MANUAL DE INSTRUCCIÓN

The final phase of this analysis examines the set of both formal and informal artifacts, most of which cannot be attributed to either Broad Point or Small Point. In total, 84 artifacts are included in this analysis (Table 4-11). It is evident that all but a few of these artifacts occur as single instances and only four have a frequency greater than 10.

Table 4-11: Non Diagnostic Tools

Table 4-11 Surface Finds to 2014 Retouched Flake 15 Scraper 15 Core 14 Drill 11 Piece Ésquillées 6 Shatter 3 Denticulate 2 Hammerstone 2 Netsinker 2 Birdstone 1 Bone, worked 1 Chopper 1

Core or Gouge Preform 1 Groundstone Tool 1 Hammerstone/Whetstone 1 Notched Flake Tool 1 Ochre Stained Pitted Stone 1 Pitted/Anvil Stone 1 Rim/Neck Sherd 1 Adze 1 Anvil Stone 1 Beak 1 Tool 1

Total number of finds 84

The impact of the activities of collectors on this sample will be highly variable by tool type. Our expectations here, based on observations of a number of collections in the past, is that the more formal tools, such as drills or adzes, would have been as heavily collected as the projectile points. In contrast, the expedient tools, such as retouched flakes or piece ésquillées, would be rarely collected and intermediate forms, such as end scrapers, would

have been occasionally collected. Given this differential access, any comparison between the tool types as to total numbers would be inappropriate. Comparisons involving the distribution, while still being problematic, are on a sounder foundation since, as discussed above, removal of specific artifacts from the areas of greatest concentration by collectors would reduce the density in those areas, but the remaining less dense concentration should still be spatially valid.

The distribution of the temporally undiagnostic tools has been restricted to categories where there are more than two instances (Figure 4-39). Cases where there were only one or two instances of a category have been lumped together under the class “Misc Tools”. This distribution shows a denser concentration of tools in the northern half of the site. However, this set of artifacts pertains to all occupations of the site, including both Broad Point and Small Point occupations. Thus, with the differing distributions of these two components, it would be expected that there should be more artifacts in the north where these two overlap. One of the original investigative goals at the Davidson site was to document the composition of the poorly known Broad Point tool kit. In analysis of the excavated material, one approach is to look at the tool content in the pure Broad Point age features. The surface collection provides another approach to this, as the southern half of the site is almost completely devoid of Small Point diagnostic artifacts. A visual examination of the distribution (Figure 4-39) indicates that three artifact types, scrapers, retouched flakes, and drills, tend to occur almost exclusively in the northern area of the site. The question, then, is to examine if these trends are statistically significant. In comparing the different distributions of the various non-diagnostic artifact types to each other, there are no significant results using the A-statistic. When the Proximity Count statistic was run comparing each type to the sum of all others, the only one that generated significant results was the scraper category, which indicated that at all distances over 15 m scrapers were clustered together with significance.

In order to refine this analysis, each category was compared to the distribution of both Broad Point and Small Point artifacts to determine which of the undiagnostic tool categories more closely approximated the distribution of the temporally provenienced

artifacts. Since we have two sets of distribution data for the Broad Point, the formal Broad Point artifacts and the coarse flakes, the test was run against both of these. The initial test consisted of running the A-statistic available in TFQA. This run is summarized in Table 4-12 (Misc Tools are excluded).

Table 4-12: A-statistic Non Diagnostic Tool Forms

Table 4-12: N u m b er Small P o in t Fo rm al Bro ad P o in t Fo rm al Co arse Flakes A-Statistic Core 14 .82 1.06 1.04 Drill 11 1.06 .94 .91 PE 6 .95 1.11 1.07 Retouched Flake 15 1.03 .91 .89 Scraper 18 .94 .9 .87 Probability Core 14 .03 .95 .86 Drill 11 .76 .17 .1 PE 6 .29 .85 .72 Retouched Flake 15 .64 .09 .05 Scraper 18 .14 .05 .02

The upper half of the table shows the A-statistic value and the lower half shows the probability of that result under random labeling. This table shows the A-statistic for each of the six artifact classes against the Small Point formal artifacts, the Broad Point formal artifacts and the coarse flakes from the site. Statistically significant results are shaded yellow and results approaching significance are shaded orange.

For the category of cores, the A-statistic indicates that these tend to be segregated from Small Point artifacts (A = .82, p = .03) with significance. In comparison with both the Broad Point artifacts and coarse flakes, a value close to 1 indicates that they are randomly intermixed. Thus, the distribution of the cores is more in accord with the distribution of Broad Point artifacts.

Examining drills, the A-statistics indicate segregation from both Broad Point distributions (A = .94 and .91) and random mixing with the Small Point artifacts. However, none of the results is statistically significant, although the comparison between drills and coarse flakes is approaching significance at p = .1. Overall, the drill distribution more closely approximates the definitive Small Point artifact distributions, but not with significance. This result is not totally unexpected, as the drill was used by Broad Point people and we have at least two drills which clearly belong to the Broad Point occupations; but it would appear here that drills may be used more often at this site during the Small Point Archaic occupation.

Looking at the piece ésquillées, there are no significant trends.

Considering the retouched flakes, these again tend to approximate the distribution of the Small Point artifacts (A = 1.03) and are segregated from the two Broad Point classes (A = .91, .89). The results of retouched flakes against the coarse flakes is significant (p = .05) while the retouched flakes against the Broad Point artifacts is approaching significance at (p = .09). The retouched flakes seem to be primarily associated with the Small Point occupation.

For the scraper category, these are less segregated from the Small Point artifacts (A = .94) and are more segregated from the both classes of Broad Point artifacts (A = .90 and .87)

with significance (p = .05 and p = .02). The scrapers, then, are most closely associated with the Small Point occupation.

Summarizing these results, while these tools were deposited by both Broad Point and Small Point occupations, it appears that scrapers and retouched flakes seem to be more closely aligned with the Small Point Archaic distribution, while cores tend to be distributed much like the Broad Point Archaic.