UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The Hatzic Rock site Mason, Andrew Robert 1994-12-31

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
ubc_1994-0289.pdf [ 9.55MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0058390.json
JSON-LD: 1.0058390+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0058390.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0058390+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0058390+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0058390+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0058390 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0058390.txt
Citation
1.0058390.ris

Full Text

The H a t z i c R o c k S i t e : A C h a r l e s C u l t u r e  Settlement  by ANDREW ROBERT MASON B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1989 A THESIS SUBMITTED I N PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE  STUDIES  (Department o f A n t h r o p o l o g y )  We a c c e p t t h i s  t h e s i s as conforming  to the required standard  THE U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA A p r i l 1994 © A n d r e w R o b e r t Mason, 1994  In  presenting  degree freely  at  this  the  tlnesis  in  partial  fulfilment  of  University  of  British  Columbia,  I agree  available for  copying  of  department  this or  publication  of  reference  thesis by  this  for  his thesis  and  study.  scholarly  or for  her  of  financial gain  Anthropology  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6  (2/88)  April  27.1994  purposes  representatives,  permission.  Department  I further  the  requirements that  agree  may  be  it  is  shall not  that  the  Library  an  granted  by  advanced  shall make it  permission  understood be  for  the that  allov^/ed without  for head  extensive of  my  copying  or  my  written  ABSTRACT  This t h e s i s d e s c r i b e s the excavations H a t z i c Rock s i t e  (DgRn-23) d u r i n g 1990  d e s c r i b e s the a n a l y s i s of s t r u c t u r a l The  site  4500-4700  The  r e m a i n s and  r e m a i n s w e r e shown t o p o s s e s s  s t r u c t u r e was  with a Charles and  and artifacts.  zones a l l d a t i n g t o the C h a r l e s  w i t h e t h n o h i s t o r i c shed-roof  8)  1991  The  contains  Culture  and  pithouse  similarities  d w e l l i n g s from  a l s o found to possess  observed  structure design  s t r u c t u r e from the McCallum similarities  the  similarities  C u l t u r e s t r u c t u r e from the Maurer s i t e  a proto-historic  (DhRk-2).  the  BP).  Structural  area.  and  i s l o c a t e d i n t h e F r a s e r R i v e r v a l l e y and  three occupation (ca.  conducted at  (DhRksite  suggest c o n t i n u i t y i n  from the Charles C u l t u r e t o  the  e t h n o h i s t o r i c p e r i o d , however, a l a c k of c l a r i t y i n t h e H a t z i c d a t a and  poor comparative  data d e t r a c t s from  this  from the H a t z i c Rock  site  hypothesis. The  a n a l y s i s of a r t i f a c t s  i n d i c a t e d d i f f e r e n c e s between the t h r e e o c c u p a t i o n were m i n o r w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of o c c u p a t i o n Occupation  zone I I I .  zone I I I c o n t a i n s a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f  p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t c l a s s e s and absent i n occupation p r o p o r t i o n s are lower  pebble t o o l s .  z o n e I I I and than  Anvil  pebble f l a k e  i n occupation  zones  stemmed stones  tool  zones I and I I .  are  The c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e assemblage t o o t h e r Charles  artifact  C u l t u r e assemblages i n d i c a t e s  c o r e a n d p e b b l e t o o l p r o p o r t i o n s a r e much h i g h e r H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  Similarly,  assemblage c o n t a i n s  at the  t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  artifact  a high proportion of u t i l i z e d f l a k e s i n  r e l a t i o n to other Charles  Culture sites.  Retouched f l a k e  t o o l s a n d f o r m e d u n i f a c e s w e r e shown t o b e p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y less represented Charles  Culture  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  than at  sites.  Differences i n site  f u n c t i o n , l o c a t i o n a n d age a r e  thought t o account f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s between assemblages.  other  artifact  TABLE OF CONTENTS  ABSTRACT  i i  TABLE OF CONTENTS  iv  L I S T OF TABLES  v i i  L I S T OF FIGURES  ix  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  x i  CHAPTER I.  INTRODUCTION  1  Introduction  1  O r i g i n of the Charles The C h a r l e s  Culture  Culture  Type  Hypotheses and O r g a n i z i n g II.  III.  ENVIRONMENT AND  Type  2 4  Framework  CULTURE  7 11  Introduction  11  E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e t t i n g of t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  11  H i s t o r y of Ethnographic Research  16  Sto:lo Subsistence  20  and S e t t l e m e n t P a t t e r n s  O r a l T r a d i t i o n o f t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  26  R e c e n t H i s t o r y o f t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  26  CHRONOLOGY  29  Introduction  29  Excavation  29  Methods  Stratigraphy  34  IV.  Radiocarbon  Age  Occupation  Zones  41 45  Introduction  45  Methods of A n a l y s i s  46  Artifacts  47 Fluorescence Analysis  67  Faunal A n a l y s i s  70  Inter-site  73  Tool Assemblage Comparisons  Features  90  Introduction  90  Features  90  Post Holes Hearths  and  91 Charcoal Concentrations  91  G r a v e l Bench  96  Ditch  96  Anvil  VI.  34  ARTIFACTS  O b s i d i a n X-ray  V.  Estimates  Stone Features  100  H a t z i c Rock S i t e A r c h i t e c t u r e  102  Discussion  106  SUMMARY AND  CONCLUSIONS  117  REFERENCES CITED  127  APPENDIX A  137  - Artifact Descriptions  Introduction  137  F l a k e d Stone A r t i f a c t s  140  Ground Stone A r t i f a c t s  153  Pecked and Ground Stone A r t i f a c t s  157  Miscellaneous A r t i f a c t s  158  APPENDIX B - P o s t H o l e  Features  Introduction  161  Circular/Ovoid Rectangular  161  Post Holes  Post Holes  APPENDIX C - H e a r t h s  and C h a r c o a l C o n c e n t r a t i o n s  164 201 206  Introduction  206  Hearths  208  Charcoal Concentrations  218  L I S T OF TABLES  CHAPTER 4 4.1  T o o l Counts and Percentages from O c c u p a t i o n Zones I - I I I (Core E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s )  48  4.2  T o o l Counts and Percentages from O c c u p a t i o n Zones I / I I and I I I  54  4.3  T o o l Counts Rock S i t e  63  4.4  H a t z i c R o c k S i t e Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s a n d  and Percentages from t h e H a t z i c  67  Frequencies 4.5  X-ray Fluorescence A n a l y s i s R e s u l t s  68  4.6 4.7  H a t z i c Rock S i t e F a u n a l Remains 72 T o o l C o u n t s a n d P e r c e n t a g e s f r o m t h e H a t z i c R o c k ....82 S i t e a n d t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e Components f r o m G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y , S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h  CHAPTER 5 5.1  B o i l i n g S t o n e M e t r i c Summary  APPENDIX A  95  ( M e t r i c Summaries o f A r t i f a c t Types)  A.l  Leaf-Shaped  A.2  Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t  140  A.3  P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t D i s t a l Fragment  141  A.4  Leaf-Shaped  142  A.5  Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t B a s e  143  A. 6  Pièce Esquillée  145  A.7  Pebble Flake,  146  A.8  F l a k e w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch  147  A.9  Flake w i t h Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch  147  A. 10  P r o j e c t i l e Point  P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Base  Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch  F l a k e w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch  140  148  A.11  Steep-Angled U t i l i z e d  Flake  148  A.12  Acute-Angled U t i l i z e d  Flake  149  A. 13  Core  A. 14  Pebble with  A. 15  Pebble with U n i f a c i a l  A.16  Hammerstone/Anvil  150 Bifacial  Peripheral Peripheral  Flaking Flaking  150 151 152  A. 17a  Ground S l a t e B l a d e Fragment  155  A.17b  C o n j o i n e d Ground S l a t e Blade Fragments  155  A.18  Formed A b r a s i v e Stone Fragments  156  A. 19  A b r a s i v e Stone  157  A. 20  Paint  159  Stone  L I S T OF FIGURES  CHAPTER 1 1.1  Location of Charles Culture Sites  5  CHAPTER 2 2.1  Map o f t h e H a t z i c R o c k S i t e V i c i n i t y  12  2.2  C o n t o u r Map o f t h e H a t z i c R o c k S i t e  28  CHAPTER 3 3.1  Plan of Excavation Units  32  3.2  Main Excavation Area  35  3.3  Radiocarbon  3.4  Trench 4 North Wall P r o f i l e  39  3.5  Core E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s  43  South Wall P r o f i l e  Dates from t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  36  CHAPTER 4 4.1  Pebble  Hammer  52  4.2  Grooved C o b b l e / A n v i l  58  4.3  Ground S l a t e Blade  Fragments  65  4.4  Quarry Locations f o rObsidian Recovered a t the H a t z i c Rock S i t e  69  CHAPTER 5 5.1  Post Hole Features  5.2  Box P l o t o f P o s t H o l e D i a m e t e r s  93  5.3  Hearth  94  5.4  L o c a t i o n of G r a v e l Bench Feature  5.5  West W a l l P r o f i l e  5.6  P l a n View o f D i t c h Feature  Features  on F l o o r D e p o s i t s  Located  on F l o o r D e p o s i t s  of D i t c h Feature  92  97 ( U n i t 36)  98 99  5.7  Composite A n v i l Stone Feature U n i t 10, L e v e l s 1-5  from Excavation  101  5.8  P l a n of S t r u c t u r e Excavated Site  a t the H a t z i c Rock  104  5.9  L o c a t i o n of the McCallum S i t e ,  DhRk-2  114  APPENDIX B B.l  Post Hole Features Grid  i n R e l a t i o n to Excavation  162  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  I would l i k e  t o t h a n k t h e members o f my  advisory  c o m m i t t e e , P r o f e s s o r C o l e H a r r i s , P r o f e s s o r R.G. Professor David  Pokotylo  Hatzic research  to a successful conclusion.  Sonny M c H a l s i e this research  (Chairperson)  from the beginning.  a s s i s t e d i n the excavation H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  The  and  G o r d o n Mohs  Thank you  Vincent  all.  a n a l y s i s of m a t e r i a l from  Lea  the  fieldschool  G o r d o n Gong, B l a i r Hammond,  Norman W i g n a l l .  Harper, Robert L i n k l a t e r ,  McHalsie,  and  supported  T w i l a Krown, J o d i M c D o n a l d , W e n d i McKim, R y a n L e e , M a i l e r , G a i l Wada a n d  the  i n d i v i d u a l s who  U.B.C. a r c h a e o l o g y  were: A l i s o n B i e l y ,  and  f o r helping guide  of the S t o : l o T r i b a l C o u n c i l have  Much a p p r e c i a t i o n g o e s t o t h o s e  students  Matson  The  Allison  S t o : l o crew were:  Zena M a i l h o t ,  McNabb, L a r a M u s s e l l , C r a i g Ned  Sonny  and  Ernie  Vincent. T h o s e who  helped  Fraser, Vincent Linklater,  Roy  H a r p e r , T w i l a Krown, R y a n L e e ,  J o d i M c D o n a l d and  Several Dr.  w i t h l a b work were A l i s o n B i e l y ,  the Maurer s i t e . M a u r e r s i t e and  Dr.  unpublished  Robert  McHalsie.  i n d i v i d u a l s f r o m S.F.U. p r o v i d e d  Carlson provided  P h i l Hobler  Sonny  assistance.  radiocarbon  Knut Fladmark p r o v i d e d  dates  from  comments on  a c o p y o f h i s Cheam s l i d e p a p e r .  provided  Scott  the  Professor  a s s i s t a n c e w i t h the a r t i f a c t a n a l y s i s .  M a l c o l m James p e r f o r m e d x - r a y  fluorescence  of the o b s i d i a n a r t i f a c t s r e c o v e r e d  a n a l y s i s on  from H a t z i c .  some  F u n d i n g f o r r e s e a r c h a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e was o b t a i n e d f r o m many s o u r c e s i n c l u d i n g U.B.C. a n d t h e S t o : l o Tribal Council.  The B.C. A r c h a e o l o g y B r a n c h p r o v i d e d f u n d s  f o r t h e S t o : l o component o f t h e e x c a v a t i o n .  Supplementary  f u n d i n g was p r o v i d e d t o t h e U.B.C. f i e l d s c h o o l b y t h e U.B.C. Dean o f A r t s O f f i c e . for a public  The B.C. H e r i t a g e T r u s t p r o v i d e d f u n d s  interpretation  I would  like  program.  t o t h a n k a l l my f r i e n d s a t U.B.C. who h a v e  h e l p e d me w i t h my r e s e a r c h i n one way o r a n o t h e r o v e r t h e p a s t few y e a r s .  I e s p e c i a l l y want t o t h a n k H e a t h e r  f o r e a r l y d r a f t s o f h e r t h e s i s and Joyce Johnson the photo  lab.  Pratt  f o r help i n  E r i c P a t t i s o n s e r v e d a s e d i t o r maximus a n d  d e s e r v e s f a r more t h a n t h e b o t t l e o f s i n g l e m a l t he r e c e i v e d for his trouble. My f a m i l y members d e s e r v e t h a n k s f o r t h e i r over the years.  A t one t i m e o r a n o t h e r t h e y have a l l r e a d a  d r a f t o f something, pay  the rent.  would a l s o l i k e  made s u r e I was f e d o r made s u r e I c o u l d  T h a n k s f o r h e l p i n g me make i t t h r o u g h .  I  t o t h a n k my g o o d f r i e n d A l l i s o n C r o n i n f o r  h e r s u p p o r t t h r o u g h o u t my g r a d u a t e p r o g r a m . sometimes d i f f i c u l t enjoyable.  assistance  Thanks  A l l i s o n made a  and o f t e n f r u s t r a t i n g e x p e r i e n c e Allison.  CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION  Introduction  This t h e s i s discusses  the results of  c o n d u c t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  excavations  (DgRn-23) d u r i n g t h e f a l l  o f 1990 a n d t h e s p r i n g a n d summer o f 1 9 9 1 . large semi-subterranean s t r u c t u r e dated C u l t u r e was t h e f o c u s An  environmental  included i n this research  of t h i s  to the Charles  excavation.  and p a l e o e n v i r o n m e n t a l  thesis to provide  setting.  The r e m a i n s o f a  background i s  a context  f o r the  The h i s t o r y o f e t h n o g r a p h i c  the F r a s e r R i v e r v a l l e y  i s described.  research i n  Ethnographic  data  p e r t a i n i n g t o n a t i v e groups i n the r e s e a r c h area a r e summarized t o p r o v i d e  a c u l t u r a l dimension.  i n f o r m a t i o n on S t o : l o s u b s i s t e n c e  This  and s e t t l e m e n t  d u r i n g t h e e t h n o h i s t o r i c p e r i o d and S t o : l o o r a l concerning  includes patterns  traditions  H a t z i c Rock.  S i t e chronology,  stratigraphy, radiocarbon  t h e methods u s e d t o d e f i n e o c c u p a t i o n  zones a r e d e s c r i b e d .  A r t i f a c t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each occupation summarized and compared t o each o t h e r . Rock s i t e a r t i f a c t  zone a r e  The c o m b i n e d H a t z i c  assemblage i s t a b u l a t e d and compared t o  artifact  assemblages from other Charles  Obsidian  artifacts  fluorescence  d a t e s and  Culture  from H a t z i c a r e examined w i t h  a n a l y s i s and t h e r e s u l t s d i s c u s s e d .  sites. X-ray Faunal  remains are  t a b u l a t e d and  Each f e a t u r e type a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the  evaluated.  i s d e f i n e d and  summarized.  Features  semi-subterranean s t r u c t u r e are  to d e s c r i b e the nature  of t h i s  structure.  combined  Ethnohistoric  a r c h a e o l o g i c a l examples of d w e l l i n g s from the F r a s e r v a l l e y are used to help This  i n t e r p r e t these  t h e s i s concludes  p e r f o r m e d on  by  the  A summary o f t h e C h a r l e s provide  a historical  context  are  Culture.  provided.  C u l t u r e type to the  analyses  from the H a t z i c Rock  s i t e have i n c r e a s e d our knowledge of the C h a r l e s Directions f o r future research  River  remains.  i n d i c a t i n g how  the m a t e r i a l excavated  and  study  follows of the  to  Charles  Culture.  O r i g i n of the Charles  The  C u l t u r e Type  C h a r l e s p h a s e was  d e f i n e d by  Charles  as a c u l t u r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n e n c o m p a s s i n g t h e R i v e r Canyon, t h e l o w e r  m a i n l a n d and  the S t r a i t  The  of Georgia.  approximately  5500 BP  lower and  the southern  Fraser i s l a n d s of  (Borden 1975:96-97).  at E s i l a o (DjRi-5)  identified  the  F r a s e r R i v e r Canyon m a n i f e s t a t i o n of t h i s c u l t u r e  gave i t the  l o c a l p h a s e name "Eayem."  ranged from roughly was  lower  3100  BP  t o 5500 BP.  The This  (DhRk-8)  (Borden 1975:71-72).  type  Eayem p h a s e local  e x p a n d e d t o i n c l u d e a component o f s i m i l a r age  Maurer s i t e  1975  time p e r i o d f o r t h i s c u l t u r e i s  t o 3000 BP  Borden's r e s e a r c h  Borden i n  phase from  the  Borden r e c o g n i z e d the c u l t u r a l phase f o l l o w i n g Old C o r d i l l e r a n Culture at the Glenrose s i t e  (DgRr-6)  s i m i l a r i n c o m p o s i t i o n a n d age t o t h e Eayem p h a s e at E s i l a o  (Borden 1975:80).  Matson's  T h i s component was  was  material  called  S t . Mungo p h a s e a f t e r t h e S t . Mungo C a n n e r y s i t e  the  (DgRr-2)  w h e r e d e p o s i t s o f s i m i l a r age a n d n a t u r e w e r e e x c a v a t e d ( C a l v e r t 1 9 7 0 ; Boehm 1 9 7 3 ; M a t s o n 1 9 7 6 : 2 8 3 ) . M a t e r i a l o f s i m i l a r age was d o c u m e n t e d b y (1970) a t t h e H e l e n P o i n t s i t e the western S t r a i t  of Georgia  Carlson  (DfRu-8) o n Mayne I s l a n d i n (Borden 1975:93).  f r o m t h e b a s a l component a t H e l e n P o i n t was  Material  attributed to  t h e "Mayne p h a s e " a n d p r o v i s i o n a l l y d a t e d t o 3 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 0 BP ( C a r l s o n 1970:116-117).  The Mayne p h a s e c l e a r l y  coincided  w i t h t h e Eayem a n d S t . Mungo p h a s e s on t h e m a i n l a n d s i d e o f the S t r a i t  of Georgia  (Borden 1975:93).  Borden r e c o g n i z e d the h i g h degree of e x h i b i t e d i n the three r e g i o n a l phases  similarity  (Eayem,  S t . Mungo a n d  Mayne) a n d s u g g e s t e d t h e l o c a l i z e d p h a s e names be b y a r e g i o n a l p h a s e name.  T h i s r e g i o n a l phase would  encompass c u l t u r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n s i n t h e l o w e r Canyon,  t h e l o w e r m a i n l a n d and t h e S t r a i t  f r o m r o u g h l y 3000 BP t o 5500 BP. "Charles phase" Burley Borden's  replaced  Fraser  of Georgia  B o r d e n named t h i s  regions the  (Borden 1975:96).  (1980:15) a n d P r a t t  (1992:7) h a v e a r g u e d t h a t  (1975) C h a r l e s p h a s e i s more a p p r o p r i a t e l y  defined  a s a c u l t u r e t y p e a s i t i s a r e g i o n a l phenomenon r a t h e r t h a n a local  o c c u r r e n c e as i m p l i e d by t h e phase c o n c e p t .  The  term Charles  C u l t u r e type has been adopted i n t h e  archaeological literature  (e.g. M i t c h e l l  in this thesis.  a complete geographic d e l i n e a t i o n  of t h e Charles  Although  C u l t u r e type  has n o t been attempted, i t i s  t h o u g h t t o encompass t h e l o w e r lower mainland area  F r a s e r R i v e r Canyon, t h e  and t h e southern  summary o f t h e s a l i e n t  1990) a n d i s u s e d  S t r a i t of Georgia.  features of the Charles  Culture  A type  follows.  The  Charles  Pratt identified  Culture  Type  (1992) r e v i e w e d  t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e and  s i t e s with Charles  C u l t u r e components and  e l i m i n a t e d s i t e s w h i c h have been i n c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d t o this period. S t . Mungo  Sites with Charles  (DgRr-2), Glenrose  Beach  (DgRr-1), Helen P o i n t  1,2),  Tsawwassen  and  River  Cannery  (DiSe-10),  (DgRn-23) Jack  (Duke) P o i n t  make t h e d a t a p r o b l e m a t i c  Two o t h e r C h a r l e s  1992:7).  (DhRk-8)  Culture  The  (DgRx-5) a n d P i t t components,  s u c h a s component  (Pratt  1992).  C u l t u r e s i t e s c a n be added t o P r a t t ' s  The P a r k F a r m s i t e  Meadows r e g i o n ,  (DeRt-  (see F i g u r e 1.1).  however, p r o b l e m s w i t h t h e a n a l y s e s ,  list.  Crescent  (DfRu-8), Pender Canal  (DhRq-21) s i t e s h a v e C h a r l e s  mixing,  (DgRr-6),  (DgRs-2), E s i l a o ( D j R i - 5 ) , M a u r e r  t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  Denman I s l a n d  C u l t u r e components i n c l u d e :  i s dated  The s e c o n d s i t e  (DhRq-22), l o c a t e d i n t h e P i t t t o 4170±120 BP (SFU 405) ( S p u r g e o n i s located at the National  F i g u r e 1.1 Location of Charles Culture  Sites  50  km  N 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)  St. Mungo, DgRr 2 Glenrose Cannery, DgRr Crescent Beach, DgRr 1 Helen Point, DfRu 8 Pender Canal, DeRt 1,2 Tsawwassen, DgRs 2 Esilao, DjRi 5  Maurer, DhRk 8 Hatzic Rock, DgRn 23 i d Denman Island, DiSe 10 11 Jack (Duke) Point, DgRx 5 12 Pitt River, DliRq 21 13 Park Farm, DhRq 22 14' Fort Langley  8  9  Historic  S i t e of Fort  Langley.  A prehistoric  component  d a t e d t o 3835±110 BP (BGS 1421) a n d 4390±90 BP (SFU 653) was found below t h e h i s t o r i c f o r t remains Pratt to define  (1992) s e l e c t e d  ten Charles Culture  the Charles Culture  type.  C r e s c e n t B e a c h , Denman I s l a n d , Helen Point, Tsawwassen  ( P r a t t 1992:286).  Chipped  Cannery, S t . Mungo a n d  A summary o f P r a t t ' s  s t o n e t o o l s t e n d t o be m a n u f a c t u r e d although quartzite  i n some q u a n t i t y .  ( P r a t t 1992:292).  expedient  E s i l a o , Glenrose  include:  (1992)  d e f i n i t i o n follows.  locally available basalt  rare  assemblages  These s i t e s  Maurer, Pender Canal, P i t t R i v e r ,  Charles Culture  a l s o used  (James 1990) .  and c h e r t a r e  Obsidian i s also present but  Chipped  i n nature with  from  stone a r t i f a c t s a r e l a r g e l y  unshaped f l a k e t o o l s and v a r i o u s  forms o f pebble  t o o l s dominant.  cores, are also  common  (Pratt  Cores,  including  bifacial  1992:290).  F o r m e d c h i p p e d s t o n e t o o l s a r e f a r l e s s common unformed t o o l s w i t h ( P r a t t 1992:291).  bifaces  e i t h e r leaf-shaped or shouldered  The e v i d e n c e  f o r prepared  t e c h n o l o g y i s weak a n d t h e p r e s e n c e contentious  (Pratt  1992:290).  stone a r t i f a c t s ) a r e n o t abundant, and pecked  rare. Islands  ( i n c l u d i n g pecked  The d e b a t e  blade  of quartz m i c r o l i t h s i s  Ground stone a r t i f a c t s ( i n c l u d i n g ground  artifacts  than  and ground  on s k e l e t o n s s u g g e s t s  that  stone  stone a r t i f a c t s ) a r e  continues over the presence  Complex a r t i f a c t s ,  and chipped  however, e v i d e n c e  of Gulf of labret  wear  some o f t h i s c o m p l e x d o e s e x i s t  (Pratt  1992:291,293).  A lack of organic  p r e s e r v a t i o n i n many o f t h e  a s s e m b l a g e s f o r t h i s p e r i o d r e s t r i c t s a n y summary o f b o n e and  antler tools.  Bone a n d a n t l e r a r t i f a c t s w h i c h d i d  survive are similar to the l i t h i c expedient nature.  i n their  R a r e n o n u t i l i t a r i a n bone o r a n t l e r  a r t i f a c t s a r e sparsely decorated, been found.  artifacts  although  exceptions  have  S h e l l a r t i f a c t s a r e n o t common, b u t e x i s t  preservation conditions are favorable  where  ( P r a t t 1992:292).  F a u n a l r e m a i n s s u g g e s t a m i x e d economy w h e r e l a n d a n d s e a mammals w e r e e x p l o i t e d . t o some e x t e n t ,  A l t h o u g h salmon were e x p l o i t e d  s p e c i a l i z a t i o n had n o t y e t begun  (Pratt  1992 :292) . Living floors, most s i t e s . although  post holes  and hearths  No e v i d e n c e f o r l a r g e p l a n k  Pratt  a r e common t o  houses e x i s t s  (1992) a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e s t r u c t u r a l  the H a t z i c Rock and Maurer s i t e s .  Pratt  an e g a l i t a r i a n s o c i e t y e x i s t e d d e s p i t e  (1992:293)  suggests  the p o s s i b l e presence  of s t a t u s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n as r e f l e c t e d i n b u r i a l Tsawwassen and p o s s i b l y Pender  remains a t  remains a t  Canal.  H y p o t h e s e s a n d O r c r a n i z i n g Framework  Little  information e x i s t s concerning  Charles  Culture  components f r o m i n l a n d r i v e r i n e l o c a t i o n s s u c h as t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e . locations,  The M a u r e r a n d E s i l a o s i t e s a r e b o t h f r o m  such  however, t h e y a r e p o o r l y u n d e r s t o o d and l a c k  formal  a n a l y s i s and d o c u m e n t a t i o n .  The a n a l y s i s o f m a t e r i a l  from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e r e p r e s e n t s p r o p e r l y document a C h a r l e s a riverine location. opportunity  Culture  site  The H a t z i c d a t a  t o examine the n a t u r e  a r c h i t e c t u r e from t h i s p e r i o d . provide  an o p p o r t u n i t y  concerning  (Eayem p h a s e )  also provide  an  This  information  will  more c o m p l e x  the p r e h i s t o r y of the Fraser  v a l l e y and s o u t h w e s t e r n B r i t i s h Three hypotheses concerning  from  of r e s i d e n t i a l  the b a s i s w i t h which to formulate  questions  to  River  Columbia. the nature  of the structure  e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e have been d e v e l o p e d and will  be t e s t e d .  These hypotheses a r e :  Hypothesis #1: The s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e resembles southern northwest coast dwellings recorded during the e t h n o h i s t o r i c period. Hypothesis #2 : The s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e c o n s t i t u t e s a new t y p e o f b u i l d i n g f o r t h e s o u t h e r n northwest coast. Hypothesis #3 : The s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e does n o t resemble s o u t h e r n n o r t h w e s t c o a s t d w e l l i n g s f r o m t h e e t h n o h i s t o r i c p e r i o d , b u t does s h a r e s t r u c t u r a l and design elements.  The t h e s i s i s d i v i d e d i n t o s i x c h a p t e r s , being  this  introduction.  environment and c u l t u r a l h i s t o r y and S t o : l o o r a l  The s e c o n d c h a p t e r s e t t i n g of the s i t e .  the f i r s t discusses The  the  recent  t r a d i t i o n o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e i s  included. nature the  Chapter 3 describes  of s t r a t i g r a p h y .  site  excavation  m e t h o d s and  Radiocarbon dates are presented  i s divided i n t o occupation  separates  them i n t o t h e o c c u p a t i o n  identified  i n the p r e v i o u s  occupation  zone are  d i f f e r e n c e s are noted. fluorescence  tool  from the  The  the C h a r l e s  nature  comparison  of  Charles  chapter  discusses  summarizes the how  at  s t r u c t u r e excavated  Culture  in  s u m m a r i e s and  The  archaeological  three  in  hypotheses  r e s u l t s of  t h i s research  C u l t u r e knowledge base.  has  the  contributed  Directions  to  are  a t H a t z i c Rock s i t e ,  and  for  general. included.  Appendix A  d e s c r i p t i o n s of a r t i f a c t  i d e n t i f i e d a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e . p r o v e n i e n c e s and  recorded  evaluated.  Three appendices are metric  in  features  of the  structure.  suggested f o r future research the Charles  included  Fraser R i v e r v a l l e y are used to a s s i s t  p r e v i o u s l y o u t l i n e d are final  describes  E t h n o h i s t o r i c and  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s  a n a l y s i s and  X-ray  assemblages.  at H a t z i c i s presented.  The  zones  and  t o o l assemblage w i t h o t h e r  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  the  similarities  faunal a n a l y s i s are  Hatzic  from each  r e s u l t s of o b s i d i a n  C h a p t e r 5 s u m m a r i z e s and  dwellings  Artifacts  Chapter 4 concludes w i t h the  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e Culture  The  a n a l y s i s and  t h i s chapter.  chapter.  c o m p a r e d and  and  zones.  Chapter 4 summarizes a r t i f a c t s e x c a v a t e d a t the R o c k s i t e and  the  presents  classes  Appendix B l i s t s  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of post h o l e  features  the from  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e . and  characteristics  concentration  Appendix C provides  of hearth  f e a t u r e s and  the  proveniences  charcoal  f e a t u r e s u n c o v e r e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  site.  CHAPTER  TWO  ENVIRONMENT AND  CULTURE  Introduction  This  chapter describes  t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l and c u l t u r a l  s e t t i n g of the study area.  This  includes  a discussion of  the environment and p a l e o e n v i r o n m e n t o f t h e H a t z i c Rock and  a summary o f p e r t i n e n t  site  ethnographic data from the  region.  E n v i r o n m e n t a l S e t t i n g o f t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  The  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  (DgRn-23) i s l o c a t e d i n t h e F r a s e r  R i v e r V a l l e y on t h e n o r t h a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 km e a s t Vancouver.  05"  of Mission,  site  lies  west l o n g i t u d e  (Figure a t 49  09' 07" n o r t h  River  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  The  f l o o d p l a i n l o c a t e d below the s i t e  ( A r m s t r o n g 1959) .  Huntington gravel  (channel  o v e r l y i n g Sumas t i l l .  This  north  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 2 ) .  s t r a d d l e s two d i s t i n c t  flood p l a i n deposits  clay  than  l a t i t u d e a n d 122 15'  o n a l o w r i v e r t e r r a c e 500 m e t r e s  The  and  i s located less  2.1)  of t h e p r e s e n t course o f t h e F r a s e r  River  River  B.C. a n d 80 km e a s t o f  H a t z i c L a k e , a n oxbow l a k e ,  1 km t o t h e e a s t The  bank o f t h e F r a s e r  sediment  zones.  i s composed o f F r a s e r  w h i c h a r e composed o f sand,  silt  The s e c o n d z o n e i s c o m p o s e d o f and f l o o d p l a i n  deposits)  zone forms t h e t e r r a c e on w h i c h  Figure Map  2.1  of the H a t z i c Rock S i t e  Vicinity  t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e i s s i t u a t e d ( A r m s t r o n g 1959) . glacial  erratic  till.  Gravel  Sumas  till.  " H a t z i c R o c k " i s o b v i o u s e v i d e n c e o f Sumas  a n d s a n d d e p o s i t s , up t o 31 m t h i c k ,  A review  of the geologic  failed to find Fraser River  The  a study  and h y d r o l o g i e  which describes  f o rthe period reflected  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  ( c . 4500-5000 B P ) .  underlie  literature  the l o c a t i o n of the i n deposits  Similarly,  at the  this  search  f a i l e d t o l o c a t e i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h i n d i c a t e s when H a t z i c L a k e was p a r t o f t h e F r a s e r R i v e r c h a n n e l a n d n o t a n oxbow lake. McLean  (1990) h a s e x a m i n e d F r a s e r R i v e r  channel  i n s t a b i l i t y and h i s t o r i c a l channel changes, however, t h e t i m e frame o f h i s work f a l l s in  this  thesis.  restricts  itself  McLean's a n a l y s i s o f h i s t o r i c to the last  maps a n d a e r i a l p h o t o s McLean's  short of the period  addressed  river  changes  100 y e a r s a n d r e l i e s h e a v i l y o n  (McLean 1 9 9 0 : 1 0 4 ) .  (1990:104) r e s e a r c h  channel remained r e l a t i v e l y  indicated the Fraser  stable over the past  River  c e n t u r y and  determined t h a t p r o c e s s e s o f e r o s i o n and d e p o s i t i o n a r e slow, t e n d i n g  t o evolve  Subsequently, r i v e r correlation with  c h a n n e l c h a n g e s may n o t show a n y  short  hydraulic parameters. assessing  over a p e r i o d of decades.  sedimentation  term flow c o n d i t i o n s o r l o c a l McLean's s t u d y or river  measured i n y e a r s o r decades  suggested  that  channel changes i s b e s t  (McLean 1 9 9 0 : 2 1 9 ) .  McLean's s t u d y e a r l i e r periods, is  yet  t o be  d i d not  therefore,  conducted.  The  a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e and  cite  similar research  for  i t i s assumed t h a t s u c h a presence of r i v e r i n e features  s u c h as a n  sediments  oxbow  n e a r b y , r e v e a l s t h a t a t some p o i n t t h e  r i v e r course,  p o r t i o n o f i t s f l o w , was  site  c l o s e r t o the  study  lake or  a  than i t i s  today. Today, t h e  Fraser River v a l l e y possesses a m i l d  c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y wet the year,  winters  tend  storms air  t o o c c u r as  (Stager  and  little  i n t h e i r seasonal  W a l l i s 1968:89) .  The  masses, w h i c h o r i g i n a t e i n the G u l f  site,  region.  temperature  p a t t e r n of of A l a s k a ,  c o l d temperatures t o the  R i v e r v a l l e y ( S t a g e r and The  Throughout  surges of westward moving c y c l o n i c  h e a v y p r e c i p i t a t i o n and  winter brings  Fraser  W a l l i s 1968:89-90) .  Coast Mountains, l o c a t e d n o r t h of the H a t z i c  occasionally fail  o r i g i n a t i n g i n t h e B.C.  Interior. and  Fraser R i v e r v a l l e y (Stager  As  a result,  heavy s n o w f a l l s and  Wallis  temperatures result in  1968:90).  Summer m o n t h s a r e d o m i n a t e d b y h i g h p r e s s u r e w h i c h b r i n g c l e a r s k i e s and Fraser River v a l l e y .  The  systems  moderate temperatures t o  (Stager  and  the  summer s t o r m t r a c k t e n d s t o l i e  n o r t h of c o a s t a l B r i t i s h Columbia r e s u l t i n g i n l e s s precipitation  Rock  t o c o n t a i n c o l d a i r masses  drop to the near-zero l e v e l the  c o o l summers.  m o i s t m a r i t i m e a i r masses dominate t h i s  These a i r masses v a r y and  and  climate  Wallis  1968:90).  P o l l e n a n a l y s i s has i n d i c a t e d t h a t t o d a y ' s c l i m a t e i s similar  to the climate  archaeological deposits 5000 BP)  f o r the period associated a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  (Mathewes 1 9 7 3 : 4 4 ) .  with ( c . 4500-  An abundance o f h e m l o c k and  c e d a r p o l l e n l o c a t e d a b o v e Mazama a s h ( c . 6600 BP) wet m e s o t h e r m a l c o n d i t i o n s  suggests  e x i s t e d then as they continue  to  today. Two b i o g e o c l i m a t i c area.  The C o a s t a l  zones a r e l o c a t e d i n t h e H a t z i c  W e s t e r n H e m l o c k Zone i s l o c a t e d a t l o w t o  m i d d l e e l e v a t i o n s , a n d t h e M o u n t a i n H e m l o c k Zone i s p r e s e n t i n higher  subalpine  The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  zones ( P o j a r e t a l . 1991:96; 1991a:114). lies  i n the Coastal  W e s t e r n Hemlock  Zone w h i c h i s d o m i n a t e d b y w e s t e r n h e m l o c k w i t h w e s t e r n r e d cedar and D o u g l a s - f i r a l s o w i d e s p r e a d  (Pojar et a l .  1991:96) . Vegetation Rock s i t e d u r i n g  w h i c h w o u l d h a v e b e e n common a t t h e H a t z i c the period  comparable t o H a t z i c  i n question  100 y e a r s ago  l a r g e s c a l e commercial l o g g i n g ) . cedar which began t o f l o u r i s h  i s roughly  (prior  t o the onset of  An e x c e p t i o n  a f t e r 6000 BP.  a n a l y s i s has documented a major i n c r e a s e  to this i s Pollen  i n cedar  frequency  f r o m 5000-2500 BP, a p e r i o d when c e d a r became a c o - d o m i n a n t species  i n c o a s t a l f o r e s t s w i t h w e s t e r n h e m l o c k (Hebda a n d  Mathewes 1984 : 712) .  History of Ethnographic  The  Research  Sto:lo Indians  live  along  t h e l o w e r 170  kilometers  of t h e F r a s e r R i v e r i n southwestern B r i t i s h Columbia. name S t o : l o t r a n s l a t e s a s " p e o p l e o f t h e r i v e r " t o a l l n a t i v e bands and t r i b e s l i v i n g a l o n g from F i v e M i l e Creek, near Yale, The  and r e f e r s  the Fraser  to the Fraser River  River  Delta.  S t o : l o a r e c o m p r i s e d o f many d i f f e r e n t b a n d s b u t a t t h e  t i m e o f w r i t i n g p r e f e r t o be r e c o g n i z e d S t o : l o w i t h two e x c e p t i o n s , Sto:lo  c o l l e c t i v e l y as  t h e K a t z i e a n d Musqueam. A l l  ( i n c l u d i n g t h e Musqueam a n d K a t z i e )  the g r e a t e r Coast S a l i s h I n d i a n N a t i o n The  H a l k o m e l e m name H a t z i c i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h  the H a t z i c people  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 9 ) .  the H a t z i c l i v e d a t a small Dewdney b u t w e r e no l o n g e r worked i n t h e area Similarly, occupied  a r e members o f  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 8 ) .  b u l l r u s h o r r e e d w h i c h grew i n p r o f u s i o n  (Smith  land along  lake  i n the t e r r i t o r y of  Marion Smith noted ( H a t z i c Lake?)  that  below  e x i s t i n g a s a t r i b e when s h e  t h e H a t z i c as a s m a l l t r i b e  t h e n o r t h bank o f t h e F r a s e r (Duff  a  1936-1939:MS 2 6 8 : 3 : 2 : 1 0 ) .  Duff described  around H a t z i c Lake lies  The  1952:23).  that  River  The H a t z i c R o c k  i n t h e t e r r i t o r y o f t h e H a t z i c t r i b e w h i c h was  site declared  e x t i n c t by t h e Canadian government. G o r d o n Mohs, h e r i t a g e Council,  consultant  has had t h e o p p o r t u n i t y  f o r the Sto:lo  t o i n t e r v i e w a number o f  S t o : l o e l d e r s who p o s s e s s k n o w l e d g e o f t h e H a t z i c An e l d e r f r o m C h e h a l i s  Tribal  people.  i n d i c a t e d t h e H a t z i c were w i p e d o u t  by  smallpox  and o t h e r d i s e a s e s p r i o r t o 1900.  who s u r v i v e d t h o s e Nooksack t r i b e s The  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 9 ) .  research.  recorded  Observations  h i s name i n 1 8 0 8 .  j o u r n a l s provide a glimpse  of h i s voyage  his  Eraser's  letters  of S t o : l o c u l t u r e a t t h e time  (Lamb 1 9 6 0 ) .  Charles Hill-Tout Coast S a l i s h ,  on t h e S t o : l o were  b y t h e e x p l o r e r S i m o n F r a s e r who d e s c e n d e d  the r i v e r which bears and  were a b s o r b e d by t h e K a t z i e and  F r a s e r R i v e r v a l l e y has had a l o n g h i s t o r y o f  ethnographic first  epidemics  The H a t z i c  conducted f i e l d  r e s e a r c h among t h e  i n c l u d i n g some S t o : l o g r o u p s .  The r e s u l t s o f  r e s e a r c h w e r e p u b l i s h e d b e t w e e n 1895 a n d 1911 (Maud  1978:163). Pilait,  H i l l - T o u t ' s observations  on t h e C h i l l i w a c k ,  Kwantlen, C h e h a l i s and S c o w l i t z people a r e  particularly  r e l e v a n t t o t h i s r e s e a r c h as they  i n f o r m a t i o n on place-names and a s p e c t s  include  of material culture  (Maud 1978) . Diamond J e n n e s s v i s i t e d t h e K a t z i e r e s e r v e interviewed Old Pierre,  a 75 y e a r  Though J e n n e s s c o n c e n t r a t e d explored aspects  o l d "Indian  i n 1936 a n d  doctor".  on t h e f a i t h o f O l d P i e r r e ,  he  of Katzie culture including social  o r g a n i z a t i o n and d a i l y l i f e  (Jenness  1955:5).  M a r i o n S m i t h c o n d u c t e d f i e l d w o r k among t h e C o a s t  Salish  of B r i t i s h Columbia and Washington S t a t e d u r i n g t h e l a t e 1930's.  Smith's research i s p a r t i c u l a r l y  research f o rher observations  relevant to this  on Coast S a l i s h d w e l l i n g s and  her t e s t e x c a v a t i o n a t t h e McCallum s i t e near A g a s s i z (see  S m i t h 1936-1939, 1940, 1940a, 1941, 1947, 1950, 1950a, 1954) . W i l s o n Duff began e t h n o g r a p h i c r e s e a r c h Sto:lo during  among t h e  t h e summers o f 1949 a n d 1950 t o c o l l e c t  data  f o r h i s U n i v e r s i t y of Washington Master's t h e s i s  (1952a).  Duff spent nine  published  "The an  weeks among t h e S t o : l o a n d l a t e r  Upper S t a l o I n d i a n s  ethnography that  of the Fraser River  concentrated  the  study concentrated  information  (Duff  1952:7).  River valley.  Although  o n t h e s e g r o u p s , he n o t e d much o f  was a l s o a p p l i c a b l e t o o t h e r Duff's  (1952)  on t h e T a i t , C h i l l i w a c k and  P i l a i t people of the upper Fraser Duff's  o f B.C."  Sto:lo  groups  ethnography encompassed such b r o a d  t o p i c s a s e n v i r o n m e n t , v i l l a g e names a n d l o c a t i o n s , h i s t o r y , material  culture, subsistence,  social organization,  social  dynamics, e x t e r n a l r e l a t i o n s , b e l i e f s and p a s t i m e s . While preparing publication, research  Wayne S u t t l e s c o n d u c t e d f u r t h e r  among t h e K a t z i e d u r i n g  subsequent v i s i t s village  Diamond J e n n e s s ' K a t z i e m a t e r i a l f o r  t h e summer o f 1952 a n d  ( S u t t l e s 1955:5).  t o c l a r i f y Jenness' phonetic  Suttles visited  g a t h e r e d m a t e r i a l on K a t z i e i d e n t i t y ,  Suttles' the  and k i n s h i p t i e s .  l a t e r observations  same m o n o g r a p h  Katzie  transcriptions of  n a t i v e terms w i t h O l d P i e r r e ' s s o n Simon.  subsistence  ethnographic  Suttles  neighbors,  also  habitat,  J e n n e s s ' e a r l i e r m a t e r i a l and  o f t h e K a t z i e were p u b l i s h e d i n  (Jenness 1955; S u t t l e s  1955).  During  the  r e s i d e n t and  I960's O l i v e r W e l l s ,  a longtime C h i l l i w a c k  amateur a n t h r o p o l o g i s t , p u b l i s h e d m a t e r i a l  various aspects  o f S t o : l o c u l t u r e (see W e l l s  1 9 6 5 a , 1965b, 1966,  1966a).  1963,  1965,  Most r e l e v a n t t o t h i s  i s a posthumously p u b l i s h e d c o l l e c t i o n of  on  research  Wells'  o b s e r v a t i o n s which c o n t a i n s t r a n s c r i p t i o n s of  taped  i n t e r v i e w s w i t h n a t i v e e l d e r s on t o p i c s i n c l u d i n g p r e c o n t a c t n a t i v e c u l t u r e , m a t e r i a l c u l t u r e , m i s s i o n i z a t i o n , mythology and  life  histories  (Wells  1987).  T h i s assortment of ethnographic data  to formulate  sources  provided  a p i c t u r e of S t o : l o c u l t u r e d u r i n g  e t h n o h i s t o r i c p e r i o d , however, p r o b l e m s e x i s t . Duff's  i n d i v i d u a l s he  i n t e r v i e w e d was  study  accuracy.  l i m i t e d t o s i x (Duff  T h i s d o e s n o t mean D u f f ' s  circumstances  surrounding  the circumstances u s i n g such  t h e n e e d t o be each work.  most  aware of  (1952)  useful, the  Information  a n d m e t h o d o l o g y m u s t be  1952:9-  i n terms of i t s  or t h a t of o t h e r a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s , i s not  rather i t i l l u s t r a t e s  the  a r e a y e t t h e number o f  Such a s m a l l sample r a i s e s q u e s t i o n s  c o v e r a g e and data,  from the  the example.  (1952) a c c o u n t o f S t o r l o c u l t u r e r e p r e s e n t s  complete body of d a t a  10).  For  the  concerning  f a c t o r e d i n when  data.  W i t h t h i s p o t e n t i a l p r o b l e m i n mind, a d e s c r i p t i o n of S t o : l o s u b s i s t e n c e and  settlement  p a t t e r n s from  the  ethnohistoric period follows.  T h i s summary i s b a s e d on  amalgam o f t h e v a r i o u s s o u r c e s  c i t e d above.  several different  sources  By  t h e i n f l u e n c e o f any  an  using inaccuracies  or inherent b i a s e s are kept  Sto:lo Subsistence  The  and  Settlement  Patterns  summer m o n t h s w e r e t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t  economy due  five  i n t h e F r a s e r R i v e r and  s p e c i e s of P a c i f i c  r i v e r s but  Chinook  preservation Sockeye  (Duff  o f J u n e and  subsided  Chum s a l m o n  feed the F r a s e r R i v e r s i z e and  (0. k e t a )  and  (Duff  continued  t o December w h i l e  most  Fraser coho  w i n t e r i n small streams which 1952:62). salmon  i t attracted.  i n c l u d i n g t h e mouth of t h e  fishery.  Fraser  territory  These groups would ascend  i n t o the lower  w i n t e r s t o r e s of preserved  (0.  through  Vancouver I s l a n d a r r i v e d i n Upper S t o : l o  to take p a r t i n the  when  spawned i n t h e  t h e number o f p e o p l e  f r o m many r e g i o n s  F r a s e r R i v e r and  for  River  P i n k salmon  importance of the F r a s e r R i v e r  f i s h e r y i s r e f l e c t e d by  1978:12) .  suitability  peaked a f t e r m i d - J u l y  (Duff 1952:62).  spawned i n t h e l a t e f a l l  R i v e r and  (0. k i s u t c h )  1952:62-63).  R i v e r from mid-September through  Indians  coho  t o t h e i r s i z e and  g o r b u s c h a ) spawned i n l a t e A u g u s t and of September.  salmon  i t s tributaries.  (0. n e r k a ) r u n s b e g a n i n t h e F r a s e r  d u r i n g the middle f r e s h e t s had  due  Sto:lo  salmon were a v a i l a b l e i n t h e  ( 0 . t s h a w y t s c h a ) and  were most i m p o r t a n t  The  t o the  t o l a r g e p r e d i c t a b l e runs of spawning  ( O n c o r h y n c h u s sp.) All  t o a minimum.  the  F r a s e r R i v e r C a n y o n t o amass  salmon  ( D u f f 1 9 5 2 : 2 5 ; Maud  Summer m o n t h s w e r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y c o n g r e g a t i o n s people  at favourable f i s h i n g locations.  e x i s t s concerning  the nature  Little  of  information  o f S t o : l o summer r e s i d e n c e s ,  h o w e v e r , i n d i c a t i o n s a r e t h a t some U p p e r S t o : l o l i v e d i n p l a n k h o u s e s o r t e m p o r a r y mat b u i l d i n g s ( D u f f 1 9 5 2 : 5 0 ; 1987:35).  The t y p e o f r e s i d e n c e  Wells  l i k e l y depended on t h e  l o c a t i o n o f resource procurement s i t e s and t h e planned length of stay. The  fall  s u b s i s t e n c e and s e t t l e m e n t  p a t t e r n was i n many  ways a c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e summer p a t t e r n . still  plentiful  Salmon were  i n t h e F r a s e r R i v e r and i t s t r i b u t a r i e s .  By  l a t e S e p t e m b e r e m p h a s i s o n t h e s a l m o n f i s h e r y b e g a n t o wane as o t h e r e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t i e s , gathered in  momentum  the f a l l  had  ( D u f f 1952:62) .  as animals  b a s e camps ( D u f f Species  place  A f t e r t h e salmon  I n these  Some h u n t i n g cases,  forays  hunters  could  established  1952:73).  (Oreamnos a m e r i c a n u s ) .  wapiti  (Cervus  elaphus),  beaver  (Castor canadensis).  (Anas s p . ) , C a n a d a g e e s e  Bird  (Ursus  deer  g r i z z l y bear  americanus),  (Odocoileus  (Ursus  1952:71).  sp.),  a r c t o s ) and  species i n c l u d e ducks  (Branta canadaensis),  (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), (Duff  took  went i n t o t h e m o u n t a i n s i n s e a r c h o f  hunted i n c l u d e b l a c k bear  mountain goat  canadensis)  Most h u n t i n g  (Duff 1952:72).  game, o f t e n f o r s e v e r a l d a y s . s e v e r a l weeks.  and b e r r y i n g ,  tended t o be f a t and t h e i r young had  t h e summer t o d e v e l o p  d r y i n g season hunters  last  such as h u n t i n g  and spruce  grouse  bald  eagles  (Dendragapus  Plant food a v a i l a b l e i n the f a l l apples  and h a z e l n u t s .  n e a r t h e mouth o f t h e F r a s e r  R i v e r , were o f t e n o b t a i n e d  through  trade o r from  (Duff 1952:74; S u t t l e s 1955:10,27). wapato, a w i l d r o o t v e g e t a b l e ,  in  crab-  C r a n b e r r i e s , w h i c h grew i n K a t z i e  t e r r i t o r y and o t h e r areas  1955:10,27) .  included wild  visitors  The K a t z i e a l s o d u g  during the f a l l  (Suttles  The a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d n a t i v e u s e o f p l a n t  S t o : l o t e r r i t o r y has been w e l l documented by D u f f  Turner Bell  (1975,1978), T u r n e r e t a l . (1990),  foods (1952),  and Turner and  (1971) . The f a l l  months were l i k e l y  a period of population  d i s p e r s a l as s m a l l task groups spread  across  to  take advantage of a v a r i e t y of resources.  in  the f a l l  summer.  the landscape Dwellings  used  w o u l d be s i m i l a r t o t h o s e u s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e  B o t h t e m p o r a r y mat l o d g e s  and p l a n k  u t i l i z e d n e a r t h e f i s h e r i e s w h i l e mat l o d g e s  houses were were u s e d  while  h u n t i n g and c o l l e c t i n g . Winter  was t h e s e a s o n when p r i m a r y  u t i l i z e d by t h e S t o : l o . ceremonial  Stored  were u t i l i z e d  was l a r g e l y a t i m e o f  the winter  most h u n t i n g  foods,  such as salmon and d r i e d b e r r i e s ,  (Duff 1952:73; S u t t l e s 1955:10).  Steelhead  t r o u t , w h i c h spawned i n J a n u a r y , ( S u t t l e s 1955:22; W e l l s  occurred  i n the f a l l ,  t h e i r dens i n t h e w i n t e r Wells  were  a c t i v i t y w i t h l e s s emphasis p l a c e d on s u b s i s t e n c e  activities.  in  Winter  group v i l l a g e s  1987:57) .  1987:133).  bears  were  caught  Although  w e r e smoked o u t o f  (Duff 1952:71-72; S u t t l e s 1955:21;  Winter  d w e l l i n g s w e r e o n e o f two t y p e s .  Chilliwack,  Pilait,  The T a i t ,  C h e h a l i s and S c o w l i t z i n h a b i t e d  p i t h o u s e s d u r i n g t h e r e g i o n ' s t h r e e c o l d e s t months M a r c h ) (Maud 1 9 7 8 : 1 1 8 ) .  Groups l o c a t e d f u r t h e r  (January-  downriver  below C h i l l i w a c k and S c o w l i t z considered p i t h o u s e s a l u x u r y and u s e d t h e m o n l y o n r a r e o c c a s i o n s 1978:47; W e l l s Joe, and  1987:35).  a Chilliwack,  ( D u f f 1 9 5 2 : 4 6 ; Maud  Wilson Duff's inforinant,  suggested  that pithouses below  Robert Chilliwack  S c o w l i t z w e r e r a r e due t o p r o b l e m s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l o w  ground and w a t e r seepage  (Duff  1952:46).  S h e d - r o o f p l a n k h o u s e s w e r e t h e m o s t common w i n t e r dwelling downriver 1952:46,49).  from t h e C h i l l i w a c k and S c o w l i t z Edmond  Lorenzo  m e n t i o n e d o t h e r l e s s common p l a n k h o u s e t y p e s  i n this  region.  Duff's K a t z i e informant,  (Duff  Lorenzo  d e s c r i b e d a g a b l e r o o f house o f h i s  g r a n d f a t h e r w h i c h was s i m i l a r t o o t h e r s l o c a t e d a t Sumas a n d elsewhere.  Lorenzo  a l s o spoke o f C h i l l i w a c k t r a d i t i o n s i n  which a house w i t h an i n v e r t e d gable r o o f prominently.  Duff  suggested  these  featured  "unusual"  h o u s e t y p e s may  have been r e l a t e d t o t h e development and g r o w t h o f ceremonial  and s o c i a l  f u n c t i o n s (Duff  1952:48).  Upper S t o : l o w i n t e r v i l l a g e p o p u l a t i o n s tended fluid vacant  t o be  with families often relocating t o other v i l l a g e s or locations.  As a r e s u l t ,  the best places f o r  h a b i t a t i o n w i t h i n a group's t e r r i t o r y would l i k e l y have been u s e d a t one t i m e o r a n o t h e r . movement was m o t i v a t e d  Much o f t h i s  population  by t h e search f o r r i c h e r  food  resources to  o r firewood.  internal  Langley,  resources  some movement w o u l d b e due  f r i c t i o n o r t h e d e s i r e f o r a change i n  surroundings. and  However,  A few v i l l a g e  locations,  s u c h a s Y a l e , Hope  w e r e p e r m a n e n t due t o t h e e x t r e m e l y  a v a i l a b l e nearby.  Duff  were few Upper S t o : l o v i l l a g e s  rich  (1952:85) s p e c u l a t e d  there  with populations exceeding  50  individuals. Recent r e s e a r c h a t the K e a t l e y Creek p i t h o u s e near L i l l o o e t b r i n g s Duff's v i l l a g e p o p u l a t i o n into  question.  Hayden and S p a f f o r d  t h a t one p e r s o n space.  then Duff's  r e s i d e d i n a p i t h o u s e p e r 2.5 m^  of f l o o r  i n Sto:lo pithouses  Sto:lo village  population  s h o u l d be r e - e x a m i n e d i n l i g h t o f t h e K e a t l e y  Creek data  ( s e e a l s o H a y d e n 1992) .  S p r i n g was a n i m p o r t a n t  p e r i o d f o r t h e S t o : l o as food  s u p p l i e s needed r e p l e n i s h i n g . important  argue  (1952) e s t i m a t e s must be c o n s i d e r e d l o w .  Hayden's r e s e a r c h s u g g e s t s estimates  estimates  (1993:116-117)  I f such d e n s i t i e s were s i m i l a r  village  role  salmonberry,  P l a n t foods p l a y e d an  a t t h i s time of year.  The s h o o t s o f  t h i m b l e b e r r y , t h e round s t a l k  p a r s n i p and o t h e r g r e e n s h o o t s were e a t e n  o f t h e cow( D u f f 1952:74) .  The a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d n a t i v e u s e o f p l a n t f o o d s h a s b e e n documented and t h e r e a d e r Turner Bell  (1975,1978), Turner  i s again r e f e r r e d t o Duff e t a l . (1990),  and Turner  well  (1952), and  (1971) f o r a n i n - d e p t h d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y  and u s e o f p l a n t  foods.  Eulachon  (Thaleichthys pacificus),  anadromous f i s h , until  an abundant  enter the Fraser River during l a t e  t h e e n d o f May  (Drake and W i l s o n  S u t t l e s 1955:21,23).  1992:8; D u f f  far  1952:70;  These f i s h were caught i n l a r g e  numbers b y t h e S t o : l o a n d p r o v i d e d a n i m p o r t a n t their diet.  April  Eulachon  addition to  r e g u l a r l y ascend t h e F r a s e r R i v e r as  as M i s s i o n b u t r a r e l y f u r t h e r than C h i l l i w a c k .  were p r e s e r v e d by smoking r a t h e r t h a n r e n d e r e d  Eulachon  i n t o o i l as  was t h e p r a c t i c e o f o t h e r g r o u p s o n t h e n o r t h w e s t (Drake and W i l s o n harvested  these  1992:22; D u f f  1952:71).  coast  The K a t z i e  f i s h w i t h rakes whereas bag n e t s were used  i n Upper S t o : l o t e r r i t o r y White sturgeon  (Duff 1952:71; S u t t l e s  (Acipenser transmontanus),  a  1955:23). fish  s p e c i e s w h i c h c a n w e i g h a s much a s 800 k g , w e r e a l s o consumed b y t h e S t o : l o ( D u f f 1 9 5 2 : 6 7 ) . a v a i l a b l e year-round  Sturgeon  were  b u t w e r e most e a s i l y o b t a i n e d  during  J u n e a n d J u l y when t h e y moved i n t o s h a l l o w r i v e r  sloughs t o  spawn  also  (Duff 1952:67; Von Krough 1980:12).  spawned i n t h e s p r i n g a n d w e r e h a r v e s t e d (Wells 1987:107). to  Little  i n some number  By mid-June spawning s o c k e y e w o u l d  appear and economic a c t i v i t i e s  salmon f i s h e r y  Trout  (Duff  begin  would again t u r n t o the  1952:63).  information exists describing spring dwellings,  however, i t i s l i k e l y t h a t w i n t e r d w e l l i n g s r e m a i n e d inhabited u n t i l of s e a s o n a l  t h e p o p u l a t i o n began t o d i s p e r s e i n s e a r c h  resources.  Dwellings a t these  procurement  l o c a t i o n s w e r e l i k e l y e i t h e r p l a n k h o u s e s o r t e m p o r a r y mat  s t r u c t u r e s d e p e n d i n g upon t h e n a t u r e o f t h e a c t i v i t i e s , group s i z e and t h e planned d u r a t i o n  of the stay  (Suttles  1955:15) .  O r a l T r a d i t i o n o f t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  During the course of excavations s i t e G o r d o n Mohs c o l l e c t e d o r a l H a t z i c Rock from S t o : l o e l d e r s .  at the Hatzic  Rock  traditions pertaining to Three e l d e r s r e v e a l e d  that  H a t z i c Rock i s a s s o c i a t e d  w i t h an e a r l i e r p e r i o d  i n Storlo  h i s t o r y when t h e C r e a t o r ,  X a : I s . came t o e a r t h .  In this  e a r l i e r time,  four great  chiefs challenged  the a u t h o r i t y of  X a : I s and were s u b s e q u e n t l y t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o t h e s t o n e a t Hatzic.  One e l d e r a l s o r e v e a l e d  t h a t Shxwexwo: s, t h e  T h u n d e r b i r d t h a t l i v e s o n n e a r b y Sumas M o u n t a i n , a c t s a s t h e g u a r d i a n o f H a t z i c Rock  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 1 1 ) .  Recent H i s t o r y o f t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  Through i n t e r v i e w s w i t h the a r e a surrounding the  Sto:lo Indians  from t h e upper  R i v e r v a l l e y camped a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  m i d - 1 8 0 0 ' s when t h e O b l a t e m i s s i o n constructed.  that  H a t z i c R o c k was u s e d a s a c a m p s i t e i n  early h i s t o r i c period.  Fraser  S t o : l o e l d e r s Mohs l e a r n t  a t M i s s i o n was  Other informants i n d i c a t e d L i l ' w a t  f r o m P o r t D o u g l a s a n d Skookumchuk, a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e w h i l e  on H a r r i s o n  the mission  was  i nthe being Indians  Lake, being  camped  established  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 1 0 ) .  The  h a v e b e e n known a s a f a v o r a b l e the  region  even though the  d i e d from disease The and  1992:11).  an o r c h a r d The  the n o r t h e r n  dike  the  fill  i n the  Hatzic people  c l e a r e d of n a t u r a l  the Catherwood f a m i l y  The  Catherwood p r o p e r t y  Trust.  and  turned  (c.  removed f o r (Wilson  was  (Mohs 1 9 9 2 : 1 1 ) .  on  use  terrace  f l o o d y e a r o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1960  o f t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e and  Heritage  river  H a t z i c R o c k s i t e o c c u p i e s was  H a r r y U t z i g i n 1979  1993  trees  attest to this  C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Government r e c o g n i z e d  s p r i n g of  vegetation (Mohs  remaining f r u i t  A l a r g e s e c t i o n of the  1 9 9 1 : 6 ) ( F i g u r e 2.2).  had  area.  f r i n g e s of the property  which the  s o l d t o Mr.  of the  p r e s e n c e o f a few  1991:6).  8000 m2)  by  to  campsite f o r native people i n  last  H a t z i c R o c k s i t e was  u s e d as  (Wilson  or l e f t  H a t z i c Rock s i t e appears  eventually The  British  the h e r i t a g e  purchased the p r o p e r t y  in  i t s management o v e r t o t h e  value the B.C.  Figure C o n t o u r Map  2.2  of the H a t z i c Rock  Site  CHAPTER THREE CHRONOLOGY  Introduction  This chapter excavated  describes the chronology  f r o m t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  of material  This includes a  d e s c r i p t i o n o f e x c a v a t i o n methods, s t r a t i g r a p h y and radiocarbon occupation  dates.  Archaeological deposits are divided into  zones t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e a n a l y s i s o f a r t i f a c t s  features i n chapters  Excavation  and  f o u r and f i v e .  Methods  During  a c u r s o r y f i e l d i n s p e c t i o n o f a new s u b d i v i s i o n  development, a r c h a e o l o g i c a l d e p o s i t s were d i s c o v e r e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e 1991:1; W i l s o n  i n O c t o b e r 1990 b y G o r d o n Mohs  1991:2).  (Mohs  A s p r e p a r a t i o n s w e r e b e i n g made t o  conduct an a r c h a e o l o g i c a l assessment o f t h e s i t e , m e t r e o f d e p o s i t was r e m o v e d b y t h e d e v e l o p e r redeposited  i n l o n g berms a l o n g t h e s o u t h e r n  the p r o p e r t y  (Mohs 1 9 9 1 : 1 ; W i l s o n  Excavations, site  the top  and perimeter of  1991:6).  d i r e c t e d b y Mohs, b e g a n a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k  i n l a t e O c t o b e r o f 1990 w i t h f u n d i n g p r o v i d e d b y t h e  Sto:lo Tribal  C o u n c i l and t h e M i n i s t r y o f M u n i c i p a l  Affairs,  R e c r e a t i o n a n d C u l t u r e t h r o u g h t h e B.C. H e r i t a g e T r u s t a n d B.C. L o t t e r i e s  (Mohs 1 9 9 1 : 1 ) .  Fieldwork  included the  e x c a v a t i o n o f s i x 1 x 1 m u n i t s , b y a r b i t r a r y 10 cm l e v e l s , and  the surface c o l l e c t i o n of a r t i f a c t s .  concluded  i n November 1990 due t o i n c l e m e n t w e a t h e r a n d a  lack of funds. was  This fieldwork  E x c a v a t i o n u n i t s were c o v e r e d  fenced o f f  and t h e area  (Mohs 1 9 9 1 : 1 ) .  Excavations  c o n t i n u e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  t h e s p r i n g a n d summer o f 1 9 9 1 . The S t o r l o T r i b a l and  t h e U.B.C. a r c h a e o l o g y  fieldschool  conducted  during Council  a  c o l l a b o r a t i v e s a l v a g e e x c a v a t i o n a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  site  p r i o r t o i t s a n t i c i p a t e d d e s t r u c t i o n by t h e s u b d i v i s i o n development.  The S t o : l o c r e w was s u p e r v i s e d b y G o r d o n Mohs  of t h e S t o : l o T r i b a l  Council.  The U.B.C.  archaeology  f i e l d s c h o o l was s u p e r v i s e d b y P r o f e s s o r D a v i d Funding B.C.  Pokotylo.  f o r t h i s e x c a v a t i o n was p r o v i d e d b y a g r a n t  Archaeology  the S t o : l o T r i b a l  Branch.  Funding  Council.  i n k i n d was p r o v i d e d b y  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  C o l u m b i a Dean o f A r t s O f f i c e p r o v i d e d s u p p l e m e n t a r y f o r t h e U.B.C. a r c h a e o l o g y T r u s t p r o v i d e d funds  from the  fieldschool.  t o operate  funding  The B.C. H e r i t a g e  a public interpretation  program a t t h e s i t e . I n S e p t e m b e r o f 1 9 9 1 , I.R. W i l s o n C o n s u l t a n t s , L t d . w e r e r e t a i n e d b y t h e B.C. A r c h a e o l o g y archaeological resource the H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  i n v e n t o r y and impact  assessment of  T h i s w o r k was t o d e t e r m i n e  to archaeological resources subdivision  Branch t o conduct an  development.  of the proposed  t h e impact  residential  Wilson's  f i e l d w o r k sought t o determine s i t e  boundaries  w i t h i n t h e proposed development and t o i d e n t i f y t h e n a t u r e of c u l t u r a l d e p o s i t s Wilson  assessed  nineteen  (Wilson 1991:2).  the nature  Using a backhoe,  of a r c h a e o l o g i c a l deposits a t  l o c a t i o n s across t h e proposed development  property.  This t h e s i s s t u d i e s the m a t e r i a l s c o l l e c t e d by t h e controlled excavations site during the f a l l  t h a t took p l a c e a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  o f 1990 a n d t h e s p r i n g / s u m m e r o f 1 9 9 1 .  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d b y I.R. W i l s o n  Consultants,  only used i n general d i s c u s s i o n s of the nature A v a r i e t y of techniques  were employed t o  operation  i s  of the s i t e . excavate  a r c h a e o l o g i c a l d e p o s i t s a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e . e x c a v a t i o n was t r e a t e d a s a s a l v a g e  Ltd.  As t h e  various  methods e v o l v e d d u r i n g t h e f i e l d w o r k i n o r d e r t o r e c o v e r as much i n f o r m a t i o n a s q u i c k l y a s p o s s i b l e . The  s i z e o f m o s t e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s was e i t h e r 1 x 1 m o r  2x2  m, h o w e v e r , some i r r e g u l a r u n i t s w e r e e x c a v a t e d  near the  end  o f t h e 1991 f i e l d  units  were e x c a v a t e d  season.  In a l l ,  thirty-eight  a l o n g w i t h f i v e e x p l o r a t o r y back-hoe  trenches  ( s e e F i g u r e 3 . 1 ) . T r e n c h 2 was l a t e r d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e 2x2 m units  ( u n i t s 33-35) a n d e x c a v a t e d  by hand.  The  s o u t h e r n m o s t p o r t i o n o f t r e n c h 5 was r e d e s i g n a t e d and  excavated  by hand.  An a r e a o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y  a s u n i t 36 67 m^  was  excavated. U.B.C. f i e l d s c h o o l  e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s were e x c a v a t e d  n a t u r a l l a y e r s i n 10 cm a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s .  by  T h e s e 2x2 m u n i t s  w e r e s u b d i v i d e d i n t o s i x t e e n 50 cm x 50 cm s u b u n i t s t o  Figure  3.1  P l a n of E x c a v a t i o n  Units  provide greater h o r i z o n t a l control f o r the material recovered. excavated not  Units excavated  b y 10 cm a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s .  separate  subunits. artifacts  A l l m a t r i x was s c r e e n e d  had  into  M" mesh a n d into the  F l o o r p l a n s o f e a c h l e v e l and i t s f e a t u r e s were  e x c a v a t i o n as r e q u i r e d .  Late  through  found i n s i t u had t h e i r l o c a t i o n s t i e d  Carbon and s o i l  completed  The S t o : l o c r e w d i d  discrete layers or divide excavation units  u n i t datum. drawn.  by t h e S t o : l o crew were  samples were t a k e n  throughout the  W a l l p r o f i l e s were drawn o f  units. i n t h e e x c a v a t i o n , a f t e r t h e U.B.C.  concluded,  fieldschool  methods were m o d i f i e d t o s a l v a g e  a s much  i n f o r m a t i o n a s p o s s i b l e p r i o r t o t h e immanent d e v e l o p m e n t o f the p r o p e r t y . perspective,  Although  not i d e a l  few o p t i o n s e x i s t e d .  i n c r e a s e d t o 2 0 cm a n d s h o v e l s instances.  Arbitrary levels  were  r e p l a c e d t r o w e l s i n most  A b a c k h o e was u s e d t o e x c a v a t e  around the perimeter  five  trenches  of the main e x c a v a t i o n area t o a s s i s t  i n p l a c i n g o t h e r u n i t s as time During  from an a r c h a e o l o g i c a l  the course  ran short.  of the excavation,  i t became  evident  t h e r e m a i n s o f a l a r g e s t r u c t u r e were b e i n g u n c o v e r e d . s t r u c t u r e became t h e f o c u s o f t h e summer f i e l d r a p i d l y excavated structure.  of the excavation.  Near t h e end  season s e v e r a l e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s were  t o l o c a t e the southwestern  These u n i t s were n o t e x c a v a t e d  simply shoveled  This  out.  limit  by l e v e l s but  Artifacts located i n situ  retained with p e r t i n e n t provenience  of t h i s  information.  were Matrix  was  not  screened.  The e x c a v a t i o n o f t h e s e u n i t s c e a s e d  post hole features demarcating were  when  t h e edge o f t h e s t r u c t u r e  encountered.  Stratigraphy  S t r a t i g r a p h y a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e was c o m p l e x a s l a y e r s were n o t e a s i l y d i s c e r n e d above f l o o r (Figure 3.2).  deposits  M a t r i x above s t e r i l e g r a v e l d e p o s i t s  c o n s i s t e d o f homogenous a c c u m u l a t i o n s This m a t r i x tended  of f l u v i a l  t o be r o c k f r e e w i t h l i t t l e  matrix.  variation i n  colour. U n d e r l y i n g s t e r i l e g r a v e l d e p o s i t s were e i t h e r accumulations  of pebbles,  layered veneers suggest  of coarse  cobbles, sand.  and coarse  unsorted  sand o r f i n e l y  The f i n e l a y e r e d s a n d s  p e r i o d s when s t a n d i n g w a t e r a c c u m u l a t e d i n t h i s  location  ( P a t t i s o n p e r s o n a l communication 1991).  was made t o s e p a r a t e profile  No  attempt  t h e s e two g r a v e l d e p o s i t s i n t h e  drawings.  Radiocarbon  Acre  Estimates  E i g h t r a d i o c a r b o n d a t e s were o b t a i n e d f o r t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  (Figure 3.3).  S i x dates  from t h e main  excavation  a r e a i n d i c a t e a r a n g e o f 510 r a d i o c a r b o n y e a r s w i t h t w o a d d i t i o n a l dates to the east  obtained from a second s t r u c t u r e d i s c o v e r e d  (trench 4 ) .  Figure  3.2  Main E x c a v a t i o n Area South Wall  Profile  F i g u r e 3.3 Radiocarbon Dates  from t h e H a t z i c  Rock  -1  Beta 46707  Beta 46708  Beta 47260  Nuta 1452  SFU 888  LAB NUMBER  Sample Age One Standard Deviation Two Standard Deviations  Site  r  WSU WSU 4327 4328  Radiocarbon dates from t h e main e x c a v a t i o n a r e a two d a t e s f r o m a p o s t f e a t u r e i n u n i t 3. cm d.b.u.  include  A s a m p l e f r o m 180  ( d e p t h b e l o w u n i t ) p r o v i d e d a d a t e o f 4420±180 BP  (Nuta-1452).  A s a m p l e f r o m 200 cm d.b.u. p r o v i d e d a  p r o b l e m a t i c d a t e o f A.D.  2800^.  Two r a d i o c a r b o n s a m p l e s w e r e o b t a i n e d f r o m h e a r t h features i n the structure's floor deposits. d a t e d t o 4490±70 BP ( S F U - 8 8 8 ) . 4800±70 BP  (Beta-46708).  i n t o account,  A second  One s a m p l e  sample d a t e d t o  When s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s a r e t a k e n  t h e two f l o o r d a t e s a r e r o u g h l y  with the p r e v i o u s l y described post f e a t u r e date  contemporary (4420±180  BP) . A fifth in unit  10, 15 cm a b o v e a g r a v e l b e n c h f e a t u r e i n s i d e t h e  structure, likely  r a d i o c a r b o n sample, t a k e n from a c h a r c o a l l e n s  d a t e d t o 4930±70 BP (WSU-4327).  reflects  T h i s sample  a n age a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e o c c u p a t i o n o f t h e  structure or a period shortly thereafter.  This date i s  o l d e r than t h e date obtained from t h e post f e a t u r e , b u t , when s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s a r e c o n s i d e r e d , t h e s e d a t e s a l l fall  w i t h i n t h e same g e n e r a l a g e r a n g e .  A  statistical  summary o f t h e f o u r v a l i d d a t e s f r o m s t r u c t u r e 1 p r o v i d e t h e age  o f 4725±39 BP The  BP  (Berry 1982).  d i s t u r b e d s u r f a c e o f t h e s i t e was d a t e d t o 4590±70  (WSU-4328) w i t h a s a m p l e t a k e n f r o m a c h a r c o a l  1 The S.F.U. l a b number a n d t h e r a d i o c a r b o n a g e o f t h i s sample c o u l d n o t be o b t a i n e d d e s p i t e r e p e a t e d a t t e m p t s . The cause o f sample i n a c c u r a c y c o u l d n o t be d e t e r m i n e d .  c o n c e n t r a t i o n 5.7m d.b.s.).  w e s t o f t h e u n i t 10 d a t u m  (5-15  cm  T h i s date suggests a r a p i d r a t e of d e p o s i t i o n at  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e . A l s o d a t e d were t h e remains exposed  of a second  e a s t o f t h e m a i n e x c a v a t i o n by an  structure,  exploratory  backhoe t r e n c h ( t r e n c h 4 ) .  A c h a r c o a l sample, a s s o c i a t e d  with the s t r u c t u r e ' s f l o o r ,  was  taken from the n o r t h w a l l  t r e n c h 4 a n d d a t e d t o 8980±90 BP sample,  A  second  a l s o t a k e n f r o m t h e n o r t h w a l l o f t r e n c h 4,  a d a t e o f 4530±120 BP this  (Beta-46707).  s a m p l e was  (Beta-47260).  t a k e n from "about"  structure's floor,  F i e l d notes 20 cm a b o v e  however, w a l l p r o f i l e s  taken from the s t r u c t u r e ' s f l o o r .  The  of  yielded  indicate  the  suggest  i t was  stratigraphie  r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e s e two d a t e s i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure The  3.4. 8980 BP d a t e i s c o n s i d e r e d p r o b l e m a t i c b e c a u s e o f  i t s g r e a t age The  failure  i n comparison  t o o t h e r samples from the s i t e ^ .  t o secure a second date of t h i s  a n a d j a c e n t s a m p l e r a i s e d some c o n c e r n . 8980 BP d a t e i s d i s c o u n t e d .  antiquity  As a r e s u l t ,  An a d d i t i o n a l d a t e ( s ) o f  from the this  ^ B e t a A n a l y t i c , I n c . n o t e d a m i n o r amount o f r o o t c o n t a m i n a t i o n p r e s e n t i n t h i s s a m p l e a n d t h e amount o f s u i t a b l e c a r b o n was s l i g h t l y on t h e l o w s i d e . In response t h e l a b p e r f o r m e d e x t e n d e d c o u n t i n g on t h e s a m p l e t o r e d u c e t h e a s s o c i a t e d , somewhat h i g h e r s t a t i s t i c a l e r r o r t e r m . The l a b a l s o went t o l e n g t h s t o e n s u r e l a b p r o c e d u r e s and c a r b o n c o n t e n t were c o r r e c t . The r e a s o n f o r t h e a p p a r e n t s a m p l e c o n t a m i n a t i o n i s n o t known.  F i g u r e 3.4 Trench 4 North Wall  Profile  w  4530 +/- 120 8980 +/- 90  Charcoal Charcoal stained Mottled brown fluvial deposits Sterile sand and gravel  0 metres  age  w o u l d be n e c e s s a r y  accepted.  c o u l d be  Whether t h e sample w h i c h p r o v i d e d t h e e a r l y  i s accurate, be d e t e r m i n e d sources  b e f o r e t h e 8980 BP d a t e  contaminated,  date  o r r e p r e s e n t s o l d wood c o u l d n o t  ( s e e Bowman 1990 f o r a d i s c u s s i o n o f p o s s i b l e  of contamination).  The  second date  problems.  f r o m s t r u c t u r e two i s a l s o n o t w i t h o u t  The 4530±120 BP ( B e t a - 4 7 2 6 0 ) d a t e  q u e s t i o n s when c o m p a r e d t o t h e d a t e disturbed surface.  The d a t e  than the s u r f a c e date,  raises  obtained f o r the  f o r s t r u c t u r e two i s y o u n g e r  however, t h e i r s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s  overlap. To  summarize, r a d i o c a r b o n dates  f r o m s t r u c t u r e one  p r o v i d e a n a v e r a g e d a g e o f 4725±39 BP. w i t h t h e second s t r u c t u r e ,  Dates a s s o c i a t e d  l o c a t e d i n t r e n c h 4, a r e  p r o b l e m a t i c due t o l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e two sample a g e s . The  second date  f r o m s t r u c t u r e two i n d i c a t e s i t i s r o u g h l y  contemporary w i t h the d i s t u r b e d s i t e above i t .  This suggests  s u r f a c e l o c a t e d 1 metre  s t r u c t u r e two i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y  4500  years o l d .  site  Though two o f t h e d a t e s  o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e H a t z i c Rock  raise  the remaining  reliable.  s e r i o u s concerns,  dates  appear  T h a t many o f t h e H a t z i c r a d i o c a r b o n d a t e s  overlap  does n o t i n d i c a t e p r o b l e m s , r a t h e r i t r e f l e c t s t h e shortcomings  of radiocarbon dating i n general.  Radiocarbon  d a t i n g i s n o t p r e c i s e enough t o measure t h e r a p i d d e p o s i t i o n of m a t e r i a l w h i c h appears t o have o c c u r r e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  site.  Occupation  Zones  Three major o c c u p a t i o n  zones were i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e  main e x c a v a t i o n a r e a a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  The s e c o n d  s t r u c t u r e e x p o s e d i n t r e n c h 4 was n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h i s analysis.  The m e t h o d s u s e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e o c c u p a t i o n  zones a r e d e s c r i b e d below. S t r a t i g r a p h y was t h e f i r s t m e t h o d u s e d t o s e p a r a t e o c c u p a t i o n zones.  Stratigraphy isolated  floor  deposits  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e s t r u c t u r e from o v e r l y i n g f i l l . d e p o s i t s were e a s i l y  i d e n t i f i e d as a t h i c k  ( c . 10-20 cm)  dark band o f m a t r i x o v e r l y i n g s t e r i l e g r a v e l . colour of f l o o r deposits i s l i k e l y the accumulation by-products  of d a i l y  life.  Though t h i s method p r o v e d  U.B.C. f i e l d s c h o o l ,  deposits separate  isolate  as o c c u p a t i o n  and post this  zone I I I .  t h e most s i m p l e a n d F o r example, as  chapter, with the exception of the  u n i t s were most o f t e n e x c a v a t e d  s e r i e s o f 10 cm o r 20 cm a r b i t r a r y were n o t s e p a r a t e d  of hearths  a l s o helped  i t was n o t w i t h o u t p r o b l e m s .  discussed e a r l i e r i n this  exists  t o have been caused by  The p r e s e n c e  The f l o o r was d e s i g n a t e d  successful  The d a r k  and t r a m p l i n g o f c h a r c o a l , a s h and o t h e r  f e a t u r e s i n many w a l l p r o f i l e s zone.  Floor  levels.  s o t h e r e was no a t t e m p t from the f i l l .  Distinct t o keep  As a r e s u l t ,  ina layers floor  blurring  between o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I and o v e r l y i n g d e p o s i t s i n  some a r e a s  of the excavation.  The  homogenous n a t u r e  occupation  o f m a t r i x l o c a t e d above  zone I I I p r e v e n t e d  of f u r t h e r o c c u p a t i o n zones. were p r e s e n t ,  they covered  the stratigraphie delineation While  stratigraphie  l i m i t e d areas  and c o u l d n o t be  linked together to define larger occupation possible with the floor The  ability  z o n e s a s was  zone.  to isolate discrete occupation  further complicated  lenses  z o n e s was  i n some o f t h e e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s b y d a t a  q u a l i t y and t h e e f f e c t of s l o p i n g s t r u c t u r e w a l l s . response  t o these d i f f i c u l t i e s  eleven of the t h i r t y - e i g h t  e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s were i s o l a t e d as a " c o r e " a r e a 3.5).  In  (Figure  Core e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s were l o c a t e d i n a r e a s  f l o o r d e p o s i t s away f r o m t h e edge o f t h e s t r u c t u r e .  of level These  e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s were u s e d t o f u r t h e r d e l i n e a t e o c c u p a t i o n zones a t t h e H a t z i c Rock The  site.  a n a l y s i s o f h e a r t h f e a t u r e s i n t h e c o r e a r e a was  the o n l y technique  which s u c c e s s f u l l y d e l i n e a t e d a d d i t i o n a l  occupation  Hearth  zones.  f e a t u r e s proved  purpose as they o f t e n covered some f o r m o f l i v i n g The  ideal  a l a r g e area and  f o r this suggested  floor or surface.  l o c a t i o n of hearth features i n core  u n i t s were p l o t t e d by u n i t and l e v e l .  excavation  T h i s method  s u c c e s s f u l l y i d e n t i f i e d two zones o f o c c u p a t i o n above zone III.  Occupation  z o n e I was i d e n t i f i e d  d e p o s i t s by t h e presence  i n t h e t o p 40 cm o f  of four hearths  a t r o u g h l y t h e same  Figure  3.5  Core E x c a v a t i o n  Units  depth f o l l o w e d by a h i a t u s of these f e a t u r e s . zone I I l a y d i r e c t l y b e l o w o c c u p a t i o n occupation  Occupation  zone I and r e s t e d  zone I I I .  To s u m m a r i z e , o c c u p a t i o n  zone I I I d e p o s i t s  were  defined  on t h e b a s i s o f s t r a t i g r a p h y a s t h e d a r k 10-2 0 cm t h i c k of m a t r i x  overlying basal gravel deposits.  i s associated w i t h the f l o o r z o n e I I was d e f i n e d  simply  This  of the s t r u c t u r e .  as t h e d e p o s i t s  and o v e r l y i n g zone I I I d e p o s i t s .  with cultural  Occupation  underlying  cultural hearths  deposits at roughly  a stable l i v i n g  surface  zone d e f i n i t i o n . occupation the  fall  identified  cm d . b . u . and p r o v i d e d  Unfortunately  z o n e I was  fluvial  throughout.  i n t h e t o p 40 cm o f  b a s e d on t h e p r e s e n c e o f s e v e r a l 3 0-40  zone I  O c c u p a t i o n zone I I i s  material distributed  O c c u p a t i o n z o n e I was  band  occupation  composed o f a r e l a t i v e l y homogenous a c c u m u l a t i o n o f matrix  on  These h e a r t h s the b a s i s of  small suggested occupation  the upper p o r t i o n of  removed by l a n d a l t e r i n g  activities in  o f 1990.  The f o l l o w i n g two c h a p t e r s  examine t h e a r t i f a c t s  features a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each occupation  zone.  and  CHAPTER FOUR ARTIFACTS  Introduction  T h i s c h a p t e r summarizes H a t z i c Rock  site.  is tabulated inter-site  artifacts  excavated from the  The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e a r t i f a c t  and compared  level.  at the i n t r a - s i t e  The i n t r a - s i t e  level  d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e t h r e e o c c u p a t i o n  isolated  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock the i n t e r - s i t e  assemblage i s compared Charles Culture  sites.  zones  site.  level,  t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  to artifact  artifact  assemblages from o t h e r  This comparison seeks t o understand  how t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e a r t i f a c t other a r t i f a c t  and t h e  comparison seeks t o  identify  At  assemblage  assemblage r e l a t e s t o  assemblages of s i m i l a r  age.  This comparison  a l s o a t t e m p t s t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n Eayem phase s i t e s artifact  a n d S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s  are reflected  assemblages o r whether d i f f e r e n c e s  residential  sites  i nthe  between  and r e s o u r c e procurement s i t e s  c a n be  observed.  Methods  of Analysis  Originally analysis,  10,016 a r t i f a c t s  however,  artifacts  were p r o c e s s e d f o r t h i s  l a c k i n g p r o p e r p r o v e n i e n c e were  l a t e r excluded.  In a l l ,  8552 a r t i f a c t s a r e u s e d i n t h i s  analysis. A r t i f a c t s w e r e p r o c e s s e d i n one o f two ways d e p e n d i n g upon t h e i r t y p e .  Items c l a s s i f i e d as t o o l s r e c e i v e d t h e  most d e t a i l e d t r e a t m e n t . typology Fraser  T o o l s were c l a s s i f i e d u s i n g t h e  d e v e l o p e d by M i t c h e l l and P o k o t y l o  Canyon P r o j e c t .  Modifications to this  i n c l u d e t h e m e r g i n g o f some a r t i f a c t a d d i t i o n o f new a r t i f a c t t o o l s because l i k e  classes.  a tool,  a l l lithic  typology  c l a s s e s and t h e  Cores were i n c l u d e d  cores r e f l e c t  t h a t were c a r r i e d o u t a t t h e s i t e includes  (n.d) f o r t h e i r  specific  activities  ( P r a t t 1992:93).  Debitage  waste m a t e r i a l r e s u l t i n g from t o o l  manufacture, m o d i f i c a t i o n , o r r e p a i r .  Classes  of debitage  i n c l u d e u n m o d i f i e d f l a k e s , f l a k e s h a t t e r and b l o c k Appendix A contains  with  d e s c r i p t i o n s and m e t r i c  shatter.  summaries f o r  each t o o l c l a s s . Artifact  raw m a t e r i a l was d e t e i n n i n e d  d e v e l o p e d by M i t c h e l l and P o k o t y l o Canyon P r o j e c t .  This  typology  using  the  (n.d) f o r t h e i r  was m o d i f i e d  typology Fraser  t o suit the  needs o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e a n a l y s i s , however, t h e classifications  remain comparable.  m e r g i n g o f raw m a t e r i a l a d d i t i o n o f new  classes.  classes  Differences  include the  i n t o s i n g l e c l a s s e s and t h e  Artifacts  Table occupation Tool counts  4.1  provides tool  and  percentages  similar  flakes  pebble  over  80%  and  Occupation  from occupation  Artifacts  and p e b b l e  recovered  whereas o c c u p a t i o n zones I I and  the absence tools.  z o n e I I and  I I I each had  zone I assemblage.  The  projectile  p o i n t was  at the i n t e r f a c e  occupation  zone I I t h u s  I?  point represents less  recovered raising  i n the lower occupation  Were b i f a c i a l t o o l s  technology  i n occupation  Perhaps l a n d a l t e r i n g e x c a v a t i o n had  of  of  the  with  the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t i t  may  zone I I . classes,  including several  not used i n o c c u p a t i o n  l a c k of b i f a c i a l a r t i f a c t s r e f l e c t  or increased tool  12%  zone I  p o i n t s , i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I r a i s e s  Does t h i s  s i t e use  t h a n 3%  occupation  near absence of b i f a c i a l t o o l  questions.  zone I  I I I a r t i f a c t assemblages whereas  occupation  projectile  of  approximately  projectile  The  zone.  several  the s i n g l e  belong  represent  single  from o c c u p a t i o n  P r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s comprised  the o c c u p a t i o n  A  are  expedient  assemblage i n each o c c u p a t i o n  b i f a c i a l l y worked f l a k e  examples.  units.  of t h i s nature  zone I i s marked by  p o i n t was  f o r each  zones I - I I I  r e f l e c t an emphasis upon  tools.  of the t o o l  projectile  and p e r c e n t a g e s  zone i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e c o r e e x c a v a t i o n  remarkably and  counts  curation?  An  zone  shifts  in  absence of b i f a c i a l  zone I i s p o s s i b l e but  unlikely.  a c t i v i t i e s which occurred p r i o r  a s k e w i n g i n f l u e n c e on t h i s  occupation  to  the  zone's  Table  T o o l Counts and P e r c e n t a g e s from O c c u p a t i o n Zones I - I I I (Core E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s )  4.1  Artifact  O c c u p a t i o n Zone  Class I  P r o j e c t i l e Points Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Lanceolate P r o j e c t i l e Point Projectile Point Tip P r o j e c t i l e Point Medial Section Leaf-Shaped P o i n t Base Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t B a s e Blade T o o l s Microblade Flake Tools M u l t i p l e Point Graver P i e c e Esquillée Pebble Flake w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Acute-Angled Utilization Flake with Acute-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Steep-Angled U t i l i z e d Flake Acute-Angled U t i l i z e d Flake Cortex S p a l l Flake w i t h SteepAngled B i f a c i a l Retouch  III  II  0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1  .0% 2 .6% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 2 .6%  3 5 .4% 1 1 .8% 1 1 .8% 1 1 .8% 0 .0% 1 1 .8% .0% 0 7 12 .5%  1 1 .5% 2 3 .0% 0 .0% .0% 0 1 1 .5% .0% 0 4 6 .1% 8 12 .1%  1 1  2 .6% 2 .6%  0 0  .0% .0%  0 0  .0% .0%  0 0 0  .0% .0% .0%  0 1 1  .0% 1 .8% 1 .8%  1 1 0  1 .5% 1 .5% .0%  2  5 .3%  4  7 .1%  3  4 .6%  1  2 .6%  0  .0%  0  .0%  0  .0%  1  1 .8%  0  .0%  0  .0%  1  1 .8%  0  .0%  3  7 .9%  6 10 .7%  5  7 .6%  2  5 .3%  2  1  1 .5%  3 .6%  6 15 .8% 7 18 .4% 0 .0%  5 8 .9% 7 12 .5% 0 .0%  8 12 . 1 % 9 13 .6% 1 1 .5%  21 55 .3%  28 50 .0%  29 43 .9% Con't  T a b l e 4.1 C o n ' t Cores/Pebble T o o l s Core Pebble w i t h B i f a c i a l Peripheral Flaking Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l Peripheral Flaking Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l Peripheral Flaking/ Hammerstone Hammerstone Hammerstone w i t h Edge Hammerstone/Anvil A n v i l Stone  10 2 6 . 3 % .0% 0 1  Abrasion  2.6%  Ground and Pecked Stone P e b b l e Hammer Miscellaneous P a i n t Stone Paint Stone/Anvil  16 24.2% 2 3.0%  1  1.8%  4  6.1%  0  .0%  0  .0%  1  1.5%  0 0 0 0  .0% .0% .0% .0%  1 0 1 1  1.8% .0% 1.8% 1.8%  1 1 0 0  1.2% 1.2% .0% .0%  11 29.0%  Ground Stone D i s c Bead Ground S l a t e B l a d e Fragment Formed A b r a s i v e S t o n e F r a g m e n t A b r a s i v e Stone  12 21.4% 1 1.8%  17  30.4%  25 37.9%  2 0 0 0  5.3% .0% .0% .0%  0 0 2 0  .0% .0% 3.6% .0%  0 1 1 1  .0% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5%  2  5.3%  2  3.5%  3  4.5%  0  .0%  1  1.8%  0  .0%  0  .0%  1  1.8%  0  .0%  2 0  5.3% .0%  0 1  .0% 1.8%  0 1  .0% 1.5%  2  5.3%  1  1.8%  1  1.5%  38 100.0% 56 100.0% 66 1 0 0 . 0Î  TOTAL  assemblage.  A s a t i s f a c t o r y explanation f o r the minimal  presence o f b i f a c i a l  t o o l s i n occupation  zone I remains  elusive. Pebble t o o l and pebble f l a k e t o o l a r t i f a c t showed c o n s i d e r a b l e v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e t h r e e zones.  Pebble t o o l  classes occupation  c l a s s e s were most dominant i n o c c u p a t i o n  z o n e I I I (10.6%) i n c o m p a r i s o n t o o c c u p a t i o n and  occupation  zone I ( 2 . 6 % ) .  z o n e I I (3.6%)  The d i f f e r e n c e i n p e b b l e  p r o p o r t i o n s between o c c u p a t i o n  z o n e s c o u l d be  tool  functionally  or temporally r e l a t e d . F o r e x a m p l e , t h e g r e a t e r number o f p e b b l e t o o l s i n occupation  zone I I I , t h e o l d e s t c u l t u r a l d e p o s i t s  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e ,  excavated  may be a r e f l e c t i o n o f a r t i f a c t  c o n t i n u i t y from the preceding  Old Cordilleran Culture  (O.C.C.).  The O.C.C. (9000-5500 BP) was d o m i n a t e d b y p e b b l e  based t o o l  classes.  While p o s s i b l e , the short time  represented  i n t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e d e p o s i t s  hypothesis,  i fvalid,  younger d e p o s i t s mentioned, t h i s proportions  span  suggests  this  would h o l d t r u e f o r t h e s l i g h t l y  i n occupation  zones I and I I .  As  i s not the case t h e r e f o r e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  of pebble t o o l s are l i k e l y  functionally related.  A somewhat d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n i s r e f l e c t e d b y t h e proportion of pebble f l a k e tool zone.  c l a s s e s i n each  O c c u p a t i o n zone I I c o n t a i n s  of these  tool  classes  containing s l i g h t l y contains  the greatest  (10.7%) w i t h o c c u p a t i o n  less  (7.9%).  occupation proportion  zone I  O c c u p a t i o n zone I I I  the smallest proportion of pebble f l a k e t o o l s  (4.6%). Ground stone represented  a r t i f a c t s a r e more o r l e s s e q u a l l y  i n the three occupation  unique t o occupation found i n occupation blade  zones.  zone I whereas a b r a s i v e zones I I and I I I .  f r a g m e n t was f o u n d i n o c c u p a t i o n  D i s c beads a r e stones  are only  A s i n g l e ground zone I I I .  slate  Pecked stone hammer, f o u n d  i s r e p r e s e n t e d by a s i n g l e i t e m , a  i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I I (see F i g u r e 4.1).  single microblade, o c c u p a t i o n zone I .  f a s h i o n e d f r o m b a s a l t , was The  best evidence  i n d u s t r y a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e microblade  A  recovered i n  f o r a prepared  blade  i s a small basalt  c o r e w i t h two w e l l d e f i n e d b l a d e s c a r s .  Unfortunately this of  pebble  i t e m was  f o u n d on t h e d i s t u r b e d s u r f a c e  the s i t e making i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the  excavated  deposits unclear. Items of note which i n c l u d e ochre  and  included i n Table  ochre-related artifacts  Several p i e c e s of ochre found  were not  and  contained a p i e c e of f i r e  of v a r i o u s types.  f l a k e s w i t h ochre  i n each o c c u p a t i o n zone.  Occupation  adhering  As  cracked rock covered w i t h  ochre utilized  ochre.  o c c u p a t i o n zones I - I I I  a l l date t o the  Charles  Culture,  the composition of the three t o o l assemblages  expected  t o be  of  comparable w i t h each other w i t h the  o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I .  with the f l o o r  Occupation  o f t h e s t r u c t u r e and was  expected  of a g r e a t e r range of a c t i v i t i e s  artifact  t y p e s and Occupation  evidence  zone I I I d i d not p o s s e s s  possess by  a large  f o r a g r e a t e r range of a c t i v i t i e s . suggest  to  artifact  t y p e s as e x p e c t e d  zone I I I t o o l assemblage does not  exception  as i n d i c a t e d  g r e a t e r numbers o f c u r a t e d  p r o p o r t i o n of c u r a t e d a r t i f a c t  was  zone I I I i s a s s o c i a t e d  evidence  types.  were  zone I I I  w h i l e o c c u p a t i o n zone I I c o n t a i n e d an a c u t e - a n g l e d f l a k e coated w i t h  4.1  The  or contain occupation  substantial  F i g u r e 4 .1 P e b b l e Hammer  d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between t h e f l o o r and n o n - f l o o r assemblages except in occupation flake  tool  f o r the higher p r o p o r t i o n of pebble  tools  zone I I I and t h e l o w e r p r o p o r t i o n o f p e b b l e  tools. The  near absence o f b i f a c i a l  tool  classes i n occupation  zone I i s an anomaly. Tools  from a combined o c c u p a t i o n  zone I / I I and  o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I , i n b o t h c o r e and non-core units,  were t a b u l a t e d and p r e s e n t e d  to the p a t t e r n observed  i n Table  4.2.  pebble  zone I I I a r e dominated by e x p e d i e n t  tools.  Occupation  zone I / I I and flake or  zone I / I I i s composed o f 80.9%  f l a k e and pebble  t o o l s w h i l e 73.8% o f o c c u p a t i o n  made u p o f t h e s e  items.  from o c c u p a t i o n  Similar  i n the core excavation u n i t s , the  t o o l assemblages f o r t h e composite occupation occupation  excavation  Anvil  stones  zone I I I i s  are noticeably  absent  zone I I I .  P r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s a r e t w i c e a s common i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I as o c c u p a t i o n  zone I / I I s u g g e s t i n g  projectile  p o i n t s may h a v e b e e n s t o r e d o r c u r a t e d w i t h i n t h e s t r u c t u r e , h o w e v e r , t h e h i g h number o f f r a g m e n t a r y this interpretation. p o i n t forms were found  Leaf-shaped  examples weakens  a n d stemmed p r o j e c t i l e  i n both occupation  zones.  p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s a n d stemmed p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t w e r e t w i c e a s common i n o c c u p a t i o n z o n e I I I . reflect  a shift  i n h a f t i n g technology  fragments T h i s may  or preference.  s i n g l e l a n c e o l a t e p o i n t , unique t o occupation recovered.  Stemmed  A  z o n e I / I I , was  The d o m i n a n c e o f t h e stemmed p r o j e c t i l e  point  Table  T o o l Counts and P e r c e n t a g e s from Zones I / I I and I I I  4.2  Artifact  Occupation  O c c u p a t i o n Zone  Class  III  I/II P r o j e c t i l e Points Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e Point Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Lanceolate P r o j e c t i l e Point Projectile Point Tip P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t , D i s t a l Fragment P r o j e c t i l e Point Medial Section Leaf-Shaped P o i n t Base Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t B a s e  3  2.0% 2.6% .7% .7% 1.3% .0% .7% .7% 8.6%  4 9 0 1 2 1 4 8 29  2 .4% 5 .4% .0% .6% 1 .2% .6% 2 .4% 4 .8% 17 .3%  .0% .0%  1  1  .6% .6%  0  .0%  1  .7% .7%  0  .0%  0 0  .0% .0%  .6% .6% 1.2% .0% 4.8%  4 1 1  2 0 1 1  13 Miscellaneous Bifaces Formed B i f a c e , S t e e p - A n g l e d  Edge  0  0 Blade T o o l s Microblade Flake Tools M u l t i p l e Point Graver Discoidal Uniface P i e c e Esquillée Pebble Flake w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Acute-Angled Utilization Flake with Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Acute-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Flake w i t h Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch  1  1  .7%  1 1 2 0  13  8.6%  8  1  .7%  1  .6%  1  .7%  0  .0%  1  .7%  4  2.4%  0  .0%  1  .6%  19  12.5%  9  5.4%  4  2.6%  2  1.2%  2  1.3%  Con't  Table  4.2 C o n ' t  Steep-Angled U t i l i z e d Flake Acute-Angled U t i l i z e d Flake Cortex S p a l l Flake w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Cortex S p a l l Flake w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Cores/Pebble T o o l s Core Pebble w i t h B i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l Flaking Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l Flaking Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l F l a k i n g / Hammerstone Hammerstone Hammerstone w i t h Edge A b r a s i o n Hamme r s t o n e / A n v i 1 A n v i l Stone M i s c e l l a n e o u s Chipped Stone Miscellaneous Flaked Slate Ground Stone D i s c Bead Ground S l a t e B l a d e Fragment M i s c e l l a n e o u s Worked N e p h r i t e Formed A b r a s i v e S t o n e F r a g m e n t A b r a s i v e Stone Ground and Pecked Stone Grooved C o b b l e / A n v i l P e b b l e Hammer Miscellaneous P a i n t Stone Paint Stone/Anvil Pyroclast  TOTAL  14 18 0  9.2% 11.8% .0%  16 28 1  9.5% 16.7% .6%  0  .0%  1  .6%  74  48.7%  75  44.6%  35 4  23 .0% 2.6%  34 5  20.2% 3.0%  4  2.6%  5  3.0%  0  .0%  1  3  .7% .0% 1.3% 2.0%  49  32.2%  0 2  1 1 2 1 0 49  .6% .6% 1.2% .6% .0% 29.2%  1  .7%  0  .0%  1  .7%  0  .0%  2 2 0 4 2 10  1.3% 1.3% .0% 2.6% 1.3%  0 3 1 3 1  .0% 1.8% .6% 1.8% .6%  6.6%  8  4.8%  0  1  .0% .7%  1 0  .6% .0%  1  .7%  1  .6%  2 0 3  1.3% .7% .0%  3 1 1  1.8% .6% .6%  2.0%  5  3.0%  152  100.0%  168  100.0%  1  form i n occupation  z o n e I I I was u n e x p e c t e d .  p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t form i s thought Beach phase  t o overlap w i t h t h e Locarno  (3300-2500 BP) o n t h e c o a s t w h i l e t h e l e a f -  shaped form i s thought  t o have c o n t i n u e d  f r o m t h e O.C.C.  This i n v e r s e r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the expected t h i s a s s u m p t i o n may r e q u i r e As  pattern  occupation  was r e c o v e r e d  zone I / I I .  intriguing,  dominant than  a single  and i s i n c l u d e d i n  Though t h e p r e s e n c e  i t s status i s i n question.  proportions i n occupation  suggests  reassessment.  discussed w i t h the core excavation u n i t s ,  basalt microblade  is  T h e stemmed  of a  microblade  Pebble  tool  z o n e I I I (6.6%) a r e s l i g h t l y more  i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I / I I ( 5 . 2 % ) .  This  differs  from t h e p a t t e r n seen i n t h e core e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s where o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I p e b b l e  t o o l s w e r e more t h a n t w i c e a s  common t h a n t h e o t h e r t w o o c c u p a t i o n D i f f e r e n c e s i n pebble  zones.  flake tool proportions revealed  t h e same g e n e r a l p a t t e r n s e e n i n t h e c o r e e x c a v a t i o n Pebble  flake tools i n occupation  almost  t w i c e a s common t h a n  This suggests  z o n e I / I I (10.7%) w e r e  i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I ( 5 . 4 % ) .  d i f f e r e n c e s between pebble  flake  tool  p r o p o r t i o n s i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I / I I and o c c u p a t i o n are r e a l w h i l e the d i f f e r e n c e s i n pebble a r e more  units.  tool  zone I I I  proportions  tenuous.  Ground stone represented  tools,  t h o u g h n o t common, a r e e v e n l y  i n each o c c u p a t i o n zone.  i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I and o c c u p a t i o n c o n t a i n any worked n e p h r i t e .  D i s c beads were  absent  zone I / I I d i d n o t  Pecked stone  i s extremely  rare  and  i s r e p r e s e n t e d by a p e b b l e  I / I I and (Figure  a grooved  hammer i n o c c u p a t i o n  zone  c o b b l e / a n v i l i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I  4.2).  The  grooved  c o b b l e / a n v i l appears t o have been used f o r  p r o c e s s i n g p l a n t o r a n i m a l m a t e r i a l as e x h i b i t e d by a r e a s p o l i s h on i t s w o r k i n g  surface.  Pecked grooves  representing  hand g r i p s were l o c a t e d a l o n g t h e edges of t h e t o o l . the time necessary likely  of  Given  t o shape such an o b j e c t , t h e t o o l  was  curated.  Paint stones, or palate-type a r t i f a c t s , both o c c u p a t i o n zones.  Not  are present  i n c l u d e d i n T a b l e 4.2  note are s e v e r a l o c h r e - r e l a t e d a r t i f a c t s .  but  in  of  Thirty-six  pieces  of ochre were r e c o v e r e d from o c c u p a t i o n zone I / I I w i t h twenty-seven utilized  found  i n o c c u p a t i o n z o n e I I I . An  f l a k e w i t h o c h r e a d h e r i n g was  zone I / I I .  found  i n occupation  I n each o c c u p a t i o n zone c l a s s e s of  including unmodified  f l a k e s and b l o c k s h a t t e r ,  recovered w i t h ochre  a d h e r i n g t o them.  contained a small unmodified pebble  were zone I / I I  coated w i t h ochre cracked  while rock  These a r t i f a c t s a r e i n t r i g u i n g and  combined w i t h the p a i n t stones p r o c e s s i n g was  debitage,  Occupation  o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I c o n t a i n e d p i e c e s of f i r e dusted w i t h ochre.  acute-angled  an i m p o r t a n t  suggest  ochre use  and  a c t i v i t y a t the H a t z i c Rock  site. An u n m o d i f i e d  v i t r e o u s b a s a l t raw m a t e r i a l n o d u l e ,  p r o b a b l y o f I n t e r i o r B.C.  origin,  was  recovered  from  o c c u p a t i o n z o n e I I I . An u n m o d i f i e d p y r o c l a s t f r o m  when  Figure Grooved  4.2  Cobble/Anvil  occupation  z o n e I I I was i n c l u d e d w i t h t h e t o o l  summary f o r r e a s o n s i n d i c a t e d b e l o w .  assemblage  T h i s p y r o c l a s t i s an  unmodified s l i v e r o f o b s i d i a n which has t h e appearance o f a bipointed awl. P y r o c l a s t i c m a t e r i a l s s e t t l e out o f t h e atmosphere after explosive volcanic eruptions  (Courty  In t h i s  out of a volcano i n  liquid it  fell  case, t h e o b s i d i a n erupted form then s o l i d i f i e d to earth.  e t a l . 1989:101).  into i t s characteristic  The p y r o c l a s t r e c o v e r e d  from  Hatzic  e x h i b i t s no e v i d e n c e o f w o r k i n g a n d i s c o m p l e t e l y with  shape as  covered  cortex. Hobler  (personal  c o m m u n i c a t i o n 1992) h a s e n c o u n t e r e d  p y r o c l a s t s i n h i s own r e s e a r c h  on t h e c e n t r a l c o a s t o f  B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a where t h e y have t u r n e d e a r l y h i s t o r i c p e r i o d t r a d e goods.  up i n t h e c o n t e x t o f  Hobler suggested  t h o u g h some p y r o c l a s t s he h a s a n a l y z e d  have been  t h e y c o u l d a l s o have been used as t o o l s i n t h e i r form.  that  modified natural  H o b l e r f u r t h e r s u g g e s t e d many p y r o c l a s t s p o s s e s s  u n i q u e f o r m s o r q u a l i t i e s w h i c h may h a v e made t h e m  objects  of i n t e r e s t and thus a p p r e c i a t e d  beauty  (Hobler  personal  f o rtheir natural  c o m m u n i c a t i o n 1992) .  (1984:514) d e s c r i b e s  similar artifacts  C a l i f o r n i a as o b s i d i a n bangles. the p y r o c l a s t d i s c o v e r e d i t may h a v e s e r v e d  Little  Fredrickson from n o r t h  coastal  c a n be s a i d a b o u t  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e e x c e p t  as an expedient t o o l  that  ( p e r f o r a t o r ? ) o r was  brought t o H a t z i c f o r i t s a e s t h e t i c p r o p e r t i e s .  To s u m m a r i z e , t h e o c c u p a t i o n  zone I / I I and I I I a r t i f a c t  assemblages i n d i c a t e expedient  t o o l s were p r e d o m i n a n t .  Further, the presence  stones  zone I / I I s u g g e s t s  of a n v i l  only i n occupation  t h e m a n u f a c t u r e a n d p r o c e s s i n g o f raw  materials occurred outside of h a b i t a t i o n s . the p r o p o r t i o n o f pebble l e s s c l e a r than  The p r e s e n c e  presence  t o o l s i n each o c c u p a t i o n zone a r e  i n the core excavation u n i t s ,  d i f f e r e n c e s i n pebble  ground stone  however,  f l a k e t o o l p r o p o r t i o n s appear  of prepared  items  blade  are present  technology  Ochre and ochre  real.  i s weak a n d  i n s m a l l numbers.  o f ground stone beads suggests  was p r a c t i c e d .  Differences i n  personal  The adornment  related artifacts are well  r e p r e s e n t e d a n d i n d i c a t e t h i s m i n e r a l was w i d e l y u s e d o r processed  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t types  i n occupation  The d o m i n a n c e o f stemmed zone I I I and t h e i r  equal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n w i t h leaf-shaped types zone I / I I s u g g e s t s  i n occupation  t h e d o m i n a n c e o f t h e stemmed f o r m s  have been d e c l i n i n g t h r o u g h  may  time c o n t r a r y t o the expected  pattern. As  occupation  zone I I I i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e f l o o r o f  the s t r u c t u r e t h e r e e x i s t e x p e c t a t i o n s concerning assemblage expected  t o be r e c o v e r e d .  of a g r e a t e r range o f a c t i v i t i e s  the tool  These i n c l u d e  as i n d i c a t e d by  t y p e s a n d g r e a t e r numbers o f c u r a t e d a r t i f a c t  evidence  artifact  types.  A r t i f a c t s w h i c h a r e u n i q u e t o o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I , l i k e l y representing a c t i v i t i e s not present  i n occupation  zone I / I I ,  i n c l u d e a grooved c o b b l e / a n v i l , a n e p h r i t e fragment and a  multiple point graver.  These a r t i f a c t s  suggest  activities  such as woodworking, t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f p l a n t m a t e r i a l s and perhaps the p r o c e s s i n g of hides. were l i k e l y anvil  curated.  The a b s e n c e o f a r t i f a c t  stones which a r e present  indicates l i t h i c  Each o f these  i n occupation  artifacts  types  such as  zone I / I I ,  r e d u c t i o n , o r t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f o t h e r raw  materials, probably  d i d not take place w i t h i n the s t r u c t u r e .  This i s not unexpected given the debris a s s o c i a t e d w i t h these  activities. The  suggests  n e p h r i t e fragment found  i n occupation  zone I I I  the maintenance, storage o r use of n e p h r i t e  a r t i f a c t s within the structure. I n g e n e r a l , t h e o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I a r t i f a c t  assemblage  s h a r e s most o f i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h o c c u p a t i o n I/II.  However, t h e a r t i f a c t s  that best r e f l e c t  specific  activities  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h o c c u p a t i o n zone I / I I o r  occupation  zone I I I a r e m o s t l y  each type. meaningful exercised.  l i m i t e d t o one e x a m p l e o f  T h i s c a u s e s some c o n c e r n interpretations. What i s a p p a r e n t  zone  when  attempting  Some c a u t i o n n e e d s t o b e i s t h a t many o f t h e a c t i v i t i e s  p e r f o r m e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e over t h e ages remained t h e same a n d r e q u i r e d t h e same t o o l s . i n the composition occupation  zone.  This i s c l e a r l y  of t h e t o o l assemblages f o r each  reflected  As  expected,  did exhibit  t h e f l o o r d e p o s i t s of o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I  some u n i q u e  a c t i v i t i e s performed  artifact  p r o v i d e s t h e number a n d p e r c e n t a g e  combines o c c u p a t i o n zones I / I I and  This  T h i s i n c l u d e s v a r i o u s types of f l a k e t o o l s  21.6%.  tool  tool  (46.6%)  Cores  and  account  w i t h one No  bifacial  k n i v e s were r e c o v e r e d .  l a n c e o l a t e e x a m p l e was  presence  of  exception being a thick p r o j e c t i l e point Projectile  r e c o v e r e d and  lanceolate.  t h e stemmed  form o c c u r r e d t w i c e as f r e q u e n t l y as t h e l e a f - s h a p e d The  for  or p r o j e c t i l e point  p o i n t f o r m s w e r e e i t h e r stemmed, l e a f - s h a p e d o r O n l y one  tools.  assemblage.  b i f a c e s are p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s ,  fragments, preform.  (30.6%).  to  When c o m b i n e d , t h e s e t o o l t y p e s r e p r e s e n t 7 7 . 2 %  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e All  table  by e x p e d i e n t c h i p p e d s t o n e  tools  each  assemblage.  i n d i c a t e s the H a t z i c Rock s i t e  various types of pebble  of  I I I f r o m T a b l e 4.2  summarize t h e e n t i r e H a t z i c Rock s i t e t o o l  assemblage i s dominated  out  site.  t o o l t y p e found a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  T a b l e 4.3  suggest  i n t h e s t r u c t u r e were n o t c a r r i e d  i n l a t e r occupations of the T a b l e 4.3  types that  form.  of a prepared blade technology i s represented  b y one b a s a l t m i c r o b l a d e a n d , s t a t u s remains  as d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r , i t s  contentious.  Ground s t o n e a r t i f a c t s a r e p r e s e n t i n s m a l l numbers i n c l u d e s l a t e blade fragments served a c u t t i n g function,  ( F i g u r e 4.3),  d i s c beads, which  w h i c h may suggest  and  have some  form o f p e r s o n a l adornment and a s m a l l p i e c e o f worked  T a b l e 4.3  Artifact  T o o l C o u n t s and P e r c e n t a g e s f r o m t h e H a t z i c Rock Site Class  Combined O c c u p a t i o n Zones  I-III  n  %  7 13 1 2 4 1 5 9  2.2% 4.1% .3% .6% 1.3% .3% 1.6% 2.8%  42  13.1%  P r o j e c t i l e Points Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e Point Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Lanceolate P r o j e c t i l e Point Projectile Point Tip P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t , D i s t a l Fragment P r o j e c t i l e Point Medial Section Leaf-Shaped P o i n t Base Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t B a s e Miscellaneous Bifaces Formed B i f a c e , S t e e p - A n g l e d Edge Blade T o o l s Microblade Flake Tools M u l t i p l e Point Graver Discoidal Uniface Pièce Esquillée Pebble Flake w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Pebble Flake w i t h Acute-Angled Utilization Flake with Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Acute-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Flake with Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch  1  .3%  1  .3%  1  .3%  1  .3%  1 1 4 1  .3% .3% 1.3% .3%  21  6.6%  2  .6%  1  .3%  5  1.6%  1  .3%  28  8.8%  6  1.9% Con't  Table  4.3 C o n ' t  Steep-Angled U t i l i z e d Flake Acute-Angled U t i l i z e d Flake Cortex S p a l l Flake with Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch Cortex S p a l l Flake with Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch  30 46 1  9.4% 14.4% .3%  1  .3%  149  Cores/Pebble T o o l s Core Pebble w i t h B i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l Flaking Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l Flaking Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l F l a k i n g / Hammerstone Hammerstone Hammerstone w i t h Edge A b r a s i o n Hamme r s t o n e / A n v i 1 A n v i l Stone M i s c e l l a n e o u s Chipped Stone Miscellaneous Flaked Slate Ground Stone D i s c Bead Ground S l a t e B l a d e Fragment M i s c e l l a n e o u s Worked N e p h r i t e Formed A b r a s i v e S t o n e F r a g m e n t Abrasive Stone Ground and Pecked Stone Grooved C o b b l e / A n v i l P e b b l e Hammer Miscellaneous P a i n t Stone Paint Stone/Anvil Pyroclast  TOTAL  46.6%  69 9  21.6% 2.8%  9  2.8%  1  .3%  2 2 3 3  .6% .6% .9% .9%  98  30.6%  1  .3%  1  .3%  2  .6% 1.6% .3% 2.2% .9%  5  1 7 3 18  5.6%  1 1  .3% .3%  2  .6%  5  2 1  1.6% .6% .3%  8  2.5%  320  100.0%  Chapter  Figure  4.3  Ground S l a t e Blade Fragments  Four  nephrite  t h a t suggests t h e use o f adzes o r c h i s e l s .  Abrasive  stone classes provide  f u r t h e r evidence o f a ground  stone i n d u s t r y . Pecked stone a r t i f a c t s a r e r a r e a t t h e H a t z i c site.  Rock  B o t h e x a m p l e s , a c r u d e p e b b l e hammer a n d a g r o o v e d  cobble/anvil, curated.  s u g g e s t a r t i f a c t s o f t h i s t y p e may h a v e b e e n  The t i m e r e q u i r e d t o f a s h i o n t h e s e a r t i f a c t s , t h e  grooved c o b b l e / a n v i l i n p a r t i c u l a r , artifact,  and others  i s considerable.  of a s i m i l a r nature,  been e i t h e r cached a t t h e i r p l a c e  This  would l i k e l y  have  o f use o r would have  t r a v e l e d from l o c a t i o n t o l o c a t i o n w i t h i t s owner(s). The  p r e s e n c e o f o c h r e a n d many o c h r e - r e l a t e d  indicates this mineral Rock s i t e . and  paint  Various  was p r o c e s s e d a n d u s e d a t t h e H a t z i c  ochre covered a r t i f a c t s ,  such as p a l a t e s  s t o n e / a n v i l s , s u g g e s t t h e m a t e r i a l may h a v e b e e n  used f o r t h e d e c o r a t i o n disintegrated The  artifacts  o f o b j e c t s w h i c h have  (e.g. b a s k e t r y  o r boxes).  range and frequency o f l i t h i c  represented  i n t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  s u m m a r i z e d i n T a b l e 4.4.  since  raw m a t e r i a l s  t o o l assemblage i s  The m o s t common r a w m a t e r i a l s a r e  l o c a l l y a v a i l a b l e a n d i n c l u d e b a s a l t a n d andésite^. r e l i a n c e on t h e s e l o c a l expedient nature  1 Also described argillite.  The  raw m a t e r i a l s f u r t h e r r e i n f o r c e s t h e  of the tool  assemblage.  as a r g i l l i t e  ( B o r d e n 1975:74) o r s i l i c e o u s  T a b l e 4.4  H a t z i c R o c k S i t e Raw Frequencies  M a t e r i a l Types  and  %  n  Type Andésite Basalt Chert Diorite Granite Mudstone Nephrite Obsidian Quartzite Sandstone Slate Vitreous Basalt  46 179 16 5 20 2 1 5 12 11 7 16  14 .4 55.9 5.0 1.6 3.4 .6 .3 1.6 3.8 3.4 2.2 5.0  Total  320  100.0%  Several  i m p o r t e d , o r e x o t i c , raw  a l s o present i n the materials  include,  These m a t e r i a l s and site  material  t y p e s were  H a t z i c Rock s i t e t o o l assemblage. obsidian,  are not  chert  and  found i n the  vitreous  basalt.  immediate H a t z i c  would have been brought t o the H a t z i c  These  area  Rock  from d i s t a n t quarry l o c a t i o n s .  Obsidian  X-ray Fluorescence  Several  Analysis  o b s i d i a n a r t i f a c t s were s u b m i t t e d f o r X - r a y  fluorescence  analysis.  This non-destructive  measures the  concentration  process  of elements w i t h i n each sample  determine the  source l o c a t i o n of o b s i d i a n  "fingerprint"  obtained  samples.  A  f o r a p a r t i c u l a r sample, i s t h e n  to  matched w i t h f i n g e r p r i n t s  forspecific  quarry locations to  reveal the source l o c a t i o n of the obsidian a r t i f a c t o r sample  ( N e l s o n 1975:95; N e l s o n e t a l . 1975:86).  James, a g r a d u a t e conducted  Malcolm  s t u d e n t a t Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y ,  the obsidian  analysis.  R e s u l t s f r o m James' a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d t h e H a t z i c  Rock  s i t e o b s i d i a n was o b t a i n e d f r o m s o u r c e s i n e a s t e r n O r e g o n State are  (Table 4.5).  Quarry  locations identified  i n Table  4.5  i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 4.4.  T a b l e 4.5  X-ray  Catalogue Number  Provenience  4032 13,162 13,163  The  Fluorescence Analysis Results  u n i t 2, l e v e l u n i t 3, l e v e l u n i t 3, l e v e l  presence  Quarry Location 3 6 2  J o h n Day Newberry C a l d e r a 1 J o h n Day o r G l a s s B u t t e B  o f o b s i d i a n from s o u r c e s i n e a s t e r n Oregon  s u g g e s t s t h e m a t e r i a l was o b t a i n e d e i t h e r t h r o u g h a n exchange network  o r d i r e c t l y by the i n h a b i t a n t s of t h e  H a t z i c Rock s i t e . widespread  C a r l s o n (1983:22) h a s a r g u e d  distribution  of o b s i d i a n throughout  that the the northwest  c o a s t s u g g e s t s t r a d e was t h e m o s t l i k e l y means o f o b t a i n i n g this  raw m a t e r i a l .  Figure  4.4  Quarry Locations f o r Obsidian R e c o v e r e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e  ( b a s e d on James  n.d.)  The site  presence of Oregonian o b s i d i a n at the  i s i n t r i g u i n g given  that other  than o b s i d i a n  This  have been a h i g h e r  from nearer sources or the  H a t z i c Rock s i t e had  greater  suggests e i t h e r quality material i n h a b i t a n t s of  a f f i n i t y w i t h groups to  south than w i t h groups to the west. presence of Oregonian o b s i d i a n  Regardless,  indicates other  or ideas,  were a l s o b e i n g  locations  (see N e l s o n e t a l . 1975:85; C a r l s o n  Faunal  to a c i d i c s o i l  a s s e m b l a g e , was  m a t e r i a l was burning and  the  the  the commodities,  exchanged between these  two  1983:22).  Analysis  Due faunal  Rock  quarry l o c a t i o n s , such  as G a r i b a l d i , a r e n e a r e r t o H a t z i c . O r e g o n i a n o b s i d i a n may  Hatzic  conditions^, small  site  i n poor c o n d i t i o n .  Faunal  recovered i n calcined condition i n d i c a t i n g that  played  a role i n preservation  Cruz-Uribe 1984:6).  remains were e i t h e r s m a l l original  and  the H a t z i c Rock  The  majority  (Crockford  1992;  of the H a t z i c  Klein  faunal  f l e c k s or minute fragments of  the  element.  ^ T h r e e m a t r i x s a m p l e s w e r e r a n d o m l y s e l e c t e d f o r pH evaluation. T w e n t y grams o f m a t r i x w e r e m i x e d w i t h 2 0 ml o f d i s t i l l e d w a t e r and t e s t e d w i t h a F i s h e r A c c u m e t pH m e t e r (model 825 MP). The r e s u l t s a r e as f o l l o w s : pH 5.3 (EU 1, l e v e l 3 ) , pH 5.7 (EU 24, l e v e l 7) and pH 5.6 (EU 13, l e v e l 7). T h e s e r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h e pH o f s o i l a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e i s a c i d i c and e x p l a i n s t h e n e a r t o t a l l a c k o f faunal remains.  As  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e  only general  observations  f a u n a l a s s e m b l a g e was  c o u l d be made.  p i s c e a n f a u n a l r e m a i n s were a n a l y z e d by Pacific  Identifications,  a n a l y z e d by  the author  Archaeology.  The  (Odocoileus identified.  Mammalian  Susan C r o c k f o r d  a t t h e U.B.C. L a b o r a t o r y  of  4.6. and  p o s s i b l y mule deer  h e m i o n u s ) w e r e t h e o n l y mammalian  species  An u n d e t e r m i n e d s p e c i e s o f s m a l l f o r e s t b i r d was  remains, i n c l u d i n g those o r b i r d s , were a l s o  identified. w h i c h may  Many u n i d e n t i f i a b l e  belong  t o s m a l l mammals  recovered.  I d e n t i f i a b l e f i s h remains i n c l u d e : P a c i f i c (Oncorhynchus s p . ) , a salmonid  sucker  s a l m o n o r t r o u t ) and o r chub  The  species  a small f i s h  butterclams  difficult.  species such  however, the  (Tresus  (Saxidomus criganteus) o r b a s k e t  Barnacles  b a s e d on  as  (Balanus  glandula)  the  identification remains  ssp.), cockles  the t h i c k n e s s of  shell  were i d e n t i f i e d  some number b e c a u s e o f t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c honeycomb s t r u c t u r e .  from  Unidentifiable shellfish  the remains of horseclams  (Clinocardium n u t t a l l i ) fragments.  (either  (Catostomidae/Cyprinidae).  H a t z i c Rock s i t e were s h e l l f i s h , o f s p e c i e s was  salmon  (Salmonidae)  most abundant f a u n a l r e m a i n s r e c o v e r e d  are l i k e l y  of  f a u n a l assemblage i s  (Canis f a m i l i a r i s )  ( P a s s e r i n i f o r m e s sp.)  Pacific  and  S h e l l f i s h remains were  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  summarized i n Table D o m e s t i c dog  Ltd.  limited  interior  in  Mammal Canis f a m i l i a r i s ( D o m e s t i c dog) u n i d e n t i f i a b l e ungulate u n i d e n t i f i a b l e u n g u l a t e ( O d o c o i l e u s hemionus?) u n i d e n t i f i a b l e c a r n i v o r e (Canis f a m i l i a r i s ? ) u n i d e n t i f i a b l e s m a l l mammal-^ unidentifiable  NISP 3 16 2 1 95 43  Bird Passeriniformes sp. (small f o r e s t b i r d ) Unidentifiable small b i r d unidentifiable^  1 83 180  Fish Oncorhynchus s p . ( P a c i f i c salmon) Salmonidae ( P a c i f i c salmon o r t r o u t ) C a t o s t o m i d a e / C y p r i n i d a e ( s u c k e r o r chub) unidentifiable  1 2 17 2  Shellfish Balanus g l a n d u l a (barnacle) unidentifiable Total  Could a l s o belong t o a small b i r d . C o u l d a l s o b e l o n g t o a s m a l l mammal.  138 782 1366  Little  c a n be s a i d about t h i s  f a u n a l assemblage  t h a t t h e s p e c i e s o f mammals, f i s h a n d s h e l l f i s h are  except  identified  c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h o s e w h i c h would have been a v a i l a b l e t o  individuals (1992)  i n h a b i t i n g t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  Crockford  s u g g e s t s t h e p r e s e n c e o f c a l c i n e d d o m e s t i c d o g bone  may l e a d t o a s s u m p t i o n s  concerning the u l t i m a t e d i s p o s a l of  dogs o r t h e i r u s e i n g e n e r a l .  Shellfish  and/or t r a d e w i t h c o a s t a l groups.  suggest c o n t a c t  The p o s s i b i l i t y  e x i s t s t h a t t h e i n h a b i t a n t s o f t h e H a t z i c Rock  also  site  p e r i o d i c a l l y ventured t o coastal regions to gather  shellfish  themselves.  I n t e r - s i t e T o o l Assemblacre  Comparisons  This s e c t i o n presents the r e s u l t s of t h e comparison of the  H a t z i c Rock s i t e a r t i f a c t  Culture a r t i f a c t assemblage  assemblages.  components  artifact from  T h i s comparison seeks t o determine  the composition of a r t i f a c t  t h r e e Eayem p h a s e  to other Charles  The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  i s c o m p a r e d w i t h Eayem p h a s e  E s i l a o and Maurer. whether  assemblage  assemblages  sites are relatively  from the  t h e same o r e x h i b i t a  h i g h degree of v a r i a b i l i t y . The to  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  t h e S t . Mungo p h a s e  Cannery,  t o o l assemblage  lithic  i s t h e n compared  t o o l assemblages  S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  This  from Glenrose comparison  a t t e m p t s t o d e t e r m i n e how t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  artifact  assemblage r e l a t e s t o s i m i l a r l y aged s i t e s f r o m t h e mouth of the F r a s e r R i v e r . Borden  (1975) p r o v i d e d t h e b e s t  phase t o o l assemblage from E s i l a o . overview  i s g e n e r a l and  illustrations  does not  of t o o l types.  summary o f t h e Unfortunately,  include artifact  The  following  Eayem this  t a b l e s or  synopsis of  Eayem p h a s e t o o l a s s e m b l a g e f r o m E s i l a o i s t a k e n  the  from Borden  (1975) . A v a r i e t y o f f l a k e and p e b b l e Esilao.  Pebble  tools  with flake tools utilized  and  t o o l f o r m s a r e common a t  i n c l u d e c h o p p e r s and  scraper  r e p r e s e n t e d by a v a r i e t y of t y p e s  retouched  flakes.  i n c l u d i n g k n i v e s , were found  at  Cortex  planes including  spall tools,  Esilao.  These t o o l c l a s s e s are comparable t o those  found  at  the  H a t z i c Rock s i t e w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of the c o r t e x s p a l l category.  While  two  c o r t e x s p a l l t o o l s were found  at  the  H a t z i c R o c k s i t e t h e y c o u l d n o t be d e s c r i b e d a s c o r t e x s p a l l knives.  Unfortunately, without  importance  frequency  data,  the  of c o r t e x s p a l l k n i v e s at E s i l a o cannot  be  evaluated. P r o j e c t i l e p o i n t types at E s i l a o are s i m i l a r to from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e w i t h b o t h forms p r e s e n t , recovered bifacial  h o w e v e r , no  at E s i l a o .  l e a f - s h a p e d and  those stemmed  l a n c e o l a t e examples were  Large  l e a f - s h a p e d k n i v e s and  small  knives are present  a t E s i l a o but were not  recovered  at the H a t z i c Rock  site.  Pièces esquillées a n d b u r i n s w e r e f o u n d a t b o t h while d r i l l s  were found o n l y a t E s i l a o .  crystal microliths, H a t z i c Rock  present at Esilao,  Similarly, were absent  quartz at the  site.  Ground stone a r t i f a c t s from both s i t e s r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n c e s perhaps activities fragments  sites  reflecting a different  a t t h e s e two l o c a t i o n s .  range o f  Ground s l a t e  and a chipped, and ground,  knife  leaf-shaped p r o j e c t i l e  p o i n t - l i k e o b j e c t were r e c o v e r e d a t E s i l a o .  Neither of  t h e s e t o o l t y p e s were found a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e . blade fragments,  disc  subtle  beads and a fragment  Slate  o f worked  n e p h r i t e were r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e b u t were not found a t E s i l a o .  A b r a s i v e stones o f v a r i o u s shapes and  s i z e s were r e p o r t e d i n b o t h t o o l  assemblages.  Decorative items found a t E s i l a o but not the H a t z i c Rock s i t e i n c l u d e a p h y l l i t e grub an i n c i s e d tools  s i l t s t o n e plaque.  c a r v i n g and a fragment  of  Fine gravers and i n c i s i n g  were a l s o found a t E s i l a o . Similar  t o t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e ,  used a t E s i l a o argillite,  lithic  t e n d t o be l o c a l l y a v a i l a b l e  raw m a t e r i a l s and i n c l u d e  c r y s t a l l i n e q u a r t z , s l a t e and sandstone.  Some  i m p o r t e d raw m a t e r i a l s s u c h as v i t r e o u s b a s a l t and v a r i o u s crypto-crystallines The remains  are also  represented.  M a u r e r s i t e h a s a n Eayem p h a s e c o m p o n e n t a n d t h e of at least  4200 B P ) .  one s t r u c t u r e d a t e d t o t h i s p e r i o d ( c a .  These f a c t o r s  make t h e c o m p a r i s o n  o f t h e Maurer  t o o l assemblage w i t h t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e logical  t o o l assemblage a  choice.  However, t h e M a u r e r t o o l a s s e m b l a g e , l i k e  Esilao,  proper documentation thus l i m i t i n g comparisons.  Also  lacks there  i s g o o d e v i d e n c e t o s u g g e s t Eayem p h a s e a r t i f a c t s a t t h e Maurer s i t e are mixed w i t h post-Eayem phase  material.  T h o u g h t h e M a u r e r d a t a n e e d t o be t r e a t e d w i t h some c a u t i o n , t h e y n e e d n o t be a v o i d e d o u t r i g h t . between  t h e Maurer t o o l assemblage summaries  (1973) a n d L e C l a i r  (1976).  The  L e C l a i r ' s 1973 tools.  i n LeClair uses  (1976) a n d d i s r e g a r d s t h e  p e r h a p s more p r e l i m i n a r y ,  R o u g h l y 6000 l i t h i c  exist  following discussion  the i n f o r m a t i o n found i n L e C l a i r earlier,  Discrepancies  summary.  a r t i f a c t s were r e c o v e r e d i n  e x c a v a t i o n w i t h 1500  of these i d e n t i f i e d  L e C l a i r d i v i d e d the Maurer t o o l assemblage  broad c l a s s e s : unifaces, b i f a c e s ,  as  into  choppers, cores or  miscellaneous. Utilized  o r r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s were c l a s s i f i e d  u n i f a c e s a t Maurer.  T o o l s o f t h i s n a t u r e r e p r e s e n t 72% o f  t h e M a u r e r t o o l assemblage as compared H a t z i c Rock Bifaces,  as  t o 44.4% a t t h e  site. including projectile points,  r e p r e s e n t 5% o f  t h e M a u r e r a s s e m b l a g e i n c o m p a r i s o n t o 13.4% o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e a s s e m b l a g e .  L e a f - s h a p e d , stemmed a n d  p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t forms a r e p r e s e n t a t each s i t e .  lanceolate Bifacial  k n i v e s and a s i d e - n o t c h e d p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t from t h e Maurer s i t e a r e a b s e n t a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  The  side-notched  projectile point l i k e l y component.  represents m i x i n g from a l a t e r  The M a u r e r t o o l a s s e m b l a g e c o n t a i n s t w o d r i l l s  w h i l e none w e r e r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e . However, a f r a g m e n t  o f an o b s i d i a n d r i l l  was f o u n d  i n the  disturbed surface deposits at Hatzic. The spall tool  cobble tool  tools  This category of a r t i f a c t s at the H a t z i c  Rock s i t e , i n c l u d i n g  LeClair's  the tool The  and e x c l u d i n g c o r e s ,  assemblage.  core c a t e g o r y i n c l u d e s p y r a m i d a l and  forms and r e p r e s e n t s 15% o f t h e Maurer  assemblage. of  spall tools  f o r 9.7% o f t h e t o o l  polyhedral  choppers,  a n d h a m m e r s t o n e s a n d r e p r e s e n t s 8% o f t h e M a u r e r  assemblage.  accounts  category a t Maurer i n c l u d e s  Cores  from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e comprise 21.6%  assemblage.  final  grouping of Maurer a r t i f a c t s f a l l s  miscellaneous category. microblades  tool  (possibly  into the  T h i s c a t e g o r y c o n t a i n s pseudo-  lenticular flakes),  p i e c e s esquillées, p i g m e n t  at least  two  (ochre) and a p a l a t e s t o n e .  The  s t a t u s o f m i c r o b l a d e s a t M a u r e r i s p r o b l e m a t i c due t o t h e h i g h l i k e l i h o o d o f component m i x i n g a n d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e y may b e l e n t i c u l a r f l a k e s . the presence remains  As a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e ,  of prepared blade technology a t the Maurer s i t e  contentious.  numbers a t b o t h  sites.  P i e c e s esquillées a r e p r e s e n t i n l o w  Quantities w i t h the  o f o c h r e and  a palate  stone are  s t r u c t u r e excavated at Maurer.  H a t z i c R o c k s i t e q u a n t i t i e s o f o c h r e and s t o n e s were  jasper,  obsidian. not  To site  s t o n e was  The  unifaces  material  utilized  site with  the  material  d o c u m e n t e d and  probably represents  relative  t o H a t z i c and be  t o o l s at Maurer, w h i l e are  the great  and  Maurer  component  number  proportionately  less  s i m i l a r to those found at the H a t z i c  exception  of k n i v e s , are  palate  drills  and  a  Rock  side-notched  s i m i l a r although  stones found i n each s i t e  and/or p r o c e s s i n g  of  warranted.  c h o p p e r s a r e more d o m i n a n t a t M a u r e r .  o f o c h r e and  were  indicate both l o c a l  Eayem t o o l component f r o m t h e  Cobble t o o l proportions  unifacial  and  i n the manufacture of t o o l s .  s u g g e s t s r e - a n a l y s i s may  represented,  point.  o f e a c h raw  vitreous  number o f t o o l s e x c a v a t e d a t M a u r e r a p p e a r s  high  Bifacial  use  T h e s e raw  i s poorly  unusually  the  palate  a c r y p t o - c r y s t a l l i n e gray chert  summarize, the  mixing.  several  m a t e r i a l types at Maurer i n c l u d e  Relative proportions  provided.  non-local  S i m i l a r l y at  found.  D o m i n a n t raw basalt,  associated  of t h i s m a t e r i a l took  Quantities  suggest  the  place.  Absent from the Maurer t o o l assemblage are ground pecked stone a r t i f a c t s .  A s m a l l number o f g r o u n d a n d  s t o n e a r t i f a c t s were e x p e c t e d a t Maurer, however, c o m p l e t e a b s e n c e c a n n o t be  satisfactorily  or pecked  their  explained.  A l t h o u g h t h e summaries o f t o o l assemblages from  Esilao  and M a u r e r a r e l i m i t e d , g e n e r a l o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e p o s s i b l e . The H a t z i c R o c k a n d M a u r e r s i t e s a r e b o t h d o m i n a t e d expedient  f l a k e and pebble  tools.  by-  These t o o l t y p e s a r e  p r e s e n t a t E s i l a o , however, w i t h o u t f r e q u e n c y d a t a i t cannot be known w i t h c e r t a i n t y w h e t h e r t h e s e t o o l t y p e s a r e a s dominant. Cortex s p a l l knives are present at E s i l a o but are m i s s i n g from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  t o o l assemblage.  I ti s  u n c e r t a i n whether these t o o l s are present a t Maurer. k n i v e s may h a v e b e e n u s e d  These  i n t h e l o w e r F r a s e r R i v e r Canyon  salmon f i s h e r y thus e x p l a i n i n g t h e i r absence a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  The e x a m i n a t i o n o f c o r t e x s p a l l t o o l s  Maurer s i t e would shed Bifacial sites.  light  from the  on t h i s h y p o t h e s i s .  t o o l s a r e roughly comparable a t t h e t h r e e  Each s i t e possesses  examples of l e a f - s h a p e d and  stemmed p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s w h i l e a t h i r d l a n c e o l a t e f o r m observed absent  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock and Maurer s i t e s .  from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e a r e b i f a c i a l  drills.  Examples o f these a r t i f a c t  was  Surprisingly k n i v e s and  t y p e s were found a t  Maurer and E s i l a o . Weak e v i d e n c e  f o r prepared blade technology e x i s t s  at t h e H a t z i c Rock and Maurer s i t e s . artifact  t r u l y exists at either site  Evidence  of microblade  both  Whether t h i s c l a s s o f remains  t e c h n o l o g y was a b s e n t  unresolved. at Esilao,  h o w e v e r , a q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h i n d u s t r y was n o t e d .  Quartz  m i c r o l i t h s were n o t found a t Maurer o r t h e H a t z i c Rock  site.  This  tool  c l a s s may  have been a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the  fishery in  the l o w e r F r a s e r R i v e r Canyon t h u s e x p l a i n i n g t h e i r at the  other  two  sites.  B i p o l a r r e d u c t i o n was i n d i c a t e d by  p r a c t i c e d at a l l three  a s m a l l number o f p i e c e s  Ground stone t o o l s are present H a t z i c Rock s i t e but explanation  a t b o t h E s i l a o and  not  be  The  an  i n c i s e d mudstone p l a q u e .  H a t z i c Rock s i t e b e a d s and  contained  difficult.  an  i n c i s e d grub the  fragments of s l a t e b l a d e s ,  from both s i t e s .  ground stone a r t i f a c t s  well.  unique  In contrast,  a fragment of worked n e p h r i t e .  were r e c o v e r e d  as  Eayem a s s e m b l a g e f r o m E s i l a o  fragments of ground s l a t e k n i v e s ,  e f f i g y and  stone  Their  q u i t e low  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e b o t h c o n t a i n  ground stone items.  the  Ground  i n number a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e .  E s i l a o and  as  A satisfactory  obtained.  f r e q u e n c y a t E s i l a o i s unknown b u t may  contained  sites  esquillées.  are absent at Maurer.  f o r t h i s a b s e n c e was  t o o l s w e r e few  paucity  The  Abrasive  stones  l i m i t e d number o f  f r o m e i t h e r s i t e makes  D i f f e r e n c e s may,  disc  i n p a r t , be  conclusions  related to  site  function. Pecked s t o n e i s e x c l u s i v e t o the H a t z i c Rock O n l y two  examples o f p e c k e d s t o n e were r e c o v e r e d .  s m a l l sample of t h i s p r o b a b l y interpretation difficult, reflect  site.  the  Rock s i t e .  curated  artifact  however, a r t i f a c t s  semi-sedentary nature  Such a  c l a s s makes  like  this  i n f e r r e d f o r the  However, t h i s argument f a i l s  to explain  may  Hatzic the  absence o f pecked stone a r t i f a c t s a l s o has a r e s i d e n t i a l  a t t h e Maurer s i t e  function.  The p r e s e n c e o f o c h r e a t a l l t h r e e s i t e s , related artifacts, Maurer s i t e s , utilized  which  such as p a l a t e s ,  and ochre-  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock and  i n d i c a t e t h i s m a t e r i a l was p r o c e s s e d a n d  t o some d e g r e e a t e a c h  In g e n e r a l ,  the l i t h i c  Eayem p h a s e s i t e s :  Esilao,  location.  t o o l assemblages from t h e three Maurer and t h e H a t z i c Rock  s h a r e many c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  However, t o o l a s s e m b l a g e s f r o m  e a c h s i t e a l s o d i v e r g e i n a number o f a r e a s . d i f f e r e n c e s may b e r e l a t e d t o l o c a t i o n , temporal d i f f e r e n c e s ,  site  however,  site  Some o f t h e s e function or  without properly  reported  t o o l a s s e m b l a g e s f r o m M a u r e r a n d E s i l a o t h e r e i s n o way t o evaluate this  further.  The f o r m a l a n a l y s i s o f t h e E s i l a o  and M a u r e r t o o l a s s e m b l a g e s i s r e q u i r e d b e f o r e a Eayem p h a s e t o o l a s s e m b l a g e c a n b e d e f i n e d w i t h The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e a r t i f a c t in a regional documented  Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  confidence.  a s s e m b l a g e was e x a m i n e d  c o n t e x t by comparing i t t o t h r e e  S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s :  "typical"  well  G l e n r o s e Cannery, S t .  T h i s comparison sought t o  d e t e r m i n e how t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e a r t i f a c t  assemblage  related to coastal manifestations of the Charles  Culture  type.  comparison  E s i l a o and Maurer were e x c l u d e d f r o m t h i s  as b o t h s i t e s l a c k e d a r t i f a c t  frequency information.  T a b l e 4.7 c o m b i n e s t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e assemblage summarized  artifact  i n T a b l e 4.3 w i t h P r a t t ' s  T a b l e 2.3 s u m m a r i z i n g a r t i f a c t  (1992:90)  counts and percentages from  Table  4.7  T o o l Counts and P e r c e n t a g e s f r o m t h e H a t z i c Rock S i t e and t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e Components f r o m G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y , S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h HR  Artifact  CB  STM  GC  Class n  n B i f a c i a l Tools 8 Leaf-Shaped Biface Stemmed B i f a c e 13 1 Lanceolate Biface Drill 0 M i s c . Formed 0 Biface Biface 21 43 Fragments  n  n  %  2 .5  19  4.0  7  2.1  7  1.9  4 .1 .3  4 0  .8 .0  13 0  3.8 .0  6 0  1.6 .0  .0 .0  1 0  .2 .0  0 0  .0 .0  0 1  .0 .3  6 .6 13 .5  29 53  6.1 11.2  27 47  7.9 13.8  14 28  3.8 7.7  .3  4  .8  0  .0  2  .6  .3  4  .8  0  .0  2  .6  .3 1 .3 .3 2 .5  2 4 40 12  .2 .8 8.4 2.5  0 26 20 14  .0 7.6 5.9 4.1  0 49 3 2  .0 13 .4 .8 .6  17 .9  133  28.1  74  21.7  47  12 .8  24 .1 .6 47 .0  82 11 284  17 .3 2.3 59.9  44 3 181  12 .9 .9 53 .1  118 14 233  32 .2 3.8 63.7  Cores/Pebble T o o l s 21 .6 Core 69 Pebble Tool 19 6 .0 7 Hammerstone 2 .2 A n v i l Stone 3 .9 98 30 .7  54 23 13 1 91  11.4 4.9 2.7 .2 19.2  49 19 14 1 83  14.4 5.6 4 .1 .3 24.3  55 19 5 4 83  Blade-Like Tools Microlith/ 1 Linear Flake 1 Flake Tools Graver 1 P i e c e Esquillée 4 Formed U n i f a c e 1 B i f a c i a l l y Ret. 8 Flake 57 Unifacially Ret. F l a k e U t i l i z e d F l a k e 77 Cortex S p a l l 2 150  15 .0 5.2 1.4 1.1 22 .7 Con't  T a b l e 4.7 C o n ' t Ground Stone D i s c Bead 2 Ground Stone 0 Biface Ground Stone 5 Biface Frag. Decorated 0 Ground Stone A b r a s i v e S t o n e 10 M i s c . Ground 1 Stone 18  1.1 .4  1.6  1  .2  .3  .0  6  1.3  1.2  3.1 .3  18 8  3.8 1.7  12 5  3.5 1.5  5.6  40  8.5  26  7.6  .0  Miscellaneous Paint Stone  TOTAL  0  .0 .3  18 1 20 (528)  4.9 .3 5.5 (60.4)  .0  .0  .0  .3  .0  .0  .3  .0  0  .0  .3  .0  1  .2  .9  .0  .2  .3  .0  .2  .3  .0  .2  Ground and Pecked Stone Misc. Pecked 2 .6 and Ground Stone 2  1.2 (508) (58.1) .0 0 .0  5 2  Chipped and Ground Stone Chipped/Ground 0 .0 B i f a c e (LeafShaped) Chipped/Ground 0 .0 Biface Medial Frag. Chipped/Ground 0 .0 Biface Distal Frag. Chipped/Ground 0 .0 Stone Frag. 0  4 0  .6 .0  .6  0  7 2 . 2  0  .0  0  .0  0  .0  7  0  .0  0  .0  0  .0  319  2.2 100.0  474 1 0 0 . 0  341  100.0  366 100.0 (874) ( 1 0 0 . 0 )  HR = H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  STM = S t . Mungo  GC = G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y s i t e  G l e n r o s e Cannery,  site  CB = C r e s c e n t B e a c h  site  S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d , bone and a n t l e r a r t i f a c t s s u r v i v e a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e ,  therefore,  n a t u r e w e r e d e l e t e d f r o m t h e S t . Mungo p h a s e assemblages t o f a c i l i t a t e  comparison.  merged i n t o g e n e r a l c l a s s e s  The p e r c e n t a g e o f e a c h a r t i f a c t  d i d not  tools of this tool  Artifact  (e.g. pebble  As  c l a s s e s were  tools).  class at the Crescent  B e a c h s i t e was c a l c u l a t e d w i t h o u t g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c due t o t h e h i g h numbers o f t h i s  artifact  class.  beads  The  i n c l u s i o n o f t h e d i s c bead c l a s s would have  skewed  class proportions.  artifact  assemblage  total  The C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e  artifact  ( i n c l u d i n g d i s c b e a d s ) was u s e d t o  c a l c u l a t e t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f d i s c beads.  T h i s f i g u r e was  i n c l u d e d i n T a b l e 4.7 b u t e n c l o s e d i n p a r e n t h e s e s . The d e g r e e o f a r t i f a c t  assemblage v a r i a b i l i t y i s  comparable a t a l l f o u r s i t e s . 24/30 a r t i f a c t  contains  c l a s s e s i n c o m p a r i s o n t o 22/30 a t t h e H a t z i c  R o c k a n d S t . Mungo s i t e s . the  G l e n r o s e Cannery  The C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e  exhibited  l o w e s t d e g r e e o f d i v e r s i t y w i t h o n l y 19/30 a r t i f a c t  classes present.  Similarly,  artifact  c l a s s e s unique t o each  s i t e r e f l e c t e d a l i m i t e d degree of v a r i a b i l i t y .  Glenrose  C a n n e r y a n d S t . Mungo e a c h p o s s e s s t h r e e u n i q u e t o o l  classes  a n d t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e p o s s e s s e s two u n i q u e c l a s s e s . C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e h a s o n l y one u n i q u e t o o l  class.  The  Artifact paint  c l a s s e s u n i q u e t o t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  stones and a l a n c e o l a t e  Unique a r t i f a c t drill,  classes i n the three  a miscellaneous  a leaf-shaped  shaped p r o j e c t i l e  include  point.  coastal sites  include a  formed b i f a c e , a ground stone b i f a c e ,  c h i p p e d / g r o u n d b i f a c e , two f r a g m e n t a r y  chipped/ground b i f a c e c l a s s e s and a chipped/ground  stone  fragment. Proportions each s i t e has  of b i f a c i a l tools are r e l a t i v e l y  (11.2%-13.8%) e x c e p t t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e  a much s m a l l e r p r o p o r t i o n  possesses the greatest The  equal f o r  (7.7%).  proportion  Glenrose  Cannery  of leaf-shaped  bifaces.  stemmed b i f a c e f o r m was common a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k  (4.1%) a n d t h e S t . Mungo s i t e  (3.8%).  which  site  Stemmed b i f a c e s a r e  a l s o p r e s e n t i n some numbers a t t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h  site  (1.6%).  i n the  This  s u g g e s t s t h e l a c k o f stemmed b i f a c e s  Glenrose Cannery assemblage pattern  seen i n other  Formed u n i f a c e s Cannery  Charles  Culture  sites.  are w e l l represented  (8.4%) a n d S t . Mungo  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  (.8%) d o e s n o t r e f l e c t t h e  at the Glenrose  (5.9%) s i t e s b u t a r e n o t common  (.3%) o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h  (.8%)  sites.  Pièces esquillées a r e common t o t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h and  S t . Mungo  (7.6%) s i t e s b u t m i n i m a l l y  Glenrose Cannery  (.8%) a n d H a t z i c R o c k  Retouched f l a k e s represent Glenrose Cannery assemblages.  This  artifact  represented (1.3%)  (25.8%)  at the  sites.  a large proportion  (30.6%) a n d S t . Mungo  (13.4%)  of the  artifact  class i s w e l l represented  at the  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  (20.4%) b u t p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y  r e p r e s e n t e d a t the C r e s c e n t Beach s i t e The  opposite pattern i s reflected  classes.  These a r t i f a c t s  Beach s i t e  utilized  in utilized  a r e m o s t common a t t h e C r e s c e n t (24.1%).  The possess  f l a k e s i n s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduced proportions. c l a s s e s a r e dominant  at the Hatzic  (30.7%) i n c o m p a r i s o n t o t h e t h r e e c o a s t a l  (19.2%-24.3%). general tool  Three of the f o u r a r t i f a c t  classes i n this  other three s i t e s . H a t z i c Rock s i t e  site.  c o n t a i n s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y more c o r e s ,  s l i g h t l y more p e b b l e t o o l s a n d more a n v i l  stones than the  Hammerstones a r e n o t dominant  at the  (2.2%) b u t t h e p r o p o r t i o n f a l l s w i t h i n t h e  same r a n g e a s G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y The  sites  c a t e g o r y a r e dominated by t h e H a t z i c Rock  The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  (1.4%).  flake  (17.3%) a n d S t . Mungo (12.9%) s i t e s  Core and p e b b l e t o o l Rock s i t e  (13.4%).  (32.3%) a n d t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e  Glenrose Cannery  less  S t . Mungo s i t e  (2.7%) a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h  (4.1%) d o m i n a t e s t h i s  class.  The p r o p o r t i o n o f g r o u n d s t o n e t o o l s a t e a c h s i t e i s c o m p a r a b l e when d i s c b e a d s excluded. sites  from the C r e s c e n t Beach s i t e  The G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y  (8.5%) a n d S t . Mungo  are  (7.6%)  share s l i g h t l y h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n s of ground stone  artifacts  t h a n t h e H a t z i c Rock  (5.5%) s i t e s .  Ground  (5.6%) o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h  stone a r t i f a c t  classes are roughly  comparable a t each s i t e except f o r d e c o r a t e d ground stone o b j e c t s w h i c h a r e a b s e n t from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  The  C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e h a s a n e x t r e m e l y h i g h number o f  disc  beads i n comparison b i f a c e fragments Chipped at  to the other three sites.  a r e m o s t common a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k  and ground  stone t o o l  Cannery  (.9%).  i s m i n i m a l l y r e p r e s e n t e d a t each the Crescent Beach s i t e which H a t z i c Rock s i t e  Mungo  {.3%).  The  comparison  These  Glenrose  Ground and pecked  stone  s i t e with the exception of  lacks t h i s class of a r t i f a c t .  (.6%) p o s s e s s e s  proportion of these a r t i f a c t s St.  classes are not present  a r e p r e s e n t , i n s m a l l numbers, a t b o t h (.2%) a n d S t . Mungo  stone  site.  t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e o r t h e C r e s c e n t Beach s i t e .  artifacts  The  Ground  a slightly  higher  than Glenrose Cannery  o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  artifact  a s s e m b l a g e w i t h t h e S t . Mungo p h a s e a r t i f a c t  assemblages  f r o m G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y , S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t i n d i c a t e d how t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e a r t i f a c t  (.2%) o r  Beach  assemblage  compared t o o t h e r documented C h a r l e s C u l t u r e a r t i f a c t assemblages.  The m o s t o b v i o u s d i f f e r e n c e i s t h e h i g h  p r o p o r t i o n o f cores and pebble  t o o l s a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  i n r e l a t i o n t o the other three  sites.  The  H a t z i c Rock s i t e a r t i f a c t  site  assemblage i s a l s o marked  by a l o w p r o p o r t i o n o f formed u n i f a c e s and fewer  retouched  f l a k e s i n r e l a t i o n t o G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y a n d S t . Mungo.  In  contrast,  the proportion of u t i l i z e d flakes at the Hatzic  Rock s i t e  i s h i g h , s i m i l a r t o t h e Crescent Beach  site.  No c h i p p e d a n d g r o u n d a r t i f a c t s H a t z i c Rock s i t e , marginally  The Rock s i t e  however, p e c k e d and ground s t o n e i s  more common.  H a t z i c Rock  proportion  of ground stone a r t i f a c t s  However, d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d  between t h e f o u r a r t i f a c t  three  sites  stone site.  a s s e m b l a g e s may  of several d i s c r e t e factors or a combination  of these f a c t o r s .  The r e s i d e n t i a l  function of the Hatzic  i n comparison t o the three  procurement s i t e s  coastal  may h a v e b e e n r e s p o n s i b l e  differences i n artifact site  at the Hatzic  were n o t i c e a b l y absent from t h e H a t z i c Rock  the result  Rock s i t e  stones are exclusive t o the  i s w i t h i n t h e same r a n g e a s t h e o t h e r  Differences be  Paint  site.  t h a t were examined. artifacts  were found a t t h e  resource f o r some o f t h e  assemblage composition.  l o c a t i o n c o u l d have been r e s p o n s i b l e  Similarly,  f o r some o f t h e  diversity. The  a g e o f t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e may a l s o e x p l a i n some  of t h e v a r i a b i l i t y  seen i n t h e f o u r a r t i f a c t  assemblages.  Artifacts  from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e a r e s l i g h t l y  artifacts  from the other  three  sites.  The g r e a t e r  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e a r t i f a c t s  suggests c l o s e r  with  three  t h e O.C.C. t h a n t h e o t h e r  would p a r t i a l l y and  The  the three  somewhat l i m i t e d .  than  age o f  affiliation  I f true,  proportion  this  of cores  site.  c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  assemblage w i t h and  sites.  account f o r the higher  p e b b l e t o o l s a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  older  artifact  S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s  was  general  However, s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s  were  found t o e x i s t  between the f o u r a r t i f a c t assemblages.  A  m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of the f o u r a r t i f a c t assemblages c l e a r l y warranted.  Unfortunately,  beyond the scope of t h i s the answers, point  this  thesis.  such an a n a l y s i s  extends  While not p r o v i d i n g a l l  comparison provides the l o g i c a l  f o r future comparative  is  analyses.  starting  CHAPTER F I V E FEATURES  Introduction  This  chapter describes  the  280  f e a t u r e s w h i c h were  e x c a v a t e d a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e . described  and  t o t a l s are provided  Feature data are  Each f e a t u r e  type i s  f o r each occupation  then used to provide  the b a s i s  for  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a r c h i t e c t u r a l remains uncovered at H a t z i c Rock s i t e . excavation  area  i n the general  Features located outside  (e.g.  trench  4 and  are  an the  main are  included  excluded from  the  structure.  Comparative a r c h a e o l o g i c a l used to a s s i s t i n the three  W i l s o n 1991)  f e a t u r e d i s c u s s i o n but  a n a l y s i s of the  the  zone.  and  ethnohistoric data  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the  h y p o t h e s e s o u t l i n e d i n c h a p t e r one  are  structure.  are  The  evaluated.  Features  F e a t u r e s r e c o r d e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e holes,  hearths,  g r a v e l b e n c h and  charcoal two  concentrations,  composite a n v i l  amalgam o f  later  section.  several feature  stone features.  t y p e s and  post  a drainage d i t c h , a  s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e an  include:  The  is essentially  i s discussed  in a  Post  Holes  P o s t h o l e s w e r e t h e m o s t common f e a t u r e t y p e .  One  hundred and e i g h t y - e i g h t o f these post h o l e s a r e c i r c u l a r / o v o i d w i t h an a d d i t i o n a l examples  ( F i g u r e 5.1).  fifteen rectangular  Post hole f e a t u r e s from t h e main  excavation area are a l l associated with occupation  zone I I I .  S p e c i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n f o r each post h o l e i s l i s t e d i n A p p e n d i x B. Metric data are available, two  post holes.  o r extrapolated, f o r a l l but  The maximum h o r i z o n t a l d i m e n s i o n  o f each  c i r c u l a r / o v o i d a n d r e c t a n g u l a r p o s t h o l e was u s e d t o summarize t h e s e 5-51  features.  Post hole diameters  cm w i t h a m e d i a n o f 16 cm.  post hole diameters  from  The i n t e r q u a r t i l e r a n g e o f  was 11-22 cm.  and B e a r i n g 1979) o f d i a m e t e r s  ranged  A box p l o t  (see  Hartwig  ( F i g u r e 5.2) i n d i c a t e s s i x  p o s t h o l e s h a v e v a l u e s w h i c h e x c e e d 3 8 cm.  Hearths  and Charcoal  Hearths  Concentrations  a n d c h a r c o a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n s w e r e common  f e a t u r e s a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e . concentrations of burnt  soil,  Hearths  a r e d e f i n e d as  c h a r c o a l and f i r e  cracked  rock  i n a well defined area.  These f e a t u r e s r e p r e s e n t  i n situ  b u r n i n g on an o c c u p a t i o n  surface s i m i l a r t o those  described  by Gose  (1976:190).  Nineteen  of the t h i r t y - s i x  identified  h e a r t h s were l o c a t e d on o r i n d e p o s i t s i n f e r r e d t o be t h e  Post Hole  Post hole feature  Features on F l o o r  Deposits  O Extrapolated post hole feature  Figure Box  0  5.2  P l o t of Post Hole  10  20  30  Diameters  40  50  60  Post Hole Diameter (cm)  floor of the structure  ( o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I ) ( F i g u r e 5 . 3 ) .  T h i r t e e n o f t h e h e a r t h f e a t u r e s were l o c a t e d i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I I w i t h t h e r e m a i n i n g  f o u r from o c c u p a t i o n zone I .  As  i n d i c a t e d i n F i g u r e s 5.3 a n d 5.8, s e v e r a l h e a r t h f e a t u r e s from o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I l i e on o r a g a i n s t a g r a v e l bench feature.  This suggests  some f i r e s may h a v e b e e n s e t a g a i n s t  this naturally fireproof wall. r e p r e s e n t f i r e s t h a t were l i t  These h e a r t h s c o u l d a l s o a f t e r t h e s t r u c t u r e was  abandoned. A t l e a s t two h e a r t h s c o n t a i n e d q u a n t i t i e s o f s m a l l disc-shaped pebbles  thought  t o be e i t h e r b o i l i n g  stones used f o r l i n i n g a hearth dimensions Table stones  5.1.  stones o r  (see Samuels 1991:189).  of these stones are s t a t i s t i c a l l y  The  summarized i n  The g e n e r a l l y u n i f o r m s i z e a n d s h a p e o f t h e s e  i n d i c a t e s t h e y were s p e c i f i c a l l y  s e l e c t e d p e r h a p s due  ' F i g u r e 5.3 H e a r t h F e a t u r e s L o c a t e d on F l o o r D e p o s i t s  Hearth feature  Rock enclosed hearth feature Extrapolated hearth feature  T a b l e 5.1  B o i l i n g S t o n e M e t r i c Summary Number  Length,mm Width,mm Thickness,mm Weight,g  to  Median  162 158 164 165  Range  46 37 15 34.2  characteristics  33-71 28-55 6-34 4.1-108.4  concentrations  concentrations fire  cracked  likely  redeposited  are,  r o c k may the  stones.  some b u r n t  a l s o be p r e s e n t . contents  These  of hearths  were r e c o r d e d .  perhaps  was  F i f t e e n of these  charcoal  concentrations  zone I I I .  O c c u p a t i o n zone I I  charcoal concentrations. zone I .  occupation  l o c a t e d 5.7m  provided  Three others  Nine charcoal  h e a r t h and  zone.  One  sample f o r the  Appendix C l i s t s d e t a i l e d charcoal  concentration.  c o u l d not  unit  site  were  concentrations  charcoal  west of the e x c a v a t i o n  a radiocarbon  Chapter 3).  during  concentrations  were l o c a t e d i n b a c k h o e t r e n c h p r o f i l e s and t o an  features  charcoal  found i n o c c u p a t i o n  assigned  and  Thirty-seven  were f o u n d i n o c c u p a t i o n possessed nine  soil  w h i c h were  away f r o m t h e i r p l a c e o f u s e ,  cleaning episodes.  or  as t h e name i m p l i e s ,  of c h a r c o a l , although  represent  42-51 34-41 12-17 25.8-47.4  s u c h as r e s i l i e n c e t o h e a t f r a c t u r e  t h e amount o f t i m e r e q u i r e d t o h e a t t h e Charcoal  Interquartile Range  be  concentration 10 d a t u m  surface  and  (refer  i n f o r m a t i o n on  each  to  Gravel  Bench  A g r a v e l b e n c h was northern perimeter by  i d e n t i f i e d a r o u n d much o f  of the s t r u c t u r e .  the  T h i s b e n c h was  the e x c a v a t i o n of the t e r r a c e slope to c r e a t e a  f l o o r surface i n the s t r u c t u r e .  In the southern  s t r u c t u r e the n a t u r a l t e r r a c e slope decreased, e l i m i n a t i n g the need t o excavate margins of t h i s  f e a t u r e c a n be  a level  formed level  half  of  the  thus  surface.  seen i n F i g u r e  The  5.4.  Ditch  The  r e m a i n s o f what i s i n t e r p r e t e d t o be p a r t o f  d i t c h f e a t u r e w e r e u n c o v e r e d i n u n i t s 19 a n d t r e n c h - l i k e f e a t u r e was deposits apparently  excavated  into sterile  run-off  s t r u c t u r e (see F i g u r e s  5.5  5.6). Evidence  t h a t the g r a v e l d e p o s i t s were e x c a v a t e d  t h e o u t e r edge o f t h e g r a v e l b e n c h as w e l l as t h e suggest the d i t c h i s present  n o r t h , w e s t , and  s t r u c t u r e j u s t beyond the areas excavations full  This  gravel  i n an a t t e m p t t o d i v e r t r a i n  from the t e r r a c e s l o p e above the and  36.  a  are necessary  extent of the  ditch.  excavated.  to corroborate  along  inner side  east of  the  Further  the dimensions  and  F i g u r e 5.4 Location of Gravel  Bench  Feature  N  m  Gravel bench feature  West W a l l P r o f i l e o f D i t c h F e a t u r e  (Unit  36)  Figure  5.6  P l a n View of D i t c h  Feature  A n v i l Stone  Two  Features  features are p r i m a r i l y a n v i l  raw m a t e r i a l s o f v a r i o u s t y p e s .  stones used t o process  However, t h e y a l s o  possess  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o r a s s o c i a t e d m a t e r i a l s w h i c h w a r r a n t a more detailed One levels  description. anvil  1-5  s t o n e was  (5-38  cm S,  found i n e x c a v a t i o n u n i t  115-149 cm E) a n d  10 i n  i s mainly  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h o c c u p a t i o n zone I I ( F i g u r e 5.7).  The  anvil  s t o n e i s a 3 0 cm x 30 cm g r a n i t e c o b b l e w i t h a r o u g h l y triangular outline.  I t s s u r f a c e has e v i d e n c e o f p e c k i n g , i n  t h e f o r m o f p i t t i n g a n d a b r a s i o n a n d was lithic  base of the a n v i l  t h r e e p e b b l e s , one flaking.  s t o n e was  s u p p o r t e d by s o i l  o f w h i c h has u n i f a c i a l  observed d i r e c t l y below the support stone s l a t e b l a d e fragment  below the c h a r c o a l l e n s . activities  second  i n l e v e l s 2-5  anvil  (L) X 34.9  cm  (W)  X 31.8  s u r f a c e of the a n v i l  recovered  cm  several food  anvil  i s associated  s t o n e m e a s u r e d 48.9  (Th) a n d w e i g h t e d o v e r 45  s t o n e was  p r o v i d e d an e x c e l l e n t w o r k i n g  just  located i n excavation unit  (75-98 cm S, 43-97 cm E) a n d The  cm  location.  s t o n e was  w i t h o c c u p a t i o n zone I I .  (20-30  r e d u c t i o n and p o s s i b l y  p r e p a r a t i o n took p l a c e at t h i s The  was  (WSU-4327),  This feature indicates  including l i t h i c  and  peripheral  A c h a r c o a l l e n s , d a t e d t o 4930±70 BP  d.b.s.) a n d a g r o u n d  The  by  debris.  The  was  surrounded  l e v e l and w o u l d  surface.  cm  kg.  have  3  1 Composite A n v i l Stone Feature from E x c a v a t i o n U n i t 10, L e v e l s 1-5  The  p r e s e n c e o f p i t t i n g and  i n d i c a t e s i n t e n s e use. was  recovered  anvil  stone  of the  A l a r g e amount o f l i t h i c  from the base of the  was  Both a n v i l end  a b r a s i o n on t h e w o r k i n g  1991  recovered stones field  3 was  r e l o c a t e d on  area.  Both a n v i l  debitage  feature suggesting  i n i t s primary  stone  were a c c i d e n t a l l y b a c k f i l l e d a t  the b a c k f i l l e d stones  f r o m u n i t 10  s u r f a c e of the  were g i v e n c a t a l o g u e  c o u l d n o t be  excavation  numbers  The  two  associated with occupation types: post  holes,  f o r the  charcoal concentration  anvil  stone  zone I I .  and  obtained.  a r e common t h r o u g h o u t t h e e x c a v a t i o n a r e a zones.  the  season, however, the example from u n i t  I n g e n e r a l , h e a r t h and  occupation  the  context.  are i n c l u d e d i n the a n a l y s i s , however, m e t r i c d a t a anvil  surface  features  i n a l l three  features are  The  t h e g r a v e l b e n c h and  remaining ditch  only feature  are  e x c l u s i v e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e s t r u c t u r e ( o c c u p a t i o n zone I I I ) . The  f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n combines the o c c u p a t i o n  zone I I I  f e a t u r e s t o r e c o n s t r u c t the s t r u c t u r e f r o m the H a t z i c Rock site.  H a t z i c Rock S i t e A r c h i t e c t u r e  The  f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n of H a t z i c Rock  a r c h i t e c t u r e i s l i m i t e d to data gathered excavation area.  interpretation.  from the  S t r u c t u r a l data gathered  structure identified  site main  from the  i n trench 4 are too l i m i t e d to  Similarly,  evidence  of a p o s s i b l e  second allow third  structure, Wilson  l o c a t e d south west o f t h e main e x c a v a t i o n a r e a by  (1991) d i d n o t p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n u s e f u l t o t h i s  summary. Approximately  t w o t h i r d s o f a s t r u c t u r e was u n c o v e r e d  i n t h e main e x c a v a t i o n area. subterranean  a n d m e a s u r e s 11 m  roughly square o u t l i n e ^ p a r t i a l l y excavated level  living The  run-off,  ( F i g u r e 5.8).  (E-W) w i t h a  The s t r u c t u r e was  into the terrace slope t o provide a  t e r r a c e e x c a v a t i o n , as w e l l as t h e method o f c r e a t e d a bench area along t h e n o r t h e r n o r  half of the structure.  bench suggests building.  (N-S) x 10 m  surface.  construction, "uphill"  T h i s s t r u c t u r e i s semi-  A break i n t h i s  an e a s t e r n ground l e v e l  A ditch,  entrance  gravel t o the  which l i k e l y d i v e r t e d h i l l s i d e  water  appears t o have e n c i r c l e d t h e n o r t h e r n h a l f o f t h e  s t r u c t u r e o u t s i d e t h e bench element. The  many p o s t h o l e f e a t u r e s d o c u m e n t e d f o r t h e  s t r u c t u r e r e v e a l a complex p a t t e r n which interpretation. to  A specific  hindered  s t r u c t u r e c a n n o t b e i s o l a t e d due  t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e a r e many p o s t h o l e f e a t u r e s .  the d i s t r i b u t i o n of post holes r e f l e c t s maintenance and r e b u i l d i n g over  Rather,  considerable  time.  -L The s t r u c t u r e o u t l i n e i n F i g u r e 5.8 i s a p p r o x i m a t e a n d was e x t r a p o l a t e d u s i n g t h e g r a v e l b e n c h m a r g i n a n d p o s t h o l e locations.  Plan o f Structure Excavated a t the H a t z i c Rock S i t e  Hearth feature  Extrapolated hearth feature  The  g r e a t number o f p o s t h o l e s w e r e h e l p f u l  d e l i n e a t i n g the boundaries larger  (>25  of the s t r u c t u r e .  cm d i a . ) p o s t h o l e s was  l o c a t i o n of major s t r u c t u r a l  The  separated  p a t t e r n o f s m a l l p o s t h o l e s i n an a t t e m p t supports.  in p a t t e r n of  from  the  to determine  the  Unfortunately,  the  r e s u l t s were i n c o n c l u s i v e . The  c o n f u s i o n i n t h e p o s t h o l e p a t t e r n i n g was  u n e x p e c t e d g i v e n t h e t i m e and  l a b o u r t h a t was  i n v e s t e d i n a s t r u c t u r e of t h i s n a t u r e . unusual  f o r such  likely  Rather,  a s t r u c t u r e t o show l i t t l e  not  i t would  s i g n of  be  extended  use. L a r g e r c i r c u l a r / o v o i d and  rectangular post holes  represent the remains of l o a d b e a r i n g s t r u c t u r a l These would i n c l u d e the p o s t h o l e s n o t e d diameters  exceeding  38  cm.  Smaller post holes are  c o n s t r u c t i o n s , s u c h as d r y i n g r a c k s ,  p a r t i t i o n s or benches.  The  posts.  i n F i g u r e 5.2  the remains of posts which served t o support light  except  with  probably  wall planks  or  interior  smaller post holes are g e n e r a l l y  l o c a t e d a t the p e r i m e t e r of the b u i l d i n g whereas the p o s t h o l e s t e n d more t o w a r d  likely  the centre of the  large  excavation  i n t h e s o u t h w e s t m a r g i n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e w h e r e some  l a r g e r examples were Although  t h e r e i s good e v i d e n c e  l o c a t i o n of post of the p o s t s  observed.  features within this  c o u l d n o t be d e t e r m i n e d .  r o o f c o n s t r u c t i o n and from the e x i s t i n g  o f t h e number structure,  the  height  Further, the type  r o o f i n g m a t e r i a l c o u l d n o t be  data.  and  of  inferred  The l o c a t i o n o f h e a r t h s s i t u a t e d o n t h e l i v i n g i n d i c a t e s s e v e r a l a r e a s were u t i l i z e d heating.  A l a r g e hearth northwest  floor  f o r cooking or  o f t h e presumed  entrance  a p p e a r s t o be t h e most i n t e n s i v e l y u t i l i z e d b a s e d on t h e recovery of great q u a n t i t i e s of f i r e concentrations of b o i l i n g  stones.  c r a c k e d r o c k and  O t h e r h e a r t h s may  s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t y areas w i t h i n the structure,  reflect  the  d i s t r i b u t i o n of s o c i a l groupings w i t h i n the s t r u c t u r e , the changing use of space through time. hole data suggest modified,  or  For instance, post  t h e s t r u c t u r e was r e p e a t e d l y m a i n t a i n e d o r  t h e r e f o r e , t h e l o c a t i o n and s i z e o f h e a r t h  features l i k e l y  changed o v e r time as w e l l .  Discussion  Three hypotheses  concerning the nature of the structure  e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e were p r e s e n t e d i n C h a p t e r one.  These hypotheses a r e :  H y p o t h e s i s #1: The s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e resembles southern northwest coast d w e l l i n g s recorded during the ethnohistoric period. H y p o t h e s i s #2: The s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e c o n s t i t u t e s a new t y p e o f b u i l d i n g f o r t h e s o u t h e r n northwest coast.  H y p o t h e s i s #3 : The s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e does n o t resemble s o u t h e r n n o r t h w e s t c o a s t d w e l l i n g s f r o m t h e e t h n o h i s t o r i c p e r i o d , b u t does s h a r e s t r u c t u r a l and design elements.  Concerning hypothesis the  one,  the data c l e a r l y  s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e does  resemble, e i t h e r i n the plank houses from the  s t r i c t sense, p i t h o u s e  ethnohistoric period.  d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between these s t r u c t u r e The  dwellings  i s the  subterranean.  f a c t t h a t the H a t z i c  Pithouses  subterranean being  and  built  w e r e , as  S m i t h 1947;  Teit  excavating  ethnohistoric  name i m p l i e s ,  to provide Laforet  and  fully  wholly contain  cladding  a  of  weatherproof York  1981;  1900).  The  only p a r t i a l l y  space o c c u p i e d by  excavated.  a p i t , a p o r t i o n of the The  terrace excavation  structure being  built  Rather  the  and  slope.  l i v i n g surface  w a l l and  roughly  h a l f o f t h e w e s t e r n and  Hatzic  was  resulted i n roughly  i n t o the  not  than  terrace slope  a level  This  interiors 1900)  i n t e r n a l b e n c h f e a t u r e known t o s u r r o u n d (see was  Laforet  and  northern  walls  of  excavated at the  pithouse  Y o r k 1981:120; Smyly 1973:50;  only p a r t i a l l y  present i n the  H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  As  the  of  excavation  demarcated the eastern  half  structure. The  Teit  pithouse  s t r u c t u r e i s not  provided  the  structure  s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e was  s t r u c t u r e was  the  basic  types.  f r a m e w o r k s and  (Boas 1890;  built with a p i t feature.  removed.  The  were c o v e r e d w i t h e a r t h  insulating layer  The  the  shed-roof  i n a large p i t excavated to  i n s u l a t e the d w e l l i n g .  pithouses  and  or  not  Several  most o b v i o u s d i f f e r e n c e between t h e  e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  and  indicate  structure  structure  at  H a t z i c was was  only p a r t i a l l y  subterranean,  t h i s earthen  bench  o n l y o b s e r v e d where t e r r a c e d e p o s i t s were removed. Pithouses  posts  possess e i t h e r four or s i x c e n t r a l  that supported  L a f o r e t and  r a d i a t i n g r o o f beams  hole  The  complex  features a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the  s t r u c t u r e made i n t e r p r e t a t i o n d i f f i c u l t ,  p o r t i o n of the  Hatzic  however, a  c o n s t r u c t i o n c o u l d have e x i s t e d i n the (northern)  (Boas 1 8 9 0 : 8 1 - 8 2 ;  Y o r k 1981:117; S m i t h 1947:257).  p a t t e r n of post  support  similar  subterranean  s t r u c t u r e , but  not  i n the  southern  f r e e s t a n d i n g p o r t i o n of the s t r u c t u r e . Roof e n t r a n c e s 1890:82) a l t h o u g h  were t h e norm f o r p i t h o u s e s  L a f o r e t and  York  (Boas  (1981:119) d e s c r i b e  side entrance  v a r i a t i o n t h a t a p p e a r s t o be  development.  E v i d e n c e o f an e a s t e r n g r o u n d l e v e l  a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e s t r u c t u r e type The  further differentiates  from shed r o o f type p l a n k aspects.  r e m o v a b l e w a l l and  h o u s e s l a r g e l y due  this  roof plank  (1890) S o n g i s h  cladding  and  be beams w i t h  ( S u t t l e s 1990:462).  shed r o o f house example from s i x large posts  t h r e e e q u a l l y l a r g e r o o f c r o s s beams. added i f f u r t h e r s t r u c t u r a l  support  was  on one  south  supporting  A d d i t i o n a l posts  were  required for greater  r o o f spans o r i f s m a l l e r d i a m e t e r p o s t s were u s e d Posts  differs  to i t s  Shed r o o f houses can b e s t  e a s t e r n V a n c o u v e r I s l a n d had  1955:36) .  entrance  a t the H a t z i c Rock s i t e  d e s c r i b e d as a p e r m a n e n t f r a m e w o r k o f p o s t s  Boas'  late  f r o m most e t h n o h i s t o r i c p i t h o u s e s .  s t r u c t u r e excavated  subterranean  a relatively  a  (Barnett  s i d e of the house, u s u a l l y p a r a l l e l  w i t h a s h o r e l i n e , were h i g h e r  than those on t h e o p p o s i t e  side to create  and an o b v i o u s " f r o n t " t o t h e  building  a slanted roof  (Boas 1890:11; S u t t l e s  The  1990:462).  s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  site  d i f f e r e d from shed roof p l a n k houses p r i m a r i l y because i t was b u i l t  i n t o the side of a terrace.  doubt as t o whether w a l l and r o o f  This  cladding  r a i s e s some c o u l d have been  r e m o v e d a n d r e i n s t a l l e d w i t h e a s e a s was t h e c a s e i n s h e d roof  structures.  Likely,  the wall cladding  f o r the northern  h a l f o f t h e s t r u c t u r e a t H a t z i c would have been d i f f i c u l t t o install  a n d remove i n c o m p a r i s o n t o t h e f r e e  standing  southern p o r t i o n . The the  i n t e r i o r bench o f t h e H a t z i c  terrace excavation,  roof houses.  differed  The  from posts  and boards  or against  walls. preceding  d i s c u s s i o n shows t h a t b a s i c  differences  e x i s t between t h e s t r u c t u r e excavated a t t h e H a t z i c s i t e and e t h n o h i s t o r i c p i t h o u s e s For  t h i s reason the f i r s t The  i s not supported as there a r e s t r u c t u r e and e t h n o h i s t o r i c  and shed roof p l a n k houses.  hypothesis  was r e j e c t e d .  that the structure excavated at  s i m i l a r i t i e s between t h e H a t z i c  first  houses.  i s a unique b u i l d i n g i n terms o f i t s  and c o n s t r u c t i o n ,  pithouses  Rock  and shed r o o f p l a n k  hypothesis  second hypothesis,  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e design  by  f r o m what i s f o u n d i n s h e d  I n shed roof houses such p l a t f o r m s ,  benches, were c o n s t r u c t e d interior  structure, created  The e v a l u a t i o n  t o u c h e d u p o n many o f t h e same p o i n t s  of the which  are used to render a n u l l The  result  s t r u c t u r e excavated at the  shares fundamental features  f o r t h i s second  hypothesis.  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  clearly  with ethnohistoric pithouse  and  shed roof p l a n k houses. Features shared with pithouses s u b t e r r a n e a n a s p e c t s and post hole  patterning  the  include  i t s semi-  g r a v e l bench f e a t u r e .  i n the n o r t h e r n  p o r t i o n of the  s t r u c t u r e suggests the presence of l o a d b e a r i n g c o u l d h a v e s u p p o r t e d r a d i a t i n g r o o f beams. employed a s i m i l a r c o n s t r u c t i o n The  Also, Hatzic  posts  Pithouses  strategy.  n o n - s u b t e r r a n e a n a s p e c t s of the H a t z i c  structure  s u g g e s t some s i m i l a r i t y t o s h e d r o o f p l a n k h o u s e s . southern h a l f of the H a t z i c post hole  features  load bearing  s t r u c t u r e was  suggesting  f u n c t i o n and  diameter post features  larger diameter posts  the  structure's  suggest they h e l d w a l l planks i n p l a c e .  entrance i n the  w i t h most shed r o o f p l a n k This  the  that the  must be  s t r u c t u r e s h a r e s some b a s i c d e s i g n forms.  a  perimeter  An  plank eastern  structure i s also  c o n s t i t u t e s a new  southern northwest coast,  e t h n o h i s t o r i c house  served  shared  houses.  second hypothesis,  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e  Hatzic  with  Small  Shed r o o f  houses used a s i m i l a r c o n s t r u c t i o n technique. ground l e v e l  The  free standing  s u p p o r t e d r o o f beams.  along  which  structure excavated  at  type of b u i l d i n g f o r r e j e c t e d as  features  with  the  Hatzic  This  r a i s e s the t h i r d  and f i n a l h y p o t h e s i s  that the  s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e does n o t strictly the  ethnohistoric period,  design the this  resemble southern northwest coast  elements.  This  but does share s t r u c t u r a l  has a l r e a d y  hypothesis  and  The e v a l u a t i o n o f  i s extended t o i n c l u d e  examples o f s t r u c t u r e s from o t h e r  from  b e e n shown t o be v a l i d i n  e v a l u a t i o n of the second hypothesis. last  dwellings  sites  archaeological  i n the region.  As m e n t i o n e d , t h e s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  shared several design  pithouses.  The H a t z i c  above ground.  with  s t r u c t u r e was n o t  subterranean, l i k e a pithouse, entirely  features  ethnohistoric  entirely  as t h e s o u t h e r n h a l f  However,  the northern  was  p o r t i o n of the  b u i l d i n g was e x c a v a t e d i n t o a h i l l s i d e a n d was  semi-  subterranean. A bench feature the  located along  the northern  s t r u c t u r e a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e a l s o  pithouse  construction.  large c e n t r a l posts design,  created  The o u t l i n e o f t h i s  perimeter of  resembles bench suggests  s u p p o r t e d r a d i a t i n g r o o f beams w h i c h ,  the i n t e r i o r  by  space.  The s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e and s h e d - r o o f p l a n k houses i s l e s s c l e a r . T h o u g h t h e s o u t h e r n h a l f o f t h e b u i l d i n g was e n t i r e l y  above  ground, t h e l a c k of p a t t e r n i n g  makes  comparisons d i f f i c u l t . small post holes  along  i n large post features  The p r e s e n c e o f o b v i o u s p a i r s o f the southern perimeter of the Hatzic  s t r u c t u r e s u g g e s t w a l l p l a n k s may  have been r e t a i n e d i n a  manner s i m i l a r t o s h e d - r o o f p l a n k ethnohistoric The  houses from t h e  period.  s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  found t o share f e a t u r e s w i t h the Charles excavated a t t h e Maurer s i t e 1982).  Culture  was  structure  (see L e C l a i r 1976; Fladmark  The s t r u c t u r e f r o m M a u r e r i s s i m i l a r t o t h e  s t r u c t u r e from H a t z i c i n i t s semi-subterranean c o n s t r u c t i o n , its  shape, e a s t e r n  (7x11  m).  ground l e v e l  The c e n t r a l d e p r e s s i o n  platforms  and  size  sleeping/storage  o b s e r v e d a t M a u r e r do n o t a p p e a r a t H a t z i c  ( L e C l a i r 1976; Fladmark Interestingly,  1982).  t h e Maurer s t r u c t u r e shares  features w i t h shed-roof plank period.  entrance and o v e r a l l  This  houses from t h e e t h n o h i s t o r i c  raises the p o s s i b i l i t y that the structure  the H a t z i c Rock s i t e roof plank  several  s h a r e s many more f e a t u r e s w i t h  houses than those which a r e d i r e c t l y  Unfortunately,  the lack of c l a r i t y  from  shed-  observable.  i n structural details at  t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e may h a v e m a s k e d much o f t h i s similarity. The  s t r u c t u r e from t h e Maurer s i t e  resembles  e t h n o h i s t o r i c shed-roof houses w i t h i t s s i x l a r g e  posts  evenly  spaced around a c e n t r a l depression.  posts  likely  served  along  a load bearing  the perimeter  wall cladding.  This  These  p u r p o s e w i t h 19 s m a l l e r  of the structure l i k e l y  posts  supporting the  i s remarkably s i m i l a r t o the plan of a  S o n g i s h shed r o o f house i l l u s t r a t e d by Boas  (1890:11,12).  At  t h e Maurer s i t e ,  a p l a t f o r m e x i s t e d i n t h e space  b e t w e e n t h e edge o f t h e c e n t r a l d e p r e s s i o n was  l i k e l y used f o r storage  and w a l l •  and/or s l e e p i n g .  The s i z e o f  the Maurer s t r u c t u r e f a l l s w i t h i n t h e range o f s m a l l e r roof plank  houses.  with other  shed roof p l a n k  nature.  This  shed-  However, i t s m a i n p o i n t o f d i f f e r e n c e houses i s i t s semi-subterranean  The c l e a r p a t t e r n o f p o s t f e a t u r e s a t M a u r e r  suggests the s t r u c t u r e experienced maintenance o r r e b u i l d i n g a c t i v i t y . single large hearth  little,  i f any,  The l o c a t i o n o f a  on t h e f l o o r o f t h e s t r u c t u r e r e i n f o r c e s  the use o f t h e s t r u c t u r e f o r a r e l a t i v e l y l i m i t e d p e r i o d o f time. The  s i m i l a r i t y o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  structure  t h e M a u r e r s t r u c t u r e r e f l e c t s a common d e s i g n Evidence from t h e Maurer s i t e existed during  the Charles  suggests t h i s design  intent.  s u g g e s t s a common h o u s e  form  C u l t u r e a n d some e v i d e n c e  may h a v e c o n t i n u e d  ethnohistoric period.  with  into the  D i f f e r e n c e s between t h e H a t z i c  Rock  s i t e a n d M a u r e r s t r u c t u r e s a r e n o t o v e r w h e l m i n g a n d may b e attributed to the specific building sites or to the c l a r i t y of t h e Maurer data,  which suggests a s i n g l e occupation, i n  contrast t o the frequently rebuilt a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  and maintained  structure  site.  House r e m a i n s t h a t a r e p e r h a p s t h e most s i m i l a r t o t h e H a t z i c s t r u c t u r e were p a r t i a l l y e x c a v a t e d a t t h e McCallum site  ( F i g u r e 5.9) b y M a r i o n S m i t h  (1947).  Figure Location  5.9  of the McCallum S i t e ,  1)  Hatzic Rock, DgRn-23  2)  Maurer, DhRk-8  3)  McCaUmn, DhRk-2  0 km  DhRk-2  50 =]  Similar to Hatzic, rectangular  t h e M c C a l l u m s i t e s t r u c t u r e was  L i k e Maurer, but  M c C a l l u m s t r u c t u r e had sleeping  perimeter.  examples w i t h  around the  ethnohistoric the  this  comparison  (Smith  The  similarity  of these three  The  basic  obvious with  choice  To  the  the  only utility  and  one  from the  to the  examples,  Canyon  i d e a of  raw  materials  design  ethnohistoric structures  differences possibly explained the  Culture  by  the  a t h a n d and  the  occupants. s t r u c t u r e excavated at the  examples from the  Hatzic  River  valley.  a p p e a r s t o r e p r e s e n t an amalgam o f t h e  various  b u i l d i n g techniques, and  other  resembles a s p e c t s of e t h n o h i s t o r i c d w e l l i n g s  archaeological Hatzic  limited  s i m i l a r i t i e s of these three  summarize, the  Rock s i t e  from the  archaeological  Charles Culture  of b u i l d i n g s i t e s ,  needs of the  interior  1947).  Charles Culture  c o n t i n u i t y from the  are  data of  (Smith 1947), f u r t h e r r e i n f o r c e s the  period.  depression  s t r u c t u r e a t t h e M c C a l l u m s i t e was  for  (late)  the  shed-roof p l a n k house dimensions.  days making the  from the  the  17 m x 9 m s i z e w h i c h i s more i n  excavated f o r three  two  interior  McCallum s t r u c t u r e diverged  i t s great  Unfortunately  unlike Hatzic,  e v i d e n c e o f an  or storage platforms The  common w i t h  large  semi-subterranean structure excavated i n t o  s i d e of a t e r r a c e .  and  a  likely  requirements of  Fraser  i n response to l o c a l  i t s occupants.  and  conditions  The  Hatzic  structure i s similar to pithouses i n i t s  semi-subterranean  aspects which  i s a l s o shared i n the  s t r u c t u r e s from t h e Maurer and McCallum s i t e s . s t r u c t u r e may h a v e i n c o r p o r a t e d  The H a t z i c  many more a s p e c t s o f s h e d -  roof p l a n k house c o n s t r u c t i o n as i s t h e case a t t h e Maurer and M c C a l l u m s i t e s .  However, t h e H a t z i c d a t a l a c k t h e  n e c e s s a r y r e s o l u t i o n needed f o r t h e c e r t a i n t y o f t h i s interpretation. A precise description of the structure at Hatzic possible.  The d a t a s u g g e s t  i s not  t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e f o r  d e s i g n c o n t i n u i t y over time, b u t t h e maintenance and r e b u i l d i n g o f t h e s t r u c t u r e h a s made t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f structural patterning d i f f i c u l t .  Perhaps  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e c a n h e l p c l a r i f y  future  fieldwork  the uncertainty.  CHAPTER S I X SUMMARY AND  CONCLUSIONS  This t h e s i s described Charles a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  C u l t u r e remains  i n 1990 a n d 1 9 9 1 .  These  i n c l u d e t h e remnants o f a semi-subterranean  excavated  remains  s t r u c t u r e dated  t o 4725±39 BP. The  analysis of a r t i f a c t s  from t h e t h r e e  occupation  zones i s o l a t e d a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e r e v e a l e d variation.  minimal  D i f f e r e n c e s were o f t e n b a s e d on t h e p r e s e n c e o r  absence o f a s i n g l e example o f an a r t i f a c t importance of these Exceptions  differences d i f f i c u l t  c l a s s making the to interpret.  t o t h i s p a t t e r n i n c l u d e pebble t o o l s and  stemmed p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s w h i c h w e r e p r o p o r t i o n a l l y more common i n o c c u p a t i o n occupation  Artifacts sites  operated Faunal  Anvil  stones  were absent i n  zone I I I and p e b b l e f l a k e t o o l p r o p o r t i o n s were  higher i n occupation  quarry  zone I I I .  zones I and I I .  fashioned  from o b s i d i a n were t r a c e d t o t h r e e  i n Oregon s u g g e s t i n g  an exchange network  between t h e q u a r r i e s and t h e H a t z i c Rock  remains, while only minimally represented,  site. indicated  the range of s p e c i e s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e occupants o f t h e s i t e . S h e l l f i s h remains suggest contact and/or trade w i t h c o a s t a l areas.  Quantitative insights into the Hatzic faunal  assemblage were n o t p o s s i b l e .  Artifacts I-III)  f r o m t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  are s i m i l a r to P r a t t ' s  Charles Culture a r t i f a c t  expedient  assemblages.  t o o l and  raw  f l a k e and p e b b l e  C h e r t , w h i c h was  Rock s i t e .  stone  both  Pratt  chert.  Similarly, the  r e l a t i v e l y rare at  t o o l s w e r e f a r l e s s common  i n P r a t t ' s summary a n d  the  leaf-  These s t y l e s were b o t h p r e s e n t  along with a lanceolate style.  than  at the H a t z i c  (1992) n o t e d b i f a c e s w e r e e i t h e r  s h a p e d o r stemmed.  A possible shift  at Hatzic  away f r o m  t h e stemmed p o i n t s t y l e t o w a r d s t h e l e a f - s h a p e d s t y l e noted  from  i s an e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s p a t t e r n .  Formed c h i p p e d unformed t o o l s ,  as  tools fashioned  and  of  (1992)  m a t e r i a l t y p e s were p r o m i n e n t a t  H a t z i c Rock s i t e . H a t z i c Rock s i t e ,  Pratt  a r t i f a c t assemblages  locally available basalt, quartzite, these  zones  (1992) summary d e s c r i p t i o n  described Charles Culture l i t h i c d o m i n a t e d by  (occupation  i n o c c u p a t i o n zone I / I I .  Occupation  anomalous i n i t s n e a r absence of b i f a c i a l  zone I  was  was  tools.  A  s a t i s f a c t o r y e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s l a c k of b i f a c i a l  tools  was  not a s c e r t a i n e d . Pratt's prepared  (1992) summary i n d i c a t e d t h e e v i d e n c e  blade  technology  This i s f u r t h e r confirmed single microblade microliths,  was  another  i n t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e was  weak.  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e where a  recovered.  No  evidence  contentious a r t i f a c t  C u l t u r e assemblages, were  for  recovered.  type  of  quartz  i n Charles  Ground  stone a r t i f a c t s  stone a r t i f a c t s ) H a t z i c Rock s i t e Gulf site,  Islands  ( i n c l u d i n g ground and c h i p p e d  w e r e r a r e i n P r a t t ' s summary a n d a t t h e ( P r a t t 1992:291).  Also,  no e v i d e n c e o f  Complex a r t i f a c t s e x i s t e d a t t h e H a t z i c  however,  Pratt  (1992:293)  Rock  c i t e s some e v i d e n c e o f t h e s e  i t e m s i n t h e assemblages she examined. The p r e s e n c e o f l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s o f o c h r e a n d o c h r e related artifacts Pratt's  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e does n o t f i t i n t o  (1992) summary o f C h a r l e s C u l t u r e  presence of t h i s m a t e r i a l at Hatzic processing  assemblages.  s u g g e s t s o c h r e u s e and  may h a v e b e e n i m p o r t a n t a c t i v i t i e s .  a r t i f a c t s e x c a v a t e d from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e Pratt's  (1992)  The  summary o f C h a r l e s C u l t u r e  In general, conform t o  lithic  artifact  assemblages. The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e was to contemporary a r t i f a c t G l e n r o s e Cannery,  compared  assemblages from E s i l a o , Maurer,  S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  done t o d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n  T h i s was  the Hatzic  Rock  site artifact  assemblage and o t h e r a r t i f a c t  assemblages  this period.  T h i s comparison a l s o sought t o determine  w h e t h e r b a s i c d i f f e r e n c e s c o u l d be d i s c e r n e d w i t h an assumed r e s i d e n t i a l  function  Rock s i t e ) and s i t e s a s s o c i a t e d activities Beach).  with  ( E s i l a o , G l e n r o s e Cannery,  Noticeable  resource  procurement  S t . Mungo a n d C r e s c e n t  d i f f e r e n c e s between  comparison.  sites  (Maurer and t h e H a t z i c  i n l a n d Eayem p h a s e  s i t e s a n d c o a s t a l S t . Mungo P h a s e s i t e s w e r e sought i n t h i s  between  from  similarly  An  absence o f q u a l i t y d a t a from E s i l a o and Maurer  hindered  t h i s comparison but i n d i c a t e d r e a l  e x i s t between a r t i f a c t and  resource  differences  assemblages from r e s i d e n t i a l  procurement s i t e s .  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c of  sites resource  procurement l o c a t i o n s a r e ground s l a t e k n i f e fragments, a large proportion (Esilao),  of unifacial  tools, spall  tools/knives?  a l a c k o f pecked stone and t h e p r e s e n c e o f i n c i s e d  stone plaques.  Characteristic of residential  pecked stone a r t i f a c t s , stones associated  formed a b r a s i v e  stones,  w i t h q u a n t i t i e s of ochre, a  proportion  of pebble t o o l s , cores,  lanceolate  style projectile points.  sites are  anvil  palate high  stones and p o s s i b l y  A formal  analysis of  the Maurer and E s i l a o a r t i f a c t assemblages i s n e c e s s a r y substantiate The  these perceived  differences.  c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  assemblage w i t h  the three  assemblages r e v e a l e d  S t . Mungo p h a s e  artifact  artifact  major d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t .  The H a t z i c  Rock s i t e h a d a f a r g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n  o f p e b b l e t o o l s and  c o r e s t h a n t h e S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s .  Utilized  proportions the  a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e were a l s o h i g h e r  S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n  Beach s i t e .  three  function,  than  of the Crescent  The H a t z i c R o c k s i t e was a l s o f o u n d t o p o s s e s s  f a r fewer formed u n i f a c e s the  flake  o r retouched f l a k e t o o l s than at  S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s .  Differences  i n site  l o c a t i o n a n d a g e a r e t h o u g h t t o a c c o u n t f o r some  of these d i f f e r e n c e s .  A major study of Charles C u l t u r e t o o l assemblages i s c l e a r l y warranted. Pratt's  Such a s t u d y c o u l d combine  elements of  (1992) C h a r l e s C u l t u r e s t u d y w i t h M a t s o n ' s  c l u s t e r i n g and s c a l i n g of S t r a i t  of Georgia s i t e s .  study would b e g i n by r e - c l a s s i f y i n g C h a r l e s C u l t u r e assemblages w i t h a c o n s i s t e n t t o o l used by P r a t t  (1992).  (1974) Such a tool  t y p o l o g y such as t h a t  Once c l a s s i f i e d  these t o o l  assemblages c o u l d be c l u s t e r e d and s c a l e d i n a r o b u s t attempt t o d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  tool  assemblages. Minimally,  s i t e s w h i c h s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n such a  s t u d y a r e : C r e s c e n t B e a c h , S t . Mungo, G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y , H e l e n P o i n t , Maurer, E s i l a o and t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e . a n a l y s i s o f t o o l assemblages from Maurer and E s i l a o  The  would  c o n s t i t u t e l a r g e u n d e r t a k i n g s i n time and r e s o u r c e s as n e i t h e r s i t e has undergone past.  any s u b s t a n t i a l a n a l y s i s i n t h e  The H e l e n P o i n t t o o l a s s e m b l a g e w o u l d r e q u i r e r e -  a n a l y s i s t o r e s o l v e q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g component m i x i n g (see P r a t t  1992) .  Such an a n a l y s i s c o u l d d e t e r m i n e , w i t h  statistical  c o n f i d e n c e , whether r e a l d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between p h a s e a n d S t . Mungo p h a s e s i t e s o r w h e t h e r r e a l e x i s t between  s i t e s w i t h an i n f e r r e d r e s i d e n t i a l  and s i t e s p r i m a r i l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r e s o u r c e activities.  Eayem  differences function  procurement  Three general  hypotheses concerning the  n a t u r e of  the  s t r u c t u r e excavated at the  H a t z i c Rock s i t e were a s s e s s e d i n  C h a p t e r 5.  s t a t e d the  H y p o t h e s i s one  e t h n o h i s t o r i c examples of northwest coast. s t a t e d the the  was  rejected.  southern northwest coast. The  construction structures  and  on  construction h o u s e s and  This  an  amalgam o f v a r i o u s  This  design  Structures  Hatzic  structure.  style  as e a r l y as the  the  from the  ethnohistoric period.  The  and  Fraser  materials,  the  traits  construction  and  site  River  McCallum with  the  possibly continuing  v a r i a t i o n seen i n  p a r t i c u l a r b u i l d i n g s o l u t i o n was s u c h as  other  s u g g e s t s a common d e s i g n i n t e n t  Charles Culture  conditions  plank  period.  e x c a v a t e d a t t h e M a u r e r and  This  Rock  and  s i t e s were f o u n d t o s h a r e b a s i c d e s i g n f e a t u r e s Hatzic  hypothesis  expanded t o i n c l u d e  examples of s t r u c t u r e s  shares  ethnohistoric  ethnohistoric  t h i r d h y p o t h e s i s was  likely  configuration,  requirements of the knowledge.  on  also  structure  s t r u c t u r e excavated at the  p i t h o u s e s from the  hypothesis  type of b u i l d i n g  elements seen i n b o t h shed r o o f  archaeological  southern  second  southern northwest coast.  the  resembles  h y p o t h e s i s was  design elements w i t h  the  s i t e represents  valley.  The  t h i r d h y p o t h e s i s s t a t e d the  a c c e p t e d as  This  from the  s t r u c t u r e c o n s t i t u t e d a new  rejected.  was  This  structures  structure  into  this  i n response to construction  occupants,  from  cultural  local  Pratt  (1992) a r g u e d C h a r l e s  egalitarian despite  p o s s i b l y Pender Canal.  t h i s p o s i t i o n was o b t a i n e d Pratt  s o c i e t y was  the p o s s i b i l i t y of status  d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n as r e f l e c t e d and  Culture  i nburial  r e m a i n s a t Tsawwassen  No e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t o r r e f u t e a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  (1992) a l s o a r g u e d t h a t C h a r l e s  site.  Culture  faunal  r e m a i n s i n d i c a t e d a m i x e d economy i n w h i c h l a n d a n d s e a mammals w e r e e x p l o i t e d .  Further,  e x p l o i t e d t o some e x t e n t , begun  she argued salmon were  but s p e c i a l i z a t i o n had not y e t  (see a l s o Matson 1992).  S t r u c t u r a l data obtained  the H a t z i c Rock and Maurer s i t e s q u e s t i o n s s a l m o n s p e c i a l i z a t i o n was n o t i n p l a c e  the b e l i e f  during  from that  the Charles  Culture. The and  inhabitants of the structures at the Hatzic  Maurer s i t e s would have r e q u i r e d  dietary resources. population, required, the  I t i s doubtful  as suggested by P r a t t  or invested  l a r g e and p r e d i c t a b l e  that a  hunting  (1992), would have  t h e n e c e s s a r y time and energy  l a r g e s t r u c t u r e s a t H a t z i c and Maurer.  remains from both s i t e s l i m i t s  Rock  into,  A lack of faunal  t h i s a r g u m e n t , b u t , i t seems  h i g h l y u n l i k e l y t h a t a m a r i t i m e o r i e n t e d p e o p l e w o u l d n o t be o b t a i n i n g and p r o c e s s i n g periods  of resource  This  l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s o f salmon f o r  scarcity.  argument s u g g e s t s t h e s t r u c t u r e e x c a v a t e d a t t h e  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  served  a function similar to structures  documented f o r t h e r e g i o n d u r i n g  the ethnohistoric  ( C h a p t e r 2) a n d a s s u m e s s e m i - s e d e n t a r y o c c u p a t i o n  period i s related  t o t h e i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n and  storage of salmon.  i s a d m i t t e d l y o p e n t o c r i t i c i s m due data, s p e c i f i c  tool  types,  technology  t o the absence of  F u r t h e r , Cannon  a r e w a i t i n g t o be  (Cannon 1 9 9 3 : 4 ) .  has been d e r i v e d f r o m c o a s t a l s h e l l midden  In response,  region.  A broad  Culture  Reliance  s u c h as t h e H a t z i c Rock  non-coastal  site.  range of C h a r l e s C u l t u r e s i t e s which  diverse a c t i v i t i e s ,  environments,  and  seasons of  reflect occupation  r e q u i r e e x c a v a t i o n b e f o r e t h i s p e r i o d c a n be  fully  understood.  time  Very  little  i s known a b o u t t h i s  in  comparison w i t h l a t e r p e r i o d s of p r e h i s t o r y , however, development i n southwestern new will  t h i s l a c k of  knowledge  p r o j e c t s which c o u l d f u r t h e r our  of the Charles C u l t u r e would i n c l u d e the  f o r m a l a n a l y s i s and p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e M a u r e r and s i t e data.  and  addressed.  In the s h o r t term, understanding  as  B r i t i s h Columbia continues,  C h a r l e s C u l t u r e s i t e s are found, l i k e l y be  on  to i t s inherent  more r e s e a r c h i s r e q u i r e d a t  Charles Culture s i t e s ,  data  sites,  c o a s t a l m i d d e n s i t e d a t a i s p r o b l e m a t i c due bias.  storage  coast.  of the C h a r l e s  from the lower mainland  data  Columbia  Perhaps s i m i l a r  d i s c o v e r e d on t h e s o u t h  In the past our understanding  particularly  or  has  of salmon s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and  a t Namu on t h e c e n t r a l c o a s t o f B r i t i s h  p r i o r t o 6000 B.P.  faunal  However, t h e s t r u c t u r a l  suggestive.  argued f o r the presence  position  s u c h as g r o u n d s l a t e k n i v e s ,  s t o r a g e f e a t u r e s s u c h as p i t s . are i n the very l e a s t ,  This  Esilao  A second s t r u c t u r e t e n t a t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d at  the  Maurer s i t e  ( C a r l s o n n.d.)  comparative  structural  Similarly,  c o u l d be  excavated  to  provide  data.  d a t a o b t a i n e d b y James  (1990) f r o m  C h a r l e s C u l t u r e component a t t h e F o r t L a n g l e y properly analyzed,  r e p o r t e d , and p u b l i s h e d .  f i e l d w o r k c o u l d be  conducted  at t h i s  More i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g  the  site  could  Additional  site.  the Charles C u l t u r e waits  t o be u n c o v e r e d a t t h e H a t z i c R o c k s i t e .  The  o f t h e s i t e h a s b e e n s e c u r e d b y t h e B.C.  preservation  Heritage  Conservation Branch encouraging  the development of a  term  of the s i t e  r e s e a r c h program.  include unresolved 91 e x c a v a t i o n s .  Aspects  be  to  long  explore  elements of the s t r u c t u r e from the  This i n c l u d e s the nature  of the  1990-  ditch  f e a t u r e around the p e r i m e t e r of the s t r u c t u r e ,  the nature  the southeastern p o r t i o n of the s t r u c t u r e ,  determining  the season(s) Future  of s i t e  and  occupation.  r e s e a r c h a t t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  should  include  l o c a t i n g an u n d i s t u r b e d p o r t i o n o f t h e s i t e  to determine  nature  t h a t was  and  age  of the top metre of the s i t e  b u l l d o z e d away i n 1990. c o u l d i n d i c a t e how h i s t o r y and The  the  largely  e x c a v a t i o n of t h i s m a t e r i a l u t i l i z e d throughout  of these l a t e r  its  occupations.  e x c a v a t i o n o f a s e c o n d s t r u c t u r e a t t h e H a t z i c Rock  s i t e w o u l d add clarify  The  t h e s i t e was  the nature  of  t o our knowledge of the C h a r l e s C u l t u r e  the s t r u c t u r e already excavated.  could separate  f l o o r d e p o s i t s from f i l l  a l l o w i n g the nature of a c t i v i t y  areas  S u c h an deposits  t o be  and  excavation thus  studied.  The  a n a l y s i s of m a t e r i a l excavated from the H a t z i c  s i t e not the  only provided  information concerning  structure i n r e l a t i o n to other  e t h n o h i s t o r i c examples, but  the  first  the  lower mainland region.  w e l l documented C h a r l e s  baseline data British  the nature  archaeological  This  The  of  and  a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d to the  C u l t u r e knowledge base i n g e n e r a l .  Rock  Charles  H a t z i c Rock s i t e  Culture  site outside  thesis provides  is  of  valuable  f o r archaeologists working i n southwestern  Columbia.  These data w i l l  c u l t u r e chronology f o r the more c o m p l e x q u e s t i o n s of n o r t h w e s t c o a s t  help  formulate  a  F r a s e r R i v e r v a l l e y and  concerning  c u l t u r e t o be  the nature addressed.  and  reliable allow  development  REFERENCES CITED  Armstrong, J.E. 1959 S u r f i c i a l G e o l o g y o f Sumas M a p - A r e a , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . G e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y o f Canada. P a p e r 59-9. Department o f Mines and T e c h n i c a l Surveys Canada. Ottawa. B a r n e t t , H.G. 1955 The C o a s t S a l i s h o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . U n i v e r s i t y o f O r e g o n M o n o g r a p h s , S t u d i e s i n A n t h r o p o l o g y . No. 4. Eugene. B e r r y , M i c h a e l S. 1982 Time, Space, a n d T r a n s i t i o n i n A n a s a z i P r e h i s t o r y . U n i v e r s i t y o f Utah P r e s s , S a l t Lake C i t y , Utah. Boas, F r a n z 1890 Second G e n e r a l Report on t h e I n d i a n s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . I n B r i t i s h A s s o c i a t i o n f o r t h e Advancement o f S c i e n c e . S i x t h R e p o r t on t h e N o r t h w e s t e r n T r i b e s o f Canada, pp. 10-163. Boehm, 1973  Borden, 1975  S.G. C u l t u r a l and N o n - C u l t u r a l V a r i a t i o n i n t h e A r t i f a c t a n d F a u n a l S a m p l e s f r o m t h e S t . Mungo C a n n e r y S i t e , B.C., D g R r - 2 . U n p u b l i s h e d M a s t e r • s t h e s i s . Department o f A n t h r o p o l o g y and S o c i o l o g y , U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a . Charles Origins Culture Canada.  E. and Development o f E a r l y Northwest Coast t o A b o u t 3 000 B.C. A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y o f Mercury S e r i e s Paper 45. Ottawa.  Bowman, S h e r i d a n 1990 Interpreting the Past: Radiocarbon Dating. University of C a l i f o r n i a Press: Berkely.  B u r l e y , D a v i d V. 1980 Marpole: A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l Reconstructions of a P r e h i s t o r i c Northwest Coast C u l t u r e Type. Department o f A r c h a e o l o g y , Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y P u b l i c a t i o n No. 8, B u r n a b y .  B u r l e y , D a v i d V. 1988 Senewélets: C u l t u r e H i s t o r y o f t h e N a n a i m o C o a s t S a l i s h and t h e F a l s e Narrows Midden. Royal B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a Museum M e m o i r No. 2. R o y a l B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a Museum: V i c t o r i a . C a l v e r t , Gay 1970 The S t . Mungo C a n n e r y S i t e : A P r e l i m i n a r y B.C. S t u d i e s No.6-7: 5 4 - 7 6 .  Report.  Cannon, A u b r e y 1993 Contingency and O p p o r t u n i t y i n t h e Growth o f Northwest Coast M a r i t i m e Economies. Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Seminar on t h e O r i g i n s , Development, and Spread o f P r e h i s t o r i c N o r t h P a c i f i c - B e a r i n g Sea M a r i t i m e C u l t u r e s . H o n o l u l u . C a r l s o n , R o y L. n.d. U n p u b l i s h e d r a d i o c a r b o n dates and a s s o c i a t e d f i e l d notes from t h e Maurer s i t e . 1970  E x c a v a t i o n a t H e l e n P o i n t on M a i n I s l a n d i n Roy C a r l s o n ( e d . ) A r c h a e o l o g y i n B.C.. New D i s c o v e r i e s . B.C. S t u d i e s S p e c i a l I s s u e . 6-7. p p . 1 1 3 - 1 2 5 .  1983  P r e h i s t o r y o f t h e N o r t h w e s t C o a s t i n R o y L. C a r l s o n (ed.), I n d i a n A r t T r a d i t i o n s of t h e Northwest Coast. Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y A r c h a e o l o g y P r e s s : Burnaby.  C o u r t y , M.A. e t a l . 1989 S o i l s and Micromorphology i n Archaeology. U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , Cambridge.  Cambridge  Crabtree, Donald 1972 An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o F l i n t w o r k i n g . O c c a s i o n a l Papers o f t h e I d a h o S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y Museum. P a p e r No. 28 S p e c i a l I s s u e . 6-7. P o c a t e l l o , I d a h o , p p . 1 1 3 - 1 2 5 .  C r o c k f o r d , Susan 1992 R e s u l t s o f H a t z i c Rock S i t e F a u n a l A n a l y s i s . r e p o r t o n f i l e a t t h e U.B.C. L a b o r a t o r y o f A r c h a e o l o g y . P a c i f i c I.D., L t d . : V i c t o r i a .  Letter  D r a k e , Aliène a n d L y l e W i l s o n 1992 E u l a c h o n : A F i s h t o C u r e H u m a n i t y . U.B.C. Museum o f A n t h r o p o l o g y Museum N o t e No. 3 2 . V a n c o u v e r . Duff, Wilson 1952 The U p p e r S t a l o I n d i a n s o f t h e F r a s e r V a l l e y , B r i t i s h Columbia. Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia M e m o i r No. 1. V i c t o r i a : B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum. 1 9 5 2 a The U p p e r S t a l o I n d i a n s : A n I n t r o d u c t o r y Ethnography. Unpublished Master's t h e s i s . of Washington. S e a t t l e .  University  F l a d m a r k , K n u t R. 1982 An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e P r e h i s t o r y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . C a n a d i a n J o u r n a l o f A r c h a e o l o g y , No. 6., pp. 95-156. F r e d r i c k s o n , D a v i d A. 1984 The N o r t h C o a s t a l R e g i o n i n M i c h a e l J . M o r a t t o e d . C a l i f o r n i a A r c h a e o l o g y . Academic P r e s s : T o r o n t o , pp. 471-528 . G o s e , P. 1976 The F e a t u r e s a t G l e n r o s e . i n The G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y S i t e , R.G. M a t s o n ( e d . ) . A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y o f Canada. M e r c u r y S e r i e s P a p e r 52. Ottawa. H a g g a r t y , James C. a n d J o h n H.W. S e n d e y 1976 T e s t E x c a v a t i o n a t Georgeson Bay, B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum O c c a s i o n a l P a p e r No. 1 9 . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: Victoria.  H a r t w i g , F r e d e r i c k a n d B r i a n E. D e a r i n g 1979 E x p l o r a t o r y D a t a A n a l y s i s . Sacre U n i v e r s i t y P a p e r S e r i e s on Q u a n t i t a t i v e A p p l i c a t i o n s i n t h e S o c i a l S c i e n c e s . No. 1 6 . B e v e r l y H i l l s . Hayden, B r i a n e d . 1992 A Complex C u l t u r e o f t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P l a t e a u : T r a d i t i o n a l S t l ' a t l ' i m o c Resource Use. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Press. Vancouver.  Hayden, B r i a n a n d J i m S p a f f o r d 1993 The K e a t l e y C r e e k S i t e a n d C o r p o r a t e G r o u p A r c h a e o l o g y i n Changing Times : B r i t i s h Columbia A r c h a e o l o g y i n t h e 1 9 8 0 ' s . K. F l a d m a r k e d . B.C. S t u d i e s Theme I s s u e No. 99 Hebda, R i c h a r d J . a n d R o l f W. M a t h e w e s 1984 Holocene H i s t o r y o f Cedar and N a t i v e I n d i a n C u l t u r e s of t h e N o r t h American P a c i f i c Coast. S c i e n c e 225: 711-713. Hobler, P h i l 1992 Personal James, n.d.  1990  Communication.  Malcolm P a r t i a l Master's thesis d r a f t author.  i n possession of the  1989 E x c a v a t i o n s , O p e r a t i o n s 3 9 - 5 1 , F o r t L a n g l e y N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Park. Report prepared f o r A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Research S e r v i c e s U n i t , Western Region, Canadian Parks S e r v i c e . Calgary.  J e n n e s s , Diamond 1955 The F a i t h o f a C o a s t S a l i s h I n d i a n . A n t h r o p o l o g y i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a M e m o i r No. 2. B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: V i c t o r i a . Klein, 1984  R.G. a n d K. C r u z - U r i b e The A n a l y s i s o f A n i m a l B o n e s f r o m A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S i t e s . U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, L t d . : Chicago.  Kornbacher, Kim 1989 S h e l l Midden L i t h i c Technology: An I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f Change a t B r i t i s h Camp ( 5 4 S J 2 4 ) , S a n J u a n I s l a n d . U n p u b l i s h e d M a s t e r ' s t h e s i s . Department o f A n t h r o p o l o g y a n d S o c i o l o g y , U.B.C. L a f o r e t , Andrea and Annie York 1981 N o t e s o n t h e Thompson W i n t e r D w e l l i n g i n T h e W o r l d as Sharp a s a K n i f e : An A n t h o l o g y i n Honour o f W i l s o n D u f f . D o n a l d N. A b b o t t ( e d . ) . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: V i c t o r i a , p p . 1 1 5 - 1 2 2 .  Lamb, W.K. e d . 1960 The L e t t e r s a n d J o u r n a l s o f S i m o n F r a s e r . 1 8 0 6 - 1 8 0 8 . M a c m i l l a n o f Canada: T o r o n t o . L e C l a i r , Ronald 1973 I n v e s t i g a t i o n s a t t h e Maurer S i t e , an E a r l y P i t h o u s e M a n i f e s t a t i o n i n t h e Upper F r a s e r V a l l e y : P r e l i m i n a r y R e p o r t . P e r m i t r e p o r t n o . 1973-19 o n f i l e , [ B r i t i s h Columbia] A r c h a e o l o g y Branch, Victoria. 1976  I n v e s t i g a t i o n s a t t h e Maurer S i t e Near A g a s s i z i n C u r r e n t R e s e a r c h R e p o r t s . Number 3. R o y L. C a r l s o n ( e d . ) . S.F.U. D e p a r t m e n t o f A r c h a e o l o g y : B u r n a b y . pp. 3 3 - 4 2 .  L o y , T. a n d G.R. P o w e l l 1977 A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Data Recording Guide. H e r i t a g e Record No. 3. B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: V i c t o r i a . M a t s o n , R.G. 1974 C l u s t e r i n g and S c a l i n g o f G u l f o f G e o r g i a S y e s i s 7: 1 0 1 - 1 1 4 . V i c t o r i a .  Sites.  1976  The G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y S i t e . A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Survey of Canada. M e r c u r y S e r i e s Paper 52. Ottawa.  1992  The E v o l u t i o n o f N o r t h w e s t C o a s t S u b s i s t e n c e i n R e s e a r c h i n E c o n o m i c A n t h r o p o l o g y , S u p p l e m e n t 6, D a l e R. C r o e s e t a l . e d s . J A I P r e s s , I n c . G r e e n w i c h , Conn. p p . 3 6 7 - 4 2 8 .  Maud, R a l p h e d . 1978 The S a l i s h P e o p l e : The L o c a l C o n t r i b u t i o n ( s ) o f C h a r l e s H i l l - T o u t . V o l u m e 3: The M a i n l a n d Halkomelem. T a l o n Books: Vancouver. M c L e a n , D a v i d G. 1990 The R e l a t i o n s h i p B e t w e e n C h a n n e l I n s t a b i l i t y a n d Sediment T r a n s p o r t on t h e Lower F r a s e r R i v e r . U n p u b l i s h e d Ph.D d i s s e r t a t i o n , D e p a r t m e n t o f G e o g r a p h y , U.B.C.  M i t c h e l l , D o n a l d H. 1990 P r e h i s t o r y of the Coasts of Southern B r i t i s h C o l u n i b i a a n d N o r t h e r n W a s h i n g t o n i n Wayne S u t t l e s ( e d . ) . Handbook o f N o r t h A m e r i c a n I n d i a n s . V o l u m e 7, The N o r t h w e s t C o a s t . S m i t h s o n i a n I n s t i t u t i o n P r e s s . W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. p p . 3 4 0 - 3 5 8 . M i t c h e l l , D o n a l d H. a n d D a v i d L. P o k o t y l o n.d. E a r l y P e r i o d Components a t t h e M i l l i k e n S i t e , F r a s e r Canyon, B r i t i s h Columbia. Paper p r e p a r e d f o r E a r l y Man i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a Roy L. C a r l s o n ( e d . ) . Mohs, G o r d o n 1991 E x c a v a t i o n s a t Smâ:lt X a t h ' a q , t h e H a t z i c R o c k , P r e l i m i n a r y R e p o r t . Ms. o n f i l e S t o : l o T r i b a l Council, Sardis.  1992  E x c a v a t i o n s a t H a t z i c R o c k , DgRn 2 3 . Ms. o n f i l e , [ B r i t i s h Columbia] A r c h a e o l o g y Branch, V i c t o r i a .  N e l s o n , D.E., J.M. D ' A u r i a a n d R.B. B e n n e t t 1975 C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of P a c i f i c Northwest Coast O b s i d i a n by X - r a y F l u o r e s c e n c e A n a l y s i s . A r c h a e o m e t r y 1 7 ( 1 ) , pp. 85-97. Nelson, E r i e 1975 Uses o f X-ray F l u o r e s c e n c e A n a l y s i s S y e s i s . V o l u m e 8:91-95. Pattison, Allan 1991 Personal  i n Archaeology.  Communication.  Percy, 1972  Richard Maurer P r o p e r t y S u r v e y i n S a l v a g e 71. Roy C a r l s o n ( e d . ) . S.F.U. D e p a r t m e n t o f A r c h a e o l o g y : B u r n a b y . pp. 160-161.  Pojar, 1991  J . , K. K l i n k a , a n d D.A. D e m a r c h i M o u n t a i n H e m l o c k Zone i n M e i d i n g e r a n d P o j a r ( e d s . ) E c o s y s t e m s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . B.C. M i n i s t r y o f F o r e s t s , S p e c i a l R e p o r t S e r i e s , No. 6. C r o w n P u b l i c a t i o n s : V i c t o r i a , pp. 95-111.  P o j a r , J . , K. K l i n k a , a n d D.A. D e m a r c h i 1991a C o a s t a l W e s t e r n H e m l o c k Zone i n M e i d i n g e r a n d P o j a r ( e d s . ) E c o s y s t e m s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . B.C. M i n i s t r y o f F o r e s t s , S p e c i a l R e p o r t S e r i e s , No. 6. C r o w n P u b l i c a t i o n s : V i c t o r i a , pp. 113-124.  P o k o t y l o , D a v i d L. 1978 L i t h i c Technology and S e t t l e m e n t P a t t e r n s i n Upper H a t C r e e k V a l l e y B.C. U n p u b l i s h e d Ph.D D i s s e r t a t i o n , D e p a r t m e n t o f A n t h r o p o l o g y a n d S o c i o l o g y , U.B.C. P r a t t , H e a t h e r L. 1992 The C h a r l e s C u l t u r e o f t h e G u l f o f G e o r g i a : A Re-évaluâtion o f t h e C u l t u r e a n d i t s T h r e e Sub-phases. U n p u b l i s h e d Master's t h e s i s . Department o f A n t h r o p o l o g y a n d S o c i o l o g y , U.B.C. S a m u e l s , S t e p h a n R. 1991 P a t t e r n s i n O z e t t e F l o o r Middens: R e f l e c t i o n s o f S o c i a l Units i n Ozette Archaeological Project R e s e a r c h R e p o r t s , V o l u m e 1: House S t r u c t u r e a n d F l o o r M i d d e n . S t e p h a n R. S a m u e l s e d . WSU D e p a r t m e n t o f A n t h r o p o l o g y R e p o r t s o f I n v e s t i g a t i o n s No. 6 3 . Pullman. M a r i o n W. 1939 E t h n o g r a p h i c Notes on t h e N o r t h Coast S a l i s h , Washington and B r i t i s h Columbia. M a n u s c r i p t i n the L i b r a r y of the Royal A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l I n s t i t u t e o f G r e a t B r i t a i n and I r e l a n d , London. 194 0  The P u y a l l u p - N i s q u a l l y . C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y C o n t r i b u t i o n s t o A n t h r o p o l o g y 3 2 . New Y o r k , ( r e p r i n t e d AMS P r e s s , New Y o r k , 1969.)  1940a The P u y a l l u p o f W a s h i n g t o n i n A c c u l t u r a t i o n i n Seven American Indian T r i b e s . Ralph L i n t o n ed. D. A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y : New Y o r k . p p . 3-36.  1941  The C o a s t S a l i s h o f Puget Sound. A n t h r o p o l o g i s t 43 ( 2 ) : 1 9 7 - 2 1 1 .  American  1947  House Types o f t h e M i d d l e F r a s e r R i v e r . A n t i q u i t y 12 (4) : 2 5 5 - 2 6 7 .  American  S m i t h , M a r i o n W. 1950 A r c h a e o l o g y of t h e C o l u m b i a - F r a s e r R e g i o n . Memoirs o f t h e S o c i e t y f o r A m e r i c a n A r c h a e o l o g y No. 6. Menasha, W i s c o n s i n .  1 9 5 0 a The N o o k s a c k , t h e C h i l l i w a c k , a n d t h e M i d d l e F r a s e r R i v e r . P a c i f i c Northwest Q u a r t e r l y 41 (4) :330-341.  1954  Smyly, 1973  Shamanism i n t h e S h a k e r R e l i g i o n o f N o r t h w e s t A m e r i c a . Man: The J o u r n a l o f t h e R o y a l A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l I n s t i t u t e 59: 8-12. L o n d o n . John The Shuswap K e k u l i . The  B e a v e r . O u t f i t 303,  4:49-51.  Spurgeon, T e r r y 1992 M i d - H o l o c e n e E n v i r o n m e n t s a t t h e P a r k Farm S i t e , DhRq 22. P a p e r P r e s e n t e d a t t h e 2 5 t h N o r t h w e s t A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l Conference, Burnaby, B.C. S t a g e r , J.K a n d J.H. W a l l i s 1968 The C l i m a t i c F a c t o r - V a r i a t i o n s on a Mean, i n L o w e r F r a s e r V a l l e y : E v o l u t i o n of a C u l t u r a l Landscape. B.C. G e o g r a p h i c a l S e r i e s No. 9. A l f r e d H. S i e m e n s (ed.) T a n t a l u s R e s e a r c h , L t d . : V a n c o u v e r , p p . 89100. S u t t l e s , Wayne 1955 K a t z i e Ethnographic Notes. Anthropology i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a M e m o i r No. 2. B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: V i c t o r i a . 1990  C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h i n Handbook o f N o r t h A m e r i c a n I n d i a n s . V o l u m e 7: N o r t h w e s t C o a s t Wayne S u t t l e s ( e d . ) . S m i t h s o n i a n I n s t i t u t i o n : W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. pp. 453-475 .  T e i t , James 1900 The Thompson I n d i a n s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . M e m o i r o f t h e A m e r i c a n Museum o f N a t u r a l H i s t o r y . V o l . 2, p a r t 4. New Y o r k .  Turner, Nancy J . 1975 F o o d P l a n t s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a I n d i a n s , P a r t 1: C o a s t a l P e o p l e s . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum H a n d b o o k No. 34. B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: Victoria. 1978  F o o d P l a n t s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a I n d i a n s , P a r t 2: I n t e r i o r Peoples. B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Museum Handbook No. 3 6 . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a P r o v i n c i a l Museum: V i c t o r i a .  Turner, Nancy J . , e t a l . 1990 Thompson E t h n o b o t a n y : K n o w l e d g e a n d U s a g e o f P l a n t s b y t h e Thompson I n d i a n s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . Royal B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a Museum M e m o i r No. 3. R o y a l B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a Museum: V i c t o r i a . T u r n e r , N a n c y Chapman a n d M a r c u s A.M. B e l l 1971 The E t h n o b o t a n y o f t h e C o a s t S a l i s h I n d i a n s o f V a n c o u v e r I s l a n d i n E c o n o m i c B o t a n y 2 5 ( 1 ) , p p . 63104. Von K r o u g h , H. 1980 A r c h a e o l o g i c a l I n v e s t i g a t i o n s a t t h e F l o o d and P i p e l i n e S i t e s , n e a r Hope, B.C. H e r i t a g e C o n s e r v a t i o n B r a n c h O c c a s i o n a l P a p e r s No. 4. Heritage Conservation Branch: V i c t o r i a . Wells, 1963  1965  O l i v e r N. K h a l - a g h - i l - t i l , C h i e f S e p a s s i n S e p a s s Poems: The Soncrs o f Y - A i l - M i h t h b y E l o i s e S t r e e t . V a n t a g e P r e s s , I n c . : New Y o r k . Myths and Legends o f t h e S t a w - l o h I n d i a n s . Published: Chilliwack.  Self  1 9 6 5 a A V o c a b u l a r y o f N a t i v e Words i n t h e H a l k o m e l e m Language as u s e d by t h e N a t i v e P e o p l e o f t h e Lower E r a s e r V a l l e y , B.C. S e l f P u b l i s h e d : C h i l l i w a c k . 1965b S q u a m i s h 1966  Legends.  Self Published: Chilliwack,  I n d i a n T e r r i t o r y 1958 (map). S e l f Chilliwack.  Published:  W e l l s , O l i v e r N. 1 9 6 6 a R e t u r n o f t h e S a l i s h Loom. The B e a v e r . (296):40-45. Winnipeg.  1987  Outfit  The C h i l l i w a c k s a n d t h e i r N e i g h b o r s . R a l p h Maud, B r e n t G a l l o w a y a n d M a r i e Weeden e d s . T a l o n B o o k s : Vancouver.  W i l s o n , I a n R. 1991 A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Assessment of Sunnyside D r i v e S u b d i v i s i o n a n d t h e H a t z i c R o c k S i t e DgRn 2 3 . P e r m i t R e p o r t 1 9 9 1 - 9 9 . Ms. o n f i l e , [ B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ] Archaeology Branch, V i c t o r i a .  APPENDIX A ARTIFACT DESCRIPTIONS  Introduction  D e s c r i p t i o n s and s t a t i s t i c a l  summaries o f a r t i f a c t  classes used i n t h i s a n a l y s i s a r e presented appendix.  Absent o r incomplete dimensions  classes are not recorded. fragmentary  tool  Incomplete  i n this o f complete  dimensions  tool  of  c l a s s e s (e.g. p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t m e d i a l  section) are recorded but are placed i n parentheses. All  t o o l s were w e i g h e d on a d i g i t a l  n e a r e s t 0.1 g w i t h a r t i f a c t s w e i g h i n g  l e s s t h a n 0.1 g  r o u n d e d u p t o a 0.1 g d e f a u l t w e i g h t .  Tool length defined  a s t h e maximum m e a s u r e m e n t o f t h e t o o l , measurement o f t h e t o o l  scale tothe  o r t h e maximum  following i t s orientation,  measured t o t h e n e a r e s t m i l l i m e t e r .  was  F o r example, t h e l e n g t h  of a f l a k e t o o l would be measured from t h e s t r i k i n g p l a t f o r m to the d i s t a l  termination area regardless of the fact  that  t h e w i d t h m e a s u r e m e n t may b e g r e a t e r . The  width dimension  o f t o o l s , m e a s u r e d a s t h e maximum  m e a s u r e m e n t a t r i g h t a n g l e s t o t h e l e n g t h m e a s u r e m e n t , was recorded t o the nearest millimeter. dimension,  d e f i n e d a s t h e measurement p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e  l e n g t h and w i d t h measurements was  The t h i c k n e s s  (Haggarty  and Sendey  a l s o recorded t o the nearest millimeter.  1976:18),  Artifact  c l a s s e s which possess l e s s than t h r e e examples are not summarized i n t a b u l a r form but a r e d e s c r i b e d i n t e x t . Pebble f l a k e c l a s s e s are s i m i l a r to r e g u l a r  flake  classes except pebble f l a k e dorsal  surfaces are completely  covered w i t h cortex.  f l a k e s a r e c r e a t e d when a  Cortex s p a l l  f l a k e i s s t r u c k from the c o r t i c a l or cobble.  The  s u r f a c e of a r i v e r  r e s u l t o f s u c h an a c t i o n i s a f l a k e w h i c h i s  e n t i r e l y c o v e r e d i n c o r t e x on i t s d o r s a l s u r f a c e 1973:180).  Most c o r t e x s p a l l  of t h e i r s t r i k i n g Utilized  pebble  (Hansen  f l a k e s possess l i t t l e  evidence  platform.  f l a k e s a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e p r e s e n c e  of  u s e w e a r a l o n g t h e w o r k i n g edge b u t no e v i d e n c e o f s y s t e m a t i c r e t o u c h (Kornbacher 1989:117).  The  edges of  t o o l s a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d by i r r e g u l a r n i c k s o r s m a l l scars  (Matson 1976:131).  In comparison,  flake  retouched  a r e a r t i f a c t s w i t h d e l i b e r a t e edge m o d i f i c a t i o n ,  such  flakes  or retouch.  M i n i m a l edge r e t o u c h f o r d e s i g n a t i o n a s a r e t o u c h e d t o o l three consecutive flake scars along a single face  are  (Pratt  1990 :348) . Working  edges of a l l f l a k e t o o l  acute-angled or steep-angled. a r e l e s s t h a n 45° greater than Retouched  classes are  either  Acute-angled working  edges  whereas s t e e p - a n g l e d w o r k i n g edges a r e  45°. artifact  b i f a c i a l l y modified.  classes are e i t h e r u n i f a c i a l l y  or  U n i f a c i a l l y r e t o u c h e d t o o l s h a v e edge  m o d i f i c a t i o n on a s i n g l e f a c e w h e r e a s b i f a c i a l l y  worked  t o o l s p o s s e s s r e t o u c h on b o t h f a c e s ( P r a t t 1 9 9 2 : 3 4 7 ) .  The  r e t o u c h on a d j a c e n t artifacts  does not  from the margin  s u r f a c e s of b i f a c i a l l y extend  (Pokotylo  more t h a n one 1978:223).  retouched  third  of e i t h e r  face  FLAKED STONE ARTIFACTS  Projectile  Points  Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e  Point  n = 7  The name o f t h i s p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t its  chief diagnostic attribute,  namely  class i sderived i t s leaf-shape  from  (Pratt  1992 :358) .  Table A . l  Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  Stemmed  7 6 7 7  Median  9.3 54 21 9  P r o j e c t i l e Point  This p r o j e c t i l e point stem.  This  Number  Median  13 8 13 13  9.6 59 24 9  8.0-14.3 50-69 20-23 8.5-10.5  n = 13  class is  Stemmed  Interquartile Range  6.9-20.9 45-74 16-25 8-15  c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a basal  stem would have f a c i l i t a t e d  T a b l e A.2  Weight Length Width Thickness  Range  Point  hafting.  P r o j e c t i l e Point Range  3 .6-27.0 35-70 20-31 4-16  Interquartile Range 7.7-15.0 52-68 21-25 7-11  Lanceolate  Point  n = 1  A l o n g n a r r o w shape c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h i s p r o j e c t i l e class.  One e x a m p l e was r e c o v e r e d  X 17 ( w i d t h )  Point D i s t a l  Fragment  a r t i f a c t c l a s s i s composed  point,  of p r o j e c t i l e  these p r o j e c t i l e  projectile  point  Weight Length Width Thickness  Projectile  50% o f t h e a r t i f a c t i s fragments d i f f e r from the  Point D i s t a l  Fragment  Number  Median  Range  Interquartile Range  4 4 4 4  (13.1) (54) 25 10  (11.9-15.1) (47-63) 24-26 8-13  (12.3-14.4) (49-60) 24 .5-255 8.5-12  Projectile Tips  point  o r stemmed  t i p class.  T a b l e A.3  class.  As r o u g h l y  point  s e c t i o n s thus making  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , such as l e a f - s h a p e d  impossible.  present,  (length)  n = 4  f r a g m e n t s t h a t l a c k much o f t h e i r b a s a l a stylistic  102  X 9 ( t h i c k n e s s ) mm a n d w e i g h s 1 6 . 1 g .  Projectile This  and measures  point  Point Tip  from p r o j e c t i l e  n = 2 points constitute this  artifact  These f r a g m e n t s a r e o f t e n q u i t e s m a l l , y e t a r e  clearly derived  from a p r o j e c t i l e  One e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s  point  (Pratt  1992:360).  18 x 16 x 4 mm a n d w e i g h s 1.2 g .  second example measures  The  14 x 16 x 6 mm a n d w e i g h s 1.1 g.  P r o j e c t i l e Point Medial Section This class  of p r o j e c t i l e  n = 1  p o i n t l a c k s t h e t i p and base.  Projectile  p o i n t m e d i a l s e c t i o n s do n o t p o s s e s s t h e  attributes  necessary to determine the s p e c i f i c  stemmed p r o j e c t i l e  point),  however,  their  form  i n d i c a t e s they are a fragment of a p r o j e c t i l e some o t h e r t y p e o f b i f a c e . class  The s i n g l e  m e a s u r e s 23 x 21 x 12 mm  shaped p r o j e c t i l e medial sections  class  a n d w e i g h s 5.3  g.  i s comprised of bases of  Median  5 5 5 5  (3.7) (23) (24) 8  Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Base  leaf-  class  Point  Range  (2.7-13.0) (16-51) (22-26) 7-11  Base Interquartile Range (3.4-6.4) (22-28) (23-26) 7-10  n = 9  i s made up o f stemmed  projectile  p o i n t b a s e s t h a t h a v e b r o k e n away f r o m m e d i a l a n d t i p sections  (Pratt  tool  n = 5  Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e  This a r t i f a c t  p o i n t and n o t  1992:361).  Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  clearly  p o i n t s w h i c h h a v e b r o k e n away f r o m t i p a n d  (Pratt  T a b l e A.4  (e.g.  example of t h i s  Leaf-Shaped P r o j e c t i l e P o i n t Base This a r t i f a c t  class  1992:361).  T a b l e A.5  Stemmed P r o j e c t i l e Number  Median  9 9 9 9  (5.5) (22) (23) 8  Weight Length Width Thickness  P o i n t Base Interquartile Range  Range  (2.9-6.3) (20-29) (22-26) 7-11  (1.8-10.5) (18-38) (17-28) 6-12  Other Formed B i f a c e s  Formed B i f a c e , Steep-Angled Edge This  artifact  class represents  e a r l y stage of reduction. has  n = 1  p r o j e c t i l e p o i n t s a t an  The s i n g l e e x a m p l e o f t h i s  an i r r e g u l a r o u t l i n e w i t h l a r g e f l a k e s c a r s  both faces.  This  specimen has an i n c o m p l e t e  d i m e n s i o n a n d m e a s u r e s 31 ( w i d t h )  class  dominating  length  x 17 ( t h i c k n e s s ) mm a n d  w e i g h s 21.9 g .  Blade T o o l s  Microblade Microblades  n = 1 a r e l e s s t h a n 2.5 cm i n l e n g t h a n d h a v e a  triangular cross-section. be  two t o t h r e e  l i n e running The site  The l e n g t h o f m i c r o b l a d e s t e n d t o  times greater  than the width  down t h e m i d d l e o f t h e b l a d e  with a guiding  ( P r a t t 1992:354).  s t r i k i n g p l a t f o r m o f t h e specimen from t h e H a t z i c i s absent, perhaps purposely  broken o f f t o create  Rock a  l i n e a r c u t t i n g edge a s s u g g e s t e d microblade  has  X 4 mm  w e i g h s 0.9  and  an  incomplete  by  P r a t t (1992:354).  The  l e n g t h d i m e n s i o n and m e a s u r e s 9  g.  Flake Tools  M u l t i p l e P o i n t Graver  n = 1  T h i s c l a s s o f g r a v e r has m u l t i p l e w o r k i n g  p o i n t s which  i n d i c a t e f r e s h p o i n t s w e r e u s e d a s o t h e r s became b l u n t . This a r t i f a c t  has  one  sharp,  blunted point opposite t h a t has  t h e f r e s h p o i n t and  b e e n w o r n down t o l i t t l e  Similar artifacts Narrows Midden  The  were r e c o v e r e d  artifacts  second  a third  more t h a n a  (DgRw-4) n e a r N a n a i m o  Burley r e f e r s to these gravers.  w e l l formed p o i n t , a  point  stub.  by B u r l e y a t t h e  False  ( B u r l e y 1988:78).  as m u l t i p l e t i p f l a k e  examples B u r l e y r e c o v e r e d  had  f r o m two  to  five  spurs. The  m u l t i p l e point graver  recovered  R o c k s i t e m e a s u r e s 30 x 35 x 11 mm  Discoidal Uniface This a r t i f a c t angled  retouch  artifact retouch  and  from the  Hatzic  w e i g h s 9.3  g.  n = 1  c l a s s i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by  small  steep-  scars around the a r t i f a c t perimeter.  i s circular  and  the systematic nature  r e s e m b l e s t h e edge o f a b o t t l e c a p .  m e a s u r e s 24 x 23 x 9 mm  and  w e i g h s 5.6  g.  of  The  The the  artifact  Pièce Esquillée  n = 4  Pièces esquillées a r e a n e b u l o u s a r t i f a c t referred also  t o b y a v a r i e t y o f names.  Pièces esquillées a r e  commonly c a l l e d b i p o l a r c o r e s o r s t o n e wedges  1992:339). material are  class  These t o o l s a r e produced by s t r i k i n g  that  r e s t s on a h a r d s u r f a c e  identified  a parent  ( C r a b t r e e 1972:42) a n d  b y t h e p r e s e n c e o f two o p p o s i n g e d g e s  e x h i b i t c r u s h i n g and b a t t e r i n g  T a b l e A.6  (Pokotylo  1978:226).  Number  Median  4 4 4 4  65.0 54.5 52 17  Range  Interquartile Range  6.2-98.5 19-62 34-58 8-31  24.0-93.4 33-62 41-57 12.5-24  Pebble F l a k e , Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch This a r t i f a c t  class  3 0 mm  class  n = 1  r e p r e s e n t s p e b b l e f l a k e s w h i c h have  s t e e p - a n g l e d r e t o u c h on b o t h f a c e s . tool  that  Pièce Esquillée  Weight Length Width Thickness  this  (Pratt  from the H a t z i c  The o n l y e x a m p l e o f  R o c k s i t e m e a s u r e s 89 x 45 x  a n d w e i g h s 116.1 g.  Pebble F l a k e , Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch This a r t i f a c t  class  represents pebble flakes  s t e e p - a n g l e d r e t o u c h on a s i n g l e  face.  n = 21 with  Table  A.7  Pebble Flake, Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Number  21 13 14 20  Weight Length Width Thickness  Median  157.0 75 60.5 29  Range  acute-angled  an i n c o m p l e t e w e i g h s 31.7  Retouch  a n d w e i g h s 56.5 g.  One  example measures  The s e c o n d e x a m p l e h a s  l e n g t h d i m e n s i o n a n d m e a s u r e s 43 x 13 mm  and  g.  Pebble F l a k e w i t h Acute-Angled U t i l i z a t i o n This a r t i f a c t wear a l o n g  n = 2  c l a s s r e p r e s e n t s p e b b l e f l a k e s w h i c h have  r e t o u c h on a s i n g l e f a c e .  76 X 56 X 13 mm  75.0-220.1 55-90 44-70 22 .5-33  24.7-460.5 42-131 34-81 13-62  Pebble F l a k e , Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l This a r t i f a c t  Interquartile Range  c l a s s i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e p r e s e n c e o f  i t sacute-angled  of t h i s t o o l  n = 1  working  edge.  c l a s s m e a s u r e s 56 x 91 x 18 mm  The o n l y  example  and weighs  79.4  g-  F l a k e w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch This a r t i f a c t r e t o u c h on a d j a c e n t  class represents surfaces.  flakes with  n = 5 steep-angled  T a b l e A.8  Flake w i t h Steep-Angled Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  Median  5 4 3 5  Bifacial  Interquartile Range  Range  12 .2 42 31 12  5.5-191.7 35-108 29-85 8-16  F l a k e w i t h Acute-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch This a r t i f a c t angled  Retouch  7.6-16.3 37-76.5 30-58 9-15  n = 1  c l a s s r e p r e s e n t s f l a k e s which have acute-  r e t o u c h on b o t h  faces.  c l a s s l a c k s a l e n g t h dimension  The s i n g l e e x a m p l e o f t h i s a n d m e a s u r e s 48 x 23  mm.  T h i s t o o l w e i g h s 51.1 g.  F l a k e w i t h Steep-Angled U n i f a c i a l This a r t i f a c t angled  Weight Length Width Thickness  face.  Flake w i t h Steep-Angled Number  Median  28 14 14 27  26.3 45.5 42.5 14  angled  Unifacial  Range  2.7-566.9 20-86 29-75 6-41  F l a k e w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l This a r t i f a c t  n = 28  c l a s s r e p r e s e n t s f l a k e s which have steep-  r e t o u c h on a s i n g l e  T a b l e A.9  Retouch  Retouch  Retouch  Interquartile Range 8.7-70.8 36-63 35-62 11-21  n = 6  c l a s s r e p r e s e n t s f l a k e s which have acute-  r e t o u c h on a s i n g l e  face.  T a b l e A.10  Weight Length Width Thickness  Flake w i t h Acute-Angled U n i f a c i a l Retouch Number  Median  6 5 5 6  16 .4 41 34 10 .5  Steep-Angled U t i l i z e d F l a k e This a r t i f a c t steep-angled  Table  class  working  A.11  Weight Length Width Thickness  2.4-237.9 20-91 24-81 5-24  6.2-22.6 35-56 29-47 10-13  flakes with a  edge.  Steep-Angled U t i l i z e d Number  Median  30 18 17 30  19.9 43 .5 40 15  This a r t i f a c t  Interquartile Range  n = 30  represents u t i l i z e d  Acute-Angled U t i l i z e d F l a k e  acute-angled  Range  Range  0.3-106.4 21-80 20-78 3-25  Flake Interquartile Range 9.1-39.0 33-52 32-48 11-20  n = 46  c l a s s r e p r e s e n t s u t i l i z e d f l a k e s w i t h an  working  edge.  T a b l e A.12  Acute-Angled Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  46 25 28 44  Median  6.5 40 33 .5 8  Utilized  Interquartile Range  Range  This a r t i f a c t and  n = 1  c l a s s has s t e e p - a n g l e d b i f a c i a l  a n d m e a s u r e s 83 x 69 x 15 mm  Cortex S p a l l Unifacial  3.2-22 .8 26-49 23-48 6.5-11  0.1-69.1 15-78 10-92 2-26  C o r t e x S p a l l F l a k e w i t h Steep-Angled B i f a c i a l Retouch This a r t i f a c t  Flake  retouch  a n d w e i g h s 103.9 g.  F l a k e w i t h Acute-Angled Retouch  n = 1  c l a s s has a c u t e - a n g l e d u n i f a c i a l  t h e s i n g l e e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s 112 x 71 x 16 mm  retouch  and weighs  147.5 g.  Cobble/Core  Core  Tools  n = 69  Cores a r e masses o f l i t h i c m a t e r i a l from w h i c h pieces of m a t e r i a l (flakes, are detached  smaller  flake shatter or block shatter)  f r o m a t l e a s t two d i f f e r e n t  surfaces  the use of a p p l i e d f o r c e ( P r a t t 1992:338).  through  In general,  c o r e s r e c o v e r e d from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e a r e i r r e g u l a r ,  that  i s , not d e l i b e r a t e l y prepared f o r t h e removal of  flakes,  and a r e d e r i v e d  from r i v e r pebbles and c o b b l e s .  T a b l e A.13  Core Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  Median  69 69 69 69  163.3 66 57 39  Pebble w i t h B i f a c i a l  Range  Interquartile Range  15 .4-2089..9 30-183 25-113 19-90  Peripheral  Flaking  Pebbles with b i f a c i a l p e r i p h e r a l  75.7-327.9 55-84 43-68 32-54  n = 9  f l a k i n g a r e commonly  known a s p e b b l e o r c o b b l e t o o l s o r c h o p p e r s .  These  a r t i f a c t s a r e r i v e r c o b b l e s o r pebbles which have been bifacially  f l a k e d a t one e n d t o p r o d u c e  w o r k i n g edge.  This a r t i f a c t  cores by t h e presence t h a t one h a d e x i s t e d  T a b l e A.14  Weight Length Width Thickness  9 7 5 9  sharp  c l a s s i s d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from  o f a formed  w o r k i n g edge o r e v i d e n c e  previously.  Pebble with B i f a c i a l Number  a relatively  Median  320.8 101 52 33  Peripheral  Range  85 .8-527 .0 61-129 40-74 20-64  Flaking  Interquartile Range 146.5-455.6 87.5-116.5 50-74 27-43  n = 9  Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l F l a k i n g Pebbles w i t h u n i f a c i a l  peripheral  flaking  are river  c o b b l e s o r p e b b l e s w h i c h have been u n i f a c i a l l y end  f l a k e d a t one  t o p r o d u c e a s h a r p w o r k i n g edge.  T a b l e A.15  Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l NuTïiber  Weight Length Width Thickness  Median  9 9 9 9  771.2 111 93 57  Peripheral  Range  Flaking  Interquartile Range  366.5-1240.0 104-150 78-123 32-65  637.6-868.3 107-141 88-96 49-63  Pebble w i t h U n i f a c i a l P e r i p h e r a l F l a k i n g / Hammerstone  n = 1  T h i s c l a s s o f a r t i f a c t p o s s e s s e s p e c k i n g damage o n peripheral  areas, which i n d i c a t e s u t i l i z a t i o n as a  hammerstone, a n d u n i f a c i a l  peripheral  i n d i c a t e s use as a chopping t o o l .  flaking  which  The s i n g l e e x a m p l e  m e a s u r e s 102 x 70 x 39 mm a n d w e i g h s 403.0 g.  Hammerstone  n = 2  These a r t i f a c t s  are pebbles which possess b a t t e r i n g o r  p i t t i n g o n o n e o r more s i d e s 1977:51). 395.6 g.  o r ends  (Loy and P o w e l l  One s p e c i m e n m e a s u r e s 92 x 62 x 48 mm a n d w e i g h s The s e c o n d e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s 84 x 82 x 55 mm a n d  w e i g h s 4 6 4 . 1 g.  Hammerstone w i t h Edge A b r a s i o n These pebbles  n = 2  possess b a t t e r i n g o r p i t t i n g  more s i d e s o r e n d s a n d a b r a s i o n m a r k s o n t h e i r a b r a s i o n was l i k e l y s u r f a c e s on cores reduction. 411.5 g .  o n one o r edges.  This  caused by t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f s t r i k i n g  o r t o o l s during stages  of l i t h i c  One e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s 104 x 60 x 42 mm a n d w e i g h s T h e s e c o n d e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s 74 x 63 x 49 mm a n d  w e i g h s 3 2 2 . 1 g.  Hammerstone/Anvil This a r t i f a c t its  n = 3  c l a s s possesses  pitting  o r b a t t e r i n g on  e n d s a n d h a s a t l e a s t one f a c e w h i c h i n d i c a t e s u s e a s  b o t h a hammerstone a n d an a n v i l . are b a t t e r e d o r p i t t e d faces possessing  The e n d s o f t h i s  artifact  w i t h a c e n t r a l a r e a o n o n e o r more  evidence  of a depression,  crushing or  grinding.  T a b l e A.16  Hammerstone/Anvil Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  3 3 3 3  Median  203.7 64 56 41  Range  Interquartile Range  194.7-422.1 57-88 54-72 35-43  n/a n/a n/a n/a  A n v i l Stone  n = 3  Stones which possess evidence of pecking o r b a t t e r i n g o n one o r more f a c e s a r e d e f i n e d a s a n v i l o f raw m a t e r i a l s ,  including lithics,  stones.  An o v e r s i g h t  a t t h e e n d o f t h e 1991 e x c a v a t i o n c a u s e d one l a r g e  for this anvil  variety  would have been  p r o c e s s e d on t h e s u r f a c e s o f such a r t i f a c t s .  s t o n e t o be b a c k f i l l e d  A  into the excavation area.  stone are not a v a i l a b l e .  anvil Dimensions  One e x a m p l e  m e a s u r e s 76 x 71 x 39 mm a n d w e i g h s 317.3 g.  The s e c o n d  e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s 489 x 349 x 318 mm a n d w e i g h s o v e r 45 k g .  Miscellaneous  Chipped Stone  n  =1  Miscellaneous  Flaked Slate  This a r t i f a c t  c l a s s describes chipped s l a t e fragments  w i t h no r e a d i l y a p p a r e n t u s e o r f u n c t i o n . artifact  of this class exhibits  The  single  systematic u n i f a c i a l  flaking  a l o n g i t s m a r g i n s u g g e s t i n g a t o o l may h a v e b e e n i n t h e process o f b e i n g roughed o u t .  T h i s e x a m p l e m e a s u r e s 96 x 53  X 13 mm a n d w e i g h s 70.3 g.  GROPMD STONE ARTIFACTS  D i s c Bead  n = 2  D i s c beads a r e s m a l l and b i c o n i c a l l y d r i l l e d  with  v a r y i n g d e g r e e s o f f i n i s h and a r e assumed t o have b e e n u s e d  f o r p e r s o n a l adornment weigh  0.1  ( P r a t t 1992:372).  g and measure 5 x 5 x 2  Both  examples  mm. n = 5  Ground S l a t e Blade Fragment  These a r t i f a c t s a r e b e s t d e s c r i b e d as fragments of symmetrical blades.  Several blade fragments could  c o n j o i n e d i n t o complete specimens The  showing  long  be  the f i n i s h e d  form.  dimensions of the conjoined t o o l s are presented  f o l l o w i n g t h e summary o f f r a g m e n t a r y d i m e n s i o n s . Matson  (1976:148-149) c l a s s i f i e d  similar  artifacts  r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e S t . Mungo Component a t t h e G l e n r o s e Cannery  s i t e as ground  slate points.  are c o n s i d e r a b l y shorter, like"  The G l e n r o s e  t h i n n e r a n d p o s s e s s a more  o u t l i n e t h a n t h o s e from the H a t z i c Rock Three examples  of t h i s a r t i f a c t  surface collected  Nemptin's  Bay  t h a n Matson's  examples.  a r t i f a c t s a r e l o n g and r e l a t i v e l y  site  (DfRu-24)  Nemptin's  t h i c k w i t h one  specimen  o f t h i s n a t u r e were r e c o v e r e d by H a g g a r t y  No and  Sendey i n t h e i r c o n t r o l l e d e x c a v a t i o n a t t h e Georgeson site  (Haggarty and Sendey  1976).  on  from the  p o s s e s s i n g a b i c o n i c a l l y d r i l l e d h o l e near i t s base. artifacts  of  w h i c h were  G a l i a n o I s l a n d , more c l o s e l y r e s e m b l e e x a m p l e s H a t z i c Rock s i t e  site.  Steve Nemtin  artifacts,  from the Georgeson  "point-  c l a s s have been  o b s e r v e d i n t h e p r i v a t e c o l l e c t i o n o f Mr. G a l i a n o I s l a n d , B.C.  specimens  Bay  T a b l e A.17a  Ground S l a t e B l a d e Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  Median  5 5 5 5  T a b l e A.17b Catalogue  Range  (9.0) (42) 17 6  (2.5-17.3) (31-110) 15-23 5-7  Numbers  Length  (4.4-10.6) (36-69) 16-19 5-6  125 113 97  This a r t i f a c t fragments.  The  class  Thickness  Weight  19 19 17  6 4 5  19.8 15.5 14.9  n = 1  r e p r e s e n t s worked n e p h r i t e  s i n g l e example o f t h i s t o o l c l a s s has  and p o l i s h e d  s u r f a c e a n d may  (10) x  (2) mm  Pratt  This  and w e i g h s  Formed A b r a s i v e Stone Fragment  (0.2)  g.  n = 7  (1992:369) d e f i n e s t h i s a r t i f a c t  i n t o shaped  forms  of a  fragment  class  p o s s e s s i n g a smooth a b r a d i n g s u r f a c e w i t h e v i d e n c e modification  a  represent a portion  l a r g e r t o o l such as a c e l t o r c h i s e l . (14) x  Fragments  Width  M i s c e l l a n e o u s Worked N e p h r i t e  measures  Interquartile Range  C o n j o i n e d Ground S l a t e B l a d e  811 a n d 5033 5029I a n d 5030 5031 a n d 5032  ground  Fragment  as of  s u c h as t e a r - d r o p p e d o r b a r .  T h i s b l a d e f r a g m e n t i s f r o m a n unknown l e v e l i n e x c a v a t i o n u n i t 1 a n d was e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e g e n e r a l summary of t h i s a r t i f a c t c l a s s .  T h i s c l a s s o f a r t i f a c t was s u c h as  Table  likely utilized  s l a t e or s o f t e r materials  A.18  7 7 7 7  Weight Length Width Thickness  A b r a s i v e Stone Pratt  (5.9) (29) (25) (11)  Range  Interquartile Range  (2 .3-445.9) (27-132) (17-116) (4-30)  through  a b r a s i o n but  Examples of t h i s a r t i f a c t  likely utilized  to grind  stone  c l a s s have  undefined  This c l a s s of s u c h as  fragments of formed a b r a s i v e s t o n e s .  surfaces.  The  artifact  s l a t e or  represent  t h e i r working  as  purposely  s u c h as bone o r a n t l e r .  have obvious  class  not  materials  abrasive stones  5.5-23 .3) ( 2 8 . 0 - 4 5 .5) (24.5-41.0) (8.0-12.5)  n = 3  margins or l a c k margins altogether. was  antler.  Stone Fragment  (1992:368) d e s c r i b e s t h i s a r t i f a c t  having been m o d i f i e d formed.  Median  stone  i n c l u d i n g bone o r  Formed A b r a s i v e Number  to grind  softer  t h r e e specimens  abrasion/incision  may  A l l three marks  on  T a b l e A.19  Abrasive  Number  Weight Length Width Thickness  Median  3 3 3 3  (102.7) (61) (58) (15)  Stone Interquartile Range  Range  (7.1-120.2) (40-102) (36-71) (5-28)  n/a n/a n/a n/a  PECKED and GROUITO STONE ARTIFACTS  Grooved C o b b l e / A n v i l A s i n g l e grooved  n = 1  c o b b l e / a n v i l was r e c o v e r e d a n d  m e a s u r e s 166 x 85 x 63 mm a n d w e i g h s 1410.1 g .  This  artifact  with a  i s a s y m m e t r i c a l l y shaped o v o i d pebble  g r o o v e r o u g h l y 3 0 mm w i d e p e c k e d a r o u n d t h e e n t i r e edge t o a depth  o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 mm.  evidence The  One f a c e o f t h e p e b b l e h a s  o f pecking and a s l i g h t  indentation i n the centre.  same a r e a i s a g l o s s y g r a y / b l a c k t h a t i n d i c a t e s  t y p e o f o r g a n i c m a t e r i a l was p r o c e s s e d p o l i s h e d a r e a i s r o u g h l y 56 x 4 1 mm.  on the s u r f a c e .  l a c k s d i r e c t evidence  same p o l i s h ,  although l e s s pronounced, i s present  The animal The  This  The o p p o s i t e f a c e o f  the a r t i f a c t  central area.  some  o f p e c k i n g , however, t h e i n the  T h i s a r e a o f p o l i s h i s r o u g h l y 67 x 36 mm.  presence  o f p e c k i n g and p o l i s h suggests  r e s o u r c e may h a v e b e e n p r o c e s s e d  a plant or  on t h e two f a c e s .  p r o n o u n c e d g r o o v e e n c i r c l i n g t h e p e b b l e may h a v e a c t e d  as a g r i p .  Pebble Hammer  n = 1  A s i n g l e p e b b l e hammer r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e e x c a v a t i o n m e a s u r e s 1 1 1 x 92 x 64 mm a n d w e i g h s  940.1 g.  i s a squat pebble w i t h a m o d i f i e d base.  This  artifact  The b a s e h a s e i t h e r  been f l a t t e n e d through u s e o r by p u r p o s e f u l m o d i f i c a t i o n . Use p o l i s h i s p r e s e n t o n t h e b a s e  of this  tool  s u g g e s t i n g i t was u s e d t o p r o c e s s p l a n t o r a n i m a l r e s o u r c e s . A b r a s i o n marks l o c a t e d near t h e base  i n d i c a t e t h e t o o l may  have b e e n u s e d a s a hammerstone on o c c a s i o n .  MISCELLANEOUS ARTIFACTS  Paint  Stone  n = 5  Paint stones areunmodified pebbles that are covered i n e i t h e r r e d ochre, a b l a c k pigment, pigment  o r both.  The p r e s e n c e o f  on t h e s e s t o n e s s u g g e s t t h e y were used t o g r i n d o r  prepare pigment.  One s p e c i m e n ,  appears  t o have been used as  a p a l a t e as w e l l as a g r i n d i n g implement.  This  artifact  (DgRn-23:5040) h a s a c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f b l a c k p i g m e n t c e n t r e o f one o f t h e f a c e s ,  i n the  s u g g e s t i n g use as a p a l a t e , and  r e d o c h r e a t t h e ends i n d i c a t i n g pigment  was g r o u n d .  T a b l e A.20  Paint  Weight Length Width Thickness  Number  Median  Range  Interquartile Range  5 5 5 5  302 .7 87 69 30  103.7-670.5 52-113 41-79 30-70  251.2-330.3 84-106 55-71 30-37  Paint Stone/Anvil This  n = 2  class of a r t i f a c t  i s covered  or a b l a c k pigment w i t h pecking faces.  Stone  w i t h e i t h e r r e d ochre  o r b a t t e r i n g o n one o r more  One e x a m p l e i s a g r a n i t e p e b b l e c o v e r e d  with  black  p i g m e n t a n d m e a s u r e s 81 x 63 x 52 mm a n d w e i g h s 391.0 g. This a r t i f a c t  has a shallow pecked d e p r e s s i o n  approximately  30 x 30 mm on one f a c e .  The s e c o n d e x a m p l e  m e a s u r e s 103 x 67 x 78 a n d w e i g h s 822.4 g . surface adjacent present  i s thickly  encrusted  on t h e p e c k e d s u r f a c e .  Pyroclast  One  No p i g m e n t i s  B o t h ends o f t h i s  n = 1 o f o b s i d i a n w h i c h f o r m when  m o l t e n o b s i d i a n s o l i d i f i e s when s e t t l i n g  out of the  atmosphere a f t e r an e x p l o s i v e v o l c a n i c e r u p t i o n 1989:101).  as a n a r t i f a c t The  artifact  ochre.  Pyroclasts are pieces  al.  unmodified  with r e d ochre with the  s u r f a c e d i s h shaped from p e c k i n g .  possess traces of  measuring  Although  unmodified,  a s i t was i m p o r t e d  pyroclast recovered  this  (Courty e t  i t e m was i n c l u d e d  from a d i s t a n t  from t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e  source. i s covered  w i t h c o r t e x a n d e x h i b i t s no s i g n o f c u l t u r a l The p y r o c l a s t m e a s u r e s 63 x 10 x 9 mm  modification.  a n d w e i g h s 5.4  g.  APPENDIX B POST HOLE FEATURES  Introduction  Post  hole  f e a t u r e s were r e c o r d e d  u n i t s and each backhoe t r e n c h .  Two s h a p e s o f p o s t  o r near c i r c u l a r ,  notes o r w a l l p r o f i l e s  hole  The most common, c i r c u l a r / o v o i d , circular,  excavation  However, d a t a a r e n o t  a v a i l a b l e f o r t r e n c h 3 as formal n o t made.  i n a l l 38  f e a t u r e s were  were  recorded.  i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a  outline.  The s e c o n d s h a p e i s  rectangular. Each post Feature and  h o l e was n u m b e r e d f o r e a s e o f r e f e r e n c e .  provenience  was i n d i c a t e d b y r e f e r r i n g t o t h e u n i t s  l e v e l s w h e r e t h e f e a t u r e was f o u n d .  Where i n f o r m a t i o n  was l a c k i n g , o r a b s e n t , a " n / a " was p l a c e d appropriate  location.  Specific  cm S, 23 cm E ) , was p r o v i d e d feature provenience used i n p l a c e hole  i n the  feature provenience  where p o s s i b l e .  I f specific  d a t a w e r e a b s e n t o r l a c k i n g , a " ? " was  of numeric coordinates.  F i g u r e B . l shows  feature locations i n relation to the excavation  assist  ( e . g . 45  i n l o c a t i n g s p e c i f i c post  hole  post  grid to  features.  The maximum h o r i z o n t a l d i m e n s i o n was u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e the diameter o f c i r c u l a r / o v o i d post dimension  (length)  f o r rectangular post  dimension of rectangular post possible.  f e a t u r e s a n d t h e maximum  The w i d t h  holes.  The w i d t h  h o l e s was i n c l u d e d w h e r e  d i m e n s i o n was m e a s u r e d a s t h e maximum  Post Hole Features i n R e l a t i o n to Excavation Grid  Post hole feature  'O Extrapolated post hole feature  dimension  at r i g h t angles to the l e n g t h dimension.  examples where f e a t u r e d a t a were l a c k i n g , s i z e o f t h e p o s t h o l e was F e a t u r e d e p t h was  or incomplete,  recorded i n centimeters.  the depth "n/a"  f e a t u r e was  reached.  In  excavated notes r a r e l y  cases indicate  I n t h e s e c a s e s where d a t a a r e l a c k i n g ,  r e p l a c e d the numeric A section  Many p o s t  floor/gravel  t h e r e f o r e t h i s data i s not a v a i l a b l e .  where t h e e n t i r e  h e a d e d "comments" p r o v i d e s  e x a m p l e , i f a f e a t u r e ' s d i a m e t e r was e x i s t i n g d a t a t h i s was  indicated.  additional For  e x t r a p o l a t e d from  Other  i n f o r m a t i o n such  the angle of the post hole or the presence w o u l d be m e n t i o n e d  a  data.  i n f o r m a t i o n not recorded i n the p r e v i o u s data f i e l d s .  bases  the  e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  h o l e s were not e x c a v a t e d beyond t h e house interface,  In  i n t h e comments  as  of rock enclosed section.  C i r c u l a r / O v o i d Post  1) U n i t 2, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience: Comments:  Holes  7-9 10 cm 20 cm 30-40 cm S, 25-35 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e bottoms out  on a  rock.  2) U n i t 2, L e v e l 8-12; U n i t 12, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 14 cm Depth: 40 cm 92-100 cm S (EU 2 ) , 30-44 cm E (EU 2 ) ; 0-? cm P r o v e n i e n c e : S (EU 1 2 ) , ? cm E (EU 12) The f e a t u r e e x t e n d s t o w a r d s t h e w e s t w a l l a t Comments : a s l i g h t angle. The s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 2 suggests the base of the post tapered to a point. No e v i d e n c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was o b s e r v e d i n U n i t 12.  3) U n i t 2, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience: Comments:  1 0 - 1 2 ; U n i t 31, L e v e l 10 43 cm 2 0 cm 26-42 cm S (EU 2 ) , 91-100 cm E (EU 2 ) ; 27-64 cm S (EU 3 1 ) , 0-34 cm E (EU 31) The s l i g h t d i s c r e p a n c y o f p r o v e n i e n c e s b e t w e e n the excavation u n i t s i s l i k e l y r e c o r d i n g error.  4) U n i t 2, L e v e l 7-10 Diameter: 10 cm Depth: 3 0 cm Provenience: 55-65 cm  S,  5-15  cm  E  U n i t 28, L e v e l 2 Diameter: 7.5 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 20-27 c m S ,  13-21  cmW  6) U n i t 28, L e v e l 1 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 54-72 cm S, 0-17 cm W  7) U n i t 3 1 , L e v e l 1 2 ; U n i t 24, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 32 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 88-100 cm S (EU 3 1 ) , 60-91 cm E (EU 3 1 ) ; 0-20 cm S (EU 2 4 ) , 60-91 cm E (EU 24)  8) U n i t 12, L e v e l 9-12 Diameter: 2 0 cm Depth: 34 cm Provenience: 34-52 cm S, 136-156 cm E Comments: The f e a t u r e a n g l e s e a s t t o w e s t .  9) U n i t 12, L e v e l 11 Diameter: 11 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 110-120 cm S, 131-142 cm E  10) U n i t 12, L e v e l 11-13 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: 24 cm Provenience: 143-150 cm S, 167-176 cm E  11) U n i t 12, L e v e l 11-12 Diameter: 11 cm Depth: 16 cm Provenience: 1 4 2 - 1 5 1 cm S, 181-192 cm E  12) U n i t 12, L e v e l 10-11 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: 11 cm Provenience: 153-167 cm S, 159-178 cm E  13) U n i t 12, L e v e l 11-13 Diameter: 10 cm Depth: 19 cm Provenience: 178-188 cm S, 182-190 cm E  14) U n i t 12, L e v e l 11-13 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: 22 cm Provenience: 192-200 cm S, 134-143 cm E  15) U n i t 12, L e v e l 1 0 - 1 2 ; U n i t 24, L e v e l n/a Diameter : 10 cm Depth: 23 cm 78-87 cm S (EU 1 2 ) , 197-200 cm E (EU 1 2 ) ; Provenience : ? cm S (EU 2 4 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 24) T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 24. However, Comments : no r e c o r d o f a s u c h a f e a t u r e was n o t e d . Due t o i t s r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l s i z e , t h e f e a t u r e was l i k e l y c u t t h r o u g h by t h e e x c a v a t o r . The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  16) U n i t 24, L e v e l 11 Diameter: 29 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 2-30 cm S, 29-58 cm E  17) U n i t 3, L e v e l Diameter : Depth: Provenience :  Comments :  18) U n i t 3, L e v e l Diameter : Depth: Provenience :  1 2 - 1 7 ; U n i t 30, L e v e l 16; U n i t 10, L e v e l 16 30 cm 50 cm 0-20 cm S (EU 3 ) , 85-100 cm E (EU 3 ) ; 22-34 cm S; (EU 3 0 ) , 0-5 cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; 190-200 cm S (EU 1 0 ) , 63-90 cm E (EU 10) T h i s f e a t u r e bottoms o u t on a r o c k . The d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n t h e p r o v e n i e n c e s f o r EU 3, EU 10 a n d EU 3 0 c a n be a t t r i b u t e d t o r e c o r d i n g error. N o t e s f r o m EU 30 i n d i c a t e t h e w a l l o f t h e f e a t u r e s l o u g h e d away a s i t was b e i n g excavated thus b l u r r i n g the data from t h i s u n i t somewhat.  1 2 - 1 8 ; U n i t 13, L e v e l 12 21 cm 75 cm 89-100 cm S (EU 3 ) , 0-18 cm E S (EU 1 3 ) , 0-10 cm E (EU 13)  (EU 3 ) ; 0-10  19) U n i t 5, L e v e l Diameter : Depth: Provenience : Comments :  9-11 9 cm 15 cm 10-19 cm S, 32-40 cm E This feature tapers with  depth,  20) U n i t 5, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience : Comments :  10-14 20 cm 50 cm 27-47 cm S, 65-85 cm E This feature tapers with  depth.  cm  21) U n i t 5, L e v e l 8-11; U n i t 12, l e v e l n / a 13 cm Diameter: 28 cm Depth: 68-81 cm S (EU 5 ) , 0-8 cm E (EU 5 ) ; ? cm S (EU P r o v e n i e n c e : 1 2 ) , ?-200 cm E (EU 12) T h i s f e a t u r e l i e s p a r t i a l l y i n u n i t 12. Comments : H o w e v e r , no e v i d e n c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was o b s e r v e d i n t h e a d j a c e n t p o r t i o n o f u n i t 12. The w e s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 5 i n d i c a t e s t h e f e a t u r e does e x t e n d i n t o t h e a d j a c e n t u n i t . The f e a t u r e was l i k e l y c u t t h r o u g h d u r i n g t h e e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 12 a s i t s s m a l l s i z e may have p r e v e n t e d i t s d e t e c t i o n . This feature tapers w i t h depth.  22) U n i t 5, L e v e l 10-11 Diameter: 11 cm Depth : 10 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 92-100 cm S, 15-26 cm E Comments : This feature extends i n t o the south (baulk) wall. F e a t u r e d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from a v a i l a b l e data.  23) U n i t 5, L e v e l 10-11 Diameter: 12 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 64-76 cm S, 53-64 cm E Comments: This feature tapers with  depth.  24) U n i t 5, L e v e l 9-13; U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 30 cm Diameter: 35 cm Depth: P r o v e n i e n c e : 44-60 cm S (EU 5 ) , n/a cm E (EU 5 ) ; 130-160 cm S (EU 13) , 0-8 cm E (EU 13) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t o b s e r v e d i n t h e u n i t 5 e x c a v a t i o n , h o w e v e r , i t c o u l d be s e e n i n t h e east w a l l p r o f i l e . The s i z e o f t h e f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m a v a i l a b l e d a t a .  25) U n i t 13, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 13 cm Depth: 3 0 cm Provenience: ?-200 cm Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e (baulk) w a l l f e a t u r e was  S, 173-186 cm E was v i s i b l e o n l y i n t h e s o u t h p r o f i l e (baulk). The s i z e o f t h e e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  26) U n i t 13, L e v e l 14 Diameter: 25 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 20-45 cm S, 162-184 cm E  27) U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 8 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 68-76 cm S, 59-67 cm E  28) U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 55-68 cm S, 84-95 cm E  29) U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 45-59 cm S, 101-113 cm E  30) U n i t 13, L e v e l 1 3 ; U n i t 14, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 2 0 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 8-28 cm S (EU 1 3 ) , 190-200 cm E (EU 1 3 ) ; ? cm S (EU 14) , 0-? cm E (EU 14) Comments: T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 14, h o w e v e r , i t  was n o t o b s e r v e d o r n o t e d d u r i n g t h e excavation of t h i s u n i t . The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  31) U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 152-163 cm S, 54-67 cm E  32) U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 10 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 168-178 cm S, 69-77 cm E  33) U n i t 13, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 6 cm Depth: 10 cm Provenience: 128-134 cm S, 88-94 cm E  34) U n i t 30, L e v e l 16 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 24-38 cm S, 29-43 cm E  35) U n i t 30, L e v e l 16 Diameter: 8 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 10-18 cm S, 42-49 cm E  U n i t 30, L e v e l 1 6 ; U n i t 13, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 18 cm Depth: n/a 86-100 cm S (EU 3 0 ) , 13-31 cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; 0-? P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 13) , ? cm E (EU 13) T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 13, h o w e v e r , i t Comments : was n o t n o t e d o r o b s e r v e d i n t h i s u n i t d u r i n g excavation. F e a t u r e dimensions have been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  37) U n i t 10, L e v e l 11-12 Diameter: 8 cm Depth: 15 cm Provenience: 80-88 cm S, 100-104 cm E  38) U n i t 10, L e v e l 14,15 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 154-173 cm S, 104-123 cm E  39) U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l 1 4 - 2 0 ; U n i t 23, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 36 cm Depth: 53 cm Provenience: 162-195 cm S (EU 1 1 ) , 184-200 cm E (EU 1 1 ) ; 162-198 cm S (EU 2 3 ) , 0-18 cm E (EU 23)  40) U n i t 29, L e v e l 15 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 43-54 cm S, 36-49 cm E  41) U n i t 14, L e v e l 11-14 Diameter: 22 cm Depth: 3 0 cm Provenience : ?-200 cm S, 76-98 cm E Comments : Not o b s e r v e d o r r e c o r d e d when t h e u n i t was excavated but v i s i b l e i n the south w a l l (baulk) p r o f i l e .  42) U n i t 14, L e v e l 11-13 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: 17 cm Provenience : ?-200 cm S, 156-175 cm E Comments : Not o b s e r v e d o r r e c o r d e d when t h e u n i t was excavated but v i s i b l e i n the south (baulk) wall profile.  43) U n i t 6, L e v e l 11-16 Diameter: 15 cm Depth: 50 cm Provenience: 24-38 cm S, 8-23 cm E  44) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 8-10; U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l n / a Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 0-18 cm S (EU 2 3 ) , 0-18 cm E (EU 2 3 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 1 ) , ?-200 cm E (EU 11) Comments: This feature extends i n t o the north (baulk) wall. No t r a c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was o b s e r v e d o r r e c o r d e d i n u n i t 11, however, i t c l e a r l y extended i n t o the u n i t . Dimensions of t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a . 45) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 10 Diameter: 15 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 38-53 cm S, 47-62 cm E  46) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 10 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 66-79 cm S, 6-20 cm E  47) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 1 0 ; U n i t 6, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 182-200 cm S (EU 2 3 ) , 23-40 cm E (EU 23) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 6, h o w e v e r , no m e n t i o n c o u l d be f o u n d i n t h e e x c a v a t i o n notes. F e a t u r e d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  48) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 10 Diameter: 15 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 63-78 cm S, 83-98 cm E  49) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 10 Diameter: 12 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 81-92 cm S, 38-50 cm E  50) U n i t 23, L e v e l 10; U n i t 21, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 30 cm Depth: n/a 130-160 cm S (EU 2 3 ) , 88-100 cm E (EU 2 3 ) ; ? P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 2 1 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 21) T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 2 1 , h o w e v e r , no Comments : m e n t i o n c o u l d be f o u n d i n t h e e x c a v a t i o n notes. F e a t u r e d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  51) U n i t 32, L e v e l 17 Diameter: 17 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 61-76 cm S, 41-58 cm E  52) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12, 13 Diameter: 31 cm Depth: 11 cm Provenience : 184-200 cm S, 138-169 cm E Comments : This feature continues south i n t o the baulk wall. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  53) U n i t 16, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  12-13 16 cm n/a 177-192 cm S, 180-196 cm E  54) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13-15 Diameter : 25 cm Depth: 22 cm P r o v e n i e n c e ; 190-200 cm S, 57-82 cm E Comments : This feature continues south i n t o the baulk w a l l and i t s s i z e has been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data. 55) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 25 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 158-174 cm S, 133-158 cm E  56) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 96-110 cm S, 13 0-143 cm E Comments: The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s f e a t u r e  57) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 28 cm Depth: 12 cm Provenience: 122-150 cm S, 44-68 cm E  58) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 21 cm Depth : 6 cm Provenience: 1 4 0 - 1 6 1 cm S, 68-88 cm E  59) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 142-162 cm S, 113-132 cm E  60) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: 5 cm Provenience: 114-123 cm S, 159-166 cm E  61) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 8 cm Depth : 4 cm Provenience: 110-117 cm S, 177-185 cm E  i s uncertain.  62) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 8 cm Depth : 5 cm Provenience: 124-132 cm S, 156-164 cm E  63) U n i t 16, L e v e l 13 Diameter: 8 cm Depth: 5 cm Provenience: 135-143 cm S, 172-179 cm E  64) U n i t 16, L e v e l 1 3 ; U n i t 15, L e v e l 13-15 Diameter: 26 cm Depth: n/a 121-140 cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 184-200 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; P r o v e n i e n c e : 16-35 cm S (EU 1 5 ) , 0-10 cm E (EU 15) The d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n f e a t u r e p r o v e n i e n c e s Comments : is l i k e l y a recording error.  65) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 18 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 86-101 cm S, 176-194 cm E  66) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 46-64 cm S, 166-185 cm E  67) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-14 Diameter: 18 cm Depth: 12 cm Provenience: 78-95 cm S, 116-134 cm E  68) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 16 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 93-109 cm S, 78-92 cm E  69) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 53-67 cm S, 72-84 cm E  70) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 12 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 188-200 cm S, 174-183 cm E Comments : This feature continues south i n t o the baulk w a l l and i t s dimensions have been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  71) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 16 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 72-84 cm S, 143-159 cm E Comments: The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s f e a t u r e  i s uncertain.  72) U n i t 16, L e v e l 15 Diameter: 3 0 cm Depth: n/a Provenience : ?-200 cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 0-30 cm E (EU 16) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y o b s e r v e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l (baulk) p r o f i l e and i t s s i z e has been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  73) U n i t 15, L e v e l 15-18 U n i t 9, L e v e l 15 Diameter: 2 8 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 80-100 cm S (EU 1 5 ) , 82-100 cm E (EU 1 5 ) ; 90100 cm S (EU 9 ) , 0-10 cm E (EU 9) T h i s f e a t u r e continues i n t o t h e s o u t h (baulk) Comments : w a l l and i t s s i z e has been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  74) U n i t 15, L e v e l 15-16 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: 13 cm Provenience: 45-56 cm S, 70-83 cm E  75) U n i t 15, L e v e l 15-17 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: 11 cm Provenience: 74-83 cm S, 57-65 cm E  76) U n i t 1 5 , L e v e l 16-17 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 72-85 cm S, 35-48 cm E  77) U n i t 15, L e v e l 15-17 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 71-78 cm S, 26-35 cm E  78) U n i t 15, L e v e l 15-16 Diameter: 17 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 13-30 cm S, 11-28 cm E  79) U n i t 9, L e v e l 15 Diameter: 16 cm Depth: 49 cm Provenience: 20-36 cm S, 31-47 cm E  80) U n i t 9, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  15 14 cm n/a 50-64 cm S, 61-75 cm E  81) U n i t 9, L e v e l 15 Diameter: 24 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 60-76 cm S, 31-55 cm E  82) U n i t 9, L e v e l 15 Diameter: 15 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 45-60 cm S, 90-99 cm E  83) U n i t 20, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  9 15 cm n/a 65-80 cm S, 70-83 cm E  84) U n i t 20, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 8 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 79-87 cm S, 86-94 cm E  85) U n i t 20, L e v e l 9-11 Diameter: 6 cm Depth: 23 cm Provenience 21-27 cm S, 96-100 cm E Comments : This feature continues i n t o the eastern baulk w a l l and i t s d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  86) U n i t 20, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 6 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 22-27 cm S, 88-94 cm E  87) U n i t 20, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 7 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 23-29 cm S, 80-87 cm E  88) U n i t 20, L e v e l 9-13 Diameter: 22 cm Depth: 4 8 cm Provenience: 74-92 cm S, 12-34 cm E Comments: T h i s f e a t u r e i s angled from west t o e a s t i s p o r t i o n furthest west).  (base  89) U n i t 7, L e v e l n/a; U n i t 20, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 15 cm n/a Depth: ?-100 cm S (EU 7 ) , 15-30 cm E (EU 7 ) ; 0-? cm S Provenience : (EU 2 0 ) , 15-30 cm E (EU 20) T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y v i s i b l e m a p h o t o g r a p h Comments : o f t h e s o u t h w a l l o f u n i t 7. No e v i d e n c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was n o t e d o r o b s e r v e d i n u n i t 20. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e h a s b e e n e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data. This post hole i s angled towards the east.  90) U n i t 17, L e v e l 5-7; U n i t 19, L e v e l 7-8 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: n/a 0-? cm S (EU 1 7 ) , 37-45 cm E (EU 1 7 ) ; 86-100 P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S ( E U 1 9 ) , 27-46 cm E (EU 19) T h i s f e a t u r e was v i s i b l e i n u n i t 19 a n d t h e Comments : n o r t h w a l l o f u n i t 17. E x c a v a t o r s o f u n i t 17 f a i l e d t o observe and r e c o r d t h i s f e a t u r e . The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  91) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 12-13 Diameter : 12 cm Depth : n/a Provenience 0-11 cm S (EU 3 3 ) , 48-60 cm E (EU 33) Comments : This feature extends i n t o the north (baulk) w a l l and i t s s i z e has been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  92) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 12 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 1 2 9 - 1 4 1 cm S, 1 0 8 - 1 2 1 cm E  U n i t 33, L e v e l 1 2 - 1 3 ; U n i t 34, L e v e l n/a 30 cm Diameter: n/a Depth : 170-200 cm S (EU 3 3 ) , 0-23 cm E (EU 3 3 ) ; 0-? P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 3 4 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 34) This f e a t u r e extends westwards i n t o the baulk Comments : wall. No e v i d e n c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was o b s e r v e d o r n o t e d i n u n i t 34. The d i m e n s i o n s of t h i s f e a t u r e have been e x t r a p o l a t e d from a v a i l a b l e data.  94) U n i t 33, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 32 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 104-136 cm S, 15-46 cm E  95) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 1 2 - 1 3 ; U n i t 34, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 187-200 cm S (EU 3 3 ) , 1 2 1 - 1 4 1 cm E (EU 3 3 ) ; 04 cm S (EU 3 4 ) , 133-148 cm E (EU 34) Comments: This feature tapers w i t h depth.  96) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 13 Diameter: 15 cm Depth: n/a Provenience : 72-87 cm S, 0-12 cm E Comments : This feature continues into the western (baulk) w a l l . F e a t u r e d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  97) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 16 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 20-36 cm S, 20-36 cm E Comments : Three l a r g e rocks surrounded the base of t h i s feature.  98) U n i t 33, L e v e l 12-13 Diameter: 34 cm Depth: n/a Provenience : 0-28 cm S, 166-200 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e d i n t o t h e n o r t h e r n and eastern baulk walls. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a . A r o c k a d j a c e n t t o t h e s o u t h edge o f t h e f e a t u r e may h a v e s e r v e d a s u p p o r t o r r e t a i n i n g function.  99) U n i t 34, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 21 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 166-185 cm S, 35-56 cm E  100) U n i t 34, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 26 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 21-44 cm S, 138-164 cm E  101) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 D i a m e t e r : 13 cm D e p t h : n/a Provenience: 72-84 cm S, 150-163 cm E  102) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 75-83 cm S, 140-149 cm E  103) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 5 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 78-83 cm S, 117-122 cm E  104) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 11 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 35-46 cm S, 94-104 cm E  105) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 6 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 77-83 cm S, 89-95 cm E  106) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 6 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 57-62 cm S, 82-88 cm E  107) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 7 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 36-43 cm S, 71-78 cm E  108) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9-10 Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 58-78 cm S, 25-44 cm E  109) U n i t 35, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  110) U n i t 35, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  9 5 cm n/a 42-46 cm S, 43-48 cm E  9 5 cm n/a 36-40 cm S, 38-43 cm E  111) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter : 5 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 17-22 cm S, 64-68 cm E  112) U n i t 35, L e v e l 8-9 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 0-12 cm S, 48-62 cm E  113) U n i t 35, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 104-117 cm S, 0-12 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e continues i n t h e w e s t e r n (baulk) w a l l a n d i t s s i z e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  114) U n i t 3 5 , L e v e l 9-10 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 97-109 cm S, 13-26 cm E  115) U n i t 35, L e v e l 8-10 Diameter: 10 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 32-41 cm S, 175-185 cm E  116) U n i t 35, L e v e l 8 Diameter: 5 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 20-24 cm S, 18-23 cm E  117) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 6 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 90-94 cm S, 178-184 cm E  118) U n i t 35, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 6 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 102-106 cm S, 182-188  cm  119) U n i t 3 5 , L e v e l 10 Diameter: 21 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 150-168 cm S, 71-92 cm E  120) U n i t 35, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  9 14 cm n/a 56-68 cm S, 140-154 cm E  121) U n i t 18, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 70-90 cm S, 94-100 cm E Comments : This f e a t u r e extends i n t o the eastern (baulk) w a l l and i t s d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  122) U n i t 18, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 78-87 cm S, 52-66 cm E  123) U n i t 18, L e v e l 1 0 ; U n i t 26, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 7 cm Depth: n/a 96-100 cm S (EU 1 8 ) , 32-39 cm E (EU 1 8 ) ; 0-? P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 2 6 ) , ? cm E (EU 26) T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 26 b u t was n o t Comments : observed by t h e excavator. Feature dimensions were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g d a t a .  124) U n i t 18, L e v e l 10 Diameter : 12 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 0-12 cm S, 22-33 cm E Comments : This feature extends i n t o the north (baulk) w a l l and i t s d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  Diameter: Depth: Provenience : Comments :  33 cm n/a 0-16 cm S, 67-100 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e extends i n t o t h e east and n o r t h (baulk) w a l l s . The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g d a t a .  126) U n i t 18, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 25-44 cm S, 93-100 cm E This feature extends i n t o the east (baulk) Comments : w a l l and i t s d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  127) U n i t 18, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 17 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 79-96 cm S, 23-39 cm E  128) U n i t 18, L e v e l 8-10 Diameter: 19 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 0-17 cm S, 5-24 cm E Comments : This feature extends i n t o t h e northern (baulk) w a l l and i t s d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  129) U n i t 18, L e v e l 8-9; U n i t 26, L e v e l 7-9; U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 40 cm Depth: 21 cm Provenience: 83-100 cm S (EU 1 8 ) , 0-20 cm E (EU 1 8 ) ; 0-18 cm S (EU 2 6 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 6 ) ; 90-130 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 64-80 cm E (EU 37)  Diameter : Depth: Provenience : Comments :  23 cm 22 cm 0-23 cm S, ?-100 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y o b s e r v e d i n t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 2 6 . The s i z e o f t h e f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a ,  131) U n i t 26, L e v e l Diameter: 8 cm Depth: 9 cm Provenience 46-54 cm S, ?-100 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y o b s e r v e d i n t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 2 6 . The s i z e o f t h e f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  132) U n i t 26, L e v e l 7-9; U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 36 cm Depth: 21 cm Provenience: 35-60 cm S (EU 2 6 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 6 ) ; 130-166 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 58-80 cm E (EU 37) Comments: The f e a t u r e t a p e r s w i t h d e p t h .  133) U n i t 26, L e v e l 9; U n i t 22, L e v e l 5-8; U n i t 37, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 24 cm Depth : 8 cm Provenience : 82-96 cm S (EU 2 6 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 6 ) ; 0-20 cm S (EU 2 2 ) , 0-9 cm E (EU 2 2 ) ; 182-220 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , ?-80 cm E (EU 37) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t e d i n t h e e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 26, h o w e v e r , i t s p r e s e n c e was c o n f i r m e d i n t h e west w a l l p r o f i l e . This feature c o n t i n u e s i n t o u n i t 3 7 , h o w e v e r , i t was n o t recorded during the excavation.  U n i t 22, L e v e l 8, U n i t 38, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 16 cm Depth: n/a 51-74 cm S (EU 2 2 ) , 94-100 cm E (EU 2 2 ) ; 3-30 P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 3 8 ) , 0-10 cm E (EU 38) The s l i g h t d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n f e a t u r e Comments : p r o v e n i e n c e i n t h e two e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s i s l i k e l y a recorder error. A thorough examination of u n i t plans suggest t h i s feature was c i r c u l a r a n d r o u g h l y 16 cm i n d i a m e t e r .  135) U n i t 22, L e v e l 5-7 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 84-94 cm S, 65-79 cm E  136) U n i t 22, L e v e l 5-6 Diameter: 17 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 52-69 cm S, 54-68 cm E  137) U n i t 22, L e v e l 6-7; U n i t 26, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 15 cm Depth : n/a 0-14 cm S (EU 2 2 ) , 31-46 cm E (EU 2 2 ) ; ?-100 P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 2 6 ) , 31-46 cm E (EU 26) T h i s f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o u n i t 26 a l t h o u g h Comments : not mentioned i n the f i e l d notes f o r t h i s unit. F e a t u r e d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  Diameter: Depth: Provenience : Comments :  139) U n i t 38, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  20 cm n/a 89-100 cm S, 3 1 - 5 1 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e extends i n t o t h e s o u t h e r n (baulk) w a l l and i t s d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  n/a 9 cm n/a 48-57 cm S, 34-43 cm E  140) U n i t 3 8 , L e v e l 12 Diameter: 28 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 4 8 - 7 1 cm S, 41-69 cm E  141) U n i t 3 8 , L e v e l 11 Diameter: 22 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 119-140 cm S, 53-75 cm E  142) U n i t 3 8 , L e v e l 11 Diameter: 43 cm Depth: n/a P r o v e n i e n c e : 128-150 cm S, 87-130 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e extends i n t o t h e s o u t h e r n (baulk) wall of the unit. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g d a t a .  143) U n i t 38, L e v e l 11 Diameter: 20 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 1 0 5 - 1 2 1 cm S, 101-121 cm E  144) U n i t 38, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 29 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 91-120 cm S, 120-145 cm E  145) U n i t 38, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 9 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 82-91 cm S, 130-139 cm E  146) U n i t 38, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 17 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 42-58 cm S, 82-99 cm E Comments: The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s f e a t u r e i s u n c e r t a i n .  147) U n i t 38, L e v e l 12 Diameter: 7 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 37-44 cm S, 82-88 cm E Comments: The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s f e a t u r e i s u n c e r t a i n .  148) U n i t 38, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 16 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 42-57 cm S, 111-127 cm E Comments: The v a l i d i t y o f t h i s f e a t u r e i s u n c e r t a i n .  149) U n i t 37, L e v e l Diameter: Depth: Provenience:  9 11 cm n/a 53-63 cm S, 31-42 cm E  150) U n i t 37, L e v e l 8 Diameter: 12 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 70-82 cm S, 34-45 cm E  151) U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 86-100 cm S, 34-46 cm E  152) U n i t 15, L e v e l 1 5 - 1 7 ; U n i t 9, L e v e l n/a Diameter:: 25 cm Depth: 15 cm Provenience: 50-75 cm S (EU 1 5 ) , 88-100 cm E cm S (EU 9 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 9)  153) U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 22 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 166-188 cm S, 60-80 cm E  154) U n i t 37, L e v e l 8 Diameter: 26 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 39-62 cm S, 48-74 cm E  (EU 1 5 ) ; 50-75  U n i t 37, L e v e l 7-8; T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 3 8 cm n/a Depth: 25-63 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-26 cm E (EU 3 7 ) ; ? cm S Provenience : ( t r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( t r e n c h 1) The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e h a s b e e n e x t r a p o l a t e d Comments : from e x i s t i n g data. T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t recorded i n the f i e l d notes or p r o f i l e s of t r e n c h 1, h o w e v e r , t h e w e s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 3 7 i n d i c a t e s c o n t i n u a t i o n i n t o t r e n c h 1.  156) U n i t 37, L e v e l 8; T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 22 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 83-105 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-8 cm E (EU 3 7 ) ; ? cm S ( t r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( t r e n c h 1) Comments: The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e h a s b e e n e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data. T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t recorded i n the f i e l d notes or p r o f i l e s of t r e n c h 1, h o w e v e r , t h e w e s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 3 7 i n d i c a t e s c o n t i n u a t i o n i n t o t r e n c h 1.  157) U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 2 0 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 128-148 cm S, 1-18  cm E  158) U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 25 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 108-130 cm S, 13-38 cm E  159) U n i t 37, L e v e l 8 Diameter: 33 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 76-109 cm S, 8-32  cm E  160) U n i t 37, L e v e l 9 Diameter: 11 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 200-208 cm S, 57-68 cm E  161) U n i t 37, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 18 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 230-248 cm S, 12-30 cm E  162) U n i t 37, L e v e l 10; T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 32 cm Depth: 31 cm 248-278 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-16 cm E (EU 3 7 ) ; 298P r o v e n i e n c e : 330 cm S ( t r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( t r e n c h 1) T h i s f e a t u r e was o b s e r v e d i n u n i t 37 a n d i n Comments : t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 1. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  163) U n i t 37, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 13 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 287-300 cm S, 26-39 cm E  164) U n i t 37, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 14 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 298-312 cm S, 44-58 cm E  165) U n i t 37, L e v e l 10 Diameter: 8 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 360-368 cm S, 18-26 cm E  U n i t 36, L e v e l 3-4; U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l n/a Diameter: 21 cm Depth: 15 cm Provenience: 0-14 cm N (EU 3 6 ) , 29-50 cm E (EU 3 6 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 1 ) , 19-40 cm E (EU 11) Comments : No r e c o r d o f t h i s f e a t u r e was f o u n d i n u n i t 11 f i e l d notes or w a l l p r o f i l e s . Feature d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  167) U n i t 2 5 , L e v e l 2-4 Diameter: 10 cm Depth: n/a 0-? cm S, 3 0-40 cm E Provenience : Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t r e c o r d e d d u r i n g t h e e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 25, h o w e v e r , i t was observed i n a photograph of the north w a l l profile. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e w e r e e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  168) U n i t 2 5 , L e v e l 1-3 Diameter: 20 cm Depth: 2 0 cm Provenience : 0-? cm S, 50-70 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t r e c o r d e d d u r i n g t h e e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 2 5 , h o w e v e r , i t was observed i n a photograph of the north w a l l profile. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e w e r e e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  169) U n i t 25, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 21 cm Depth: n/a Provenience: 54-74 cm S, 45-66 cm E  T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a; U n i t 37, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 16 cm Depth: 24 cm Provenience: 182-198 S ( t r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( t r e n c h 1 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 37) Comments: T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y o b s e r v e d i n t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 1. The feature c o n t i n u e s i n t o u n i t 37, h o w e v e r , no m e n t i o n c o u l d be f o u n d i n t h e f i e l d n o t e s . The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  171) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a; U n i t 37, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 8 cm Depth: 11 cm Provenience: 200-208 cm S ( t r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( t r e n c h 1 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 3 7 ) . Comments: T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y o b s e r v e d i n t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 1. The f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o u n i t 37, h o w e v e r , no m e n t i o n was r e c o r d e d i n t h e f i e l d n o t e s . The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  172) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a; U n i t 37, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 18 cm Depth : 29 cm 382-400 S ( t r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( t r e n c h 1 ) ; ? P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 37) T h i s f e a t u r e was o n l y o b s e r v e d i n t h e e a s t Comments : w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 1. The f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o u n i t 37, h o w e v e r , no m e n t i o n was r e c o r d e d i n t h e f i e l d n o t e s . The f e a t u r e continues i n t o the south (baulk) w a l l of t r e n c h 1. F e a t u r e s i z e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  173) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 14 cm 36 cm Depth: P r o v e n i e n c e : 96-110 cm S, This feature Comments : wall profile extrapolated  0-? cm E was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e w e s t e r n o f t r e n c h 1 a n d i t s s i z e was from e x i s t i n g data.  174) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 26 cm Depth: 32 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 2 4 5 - 2 7 1 cm S, 0-? cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e w e s t e r n w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 1 a n d i t s s i z e was e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  175) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n/a Diameter : 9 cm Depth: 35 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 331-340 cm S, 0-? cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d f r o m t h e w e s t e r n w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 1. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  176) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 42 cm Depth: 42 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 0-? cm S, 0-42 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e n o r t h p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4 a n d i t s s i z e was e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  177) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 2 0 cm Depth: 42 cm Provenience: 0-? cm S, 150-170 cm E  wall  Comments :  T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e n o r t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  178) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter : 27 cm Depth: 24 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 0-? cm S, 496-523 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e n o r t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  179) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 37 cm Depth: 24 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 0-? cm S, 523-560 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e n o r t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  180) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 25 cm Depth: 24 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : ?-130 cm S, 74-99 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  181) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 13 cm Depth: 23 cm Provenience : ?-130 cm S, 277-290 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  182) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 18 cm Depth: 24 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : ?-130 cm S, 370-388 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  183) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 28 cm Depth: 25 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : ?-130 cm S, 502-530 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  184) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 16 cm Depth: 28 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : ?-130 cm S, 534-550 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  185) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 18 cm Depth: 18 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : ?-130 cm S, 562-580 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d w i t h e x i s t i n g d a t a .  186) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Diameter: 40 cm Depth: 46 cm Provenience: 40-80 cm S, 0-? cm E  Comments:  T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e w e s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g d a t a .  187) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 2 0 cm Depth : 24 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 120-140 cm S, ?-600 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o t h e e a s t e r n and s o u t h e r n (baulk) w a l l s . The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  188) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n/a Diameter: 5 cm Depth: 28 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : 21-26 cm S, ?-600 cm E Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e e a s t w a l l p r o f i l e o f t r e n c h 4. The f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o t h e e a s t e r n (baulk) w a l l . The s i z e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m e x i s t i n g data.  Rectangular  Post  Holes  1) U n i t 28, L e v e l 3; U n i t 1, L e v e l n/a Size: 10 cm (N-S) x ? cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience: 19-29 cm S (EU 2 8 ) , 0-10 cm W (EU 2 8 ) ; EU 1 n/a Comments: T h i s f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o u n i t 1, h o w e v e r , i t was n o t o b s e r v e d o r n o t e d when u n i t 1 was excavated.  U n i t 28, Size : Depth:  L e v e l 4-5; U n i t 2, L e v e l 4-6 14 cm ( N - S ) x 26 cm (E-W) 20 cm 6-17 cm S (EU 2 8 ) , 0-26 cm W (EU 2 8 ) ; 6-20 cm P r o v e n i e n c e : S (EU 2 ) , ? cm E (EU 2) T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e Comments : e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 2, h o w e v e r , i t was recorded i n the west w a l l p r o f i l e .  3) U n i t 12, L e v e l 9 Size: 26 cm (N-S) x 16 cm (E-W) Depth : 7 cm Provenience: 66-92 cm S, 133-149 cm E Comments: T h i s e l o n g a t e f e a t u r e may be c i r c u l a r post holes.  4) U n i t 5, L e v e l 9-11 Size: 10 cm (N-S) Depth: 15 cm Provenience: 45-55 cm S,  5) U n i t 5, Size: Depth:  x 20  cm  20-40 cm  two  adjacent  (E-W) E  L e v e l 8-13; U n i t 13, L e v e l n/a 30 cm (N-S) X 51 cm (E-W) 45 cm 75-100 cm S (EU 5 ) , 77-100 cm E (EU 5 ) ; ?-200 P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 1 3 ) , 0-28 cm E (EU 13) This f e a t u r e extends i n t o the southern (baulk) Comments : w a l l o f u n i t s 5 a n d 13. The f e a t u r e was not n o t e d d u r i n g t h e e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 13, h o w e v e r , i t was r e c o r d e d i n t h e s o u t h (baulk) wall profile. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s p o s t h o l e were e x t r a p o l a t e d from a v a i l a b l e d a t a . The b o t t o m o f t h e p o s t h o l e e n d s a b r u p t l y s u g g e s t i n g t h e p o s t b a s e was s h a p e d .  6) U n i t 5, L e v e l 9-16; U n i t 13, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 24, L e v e l n/a Size : 20 cm ( N - S ) , 30 cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience 0-15 cm S (EU 5 ) , 85-100 cm E (EU 5 ) ; ? cm S (EU 1 3 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 1 3 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 2 4 ) , 80-100 cm E (EU 2 4 ) . T h i s f e a t u r e t a p e r s w i t h d e p t h a n d was n o t Comments o b s e r v e d d u r i n g t h e e x c a v a t i o n o f u n i t 24, however, t h e n o r t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 5 c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s feature continues i n t o u n i t 24. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g d a t a . The b o t t o m o f t h e p o s t h o l e ends a b r u p t l y s u g g e s t i n g t h e p o s t b a s e was s h a p e d .  7) U n i t 15, L e v e l 15-17 Size: 20 cm (N-S) x 12 cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience: 50-70 cm S, 56-68 cm E  8) U n i t 20, L e v e l 8 Size: 15 cm (N-S) x 34 cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience: 39-54 cm S, 50-84 cm E  9) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 12-13 Size: 15 cm (N-S) x 21 cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience: 98-113 cm S, 37-58 cm E Comments: The f e a t u r e i s k i d n e y - s h a p e d .  10) U n i t 12, L e v e l 11-12 Diameter: 21 cm (N-S) x 11 cm (E-W) Depth: 12 cm Provenience: 87-108 cm S, 164-175 cm E  U n i t 30, L e v e l 1 6 ; U n i t 4, L e v e l 1 3 - 1 4 ; U n i t 10, L e v e l 1415; U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l 15 Size: 30 cm (N-S) x 49 cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience: 0-6 cm S (EU 3 0 ) , 77-100 cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; 176-200 S (EU 1 0 ) , 175-200 cm E (EU 1 0 ) ; 178-200 cm S (EU 1 1 ) , 0-16 cm E (EU 1 1 ) ; 0-16 cm E (EU 4 ) , 0-6 cm S (EU 4)  12) U n i t 6, L e v e l 1 1 - 1 8 ; U n i t 29, L e v e l n / a Size: 19 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) Depth: 53 cm 0-19 cm S (EU 6 ) , 0-17 cm E (EU 6 ) ; ? cm S (EU P r o v e n i e n c e : 2 9 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 29) No e v i d e n c e o f t h i s p o s t h o l e was o b s e r v e d o r Comments : r e c o r d e d i n u n i t 29 a l t h o u g h t h e f e a t u r e c l e a r l y extends i n t o the u n i t . The d i m e n s i o n s of t h i s f e a t u r e have been e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  13) U n i t 16, L e v e l 1 1 - 1 6 ; U n i t 32, L e v e l n/a Size: 30 cm (N-S) X 12 cm (E-W) Depth: 50 cm 0-22 cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 178-190 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; ?-100 P r o v e n i e n c e : cm S (EU 3 2 ) , ? cm E (EU 32) T h i s f e a t u r e e x t e n d s i n t o u n i t 32, h o w e v e r , no Comments : m e n t i o n c o u l d be f o u n d i n t h e e x c a v a t i o n notes. F e a t u r e d i m e n s i o n s were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g data.  14) U n i t 18, L e v e l 8-9 Size: 22 cm (N-S) x 12 cm (E-W) Depth: n/a Provenience: 48-70 cm S, 3-15 cm E  15) U n i t 38, L e v e l 11 Size: 27 cm (E-W) x 36 cm (N-S) Depth: n/a Provenience: 67-94 cm S, 76-112 cm E  APPENDIX C HEARTHS AND CHARCOAL CONCENTRATIONS  Introduction  H e a r t h and c h a r c o a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n f e a t u r e s were recorded  i n a l l 3 8 e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s and each backhoe  with the exception  o f t r e n c h 3.  trench  Formal notes o r w a l l  p r o f i l e s w e r e n e v e r made f o r t r e n c h 3, t h e r e f o r e , t h o s e are not a v a i l a b l e . burnt  soil,  area.  Hearths a r e d e f i n e d as c o n c e n t r a t i o n s of  c h a r c o a l and f i r e  cracked  These f e a t u r e s r e p r e s e n t  floor  (Gose 1 9 7 6 : 1 9 0 ) .  are concentrations  cracked  rock and burnt  redeposited  i n a well  on a l i v i n g  concentrations,  of charcoal.  a s t h e name  However,  fire  s o i l may a l s o b e p r e s e n t .  represent  defined  These  t h e remnants o f h e a r t h s  w h i c h were  away f r o m t h e i r o r i g i n a l p l a c e o f u s e .  In general, hearth  rock  i n s i t u burning  Charcoal  infers,  features l i k e l y  data  notes concerning  t h e l o c a t i o n and nature o f  and c h a r c o a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n f e a t u r e s a t t h e H a t z i c  Rock s i t e were m i n i m a l o r n o n - e x i s t e n t .  I n many  instances  f e a t u r e s were i d e n t i f i e d d u r i n g t h e a n a l y s i s from plans, w a l l p r o f i l e s , shortcomings,  and photographs.  t h e d a t a were s u f f i c i e n t  d e s c r i p t i o n s o f these  Apart  from  to provide  floor these accurate  features.  E a c h f e a t u r e was n u m b e r e d f o r e a s e o f r e f e r e n c e . Feature and  provenience  levels  was i n d i c a t e d b y r e f e r r i n g t o t h e u n i t s  i n w h i c h t h e f e a t u r e was f o u n d .  Where  i n f o r m a t i o n was l a c k i n g a " n / a " was p l a c e d i n t h e appropriate location.  Specific  feature provenience  cm S, 23 cm E ) , was p r o v i d e d w h e r e p o s s i b l e . feature provenience  d a t a was l a c k i n g ,  ( e . g . 45  If specific  a " ? " was u s e d i n  place of numeric c o o r d i n a t e s . The maximum l e n g t h a n d w i d t h d i m e n s i o n s for  each f e a t u r e .  the dimensions cases,  were  I n c a s e s w h e r e t h i s d a t a was  o f t h e f e a t u r e was l e f t  extrapolated.  incomplete,  b l a n k o r , i n some  Feature dimensions  e x t r a p o l a t e d due t o t h e i r i r r e g u l a r  recorded  were  rarely  nature.  F e a t u r e d e p t h was r e c o r d e d i n c e n t i m e t e r s .  In cases  where d a t a a r e l a c k i n g a "n/a" r e p l a c e d t h e n u m e r i c An o p t i o n a l  comments s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s a d d i t i o n a l  not recorded i n p r e v i o u s data f i e l d s .  infoirmation  F o r example, i f a  feature's dimensions  were e x t r a p o l a t e d from e x i s t i n g  t h i s was i n d i c a t e d .  Other  of  c a l c i n e d bone o r b o i l i n g  in  this  field.  data.  i n f o r m a t i o n , such as t h e  data presence  s t o n e s , w o u l d a l s o be m e n t i o n e d  1) U n i t 1, L e v e l 1-4, U n i t 25, L e v e l 2-5 Dimensions : 55 cm (N-S) X 40 cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s 32 cm Provenience : 0-30 cm S (EU 1 ) , 50-90 cm E (EU 1 ) ; 75100 cm S (EU 2 5 ) , 50-88 cm E (EU 25) The b a s e o f t h i s f e a t u r e i s a d i s h Comments : shaped p a t c h o f b u r n t s o i l w i t h c h a r c o a l , c a l c i n e d f i s h bone, and l i t h i c s present. Hearth size i n u n i t 1 was b a s e d o n a l e n s o f b u r n t s o i l (22-32 cm d.b.u.) i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e n o r t h w a l l profile. A large patch of charcoal s t a i n e d s o i l undoubtedly r e l a t e d , though not p a r t of the h e a r t h f e a t u r e proper, e x i s t s above t h e b u r n t s o i l l e n s .  2) U n i t 2, L e v e l 2-5; U n i t 3 1 , L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 28, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 1, L e v e l n/a Dimensions : n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience : 0-40 cm S (EU 2 ) , 0-100 cm E (EU 2 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 1 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 3 1 ) ; ? cm S (EU 2 8 ) , ? cm E (EU 2 8 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 1) , ? cm E (EU 1) Comments : F i r e c r a c k e d r o c k , c a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s , and b u r n t s o i l were o b s e r v e d in this feature.  3) U n i t 25, L e v e l n/a; Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  U n i t 10, L e v e l 3; U n i t 1, L e v e l 4-6 41 cm (N-S) x 141 cm (E-W) 18 cm ? cm S (EU 2 5 ) , 0-100 cm E (EU 2 5 ) ; 79120 cm S (EU 10) 0-75 cm E; 0-? cm S (EU 1 ) , 34-100 cm E (EU 1)  Comments :  4) U n i t 12, L e v e l 8-9 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  5) U n i t 5, L e v e l 9-10; 12; U n i t 14, L e v e l Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  Comments:  F i e l d n o t e s were n o t p r e c i s e enough t o define the hearth alone, therefore, the surrounding carbon s t a i n e d s o i l i s included i n feature dimensions.  U n i t 5, L e v e l 6-8 29 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) 16 cm 126-144 cm S (EU 1 2 ) , 179-200 cm E (EU 1 2 ) ; 13-42 cm S (EU 5 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 5) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  U n i t 24, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 13, L e v e l 1 1 12 60 cm (N-S) x 280 cm (E-W) 12 cm 0-24 cm S (EU 5 ) , 74-100 cm E (EU 5 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 2 4 ) , ? cm E (EU 2 4 ) ; 28150 cm S (EU 1 3 ) , 0-200 cm E (EU 1 3 ) ; 58-93 cm S (EU 1 4 ) , 0-40 cm E (EU 14) C h a r c o a l s t a i n e d s o i l , b u r n t s o i l , and c a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s a r e p r e s e n t i n this feature. In unit 5 the f l o o r g e n t l y s l o p e s from west t o e a s t and i s stained black with charcoal. The s c a l e and s h a p e o f t h i s f e a t u r e , s u g g e s t s i t may r e p r e s e n t a b u r n t s t r u c t u r a l e l e m e n t r a t h e r than a hearth. The f e a t u r e g e n t l y c u r v e s n o r t h as i t p r o g r e s s e s eastward. The n o r t h - s o u t h d i m e n s i o n may seem g r e a t ( e . g . u n i t 1 3 ) , h o w e v e r , t h e f e a t u r e i s o n l y 50-60 cm w i d e a t i t s maximum. The f e a t u r e r e s t s o n s t e r i l e g r a v e l i n u n i t 13. T h i s f e a t u r e i s l o c a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f t h e s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  U n i t 24, L e v e l 6-9, U n i t 3, L e v e l n/a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  Comments :  7) U n i t 3, L e v e l 1-3 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  8) U n i t 3, L e v e l 8-10 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  Comments :  Unit  31, L e v e l n/a. U n i t  13, L e v e l  7-8;  ? cm (N-S) X 51 cm (E-W) 10 cm 0-54 cm S (EU 2 4 ) , 62-100 cm E (EU 2 4 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 3 1 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 3 1 ) ; 17-60 cm S (EU 1 3 ) , 0-13 cm E (EU 1 3 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 3 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 3) This dish-shaped feature contains fire c r a c k e d r o c k , b u r n t s o i l , c h a r c o a l , and ash.  24 cm (N-S) X 51 cm (E-W) n/a 60-84 cm S, 48-99 cm E L i t t l e i s known a b o u t t h i s f e a t u r e , h o w e v e r , l e v e l 1 n o t e s i n d i c a t e wood, t e n t a t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d a s c e d a r , was present. The p r e s e r v a t i o n o f wood i s u n l i k e l y a n d was p r o b a b l y introduced t o t h e f e a t u r e when t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e s i t e was b u l l d o z e d . The f e a t u r e l a y below a c h a r c o a l l a y e r and c o n t a i n s c a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s and b u r n t s o i l .  U n i t 30, L e v e l 1 2 - 1 5 ; U n i t 10, L e v e l 14 ? cm (N-S) X 109 cm (E-W) 2 6 cm 0-95 cm S (EU 3 ) , 44-100 cm E (EU 3 ) ; 042 cm S (EU 3 0 ) , 0-53 cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; ? cm E (EU 1 0 ) , ?-200 cm S (EU 10) In a d d i t i o n t o a b o i l i n g stone, c a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s and q u a n t i t i e s o f f i r e c r a c k e d r o c k were f o u n d i n t h i s d i s h shaped f e a t u r e .  U n i t 30, L e v e l 1 5 - 1 7 , U n i t 13, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 14, l e v e l 810; U n i t 4, L e v e l 13-15 Dimensions : n/a 15 cm Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience : 63-100 cm S (EU 3 0 ) , 60-100 cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 14) , 0-52 cm E (EU 1 4 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 3 ) , ?-200 E cm (EU 1 3 ) ; 65-100 cm S (EU 4 ) , 0-40 cm E (EU 4) Comments : C a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s were o b s e r v e d i n t h i s d i s h - s h a p e d f e a t u r e w h i c h l i e s on the f l o o r of the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  10) U n i t 13, L e v e l 3-4 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments:  11) U n i t 14, L e v e l H E , n/a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  Comments :  12) U n i t 14, L e v e l 2-4; Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  36 cm (N-S) x 92 cm (E-W) 10 cm 108-144 cm S, 70-162 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e slopes west t o e a s t .  9W;  U n i t 4, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 29, L e v e l  ? cm (N-S) X 88 cm (E-W) n/a 0-23 cm S (EU 1 4 ) , 62-150 cm E (EU 1 4 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 4 ) , ? cm E (EU 4 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 2 9 ) , ? cm E (EU 29) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  U n i t 16, L e v e l 3 ? cm (N-S) x 147 cm (E-W) n/a 92-200 cm S (EU 1 4 ) , 93-200 cm E (EU 14) ; 85-200 cm S (EU 16) , 0-40 cm E (EU 16)  Comments :  13) U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l 4-6; Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  14) U n i t 2 3 , L e v e l 5-7 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  Comments :  15) U n i t 11, L e v e l 7 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  This feature continues (baulk) w a l l .  i n t o the southern  U n i t 23, L e v e l n/a ? cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 0-74 cm S (EU 1 1 ) , 112-200 cm E (EU 1 1 ) ; ? cm S (EU 2 3 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 23) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  U n i t 2 1 , L e v e l 5 - 1 1 ; U n i t 32, L e v e l n/a ? cm (N-S) X 106 cm (E-W) n/a 145-200 cm S (EU 2 3 ) , 65-100 cm E (EU 2 3 ) ; 120-200 cm S (EU 2 1 ) , 0-71 cm E (EU 2 1 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 3 2 ) , ? cm E (EU 32) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area. I n u n i t 21 q u a n t i t i e s of s m a l l o v o i d stones b e g i n t o appear in level 7 with a large concentration i n l e v e l 8. Some s t o n e s w e r e i n l e v e l 9. These stones l i k e l y represent concentrations of b o i l i n g stones which were u s e d f o r c o o k i n g i n c o n t a i n e r s such as b a s k e t s o r wooden b o x e s .  20 cm (N-S) X 70 cm (E-W) 5 cm 1 3 1 - 1 5 1 cm S, 10-80 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e c o n t a i n e d c a l c i n e d bone fragments.  16) U n i t 11, L e v e l 13-14 Dimensions: 30 cm (N-S) x 105 cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience: 141-171 cm S, 5-100+ cm E Comments: The e a s t e r n h a l f o f u n i t 11 was e x c a v a t e d b y U.B.C. a n d a n o t h e r c r e w excavated the western h a l f at a l a t e r date. No t r a c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e was o b s e r v e d b y t h e U.B.C. c r e w , h o w e v e r , f l o o r plans indicate the feature l i k e l y e x t e n d e d f o r a n a d d i t i o n a l 10 cm eastwards. T h i s e x p l a i n s why t h e e a s t e r n p r o v e n i e n c e o f t h e f e a t u r e i s 0100+ cm. The d i m e n s i o n s o f t h i s f e a t u r e were e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m a v a i l a b l e d a t a . T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  17) U n i t 6, L e v e l 1-3; U n i t 32, L e v e l n/a Dimensions: 11 cm (N-S) x ? cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience: 43-54 cm S (EU 6 ) , 86-100 cm E cm S (EU 3 2 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 32)  (EU 6 ) ; ?  18) U n i t 6, L e v e l 1 0 - 1 1 ; U n i t 23, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 29, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 11, L e v e l n/a Dimensions : n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s 10 cm Provenience : 0-40 cm S (EU 6 ) , 0-15 cm E (EU 6 ) ; ?200 cm S (EU 2 3 ) , ? cm E (EU 2 3 ) ; ? cm S (EU 2 9 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 2 9 ) ; ?-200 cm S (EU 1 1 ) , ?-200 cm E (EU 11) Comments : This dish-shaped lens of burnt s o i l c o n t a i n e d f i r e c r a c k e d rock and i s associated with the f l o o r of the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  19) U n i t 16, L e v e l 12 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience :  Comments :  U n i t 32, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 6, L e v e l 11-14 135 cm (N-S) X ? (E-W) n/a 0-49 cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 25-100 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 3 2 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 3 2 ) ; 14-100 cm S (EU 6 ) , 21-100 cm E (EU 6) O v e r 14 k g o f f i r e c r a c k e d r o c k was r e m o v e d f r o m t h i s f e a t u r e i n u n i t 6. T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  20) U n i t 16, L e v e l 1 2 ; U n i t 14, L e v e l n/a Dimensions : 46 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience : 19-65 cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 0-41 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; cm S (EU 1 4 ) , ?-200 cm E (EU 14) T h i s f e a t u r e was e n c i r c l e d b y c o b b l e s Comments : and i s l o c a t e d o n t h e f l o o r o f t h e s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n the main excavation area.  21) U n i t 16, L e v e l 9-10, U n i t 15, L e v e l 9 Dimensions : n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience : ? cm S (EU 1 6 ) , ?-200 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; cm S (EU 1 5 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 15) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  22) U n i t 15, L e v e l 4 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  15 cm (N-S) x 35 cm (E-W) n/a 35-50 cm S, 10-45 cm E  23) U n i t 15, L e v e l 4 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  10 cm (N-S) x 15 cm (E-W) n/a 15-25 cm S, 60-75 cm E  24) U n i t 1 5 , L e v e l 8-10, U n i t 9, L e v e l 6-10 46 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a 51-97 cm S (EU 1 5 ) , 61-100 cm E (EU 1 5 ) ; Provenience : ? cm S (EU 9 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 9) I n u n i t 15 t h i s f e a t u r e i s a Comments : concentration of burnt s o i l surrounded by g r a y a s h . T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f t h e s t r u c t u r e u n c o v e r e d i n the main excavation area.  25) U n i t 9, L e v e l 3-5 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  26) U n i t 2 7 , L e v e l 3-4, Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  32 cm (N-S) X 55 cm (E-W) n/a 42-74 cm S, 45-100 cm E This feature continues i n t o the eastern (baulk) w a l l .  U n i t 37, L e v e l n / a 22 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) 11 cm 75-97 cm S (EU 2 7 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 7 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 7 ) , ?-80 cm E (EU 37) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  27) U n i t 20, L e v e l 5-8 U n i t 7, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  Comments :  28) U n i t 36, L e v e l 4-8, Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  Comments :  29) U n i t 33, L e v e l 11 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  Unit  16, L e v e l  8-9; U n i t  32, L e v e l n / a ;  n/a 25 cm 0-42 cm S (EU 2 0 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 0 ) ; 020 cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 184-200 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 3 2 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 3 2 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 7 ) , ?-100 cm S (EU 7) This feature i s a pocket of burnt s o i l c a p p e d b y a mound o f t h i c k c h a r c o a l . T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l n / a ; T r e n c h 5, L e v e l n/a n/a 32 cm 60-160 cm N (EU 3 6 ) , 3-100 cm E (EU 3 6 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 1 ) , ? cm E (EU 1 1 ) ; 0-? cm S ( T r e n c h 5 ) , ? cm E ( T r e n c h 5) This feature i s a curved p i t / h e a r t h containing large q u a n t i t i e s of charcoal and b u r n t s o i l .  70 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 80-150 cm S, 0-47 cm E C a l c i n e d b o n e was i d e n t i f i e d i n t h i s feature which continues i n t o the western (baulk) w a l l . This feature i s situated on t h e f l o o r o f t h e s t r u c t u r e u n c o v e r e d i n t h e main excavation area.  30) U n i t 3 5 , L e v e l 8 ; U n i t 34, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : ? cm (N-S) X 68 cm [E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s n/a Provenience : 0-38 cm S (EU 3 5 ) , 64-132 cm E (EU 3 5 ) ; ?-200 cm S (EU 34) ? cm E (EU 34) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  31) U n i t 2 2 , L e v e l 4-5; Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  32) U n i t 2 2 , L e v e l 3-4, Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  U n i t 37, L e v e l n / a 18 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 75-93 cm S (EU 2 2 ) , 0-13 cm E (EU 2 2 ) ; cm S (EU 3 7 ) , ?-80 cm E (EU 37) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r of the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  U n i t 37, L e v e l n/a 33 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 21-54 cm S (EU 2 2 ) , 0-48 cm E (EU 2 2 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 7 ) , ?-80 cm E (EU 37) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  33) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l 5-9 Dimensions : 70 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : 3 6 cm Provenience : 90-160 cm S, 0-? cm E  T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 37, L e v e l n / a 57 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) Dimensions : 12 cm Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience : 159-216 cm S T r e n c h 1 ) , ?-60 cm E ( T r e n c h 1 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 37) Comments : T h i s f e a t u r e was d i s h - s h a p e d .  35) U n i t 4, L e v e l 9-10, Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  36) U n i t 2 5 , L e v e l 3-4, Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  Charcoal  U n i t 30, L e v e l n/a 7 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 50-57 cm S (EU 4 ) , 0-12 cm E (EU 4 ) , cm S (EU 3 0 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 30) Fragments o f c a l c i n e d bone and f i r e c r a c k e d r o c k were o b s e r v e d i n t h i s feature.  U n i t 10, L e v e l n / a 16 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 19-35 cm S (EU 2 5 ) , 89-100 cm E (EU 2 5 ) ; ? cm S (EU 10) , 0-? cm E (EU 10) T h i s f e a t u r e i s s i t u a t e d on t h e f l o o r o f the s t r u c t u r e uncovered i n t h e main excavation area.  Concentrations  1) U n i t n/a. L e v e l n/a Dimensions: n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience: 5 . 7 m w e s t f r o m t h e u n i t 10 d a t u m ; 5-15 cm d . b . s . Comments: A sample o f c h a r c o a l from t h i s f e a t u r e p r o v i d e d a d a t e o f 4590 ± 70 BP (WSU-  4328) f o r t h e b u l l d o z e d s u r f a c e o f t h e H a t z i c Rock s i t e .  2) U n i t 1, L e v e l 7; U n i t 2 5 , L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 10, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s : 3 cm Provenience : 0-? cm S (EU 1 ) , 68-100 cm E (EU 1 ) ; ?100 cm S (EU 2 5 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 2 5 ) ; ? cm S (EU 1 0 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 10) Comments : This feature i s a t h i n charcoal lens w h i c h c o n t a i n s c a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s .  3) U n i t 10, L e v e l 8 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments :  67 cm (N-S) x 38 cm (E-W) n/a 108-175 cm S, 18-56 cm E F i r e c r a c k e d r o c k was p r e s e n t i n t h i s feature.  4) U n i t 6, L e v e l 3-5; U n i t 2 9 , L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 32, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 16, L e v e l 2,3; U n i t 14, L e v e l 3-5; U n i t 13, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 4, L e v e l 2-3; U n i t 30, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 2 0 , L e v e l 2-3; U n i t 7, L e v e l n / a Dimensions: n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s : 24 cm Provenience: 15-100 cm S (EU 6 ) , 0-100 cm E (EU 6 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 2 9 ) , ? cm E (EU 2 9 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 2 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 3 2 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 6 ) , 0-200 cm E (EU 1 6 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 4 ) , 0-100+ cm E (EU 1 4 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 1 3 ) , ? cm E (EU 1 3 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 4 ) , 0-100 cm E (EU 4 ) ; ?-100 cm S (EU 3 0 ) , ? cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; 0-100 cm S (EU 2 0 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 0 ) ; ? cm S (EU 7 ) , 0? cm E (EU 7) Comments : This feature i s a thin charcoal lens w h i c h s l o p e s t h r o u g h much o f u n i t 6 f r o m north t o south. U n i t 6 l e v e l s were determined by e x t r a p o l a t i n g d a t a from  photographs. The u n i t 14 (E-W) p r o v e n i e n c e i s 0-100+ cm E b e c a u s e onlyh a l f o f t h e n o r t h w a l l p r o f i l e was r e c o r d e d , however, t h e f e a t u r e c l e a r l y continues. The u n i t 4 l e v e l s may b e o u t b y a s much a s 2 0 cm d u e t o p o o r r e c o r d s . T h i s f e a t u r e s l o p e s from west t o east (10 cm o v e r 1 m) i n t h e s o u t h w a l l p r o f i l e o f u n i t 4. In general, the records f o r t h i s f e a t u r e a r e very poor.  5) U n i t 10, L e v e l 5 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  U n i t 10, L e v e l 3 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  14 cm (N-S) x 12 cm (E-W) n/a 113-127 cm S, 26-38 cm E  33 cm (N-S) X 34 cm (E-W) 3 cm 5-38 cm S, 115-149 cm E The p r o v e n i e n c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e i s s l i g h t l y skewed a s t h e c a r b o n c o n c e n t r a t i o n was p a r t o f a c o m p l e x f e a t u r e which i n c l u d e d an a n v i l stone, support stones, and s e v e r a l l i t h i c artifacts. P r o v e n i e n c e was r e c o r d e d f o r the e n t i r e f e a t u r e but not i n d i v i d u a l components such as t h i s l e n s . The provenience coordinates used f o r t h i s l e n s a r e from t h e composite f e a t u r e . A r a d i o c a r b o n d a t e o f 4930 ± 70 BP (WSU4327) was o b t a i n e d f r o m c h a r c o a l i n t h i s feature.  7) U n i t 3 1 , L e v e l 7-8; U n i t 24, L e v e l n / a Dimensions: ? cm (N-S) x 45 cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n / a Provenience: 56-100 cm S (EU 3 1 ) , 27-72 cm E (EU 3 1 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 2 4 ) , ? cm E (EU 24)  U n i t 5, L e v e l 1 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  30 cm (N-S) x 8 cm (E-W) n/a 20-50 cm S (EU 5 ) , 21-29 cm E  (EU 5)  9) U n i t 3, L e v e l 7; U n i t 10, L e v e l n/a Dimensions: ? cm (N-S) x 21 cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience: 0-45 cm S (EU 3 ) , 58-79 cm E (EU 3 ) ; ?200 cm S (EU 1 0 ) , ? cm E (EU 10)  10) U n i t 30, L e v e l 16 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  8 cm (N-S) x 27 cm (E-W) n/a 66-74 cm S, 38-65 cm E  11) U n i t 30, L e v e l 5; U n i t 3, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 10, L e v e l n/a Dimensions : n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s n/a Provenience : 0-30 cm S (EU 3 0 ) , 0-50 cm E (EU 3 0 ) ; 0? S (EU 3 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 3 ) ; ?-200 cm S (EU 1 0 ) , ? cm E (EU 10) T h i s f e a t u r e was n o t r e c o r d e d i n f i e l d Comments : n o t e s b u t was o b s e r v e d i n a p h o t o g r a p h . The p r o v e n i e n c e o f t h i s f e a t u r e , i n u n i t 30, w e r e e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m t h e photograph.  12) U n i t 14, L e v e l 2-4 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  ? cm (N-S) X 137 cm (E-W) 24 cm ?-200 cm S, 53-190 cm E C a l c i n e d f i s h bone f r a g m e n t s were observed i n t h i s feature which extends i n t o the southern (baulk) w a l l .  13) U n i t 4, L e v e l 11-12 ? U n i t 29, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : 41 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : 5 cm Provenience : 47-88 cm S (EU 4 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 4 ) ; ? cm S (EU 2 9 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 29) Provenience information f o r t h i s feature Comments : was e x t r a p o l a t e d f r o m a p h o t o g r a p h o f t h e e a s t w a l l o f u n i t 4. The f e a t u r e i s a d i s h - s h a p e d band o f c h a r c o a l w i t h as much a s 20 cm o f o r a n g e m a t r i x a b o v e . Whether t h e orange m a t r i x i s r e l a t e d i s not c l e a r .  14) U n i t 4, L e v e l 13-14 U n i t 1 1 , L e v e l n / a . U n i t 10, L e v e l n / a ; U n i t 30, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : n/a Maximum T h i c k n e s s : 17 cm Provenience : 0-? cm S (EU 4 ) , 0-17 cm E (EU 4 ) ; ?-200 cm S (EU 1 1 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 1 1 ) ; ?-200 cm S (EU 1 0 ) , ?-200 cm E (EU 1 0 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 3 0 ) , ?-100 cm E (EU 30)  15) U n i t 16, L e v e l 11 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  22 cm (N-S) X 13 cm (E-W) n/a 126-148 cm S, 32-45 cm E  16) U n i t 16, L e v e l 11 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience :  16 cm (N-S) X 32 cm (E-W) n/a 36-52 cm S, 64-96 cm E  17) U n i t 9, L e v e l 8 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience :  12 cm (N-S) X 12 cm (E-W) n/a 42-54 cm S, 14-24 cm E  18) U n i t 9, L e v e l 7-8 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience : Comments :  ? cm (N-S) X 30 n/a 0-8 cm S, 14-44 This feature i s around a c l u s t e r feature extends (baulk) w a l l .  cm  (E-W)  cm E a carbon concentration of cobbles. The into the northern  19) U n i t 9, L e v e l 8 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience :  10 cm (N-S) X 22 cm (E-W) n/a 79-89 cm S, 5-27 cm E  20) U n i t 9, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  6 cm (N-S) X 22 cm (E-W) n/a 74-80 cm S, 36-58 cm E  21) U n i t 8, L e v e l 2-3 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience : Comments :  22) U n i t 8, L e v e l 8-9 Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s Provenience : Comments :  ? cm (N-S) X 43 cm (E-W) 7 cm 0-10 cm S, 30-73 cm E This t h i n carbon lens extends i n t o the n o r t h e r n (baulk) w a l l .  ? cm (N-S) X 13 cm (E-W) n/a 0-10 cm S, 68-81 cm E The f e a t u r e c o n t i n u e s i n t o t h e n o r t h e r n (baulk) w a l l .  23) U n i t 36, L e v e l 2 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  10 cm (N-S) x 13 cm (E-W) n/a 64-74 cm N, 61-74 cm E  24) U n i t 36, L e v e l 7-8 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  n/a n/a 0-33 cm N, ?-160 cm E  25) U n i t 3 3 , L e v e l 13 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  20 cm (N-S) x 40 cm (E-W) 6 cm 120-140 cm S, 63-103 cm E  26) U n i t 37, L e v e l n/a; Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  27) U n i t 17, L e v e l n / a ; Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience:  U n i t 27, L e v e l 5-6 n/a 8 cm 320-400 cm S (EU 3 7 ) , 0-80 cm E (EU 3 7 ) ; 59-100 cm S (EU 2 7 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 27) This feature extends i n t o the western (baulk) w a l l o f u n i t 3 7 and t h e s o u t h e r n (baulk) w a l l s of b o t h e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s .  U n i t 7, L e v e l n / a ? cm (N-S) x 46 cm (E-W) 7 cm ?-100 cm S (EU 1 7 ) , 24-70 cm E (EU 1 7 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 7 ) , ? cm E (EU 7)  28) U n i t 27, L e v e l 4-5; Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience :  29) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l 1-2 Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments:  30) T r e n c h 1, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments:  31) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments:  U n i t 38, L e v e l n / a 50 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) n/a 25-75 cm S (EU 2 7 ) , 60-100 cm E (EU 2 7 ) ; ? cm S (EU 3 8 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 38)  ? cm (N-S) x 17 cm (E-W) 10 cm 0-? cm S, 39-56 cm E This feature continues i n t o (baulk) w a l l .  the northern  n/a 5 cm 340-400 cm S, 0-? cm E This t h i n charcoal lens continues into the s o u t h e r n and w e s t e r n (baulk) w a l l s .  n/a 47 cm 0-? cm S, 0-210 cm E Along the north wall of trench 4 t h i s f e a t u r e i s a c a r b o n l e n s 5 cm t h i c k . From 120-210 cm E t h e s i z e o f t h e f e a t u r e e x p l o d e s t o a maximum t h i c k n e s s o f 4 7 cm. The t h i n l e n s may r e p r e s e n t the d i s p e r s a l of burnt m a t e r i a l from the nucleus of t h i s feature. C a l c i n e d bone f r a g m e n t s were o b s e r v e d .  32) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n/a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  33) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments :  34) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Dimensions: Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience: Comments :  35) T r e n c h 4, L e v e l n / a Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  n/a 5 cm 0-? cm S, 0-60 cm E This feature i s a dish-shaped charcoal lens which continues i n t o the northern and w e s t e r n ( b a u l k ) w a l l s .  ? cm (N-S) x 17 cm (E-W) 8 cm 0-? cm S, 250-267 cm E This f e a t u r e extends i n t o t h e n o r t h e r n (baulk) w a l l and i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a r a d i o c a r b o n d a t e o f 8980 ± 90 BP ( B e t a 46707) .  ? cm (N-S) x 117 cm (E-W) 22 cm 0-? cm S, 343-460 cm E T h i s f e a t u r e extends i n t o the n o r t h e r n (baulk) w a l l and i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a r a d i o c a r b o n d a t e o f 4530 ± 120 BP ( B e t a 47260) .  n/a 10 cm 0-? cm N, 0-40 cm E This feature continues i n t o the western and s o u t h e r n ( b a u l k ) w a l l s .  36) U n i t 2 2 , L e v e l 2-4; Dimensions : Maximum T h i c k n e s s : Provenience : Comments :  U n i t 37, L e v e l n/a 2 0 cm (N-S) X ? cm (E-W) 21 cm 19-39 cm S (EU 2 2 ) , 0-? cm E (EU 2 2 ) ; ? cm S (EU 37) , ?-80 cm E (EU 37) T h i s f e a t u r e i s an ash p o c k e t w h i c h continues i n t o t h e w e s t e r n (baulk) w a l l .  37) U n i t 24, L e v e l 3; U n i t 5, L e v e l n / a Dimensions: ? cm (N-S) x 22 cm (E-W) Maximum T h i c k n e s s : n/a Provenience: 94-100 cm S (EU 2 4 ) , 60-88 cm E (EU 2 4 ) ; 0-? cm S (EU 5 ) , ? cm E (EU 5)  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 24 2
Canada 21 9
China 4 7
Russia 4 0
Japan 3 0
Ukraine 2 0
France 2 0
Iran 2 0
Brazil 1 6
New Zealand 1 0
Germany 1 91
City Views Downloads
Unknown 23 98
Ashburn 7 0
Montreal 5 0
Victoria 5 5
Shenzhen 4 3
San Francisco 4 0
Tokyo 3 0
Maple Ridge 3 0
Seattle 3 0
Saint Petersburg 2 0
Ambler 1 0
Chilliwack 1 0
Phoenix 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0058390/manifest

Comment

Related Items