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度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有柄的尖头（狩猎工具），用燧石制作其他工具（资源加工工具）。通过确定黑曜石和燧石的来源，以及它们的用途，纽兰德希望能够区分不同的流动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流动模式，因为它们的来源可以很容易地通过地球化学方法确定。以前的研究表明，一个单一的网站往往包括黑曜石来源200-250公里远，定义黑曜石输送带（OCZ）。然而，考古学家们对这些区域代表着什么意见不一。一些大盆地主义者认为，古印第安人的采集者进行了分工，男性狩猎队从远处采集资源，包括黑曜石，然后带回固定的大本营。在这个模型中，OCZ代表男性狩猎突袭的空间范围。其他的大盆地论者则认为古印第安觅食者经常迁移他们的大本营。在这个模型中，OCZ描绘了整个乐队的年度觅食领土。然而，这两种模型都与人种学数据不一致。假设男性狩猎突袭和年度觅食领土的空间范围大大超过历史记载的值。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，黑曜石来源使用的知识必须在地质景观，也包括燧石的理解。然而，燧石来源的记录很少，使得目前基于黑曜石的模型变得脆弱。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文物的地质来源、使用和技术组织，来检验有关燧石获取的假设。关于燧石的获取模式，提出了三种假设：（1）当地（距离大本营10公里），反映了日常的觅食需求;（2）长距离的任务组突袭，反映了比通常假设的更高的流动性水平;（3）组间交换，在古印第安人研究中很少考虑的解释。考古数据将来自已从巴特，杰克斯和长谷收集，增加了煤谷内的调查，以前的研究表明，包含古印第安遗址。该项目将包括密歇根大学和汉密尔顿学院的学生，提供实地方法，大盆地考古学和石器分析的经验。拟议的研究包括第一次系统分析大盆地古印度组合的燧石来源。通过测试有关燧石的获取和分布的假设，这项研究有助于更大的辩论古印第安人的流动性，经济和群体间的相互作用。它还将产生一个比较数据集在未来的区域研究中有用，并可以带来对其他长期存在的争论在大盆地努米克扩张和大盆地觅食是否领土，一个有关持续的土地所有权纠纷的问题。

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.