early contact period within our study area, although some of the prehistoric sites such as 95.3 at Gould Landing on Grand Lake Stream may contain components from this period. Certainly the burial ground and associated monument on Gordon Island stands as a striking symbol of the adverse effects of European contact. It perhaps also stands as 

### a symbol for the end of an 

### 11,000 year period of prehistoric cultural development and human adaptation in the Big Lake region. Sununary Findings Of 

### 13 reported prehistoric sites within the project area, we were able to confirm the existence of five 

### (95.3,10,11,15,16). Presumably most or all of the others have been lost to erosion, and indeed, many of them may have been reported on the basis of artifacts found on the beach from an already destroyed site. In addition, we found three new sites (95.18-20). The confirmed sites share certain characteristics in common. All on the lake were located on sandy, well-drained deposits, and five of six lake sites were on points (the exception is 

### 95.16). Of course since we, and possibly the amateurs as well, selected for these characteristics in our surveys the apparent tendencies may be the result of sampling bias, although we believe that they are not. Of the six confirmed lake sites, four face east or southeast, one faces southwest, and one 

### (95.11) faces either southeast or northwest. Perhaps the most significant finding is that the four largest and most intensively occupied sites within the area are all located at constrictions within the drainage - 

### 95.3 and 15 on Grand Lake Stream, 95.18 on Governor's Point at the narrowest part of Big Lake, and 

### 95.20 at the Narrows. 27•

Three of these four sites are located on north (south-facing) shores. Through our own surveys and inspection of previously unknown amateur collections we were able to confirm habitation of the region from Middle Archaic through late Ceramic, and it is likely that the Big Lake region supported a significant population throughout the Holocene, although perhaps on a seasonal basis. The majority of the sites in the project area for which we have collections have a Late Archaic component, and three sites (95.3,15,20) have definite or probable Middle Archaic components. All phases of the Ceramic period are present in the region, and particularly during late Ceramic significant quantities of exotic raw materials are represented. As might be expected, cherts from Maritimes sources are the most common exotics, but New York cherts, Ramah chert from Labrador, and a series of unidentified cherts and quartzites from outside of Maine are also well represented. Recommendations Of the eight prehistoric sites we found during the survey, five sites (95.3,10,15,18,20) were judged to have intact cultural deposits and to be sites potentially worthy of National Register nomination as significant archeological resources. All five of these sites show some degree of erosional damage. As we are not qualified to judge precise erosional rates and therefore the amount of site area at risk during the licensing period, we have recommended geological evaluation of these five sites to determine the erosional threat, followed by archeological mitigation of any sites with potential for significant further erosional damage to intact site deposits. The prehistoric and historic archeological sites of the Big Lake region are part of the cultural heritage of the native peoples of the region. We wish 28•

to both preserve and learn from that heritage, and are concerned that sites at Big Lake are threatened not only by srosion but also by looting of pothunters and by development in the region. It is our hope that we as archeologists can work together with the Passamaquoddy tribe, other landowners in the region, Georgia Pacific, and the Maine Historic Preservation Commission to preserve as much of that heritage as possible.

REFERENCES Kopec, Diane 1984 A Summary of the Brown Collection. MS. on file at the Maine State M

useum, Augusta. 1985 The Eddie Brown Collection of the West Grand Lake Area, Maine. The Maine Archaeological Society Bulletin 25(2) :3-37.

29