Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant: The Role of Chert in Paleoarchaic Landuse Strategies in the Central Great Basin

在John Speth博士的指导下，Khori Newlander将通过研究内华达州东部古印第安石器组合的地质来源和技术组织来探索流动性和群体间的相互作用。这些采集者用黑曜石制作茎尖（狩猎工具），用燧石制作其他工具（资源加工工具）。通过确定他们从哪里获得黑曜石和燧石，以及他们对这些材料的使用，纽兰德先生希望区分不同的流动性规模和资源获取模式。大盆地考古学家依靠黑曜石文物来重建古印第安人的活动模式，因为它们的来源可以很容易地从地球化学角度确定。先前的研究表明，一个单一的地点通常包括来自200-250公里外的黑曜石，定义了黑曜石输送带（OCZ）。然而，考古学家对这些区域所代表的意义意见不一。一些大盆地主义者提出，古印第安人的觅食者采用了一种劳动分工，在这种分工中，男性狩猎团队获取远处的资源，包括黑曜石，并将其带回固定的大本营。在该模型中，OCZ表示雄性狩猎活动的空间范围。其他大盆地主义者提出，古印第安人的觅食者经常迁移他们的大本营。在这个模型中，OCZ描述了整个带的年度觅食区域。然而，这两种模型都与人种学数据不一致。假设雄性狩猎活动的空间范围和每年的觅食范围大大超过了历史记录的值。纽兰德的研究提出，OCZ反映了多个觅食群体之间的交换模式。为了测试这些模型，对黑曜石来源使用的了解必须在理解地质景观的背景下进行，其中也包括燧石。然而，燧石来源的文献记录很差，使得目前基于黑曜石的模型很脆弱。因此，纽兰德先生计划通过分析内华达州东部古印第安人组合中燧石制品的地质来源和技术组织，来检验有关燧石获取的假设。关于火石的获取模式，提出了三种假设：(1)当地（距离大本营10公里），反映了日常觅食需求；(2)远距离任务组突袭，反映出比通常假设的更大的流动性水平；(3)族群间交换，这是古印第安研究中很少考虑的解释。考古数据将来自比尤特、杰克斯和长谷已经收集到的资料，并通过对煤谷的调查加以补充，此前的研究表明，煤谷中含有古印第安遗址。该项目将包括来自密歇根大学和汉密尔顿学院的学生，提供实地方法、大盆地考古和石器分析方面的经验。提出的研究包括首次系统分析大盆地古印第安组合的燧石来源。通过测试关于燧石的获取和分布的假设，这项研究有助于对古印第安人的流动性、经济和群体间互动进行更大的辩论。它还将生成一个对未来区域研究有用的比较数据集，并且可以用于大盆地中其他长期存在的争论-努米克扩张和大盆地觅食者是否具有领土性，这是一个与正在进行的土地所有权争议相关的问题。

Under the guidance of Dr. John Speth, Khori Newlander will explore mobility and intergroup interaction by studying the geologic source and technological organization of Paleoindian stone tool assemblages in eastern Nevada. These foragers used obsidian to make stemmed points (hunting gear) and flint for other tools (resource-processing gear). By determining where they obtained both obsidian and flint, and their use of these materials, Mr. Newlander expects to distinguish different scales of mobility and modes of resource acquisition.Great Basin archaeologists rely on obsidian artifacts to reconstruct Paleoindian mobility patterns because their sources can easily be identified geochemically. Previous research shows that a single site often includes obsidian from sources 200-250 km away, defining obsidian conveyance zones (OCZ). Yet archaeologists disagree over what these zones represent. Some Great Basinists propose that Paleoindian foragers employed a division of labor in which male hunting parties procured distant resources, including obsidian, which they brought back to fixed base camps. In this model OCZ represent the spatial extent of male hunting forays. Other Great Basinists propose that Paleoindian foragers moved their base camps frequently. In this model OCZ delineate annual foraging territories of entire bands. However, both models are inconsistent with ethnographic data. The spatial extent of assumed male hunting forays and annual foraging territories greatly exceed historically documented values. Mr. Newlander's research proposes instead that OCZ reflect patterns of exchange among multiple forager groups. In order to test these models, knowledge of obsidian source use must be contextualized within an understanding of the geologic landscape that also includes flint. Yet, flint sources are poorly documented, making current obsidian-based models tenuous. Mr. Newlander plans, therefore, to test hypotheses about flint acquisition through analysis of geologic source use and technological organization of flint artifacts from Paleoindian assemblages in eastern Nevada. Three hypotheses are offered regarding mode of flint procurement: (1) local (10 km from a base camp), reflecting daily foraging needs; (2) long-distance task-group forays, reflecting greater levels of mobility than generally assumed; (3) intergroup exchange, an explanation seldom considered in Paleoindian studies. The archaeological data will be derived from collections already available from Butte, Jakes, and Long valleys, augmented by survey within Coal Valley, which previous research has shown to contain Paleoindian sites. The project will incorporate students from the University of Michigan and Hamilton College, providing experience in field methods, Great Basin archaeology, and stone tool analysis. The proposed research includes the first systematic analysis of flint sources for Great Basin Paleoindian assemblages. By testing hypotheses about the acquisition and distribution of flint, this research contributes to larger debates about Paleoindian mobility, economy, and intergroup interaction. It will also generate a comparative dataset useful in future regional studies, and which can be brought to bear on other long-standing debates in the Great Basin-the Numic expansion and whether Great Basin foragers were territorial, a question relevant to ongoing land-ownership disputes.