Antiquities Section Selected Papers Volume VII Number 16

Common post-archaic projectile points of the fremont area

COMMON POST-ARCHAIC PROJECTILE POINTS OF THE FREMONT AREA by RICHARD N. HOLMER <uid DENNIS G. WEDER University of Utah ABSTRACT The projectile poiin« recovered from post-Archaic sites in the Fremont area can be divided into eight temporally and/or spatially diagnose types. The earliest of the types (Rose Spring Corner-notched) dat's to approximately A.D. 300 in the northern Colorado Plateau and A.D. 500 in the eastern Great Basin. They are common throughout the Fremont and surrounding regions suggesting a homogeneous hunting tech­nology associated with the diffusion of the bow and arrow. A related and also early type (Eastgate Expanding-stem) is occasionally recovered but its distribution is limited to the Great Basin. Significant regional diversity began about A.D. 800 with the introduction of side-notched projectile points (Bear River and Uinta Side-notched) around the Great Salt Lake and Uinta Basin. These points are similar, if not iden­tical to side-notched points commonly recovered in the north­ern Great Plains. To the south, regional diversity began about A.D. 950 with the introduction of three point types (Parowan Basal-notched, Nawthis Side-notched, and Bull Creek Points) that are identical to the adjacent Anasazi point styles. The overall pattern indicates a sharing of hunting technology among the Fremont and the cultures of those surrounding regions that bear similar faunal resources. By A.D. 1150 Shoshoni projectile points (Desert Side-notched) were introduced com­pletely replacing Fremont related points by A.D. 1250 in the south and A. D. 1350 in the north. INTRODUCTION Several authors have addressed the problem of Fre­mont origins, internal regional variation, and external relationships. Within a culture-historical tradition, most have based their arguments on differential trait lists mentioning attributes of ceramics, lithics, basketry, resi­dential and storage structures, and nonutilitarian objects. No matter how detailed the trait lists, arguments seem to ultimately rest on ceramic associations and distribu­tions. Ceramics are relied upon so heavily because of the highly developed temporally and spatially diagnostic typology available for the Fremont and surrounding cultures. The popularity of ceramics as cultural indica­tors is supported by the fact that pottery preserves well, is easily collected, and often occurs in large quantities at sites. Other cultural remains usually do not preserve well (for example basketry) or require extensive excava­tion prior to evaluation (for example dwelling struc­tures). Lithics are perhaps the only other artifact class that share some of the diagnostic potential generally associated with ceramics. Their primary failing is that finished lithic tools, in this case projectile points, usually do not occur in large quantities on a site. Numerous ex­cavations are required before temporal and spatial dif­ferences can be noted. We believe that sufficient data is now available to allow a lithic typology to be sug­gested for trie Fremont culture. To infer that a lithic typology does not already exist is not entirely accurate. Several named types generally associated with the post-Archaic inhabitants of the northern Colorado Plateau and the eastern Great Basin are commonly found in the literature. These include the Desert Side-notched, Rose Spring Series, Eastgate Series, Cottonwood Series, and Parowan Basal-notched. It is apparent from the examination of projectile point collections from over 35 post-Archaic sites that these traditional classifications do not adequately delineate the temporal and spatial differences that occur in the Fremont area. A new typology, therefore, is proposed which refines and expands upon the above classifica­tions. 55 Site and Reference Caldwell Village (Ambler l"66) Boundary Village (I.each 1966) Delude Shelter (I.each 1967) Uinta Basin (Shields 1967) Innocents Ridge(Sehrocdl and Hogan 1975) Hinckley '; arm (Green 1961) Bear Ki\er I (Aikens 1966b) IniunC eek (Aikens 1966b) P-.-ir River i (Shields n.d.) Bea. River 2 (Aikens 1967) levee & Knoll (try and Dallcy n.d.) Nephi Mounds (Sharrock and Marwitt 1967) Garrison ! Taylor 1954) Turner-l.ook (Wormington 1955) Nawthis Village (Jennings 1978) Old Woman (Taylor 1957) Snake Rock (Aikens 1967) Poplar Knob (Taylor 1957) 1-70 Sites (Wilson and Smith 1976) Bull Creek (Jennings n.d.b) Pharo Village (Marwitt 1968) Backhoe Village (Madsen and Lindsay 1977) Paragonah (Meighan et al. 1956) Evans Mound (Berry 1972) Median Village (Marwitt 1970) O'Malley Shelter (Fowler et al. 1973) Thomas Shelter (Dallcy 1976) Kimber Shelter (Dalley 1976) Hogup Cave (Aikens 1970) Danger Cave (Jennings 1957) Swallow Shelter (Dalley 1976)' x y ; Y-\f. Fig. 7. Seriation diagram of projectile point frequencies at Fremont sites. PROJECTILE POINT TYPOLOGY The typology proposed here consists of eight named projectile point types. The Desert Side-notched point originally defined by Baumhoff and Byrne (1959) is maintained but the definition is restricted to a single basal shape (called the Sierra Subtype by Baumhoff and Byrne). Other basal shapes, which have traditionally been included in the Desert Side-notched type, appear to have different spatial distributions and, therefore, are given individual type status. Those types are the Uinta Side-notched, Bear River Side-notched, and the Nawthis Side-notched. The remaining types include the Rose Spring Cor­ner- notched originally defined by Lanning (1963), the Eastgate Expanding-stem defined by Heizer and Baumhoff (1961), the Parowan Basal-notched defined by Adovasio (1970a), and the Bull Creek points by Weder (n.d.). Cottonwood Triangular points are not included in the discussion because they occur at all sites usually in large quantities, and often a wide range of tools and preforms are incorporated into the single type. Not all of the projectile point collections recovered from the sites included in this analysis were available for inspection. Published illustrations and descriptions had to be relied upon for several collections. Because unillustrated points could not be accurately classified, actual counts could only be approximated for those sites. Therefore, the included seriation diagram (Figure 7) and distribution maps (Figure 8) are based on appcx-imate frequencies. All of the types presented here result from identical manufacturing techniques. They are typically produced by pressure-retouching thin flakes of locally available siliceous stone. ROSE SPRING CORNER-NOTCHED Rose Spring Corner-notched points are slender points with stems that are either parallel sided or expand slightly toward their bases (Figure 9, d-f). They occur throughout the northern Colorado Plateau and Great Basin. Their presence in preceramic strata at Cowboy Cave 56 fsssss7>> -^ /-J . s s s s s sJX / *"-y y ss s s fs s ss s S 'SSSS. 'SSSSS • S s ss s s ss *sssss sssssss* XSSss ssss 'SSS SS SSS f \ssssss,ss K/ssss sss \sssss \ss//s ^ssssss Bear River Side-notched Uinta Side-notched Desert Side-notched &>*' Nawthis Side-notched U Eastgate Expanding-stem Bull Creek Points 8K&$Sft&: Parowan Basal-notched ?,; -^SsiyaSwSHt^XMv. Fig. 9. Common projectile points of the Fremont area. 58 dated at approximately A.D. 300 suggests their greater antiquity than the other arrow points described here. A few sites such as the Levee Site, O'Malley Shelter, and Deluge Shelter document Rose Spring points oc­curring in greater frequencies in earlier occupations than in later ones. If this trend h significant, higher propor­tions of Rose Spring points should occur in the earlier Fremont sites. A regression analysis of the frequency of Rose Spring points (number of Rose Spring points divided by the total number of points excluding Cotton­wood Triangular) and the average age of trie site reveals a significant decrease of the Rose Spring noint frequency over time. The resultant regression equation is: 945 - 530f=Y*HC where I is the frequency of Rose Spring points and Y is the date A.D. (r2 corrected for degrees of freedom = .72). Table XIV compares the predicted date of occupa­tion with the radiocarbon dates recovered from the site. The most notable inconsistency is the predicted date for Pharo Village. Three radiocarbon dates were processed but the earliest was considered unacceptable. However, the predicted date (A.D. 620± 110) falls between the early date (A.D. 460±80) and the two later dates (A.D. 1190 ±80 and 1260±90) suggesting that there may have been two occupations at the site: an early one, represented by several projectile points and no dwelling structures, and a later one represented by numerous dwelling structures and few projectile points TABLE XIV Predicted dates based on the frequency of Rose Spring Corner-noiched points. g|||J! t^.'.- ?y$. •*!£*• ?: -:-C* $ p g Radiocarbon dates A.D. 885*120 955* H)5 920*235J 005*50,1075* 190 ng|i§ 1435*140, 1240*760, 1220*60, 1200*60,4130*55,, 1055*75,980*65,945*60,940*105,9lO*55V865*65,785*65,,780*70i 900*90,930*90,960*100,*145C*80 1095*90,*655*90 •445*95 •"•?;*•- 700*140,780*140,1090*110, .1140*120 •520*70 •*,••<«&$ 683*110; 701* 100,810* 100,849* 110,894*100^ 1000*110,1016* K 780*85,860*75,920*70, •1670*80, 5oo*iio?'.-'?^mmSSjB§JSl * 1605* loo, * 1365*90 >• - v& ^Mzmim* 670*60,680*95,710*85,820*80,860*60 *J63G^odir 735*85,920*85 '.M^&T$$&§T^ ?1060*100,1086*100 |;830tilp. 77no"ne? Hone: >420*80,740* 100,1330*166>680* 120 •460*80,1190*80,1260*90 "20*240 : \ . .:/'W:'' /none "J. none/ ••& \:-'yi'"'\ | 455*60,390*70,360*60, 275*70, 1 4 none ' r.165tl00 'Dates rejected by report authors 59 dated at approximately A,I) 300 suggests their grcatci antiquity than the other arrow points described here. A lew sites such as the levee Site. O'Mallcy Shelter. and Deluge Shelter document Rose Spring points oc­curring in greater lrcqucncies in earlier occupations than ir !..:;, ::nes, It this trend is significant, higher propor-tir <•. ..: I'.osc Spring points sl;ould occur in the earlier Fremont sites. A regression analysis ol the frequency ol Rose Spring points (number ol Rose Spring points divided by the total number ol points excluding Cotton­wood Triangular) and the average age of the site reveals a significant decrease of the Rose Spring point Irequcncy over timr The resultant regression equation is: 945- 530f= Y± 110 uhcte ! is the treqtiencv <>! Rose Spring points and Y is I he date A I), (i corrected lor degrees ol liccdom -" .""2). I able XIV compares the predicted date ot occupa­tion with the radiocarbon dates recovered from the site. I he most notable inconsistency is the predicted date lor Pharo Village. Three radiocarbon dates wcr" pr -<-essed but the earliest was considered unacceptable However, i he predicted dale (A. I). h2i):: I 10) falls between the early date (A.I). 460+KO) and the two later dates (A.D. I 190 t:K0 and 1260+90) suggesting that there may have been two occupations at the site: a n early one, represented by several projectile points and no dwelling structu.es, and ;• later one represented bv numerous dwelling structures and lew projectile points. TABLE XIV Predicted dates based on the frequency ol Rose Spring Corner-notched points. Site Bear River 1 Bear River 2 Nawthis Village Old Woman . 1-70 Sites Bull Creek Median Village Evans Mound Snake Rock Levee & Knoll Caldwell Village Paragonah Poplar Knob Turner-Look Backhoe Village Nephi Mounds Bear River 3 Injun Creek Uinta Basin Deluge Shelter ^ Garrison O'Malley Shelter Swallow Shelter Innocents Ridge Hinckley Farm Hogup Cave Kimber Shelter Pharo Village Danger Cave Thomas Shelter Boundary Village Cowboy Cave Beatty Springs Pint-Size Shelter n tion ears) d mea ecu pa 110 y C O I' n^+! ^ i Q ci. -o Ci 945 945 945 945 945 945 945 920 905 890 875 875 870 870 840 835 825 775 775 760- 750 740 715 680 645 645 620 620 615 600 500 445 445 415 <_ mber 3 - •£. n c O '5 h- 0. 41 57 36 15 5 39 166 217 25 42 16 32 7 457 10 38 12 19 22 40 19 75 42 4 7 67 23 67 53 23 19 16 18 6 0 Rose oints i ^° °0-0 -2.= ^ « c. c a. <s> h - (X) .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .05 .08 10 .13 .13 .14 .14 .20 .21 .23 .32 .32 .35 .37 .39 .43 .50 .57 .57 .61 .61 .62 .65 • .84 .94 .94 1.00 Radiocarbon dates A.D. 885*120 955*105 920*235, 1005*50, 1075*190 780*250 none 1435*140, 1240*760. 1220*60. 1200*60, I130±55, 1130±60, 1120*65, 1055*75,980*65,945*60,940*105.910*55, 865*65, 785*65. 780*70 T 900*90, 930*90, 960*100. *I45(*80 1095*90, *655*90 •445*95 700*140,780*140. 1090*110, 1140*120, 1240*100, 1310± 110 *520*70 none 890*200 none 683*110,701*100,810*100,849*110,894*100, 1000*110, 1016*100 780*85, 860*75,920*70,* 1670*80 500*110 * 1605*100,*1365*90 670*60, 680*95. 710*85, 820*80, 860*60, * 1 630-modern 735*85. 920*85 none 1060*100, 1080*100 830*110 none none 420*80, 740* 100/1330*= 100, 680*120 none •460*80. 1190*80.1260*90 20*240 none none 455*60,390*70,360*60,275*70, 110*65, 60^65 none 165*100 * Dates rejected by report authors 59 Whatever the case may be at Pharo Village, there is a significant temporal trend in the frequency of Rose Spring points that is consistent throughout the Fremont area. Their occurrence at approximately A.D. 300 in the northern Colorado Plateau and at approximately A.D. 500 in the eastern Great Basin (Hester and Heizer 1973), and their gradual replacement by regionally diag­nostic types by A.D. 850-950 is documented by 20 radiocarbon-dated sites. EASTGATE EXPANDING-STEM Eastgate Expanding-stem projectile points are recog­nizable by their deep, parallel-sided notches in the convex base (Figure 9, a-c). The points are usually short with their length not much greater than tneir width although a few long specimens occur (Figure 9, a). Then spatial distribution is limited to the northwest­ern quarter of the Fremont area although they occur outside of the area in many other parts of the centra! and western Great Basin (Figure 8). Arguments for the association of Eastgate and Rose Spring series are convincing (Hester and Heizer 1973), and seem to be supported by the data collected here. Wherever Eastgate Expanding-stem points are recov­ered, there are always Rose Spring points present.. The inverse, however, is not true because the Eastgate series is limited to the Great Basin and the Rose Spring series is not. DESERT SIDE-NOTCHED The Desert Side-notched points, as defined here, are recognizable by their high side notches and pro­nounced basal notch or concavity (FigureN?j-1). They have been recovered from excavated sites near the north­ern and western periphery of the Fremont area (Figure 8) although they have been reported in uncontrolled situations throughout the Fremont area (e.g. Berry and Berry 1976). Of the excavated Fremont sites they have never been the dominant type making up only 12 per­cent of the total points recovered. Of significance is that most of those sites contain Shoshoni ceramics although they constitute only 3 percent of the total ceramic collection. The suggested association can be evaluated using a chi-square test of significance on Table XV which tabulates, by numbers of sites, the occur­rence of Desert Side-notched points and Shoshoni pottery. The correlation of the occurrence of Shoshoni ceramics and the Desert Side-notched points is signifi­cant at the .001 level (chi square = 16.38). The correlation has been inferred by Fowler et al (1973) at O'Malley Shelter, and by Frison (197 I) at the Eden-Farson Site in Wyoming. The conclusion is that the occurrence of Desert Side-notched points does not result from Fremont occu­pations but indicates post-Fremont (Shoshoni) use of the area after approximately A.D. 1150. This conclu­sion is supported by the presence of identical point types in the northern Plains (Plains Side-notched) after approximately A.D. 1590 (Kehoe 1966). TABLE XV Ceramic- and Point- type Cooccurrence SHOSHONI CERAMICS BEAR RIVER SIDE-NOTCHED The Bear River Side-notched points are visually distinguishable from other types by their high side notches and straight to convex basal shape (Figure 9, g-i). The distribution of these points is limited to the northwestern corner of the Fremont area (Figure 8) occurring from approximately A.D. 750 to 1350. Where-ever they arc the dominant point, Great Salt Lake Gray is the dominant ceramic type. However, they also occur in low numbers at Pharo Village and Nephi Mounds where no Great Salt Lake Gray is reported. UINTA SIDE-NOTCHED Uinta Side-notched are recognizable by their low side notches and irregular outlines. They are often crude­ly made with little care taken to make them symmetrical (Figure 9, m-o). They are widely distributed over the northern half of the Fremont region (Figure 8) dating from approx­imately A.D. 800 to 1200. Sites where they are the dom­inant type usually contain a large percentage of Uinta Gray ceramics. Their similarity to the Prairie Side-notched points recovered in the northern Great Plains dating from approximately A.D. 700 to 1300 (Kehoe 1966) supports conjectures of a Great Plains influence in the northern Fremont areas (Aikens 1966b). 60 NAWTHIS SIDE-NOTCHED The Nawthis Side-notched points are long, thin points with low side notches (Figure 9, p-r). Their bases range from slightly concave to slight ».on\cx. They are distinguished from the Uinta Sid-: notched by their greater length and greater precision >f flaking during manufacture. The resultant shape is very regular and more gracile than the other side-notched types with delicate tips and bases. Their distribution is limited to the southern half of the Fremont region (Figure 8) dating from approximate­ly A.D. 950 to 1250. They are similar, if not identical, to points associated with Pueblo II occupations south of the Colorado River, There is no apparent associa­tions with any single ceramic type although most sites also produce small quantities of both Kayenta and Vir­gin ceramics. BULL CREEK POINTS Bull Creek points are relatively narrow »sosceles triangles with slightly concave to markedly concave bases (Figure 9, v-x). The points are thin and have delicate tips and tangs. Flaking is usually fine and edge grinding of the proximal lateral edges is sometimes present. A few specimens have remnants of resin on the faces of the point adjacent to the basal concavity. The spatial distribution is limited to the southeastern corner of the Fremont area extending south of the Colo­rado River into the Mesa Verde and Kayenta Anasazi areas (Figure 8). A literature search of 92 excavated and surveyed sites has provided extensive data on the geographic range, temporal span, and ceramic associa­tions of the point type. Based on the ceramic associa­tions, five subareas can be clearly delineated. Area I includes the Kaiparowits Plateau and most of the Escalante River drainage (Figure 10). Sites are characterized by very high percentages (90%) of Kayenta ceramics and low percentages (10%) of Mesa Verde and/ or Fremont Fremont ceramics (Table XVI). Temporal spans of the sites cluster between A.D. 1050 and 1250. Bull Creek points make up about 38% of the total reported arrow points. Area II includes the Colorado River from the Es­calante River confluence upstream to Red Canyon and also the uplands to the east (Figure 10). This area is characterized by sites which exhibit varying mixtures of Kayenta (65%) and Mesa Verde (35%) ceramics with­out any Fremont ceramics (Table XVII). The temporal spans of the sites cluster between A.D. 1050 and 1300. Bull Creek points constitute 32% of the total points. Area III includes the south side of the Colorado River upstream from Red Canyon (Figure 10). The sites are characterized by high percentages (80%) of Mesa Verde ceramics, low percentages (20%) of Kayenta ceramics, and no Fremont ceramics (Table XVIII). The temporal span for the sites ranges between A.D. 1100 and 1250. Bull Creek points constitute 54% of the total reported arrow points. Area IV includes the Bull Creek drainage and a single site at the confluence of the Dirty Devil and Colorado Rivers (Figure 10). The sites in this area are characterized by high percentages of both Kayenta (40%) and Fremont (56%) ceramic types (Table XIX). Mesa Verde ceramics are present but always in low percentages (4%). The temporal span of these sites is between approximately A.D. 735 and 1080. However, most of the lithic and ceramic artifacts are from the fill of the dated house structures and probably are later than the above date range. Bull Creek points constitute 65 percent of the total arrow points. Area V includes the Ivie Creek and Muddy River drainages (Figure 10). The ceramics from the sites are predominantly Fremont (98%) with very low percentages (2%) of both Kayenta and Mesa Verde ceramics (Table XX). The temporal span ranges from approximately A.D. 1000 to 1300. Bull Creek points make u p 40 per­cent of the total arrow points. Of significance here is that Bull Creek points are almost always associated with Kayenta ceramics. Only five sites out of the 92 examined sites do not contain Kayenta ceramics, but those sites are all on the peri­phery of the Bull Creek point spatial distribution. Also, Bull Creek points have never been recovered from sites which have high percentages of both Fremont and Mesa Verde cerariTics. All sites which have high percentages of two ceramic groups are exclusively Kayenta and Mesa Verde or Kayenta and Fremont mixtures. It is also significant that only rarely (two sites) are Bull Creek points the only arrow point type recovered at a site. On the average, they account for approximately 43 percent of the total arrow points from any single site. The temporal span of Bull Creek points consistently falls between approximately A.D. 1050 and 1300. The accumulated data does not allow temporal priority to be assigned to any particular area. In all five areas, Bull Creek points appear at about the same time (late Pueblo II) and continue well into the Pueblo III period. 61 M!I Point* Fig. 10. Distribution map of Bull Creek points and Parowan Basal-notched points. 62 TABLK XVI Occurrence ol Hull Creek Points: Area I Site Talus Ruin Golden Stairs Ava Pocket Hollow Farm.-. II Pridgette Mudhole Pueblo Tcwap Knoll Observatorv Circle Terrace Alvey Coombs Village 42Ka3l4* 42Ka326* , 42Ka330* 42Ka333* 42Ka338* 42Ka339* 42Ka344* 42Ka 360* 42Ka 368* 42Ka369* 42Ka376* 42Ka406* 42Ka407* 42Ka421* 42Ka753* 42Ka764* 42Ka766* 42Ka778* 42Ka789* 42Ka793* 42Ka809* 42Ka8l9* 42Ka823* 42Ka824* 42Ka829* 42Ka840* 42Ka844* 42Ka849* 42Ka869* 42Ka884* 42Ka885* 42Ka896* 42Ka505* 42Ka287* 42Ga290* 42Ga70 * 42Ga67 * 42Ga89 * NA7498 N A 7961 RB568 Neskahi Village Date A.D.IIOO-I250 A.D. 950-1300 Late Pll-Middle PHI L. Pll-M. PHI A. D.| 050-1300 Pll-M. Pill L. PII-M. PHI L. Pll-M. Pill L. PII-M. Pill A 13.1075-1275 A.D. 1100-1225 PII-PIII A.D. 1200-1275 A.D. 1070-1300 u. '-> E = £ 3 3 O Zffio. 7 -» 1 2 3 *» 1 5 A 8 29 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I -i 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 5 Yes 9 -t _ '£. £ « c ~ B o mC j - a. 7 4 2 2 8 7 3 9 10 18 59 3 1 1 3 5 1 3 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 2 I 2 6 -> 2 1 2 3 4 3 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 2 3 1 7 1 1 11 54 •i 42 (' _ r. ^ u 92 98 96 96 84 92 99 89 19 98 96 39 86 89 94 79 100 88 95 97 97 100 94 92 92 92 None 91 98 100 94 100 26 82 79 98 100 71 Single"sherd 94 90 100 87 100 99 90 79 •> None 99.7 100 96.8 :ramics '/< =- ~ • yi 8 2 4 4 8 6 1 1 19 1 3 4 1 3 I 7 6 7 0.3 0.8 - - E -- 8 2 1 3 80 2 39 8 6 17 1 2 3 3 6 8 8 4 9 2 4 74 16 18 1 29 6 3 13 ! 10 8 Reference Lipc IJOV' Fowler & A.idcns 1963 Fowler & Aikens 1963 Fowler 4 Aikens 1963 Fow':r& Aikens 1963 r-owler& Aikens 1963 Fowler 4 Aikens 1963 Fowler & Aikens 1963 Fowler 1963 Gunnerson 1959 Lister 1959, Lister & Lister 1961 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowler etal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 ! Fowieretal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Ambler etal 1964 Ambler etal 1964 Bealsetai 1945 Hobler 1974 •Surveyed Sites 63 PAROWAN BASAL-NOTCHED Parowan Basal-notched points arc relatively nanou isosceles triangles with straight bases. I wo notches, each parallel to the longitudinal axis ol the point jorm a stem in the middle ol the base (figure 9. s-u). The basal notches may be parallel-sided as they are at the type site (Median Village) and neighboring vicinity or rounded as at Backhoe Village or O'Malley and Cona-way Shelters. The spatial distribution ol Parowan points can be divided into two groups basvd on the ceramic associa­tions. Area VI includes the Virgin River. Santa Clara River, and Johnson Canyon (Figure 10). The sites in the area have high percentages ol Virgin ceramics (98%) .old \er\ small percentages ol Kayenta. Mesa Verde or Seuci ceramics (2r.'<) ( 1 able XXI). 1 lie temporal span clusters between approximately A.I). 900 and 1200. I'af'jw.m n< tnts constitute 6 3 percent ol the total arrow poi \\, imi-.', sites in this area. Area VII includes the Parowan Valley, part ol the Sc\iei River drainage, and part ol southeastern Nevada (Figure 10). The ceramics from the sites in this area arc predn-ninantly Sevier ceramics. The temporal span clus­ters around A.D. 950 to 1 150 (fable XXII). Parowan points con:;.i.ute 55 percent ol the total arrow points recovered. 'Surveyed Sites TABLE XVII Occurrence ol Bull Creek Points: Area II Site Shadv Alcove Doll Ruin 435a588 Buried Olla Husted'sWell Defiance House Widows Ledge The Fortress Horsefly Hollow Dead Tree Flats Axe Groove Alcove The Watchtower Scorup Pasture | Steer Palace Date A.D.1130-1250 A.D. 1200-1300 AD. 1050-1300 A.D.1050-1150 A.D. 1110-1300 PHI A.D. 1150-1300 AD. H50-1300 A.D. 1200-1300 . L. Pll-M. Pill A.D.I 100-1250 Pll-PIH A.D. 1000-1100 J- u 3 3 C Z m t 2 3 1 4 i 1 1 3 5 i 1 4 1 1 ----- i mis umber otal Pi z j- } 13 3 9 7 5 7 5 16 12 1 b 3 7 x U 61 50 96 99 17 45 55 64 91 90 40 98 42 Ceramics';/ c ir. 32 50 •> 4 82 54 45 31 4 10 59 2 57 Reference Lipeetal 1960 Lipeetal I960 Lipeetal I960 Lipeetal I960 Lipeet al I96i/ Lipeetal 1960 Sharrock 1964 Sharrocketal1961 Sharrock etal 1961 Sharrocketal1961 Sharrock etal 1961 Sharrock etal 1961 Sharrock etal 1961 Sharrock etal 1961 TABLE XVIII Occurrence ol Bull Creek Points: Area III Site Forked Stick 42Sa566 Dave's Site Loper Ruin 42Sa790* Henry's Cave* Sandy Camp* Turkev House* 42Sa797* Sweet Alice Spring* Deer Flats* Ridge Site Sweet Alice L-House Date A.D. 1130-1200 A.D. 1200-1300 A.D. 1150-1250 A.D. 1150-1250 L. Pll-PIH L. PII-M. Pill L. PII-M. PHI Number Bull Creek Points Number Total Points 1 3 3 5 4 6 17 17 1 2 1 2 3 3 3 7 1 1 -) 7 1 9 1 2 1 9 1 1 Ceramics 9r c - $ 1 § * / • * * > E gi C 41 M _3 i_ ~1C7 7U0. J- 16 83 86 14 35 59 •J •) Single sherd Single sherd Single sherd 100 0.3 99.7 2 67 69 Reference Lipeetal 1960 Lipeetal I960 Lipeeial I960 Lipe 1960 Sharrock & Keane 1962 Sharrock & Keane Sharrock & Keane Sharrock & Keane Sharrock & Keane Sharrock & Keane Sharrock & Keane Rudv 1955 Rudv 1955 Rudv 1955 - *Surveved Sites 64 lSurve\ed Sites I A B L E XXII ()ccun.ence ol Parowan Points: Area Vli Site Evans Site Median Village Paragonah Date \ 1) 1050-1150 A.D. 960-1020 A D. 700-1100 c Pa row a Points 206 166 . Numbe Total Points 307 215 16 Ceramic' i c 71 1)4 s 7. 0.07 a Qt)9 99 5 100 R rlcrence lierrv 1972 Marwitt 1970 Mciphan et al 1956 TABLE XXI11 Occurrence ol Parowan Points: Miscellaneous Sites Site Nephi Alvev Coombs Village Bull Creek Area* 42Wn231 Struct 42Wn23l Struc 2 Date A.D. 850-920 A.D 1075-1275 A.D. 735 AD. 1080 Number Parowan Points 3 1 1 2 2 1 Number Total Points 73 18 59 24 X Virgin 98 96 27 34 Ceramic' Kayenta Not applici 2 3 'r -mC <U ra zz zz 7i IS-. > 99.9 2 ble 49 19 Kelerence Sharrock & Marwitt 1967 Gunnerson 1959 Lister 1959. Lister & Lister 1961 TABLE XXIV Occurrence ol Parowan Points: Miscellaneous Sites Site O'Mallev, Level IV O'Malley, Level V O'Malley. Level VI Conawav, Level IV Conaway. Level V Backhoe. Struc. 3 Backhoe, Struc. 3 Date 1020(7) A.D. 1070 •> A.D. 900 A.D. 1010 A.D. 850 A.D. 850 Number Parowan Points 2 8 11 7 22 1 4 Number Total Points 2 45 28 9 30 4 16 Ceramic r'r Snake Valley 71 85 59 84 15 14 12 83 88 Virgin 29 12 12 8 85 Reference Fowler, etal 1973 Fowler, etal 1973 Fowler, et al 1973 Fowler, etal 1973 Fowler, etal 1973 Madsen and Lindsav 1977 66 TABLE XIX Occurrence ol Hull Creek Points: .Area IV Site 42Ga3l4* 42Wn229 42Wn230 42Wn231 Struc 1 42Wn23l Struc 2 42Wn26l 4zWn326 42Wn23l General Occupation Date A D 895 A 1) 1080 \ D. 735 \ D 1080 Number Bull Creek Points 1 5 1 IS 1 8 1 x. _ z :- 23 8 IS 1(1 Points t • ^ h2 17 T7 34 52 13 "cranuc' i >: 4 4 1 1 1 remont 100 18 44 • • < ; 19 31 31 Relerenc: l-uwiei -etal 1959 Fowler et al 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 Fowieretal 1959 •Siirvcvcd Sue TABLE XX Occurrence ol Bull Creek Points: Area V Site Old Woman Poplar Knob Emery Site Snake Rock Village Fallen Woman Pharo Village Date PH-PIIl PH 1075-1325 700-1200 1190-1260 Number Bull Creek Points 11 6 8 21 2 1 Number Total Points 33 14 15 52 5 156 Ceramic % Kayenta .08 1.3 0.6 San Juan .06 3.3 0.1 Fremont 98.6 95.4 98 99.3 100 99 Relerence Taylor 1957 Taylor 1957 Gunnerson 1957 Aikens 1967 Wilson & Smith 1976 Marwitt 1968 TABLE XXI Occurrence ol Parowan Points: Area VI Site 42Ws45 42Ws53 42Ws63 42Ws73 42Ws75 42Ws77 42Ws82 42Ws99 Frei Site Lost Citv Gunlock Flats Bonanza Dune Sand Hill Three Mile Ruin ReuschSite Lamb's Knoll Parunuweap Knoll Date A.D.I 100-1300 ca A.D. 1150 A.D.PH-PIH A.D.900-1200 A.D. 900-1200 A.D.900-1200 A.D. 900-1200 A.D. 900-1200 A.D. 750-900 T> ca Numb Parow Points 3 -> 10 4 16 8 4 7 3 3 2 <- Numb Total Points 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 5 10 7 23 26 5 9 3 5 3 Ceramic % Virgin Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 99.7 99.1 98.3 98.8 99.0 96.5 99.0 97 c Kayeni San Jua Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0.3 0.9 1.7 0.3 0.8 2.7 0.5 _ Kremon 0.O3 0.2 0.2 Relerence Rudy&Stirland 1949 Rudv&Stirland 1949 Rudy & Stirland 1949 Rudv&Stirland 1949 Rudv & Stirland 1949 Rudy&Stirland 1949 Rudv&Stirland 1949 Rudy&Stirland 1949 Pendergast 1962 Schroeder1961 Day 1966 Aikens 1965 Aikens 1965 Aikens 1965 Aikens L965 Aikens 1965 Aikens 1965 65 Parowan points have been noted at other sites at low frequencies as Jar east as the Bull Creek drainage. Not surprisingly, the two pithouses at Bull Creek from which Parowan points were recovered were the ones which had significant quantities of Virgin Kayenta ceramics (Tables XX111 and XXIV). Parowan points are the predominant points i n both the Parowan and Virgin Kayenta cultural regions. They were used ca. A.D. 950-1150. CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY The temporal distributions of projectile points in the Fremont area are summarized in Figure 11. The earliest point type is the Rose Spring Corner-notched which appears to have been introduoed into the north­ern Colorado Plateau with the bow and arrow at ap­proximately A.D. 250 to 300 (Jennings n.d.a) and pro­bably reached the eastern Great Basin by A.D. 500 (Hester and Heizer 1973). The Eastgate Expanding-stem has a similar temporal range but occurs only in the Great Basin. It may represent a regional develop­ment soon after the introduction of the bow and arrow from the Rose Spring stock. The Bear River and Uinta Side-notched points devel­oped or were introduced into the northern half of the Fremont area after approximately A.D. 750 or 800. In the southern half of the Fremont area the Parowan Basal-notched, Nawthis Side-notched, and Bull Creek points became the dominant type after approximately A.D. 950. Each of the projectile point types indicates a sharing of hunting-related traits with surrounding peoples; the northern half with the Great Plains and central Great Basin, and the southern half with the Anasazi. After approximately A.D. 1150 the Desert Side-notched point occurs sporadically throughout the Fremont area. The presence of this type seems to mark the movement of Shoshoni-speaking peoples into the Fremont a r e a. Fig. 11. Temporal distributions of Fremont p o i n t types. CONCLUSIONS The most significant results of the research reported here is that there is nothing uniquely Fremont about the Fremont projectile points. There seems to have been a single hunting technology shared by the earliest post- Archaic inhabitants of a large area of which the Colo­rado Plateau and Great Basin are only a portion. Re­gional differentiation in the Fremont area developed about A.D. 750 in the north and A.D. 950 in the south. Of importance is that the regional differentiation in­dicates a stronger interaction with peoples outside of the Fremont area than within. It is apparent that projectile point distributions show little regard for the traditional ceramic boundaries often used to define the Fremont culture area. However, other material remains such as dwelling structures and basketry support the ceramic boundaries. Explanations for this pattern may simply indicate that hunters (pre­sumably men) move around and are constantly sharing hunting technology with inhabitants of the surrounding areas. Women were probably much more stationary keeping the home fires burning while making pottery and basketry. Hunters may also have transported ceram­ics and other trade items of foreign origin. It is no surprise to find that regions s h a r i n g projec­tile point technology (and the associated ceramic trade wares) are those that have similar faunal resources. For example, sites that yield Uinta and Bear R i v e r Side-notched points also yield elk and bison remains dup­licating the artifact and faunal collections commonly recovered from sites in the adjacent Great P l a i n s areas. The Bull Creek, Parowan Basal-notched, a n d Nawthis Side-notched points are associated primarily with big­horn sheep remains. The projectile point t y p e s and the preference for sheep meat is a trait shared b y the Fre­mont, Kayenta, and Virgin Branch Anasazi. D e e r seems to have been heavily utilized throughout the Fremont, Great Plains, and Anasazi areas. If it can be agreed upon that the apparent pattern may be the result of men roaming considerably more than women, then the next question concerns the formality of interaction among the moving men and the stationary women: or post-marital residence pat­terns. Matrilocality would explain the complete sharing of hunting-related technology (male-related) 67 between areas and the lack of sharing of ceramics and basketry technology (female-related). It also would account for the complete independence of projectile point frequencies from ceramic frequencies. For example, the frequency of Bull Creek points varies independently from the frequency of Knymta ceramics. They would be expected to vary denen-dently if Kayenta families were cohabiting areas with Fremont families. Additional support for the idea of permanent relocation of men is derived from the size and density of Fremont "villages" (see Lohse, this volume). In order for a population to be demographically viable, a minimum interbreeding population size must be maintained (Wobst 1974*. The small size and scattered nature of the Fremont habitations may have required interaction from out­side groups in order to maintain a flow of mates. The major problem with the matrilocality explana­tion is that dwelling structures do not reflect the cultural interchange. Women would have had to have been the architects only occasionally allowing foreign traits to be incorporated in their homes. This is a possibility but the likelihood of males contribut­ing nothing to dwelling structure design and con­struction seems small. Interaction between the Fremont and surround­ing groups has been postulated by many. Convincing arguments have been formulated for origins and/or interaction of the northern Fremont with the Great Plains cultures (e.g. Aikens 1966b, Sharrock 1966, Madsen and Lindsay 1977); and for the southern Fremont with the Anasazi (e.g. Morss 1931, Gunner­son 1969, Winter 1973). The projectile point data strongly support those hypotheses and suggest that the movement of men as a result of their hunting routine provided the means by which hunting tech­nology, ceramic trade wares, and possibly even agri­culture spread throughout the northern Colorado Plateau and the eastern Great Basin. 68