Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The Charles culture of the Gulf of Georgia : a re-evaluation of the culture and its three sub-phases Pratt, Heather Lynn 1992-12-31

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1992_fall_pratt_heather_l.pdf [ 22.72MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0058402.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0058402-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0058402-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0058402-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0058402-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0058402-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0058402-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0058402-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0058402.ris

Full Text

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 GEORGIA: A R E - E V A L U A T I O N O F T H E C U L T U R E AND I T S THREE S U B - P H A S E S by HEATHER L. PRATT B.A., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1987  A T H E S I S S U B M I T T E D IN P A R T I A L  F U L F I L M E N T OF  THE R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE F A C U L T Y O F G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S ( D e p a r t m e n t of A n t h r o p o l o g y  a n d Sociology,  U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia)  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s a s c o n f o r m i n g to^the^ y e q u i r e d , « S ^ c J a r c h \  THE U N I V E R S I T Y  OF B R I T I S H  COLUMBIA  F a l l of 1992  © H e a t h e r P r a t t , 1992  In  presenting this  degree at the  thesis  in  University of  partial  fulfilment  of  of  department  this thesis for or  by  his  or  requirements  British Columbia, I agree that the  freely available for reference and study. I further copying  the  representatives,  an advanced  Library shall make  it  agree that permission for extensive  scholarly purposes may be her  for  it  is  granted  by the  understood  that  head of copying  my or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  DE-6 (2/88)  ABSTRACT T h i s t h e s i s i n v e s t i g a t e s a p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r a l p e r i o d (the C h a r l e s C u l t u r e ) e x i s t i n g from a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5500 to 3300 y e a r s ago o n t h e Coast.  Northwest  T h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e c o n s i s t s of t h r e e l o c a l p h a s e s k n o w n a s E s i l a o , S t .  Mungo and Mayne.  Three research questions are proposed i n this s t u d y .  The  f i r s t q u e s t i o n deals w i t h t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e a n d f o c u s e s o n t h e d e g r e e of c u l t u r a l v a r i a b i l i t y manifest w i t h i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s u b - p h a s e .  Two  sites  k n o w n to c o n t a i n S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s (Glenrose C a n n e r y a n d S t . M u n g o C a n n e r y ) a r e c o m p a r e d to a t h i r d c o m p o n e n t o r i g i n a l l y p r o p o s e d to be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e M a y n e p h a s e .  T h e h y p o t h e s i s s t a t e s t h a t t h e d e g r e e of  v a r i a b i l i t y b e t w e e n t h e t h r e e c o m p o n e n t s w i l l be minimal i f a l l t h r e e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e .  This hypothesis is tested u s i n g both  a r t i f a c t u a l and n o n - a r t i f a c t u a l data from the three sites a n d components.  are  respective  Of t h e t h r e e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s p r o p o s e d , t h i s one i s a n s w e r e d  the most s u c c e s s f u l l y .  There is little v a r i a t i o n present amongst the  three  c o m p o n e n t s i n t e r m s of b o t h a r t i f a c t u a l a n d n o n - a r t i f a c t u a l d a t a . U n e x p e c t e d l y , i t was also d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t w h i l e the C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t s Glenrose a n d St. Mungo are often d i s c u s s e d interchangeably, there differences  in their artifact  from  are  assemblages.  T h e s e c o n d r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s follows from t h e f i r s t a n d p o n d e r s  the  d e g r e e of v a r i a b i l i t y p r e s e n t b e t w e e n t h e C h a r l e s a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s at t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e .  A comparison between these  p h a s e s f r o m t h e same site h a d not b e e n p r e v i o u s l y p o s s i b l e .  The  two  hypothesis  s t a t e s t h a t i f t h e two p h a s e s d e m o n s t r a t e c o n t i n u i t y w i t h e a c h o t h e r , t h i s i s e v i d e n c e of a g r a d u a l i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n of t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n p r e s e n t at c o n t a c t .  T h i s q u e s t i o n i s not a n s w e r e d as s u c c e s s f u l l y as  the f i r s t due to t h e h i g h d e g r e e of s i m i l a r i t y p r e s e n t b e t w e e n t h e two assemblages.  Several explanations for this are presented.  The L o c a r n o  a r t i f a c t assemblage  from C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s a l s o c o m p a r e d to t h e  a r t i f a c t assemblage  from the L o c a r n o B e a c h s i t e , w i t h d i f f e r e n c e s  two components  presented  and discussed.  artifact Beach  typesite between  T h i s was done i n o r d e r  the  to  d e t e r m i n e the f e a s i b i l i t y of d e f i n i n g t h e middle component at C r e s c e n t B e a c h as L o c a r n o B e a c h i n n a t u r e . be p a r t i a l l y r e f l e c t i v e at the two  The a r t i f a c t u a l d i f f e r e n c e s  present are a r g u e d  of s i t e f u n c t i o n a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s  to  present  sites.  The f i n a l r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n s t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e a n d the f e a s i b i l i t y of i t s e x i s t e n c e o v e r s u c h a l o n g time p e r i o d a n d p h y s i c a l a r e a . This hypothesis states that there is sufficient c u l t u r a l similarity p r e s e n t  to  c o n t i n u e u s a g e of the t e r m C h a r l e s C u l t u r e .  as  Charles or tentative  S e v e r a l components  C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t s a r e examined.  defined  The data is  t o g e t h e r to p r e s e n t a s y n o p s i s of w h a t i s k n o w n to date c o n c e r n i n g Charles Culture.  gathered the  A s w i t h the f i r s t r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n , t h i s q u e s t i o n f o c u s e s  on  the d e g r e e of v a r i a b i l i t y p r e s e n t b e t w e e n t h e t h r e e s u b - p h a s e s of t h e C h a r l e s Culture (rather  t h a n j u s t one)  u s i n g both artifactual and non-artifactual data.  T h e r e i s some d i f f i c u l t y e n c o u n t e r e d of p u b l i s h e d d a t a .  d u r i n g t h i s f i n a l a n a l y s i s d u e to t h e l a c k  F o r example, l i t t l e i s p u b l i s h e d c o n c e r n i n g t h e E s i l a o  p h a s e , y e t i t i s a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e . t h i r d research question is answered  Nevertheless,  somewhat a f f i r m a t i v e l y .  this  T h i s s e c t i o n of  my t h e s i s i n c l u d e s f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g the p l a c i n g of t h e  Charles  component at C r e s c e n t B e a c h i n t o the St. M u n g o p h a s e as w e l l as t h e s t a t u s of the Mayne  phase.  The r e s u l t s of t h e s t u d y i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e t h r e e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s a n d t h e i r r e s u l t i n g h y p o t h e s e s c a n be a n s w e r e d i n t h e a f f i r m a t i v e w i t h v a r y i n g d e g r e e s of  success.  Recommendations f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n c l u d e t h e n e e d f o r  better  p u b l i s h e d d a t a c o n c e r n i n g t h e e a r l y time p e r i o d s o n t h e N o r t h w e s t C o a s t . i s also recommended  t h a t f u t u r e a n a l y s i s of t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e i n c o r p o r a t e  n o n - a r t i f a c t u a l d a t a s u c h as d e b i t a g e a n d f a u n a l r e m a i n s because t h e s e of i n f o r m a t i o n a r e i m p o r t a n t w h e n d o i n g a c c u r a t e c o m p a r i s o n s of assemblages.  It  Finally, it is also suggested  t h a t N o r t h w e s t Coast  w o r k t o g e t h e r to c r e a t e more c o m p a r a b l e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l d a t a .  types  artifact archaeologists  B e f o r e one c a n  make f i r m c o n c l u s i o n s a b o u t t h e g e n e r a l r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s p e r t i n e n t to t h e p r e h i s t o r y of t h e N o r t h w e s t C o a s t , N o r t h w e s t C o a s t a r c h a e o l o g i s t s m u s t s t a r t at the b e g i n n i n g a n d c r e a t e i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e  data sets.  T A B L E OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT  ii  L I S T OF T A B L E S  xvi  L I S T OF F I G U R E S  xviii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  xx  CHAPTER 1.  2.  INTRODUCTION  1  Northwest Coast P r e h i s t o r i c Research  1  Research Questions Defined  7  R E S E A R C H Q U E S T I O N ONE: The R e l a t i o n s h i p B e t w e e n T h r e e C h a r l e s Components a n d T h e i r A r t i f a c t Assemblages  12  The St. Mungo a n d Mayne Phases  13  The St. Mungo Phase  13  S i t e Names a n d L o c a t i o n s  13  Ethnographic Culture Area  14  Chronology  16  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  17  Unshaped Chipped Stone  18  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e F l a k e Tools  18  S h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Tools  18  G r o u n d Stone Implements  19  Bone a n d A n t l e r A r t i f a c t s  20  SheH Objects  21  D i s c u s s i o n of S t . M u n g o A r t i f a c t A s s e m b l a g e Raw M a t e r i a l s  . . . .  22 22  V  F a u n a l Remains  22  Features  23  St. Mungo Phase Conclusions  24  The M a y n e P h a s e  25  S i t e Names a n d L o c a t i o n s  25  Ethnographic Culture Area  26  Chronology  26  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  32  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Tools ( i n c l u d i n g F l a k e Tools)  32  S h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Tools  33  G r o u n d Stone Implements  34  Bone a n d A n t l e r Implements  34  D i s c u s s i o n of M a y n e P h a s e A r t i f a c t A s s e m b l a g e  . .  35  Raw M a t e r i a l s  37  F a u n a l Remains  37  Features Mayne Phase Conclusions Site Descriptions The Glenrose C a n n e r y Site  >  38 40 43 43  Site Location  43  Ethnographic Culture Area  44  Excavation Procedures  44  Chronology  46  F a u n a l Remains  46  Features  48  Glenrose N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data Conclusions vi  49  The S t . M u n g o C a n n e r y S i t e  50  Site Location  50  Ethnographic Culture Area  53  Excavation Procedures  53  Chronology  56  F a u n a l Remains  57  Features  60  S t . M u n g o N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data C o n c l u s i o n s  63  The C r e s c e n t Beach Site  64  Site Location  64  Ethnographic Culture Area  65  Excavation Procedures  66  Chronology  70  F a u n a l Remains  71  Features  76  C r e s c e n t B e a c h N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data C o n c l u s i o n s  78  N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data C o n c l u s i o n s f o r G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o and Crescent Beach Artifact Classification  80 82  Variables and A r t i f a c t Coding Format  82  Artifact Classification and Analysis  85  Lithic Artifacts  (chipped  stone)  93  G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  113  P e c k e d a n d G r o u n d Stone Implements  118  Bone Tools  119  A n t l e r Implements  131  Shell Artifacts  135 vii  Artifact Analysis: Conclusions  137  Unique Artifact Types  139  Shared Artifact Types  142  Unique and Shared Artifact Types: Conclusions  144  Raw M a t e r i a l C o m p a r i s o n  145  General Conclusions 3.  151  R E S E A R C H Q U E S T I O N TWO: T h e R e l a t i o n s h i p B e t w e e n t h e C h a r l e s C u l t u r e a n d the Locarno Beach Period at Crescent Beach 154 Component One a n d Two F r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h  155  Site Location  155  Chronology  156  F a u n a l Remains  157  Features  159  N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data C o n c l u s i o n s  161  Artifact Classification  163  Typology Organization  163  L i t h i c A r t i f a c t s (chipped stone)  167  G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  181  P e c k e d a n d G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  185  Bone Tools  185  Antler Objects  191  Shell Artifacts  193  Artifaict A n a l y s i s : C o n c l u s i o n s  194  Unique Artifact Types  196  Corresponding Artifact Types  198  Unique and Similar Artifact Types: Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s  Conclusions  200 204  viii  T h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h Component Two A r t i f a c t  Assemblage  C o m p a r e d With t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h T y p e s i t e Locarno Beach Introduced  211  Ethnographic Culture Area  212  Excavation Procedures  212  Chronology  213  F a u n a l Remains  213  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  215  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Implements  219  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone F l a k e T o o l s  219  Shaped Chipped Stone Artifacts  220  G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  220  Bone a n d A n t l e r Tools  221  Shell Artifacts C o n c l u s i o n s of C o m p a r i s o n of C r e s c e n t B e a c h C o m p o n e n t a n d Locarno Beach Artifact Assemblages General Conclusions 4.  211  223 Two 223 224  R E S E A R C H Q U E S T I O N T H R E E : A C l o s e r E x a m i n a t i o n of The Charles C u l t u r e  226  The E a y e m P h a s e  228  Esilao  228 Site Location  228  Ethnographic Culture Area  228  Chronology  229  Maurer  229  Site Location  229  Ethnographic Culture Area  230  Chronology  230 ix  Esilao a n d Maurer A r t i f a c t  Assemblage  Comparison  231  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone  231  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Flake Tools  232  S h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Tools  232  G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  233  Bone a n d A n t l e r Implements  236  Artifact Comparison: Conclusions  237  Raw M a t e r i a l s  238  F a u n a l Remains  238  Features  239  C o n c l u s i o n s C o n c e r n i n g t h e Eayem P h a s e  240  C o n t r o v e r s i a l Charles C u l t u r e Components  241  M a r pole  241  Site Location  241  Ethnographic Culture Area  242  Excavation Procedures  242  Chronology  242  Artifact Assemblage  243  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Implements  244  S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone A r t i f a c t s  244  G r o u n d Stone O b j e c t s  245  Bone a n d A n t l e r A r t i f a c t s  245  F a u n a l Remains a n d F e a t u r e s Conclusions  .  246 246  Bliss Landing  249 X  Site Location  249  Ethnographic Culture Area  249  Excavation Procedures  .  249  Chronology  250  Artifact Assemblage  250  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Implements  250  S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Tools  250  G r o u n d Stone  250  Bone a n d A n t l e r O b j e c t s  251  F a u n a l Remains  252  Features  252  Conclusions Pitt River  •  253 254  Site Location  254  Ethnographic Culture Area  254  Excavation Procedures  255  Chronology  255  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  256  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone O b j e c t s  256  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e F l a k e Tools  256  S h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Tools  257  G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  257  Bone/Antler/Shell Objects  258  Raw M a t e r i a l s  259  F a u n a l Remains  259  Features  259  Conclusions Pender Canal  260 260  Site Location  260  Ethnographie Culture Area  260  Excavation Procedures  261  Chronology  261  Artifact Assemblage  262  Features  262  Conclusions  263  B i r c h B a y a n d Semiahmoo S p i t  263  Site Locations  263  Ethnographic Culture Area  264  Excavation Procedures  264  Chronology  265  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  265  Features  266  Conclusions  266  Denman I s l a n d  266  Site Location  266  Ethnographic Culture Area  266  Excavation Procedures  266  Chronology  267  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  267  Unshaped Chipped Stone A r t i f a c t s  267  S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Implements  268  G r o u n d S t o n e Tools  268  Raw M a t e r i a l s  269  F a u n a l Remsiins  269  Features  270  Conclusions  •  270  Tsawwassen  271  Site Location  271  Ethnographic Culture Area  272  Excavation Procedures  272  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  273  Features Conclusions Duke Point  •  273 275 276  Site Location  276  Ethnographic Culture Area  276  Excavation Procedures  276  Chronology  277  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  277  C h i p p e d Stone (Unshaped a n d Shaped)  278  G r o u n d Stone  278  Bone a n d A n t l e r A r t i f a c t s  278  F a u n a l Remains  279  Conclusions  279  Deep B a y Site Location  280 280  Ethnographie Culture Area  280  Excavation Procedures  280  Chronology  281  A r t i f a c t Assemblage  281  F a u n a l Remains  283  Features  283  Conclusions  284  Discussion  •  285  The Charles C u l t u r e  286  Location  287  Ethnographic Affiliation  287  Excavation Procedures  288  Chronology  288  Artifact Assemblage  289  C o r e s a n d B i p o l a r Implements  290  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Implements  290  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e F l a k e Tools  290  S h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Tools  290  G r o u n d S t o n e Implements  291  Bone a n d A n t l e r Implements  292  S h e l l Implements  292  Raw M a t e r i a l s  292  F a u n a l Remains  292  Features  293  Conclusions  294  5.  S U M M A R Y AND C O N C L U S I O N S  303  6.  R E F E R E N C E S CITED  312  APPENDICES  325  APPENDIX A Artifact Coding Format  325  APPENDIX B Artifact Classification for the Charles Components From Glenrose, St. Mungo a n d Crescent Beach  335  APPENDIX C A r t i f a c t C l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r C o m p o n e n t s One a n d From Crescent Beach  431  Two  LIST OF T A B L E S  C H A P T E R TWO 2.1  G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o C h a r l e s Component R a d i o C a r b o n Dates S u m m a r i z e d  16  2.2  Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s T e r m i n o l o g y  84  2.3  A r t i f a c t s From Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach Charles C u l t u r e Components Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s f o r C o r e s F r o m G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o and Crescent Beach  2.4 2.5  2.6  90 94  Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s f o r U t i l i z e d F l a k e s F r o m G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o and Crescent Beach Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s f o r S t e e p - A n g l e d  100  Retouched Flakes  F r o m G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t Be£K:h  102  2.7  U n i q u e A r t i f a c t Types at Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach  .  140  2.8  Artifact T y p e s p r e s e n t at all Three Sites  143  2.9  Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s  146  CHAPTER THREE 3.1  R a d i o C a r b o n Dates S u m m a r i z e d F r o m t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h a n d C h a r l e s Components at C r e s c e n t Beach  156  3.2  A r t i f a c t T a b u l a t i o n f o r C o m p o n e n t s One a n d Two a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h  164  3.3  Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s of C o r e s i n Component One a n d From Crescent Beach  168  3.4  Two  Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s f o r U t i l i z e d F l a k e s i n C o m p o n e n t One a n d Two From Crescent Beach  174  3.5  U n i q u e A r t i f s i c t T y p e s F r o m C r e s c e n t B ^ c h C o m p o n e n t s One a n d Two 197  3.6  A r t i f a c t T y p e s P r e s e n t i n B o t h C o m p o n e n t s One a n d Two at Crescent Beach Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s at C r e s c e n t B e a c h  199 205  L o c a r n o B e a c h A r t i f a c t s F r o m Component Two a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d Locarno Beach  216  3.7 3.8  CHAPTER FOUR 4.1  C h a r l e s C o m p o n e n t s Radio C a r b o n Dates Summeurized  288  4.2  Charles and Locarno Beach Artifact Frequencies  295  LIST OF F I G U R E S C H A P T E R TWO 2.1  Map of S t . M u n g o C o m p o n e n t s  15  2.2  Map of M a y n e C o m p o n e n t s  27  2.3  G l e n r o s e a n d L o c a t i o n of E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s  45  2.4  E c o l o g i c a l C o m m u n i t i e s A v a i l a b l e to G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t Beax^h  52  2.5  S t . M u n g o a n d L o c a t i o n of E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s  55  2.6  C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d L o c a t i o n of E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s  68  2.7  B a r G r a p h of Raw M a t e r i a l P r o p o r t i o n s f o r G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o and Crescent Beach  148  CHAPTER THREE 3.1  B a r G r a p h of Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s F o u n d a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h i n C o m p o n e n t s One a n d Two  207  CHAPTER FOUR 4.1  C l u s t e r Diagram  298  4.2  Multi Dimensional S c a l i n g  301  APPENDIX B B.l  C h i p p e d Stone A r t i f a c t s - Glenrose  363  B.2  C h i p p e d Stone Bifaces - St. Mungo  364  B.3  G r o u n d Stone Objects - Glenrose  375  B.4  G r o u n d Stone O b j e c t s - S t . M u n g o  376  B.5  Abrasive Stones - Crescent Beach  377  B.6  Splinter Awls - Glenrose  412  B.7  S p l i t Rib Awls - Crescent Beach  413  B.8  F o r m e d Bone A w l s - G l e n r o s e  414  B.9  Bone C h i s e l s W i t h U n i l a t e r a l l y T a p e r e d E n d s - St. M u n g o  415  B.IO  Bone A r t i f a c t s - St. M u n g o  416  B.ll  Bone A r t i f a c t s - G l e n r o s e  417  B. 12  Bone A r t i f a c t s - S t . M u n g o  418  APPENDIX C C. l C.2  S h a p e d C h i p p e d a n d G r o u n d Stone Implements - Component One a n d Two, C r e s c e n t B e a c h  442  Bone C h i s e l s With U n i l a t e r a l l y T a p e r e d a n d Two, C r e s c e n t B e a c h  457  E n d s - Component One  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS F i r s t l y I w o u l d l i k e to t h a n k t h e members of my a d v i s o r y  committee,  P r o f . RG M a t s o n , c h a i r m a n . P r o f . D a v i d P o k o t y l o a n d P r o f . M i c h a e l Kew. h a v e g e n e r o u s l y c o n t r i b u t e d t h e i r time a n d k n o w l e d g e  to my r e s e a r c h  All work.  M i k e Kew k i n d l e d my i n t e r e s t i n t h e C o a s t S a l i s h p e o p l e , e s p e c i a l l y Halkomelem s p e a k e r s who r e s i d e i n t h e V a n c o u v e r a r e a .  the  He a l s o t a u g h t me  t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e to i n t e r t w i n e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l a n d a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l d a t a . D a v i d P o k o t y l o was my f i r s t a r c h a e o l o g y f o r h i s p r o f e s s i o n was i m p o s s i b l e n o t to c a t c h .  instructor and his enthusiasm He t a u g h t me most of w h a t I  k n o w a b o u t l i t h i c a n a l y s i s a n d q u a n t i t a t i v e t e c h n i q u e s as t h e y a p p l y to archaeological data.  He w i l l i n g n e s s to w o r k w i t h me o n s o l v i n g t h e many  problems that presented themselves gratefully acknowledged writing  t h r o u g h o u t my r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t  is  as a r e h i s e d i t o r i a l s u g g e s t i o n s t h r o u g h o u t t h e  process.  RG M a t s o n , c h a i r m a n , h a s e n c o u r a g e d a n d g u i d e d my i n t e r e s t i n N o r t h w e s t Coast p r e h i s t o r y s i n c e I was a n u n d e r g r a d u a t e . share his knowledge  H i s w i l l i n g n e s s to  a n d h i s e n t h u s i a s m f o r my i d e a s l e a d to t h i s r e s e a r c h  p r o j e c t w h i c h , w i t h o u t h i s s u p p o r t a n d f u n d i n g , w o u l d h a v e b e e n i m p o s s i b l e to complete.  He also g a v e me a p h i l o s o p h y t h a t I w i l l a l w a y s follow a n d t h a t i s i f  y o u do n o t a s k q u e s t i o n s , y o u w i l l n o t g e t a n s w e r s .  I also appreciate the  fact  t h a t he let me w o r k w i t h him o n t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h p r o j e c t f r o m w h i c h a g r e a t d e a l of d a t a f o r my t h e s i s came. I w o u l d l i k e to t h a n k t h e two f i e l d s c h o o l s a n d t h e p a i d c r e w w o r k e d on the Crescent Beach project.  who  I also t h a n k P r o f . R i c h a r d P e a r s o n  t h e g r e a t deal of i n f o r m a t i o n I l e a r n e d from him w h i l e b e i n g h i s T e a c h i n g A s s i s t a n t f o r t h e 1990 U B C F i e l d S c h o o l .  S p e c i a l t h a n k s a l s o goes to T u r i  for  K i n g w h o was my l a b a s s i s t a n t f o r s e v e r a l m o n t h s a n d who h e l p e d me f i r s t d e v e l o p a n d o r g a n i z e my a r t i f a c t t y p o l o g y .  K a t i n a Owen a l s o h e l p e d me a  great deal i n the lab t h r o u g h o u t the a n a l y s i s process. acknowledge Beattie.  I w o u l d a l s o l i k e to  t h e h e l p I r e c e i v e d w h i l e i n t h e l a b from Kim Wooten a n d G r a n t  B r i a n Thom a n d L i s a R a n k i n w i l l i n g l y s h a r e d t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t h e y h a d  discovered while w o r k i n g on t h e i r own research projects Crescent Beach data.  related to the  B r i a n also drew the f i g u r e s i n C h a p t e r F o u r a n d I  t h a n k him f o r h i s d r a w i n g  skills.  L y n n M a r a n d a of t h e V a n c o u v e r M u s e u m a n d B a r b a r a W i n t e r s of t h e Simon F r a s e r A r c h a e o l o g y  M u s e u m a l l o w e d me f r e e a c c e s s to a r t i f a c t s from t h e  St. M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e s .  Without t h e i r help I could not  have  attempted this a n a l y s i s . To a l l of my f r i e n d s w h o h a v e g i v e n me emotional s u p p o r t , i n t e l l e c t u a l inspiration and encouragement,  I thank you.  J o h n s o n f o r h e r h e l p w i t h my p h o t o g r a p h y  I e s p e c i a l l y w a n t to t h a n k J o y c e  needs, A n n Stevenson for  always  b e i n g a r o u n d to look a t my m y s t e r i o u s bone a r t i f a c t s , a n d most of a l l I w i s h to t h a n k two of my b e s t b u d d i e s L i s a R a n k i n a n d P a u l P r i n c e w h o w e r e a l w a y s t h e r e a n d w i l l i n g to s p e n d m a n y l o n g n i g h t s a n d w e e k e n d s  w i t h me w o r k i n g  t h r o u g h t h e m o u n d s of d a t a b o t h L i s a a n d I h a d to get t h r o u g h ,  Lisa and  P a u l a l w a y s c h e e r e d me u p a n d c h a l l e n g e d my i d e a s c o n c e r n i n g my t h e s i s . My family also deserves  t h a n k s f o r p r o v i d i n g me w i t h l o v e a n d s u p p o r t  t h r o u g h o u t my u n d e r g r a d u a t e a n d g r a d u a t e c a r e e r .  A l t h o u g h t h e y d i d not  a l w a y s u n d e r s t a n d w h a t my r e s e a r c h i n v o l v e d , t h e y a l w a y s e n c o u r a g e d F i n a l l y I t h a n k my h u s b a n d , M a t t i N i i t . suggestions and encouragement this far.  me.  Without his s u p p o r t ,  my l o v e of a r c h a e o l o g y  w o u l d n o t h a v e come  C H A P T E R ONE  INTRODUCTION  T h e major f o c u s of t h i s t h e s i s i s a n e x a m i n a t i o n of t h r e e assemblages  artifact  d a t e d to t h e p r e h i s t o r i c p e r i o d of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4500 to 3300  y e a r s ago, a n d e x c a v a t e d f r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g s i t e s : G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y ( D g R r 6), S t . M u n g o C a n n e r y ( D g R r 2), a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h ( D g R r 1). of t h i s t h e s i s i s to s t u d y t h e s e t h r e e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s  T h e main p u r p o s e i n o r d e r to  compare  a n d c o n t r a s t t h e t y p e s of a r t i f a c t s , t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n s , r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s  and  technology  This  so as t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e .  goal i s a t t a i n e d b y t e s t i n g t h r e e d i f f e r e n t  hypotheses.  T h i s i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r outlines the framework  f o r my t h e s i s .  It  p r e s e n t s t h e t h r e e major r e s e a r c h p r o b l e m s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y a l o n g w i t h p r o v i d i n g t h e g e n e r a l c o n t e x t of N o r t h w e s t C o a s t a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h f r o m which these three problems were developed.  NORTHWEST C O A S T P R E H I S T O R I C R E S E A R C H On t h e most g e n e r a l l e v e l of a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s t h e one of g r e a t e s t i n t e r e s t to N o r t h w e s t C o a s t a r c h a e o l o g i s t s c o n c e r n s t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e s h i f t from e g a l i t a r i a n to n o n - e g a l i t a r i a n s o c i e t y .  I n many p a r t s of  the  w o r l d w h e n a c u l t u r e w h o s e method of p r o c u r i n g s u b s i s t e n c e c h a n g e d  because  of t h e a d o p t i o n of d o m e s t i c a t i o n , t h e c u l t u r e a l s o exhibii^ed a d r a m a t i c  change  from e g a l i t a r i a n to n o n - e g a l i t a r i a n s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n .  Once a s t a b l e , r e l i a b l e  a n d p l e n t i f u l s u b s i s t e n c e base was c r e a t e d , t h e c u l t u r e q u i c k l y moved a sedentary lifestyle focusing around the newly obtained foodstuff  towards  a n d a more  rather than achieved.  U s u a l l y t h e p r o c u r e m e n t c h a n g e came a b o u t b e c a u s e of  t h e d o m e s t i c a t i o n of p l a n t s a n d a n i m a l s .  U n l i k e many a r e a s of t h e w o r l d  w h e r e n o n - e g a l i t a r i a n s o c i e t i e s e v o l v e d , N o r t h w e s t Coast s o c i e t i e s d i d not r e l y on domestication for their stable, reliable and plentiful subsistence I n s t e a d of b e c o m i n g a g r i c u l t u r i s t s , p r e h i s t o r i c N o r t h w e s t Coast d e v e l o p e d i n t o complex h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r s .  base.  societies  The archaeological r e c o r d  suggests  t h a t among t h e p r e h i s t o r i c C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h w h o r e s i d e d i n t h e C e n t r a l N o r t h w e s t Coast C u l t u r a l A r e a (as d e f i n e d b y S u t t l e s 1990), t h e r e i s a s h i f t away f r o m e g a l i t a r i a n h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r s to n o n - e g a l i t a r i a n complex h u n t e r gatherers  some t h r e e t h o u s a n d y e a r s ago d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d  immediately  f o l l o w i n g t h e one t h a t i s t h e s u b j e c t of t h i s t h e s i s . To u n d e r s t a n d how s u c h a c h a n g e from e g a l i t a r i a n to n o n - e g a l i t a r i a n s o c i e t y c o u l d t a k e p l a c e , i t i s i m p o r t a n t to f i r s t examine t h e p r e h i s t o r i c c u l t u r e p r e s e n t immediately p r i o r to s u c h a s h i f t i n o r d e r to a s c e r t a i n what p r o c e s s e s i n t h e s o c i e t y a n d / o r t h e e n v i r o n m e n t c o u l d be r e s p o n s i b l e .  Before  N o r t h w e s t Coast a r c h a e o l o g i s t s c a n d e v e l o p a n d t e s t complex models of p r o c e s s u a l c h a n g e , t h e y m u s t be f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e c o r d t h e a p p r o p r i a t e time p e r i o d s .  from  On t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast, i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g  e a r l y p r e h i s t o r y i s o f t e n s c a n t a n d u n p u b l i s h e d , t h e r e f o r e m a k i n g r e s e a r c h of pertinent questions difficult.  I hope that t h i s thesis can c o n t r i b u t e  i n f o r m a t i o n o n e a r l y N o r t h w e s t C o a s t s o c i e t y to f i l l i n some of t h e g a p s now present i n our  knowledge.  T h e e v o l u t i o n of t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n h a s l o n g interested archaeologists and anthropologists.  It i s from t h e  ethnographic  p a t t e r n t h a t we h a v e d i s c o v e r e d t h e u n i q u e n e s s of t h e N o r t h w e s t a b o r i g i n a l people.  Coast  A t t h e time of E u r o p e a n c o n t a c t , t h e C o a s t S a l i s h  e t h n o g r a p h i e p a t t e r n i n t h e G u l f of G e o r g i a A r e a was w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d a n d c o n s i s t e d of a w e l l - s t r a t i f i e d s o c i e t y b a s e d o n a h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r  subsistence  base ( S u t t l e s 1987, 1990). Documents p r e s e n t from t h e e a r l y c o n t a c t p e r i o d a n d t w e n t i e t h ethnographies  century  g i v e u s most of o u r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t N o r t h w e s t C o a s t  society.  A l t h o u g h d o c u m e n t s d e s c r i b e t h e c u l t u r e s p r e s e n t , t h e w r i t t e n w o r d does not e x p l a i n how o r w h y t h e N o r t h w e s t C o a s t e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n e v o l v e d .  Some  archaeologists  new  (see  f o r example B o r d e n 1975) c o n t e n d t h a t m i g r a t i o n s of  people a n d c u l t u r a l ideas i n the e a r l y p r e h i s t o r i c p e r i o d have been important i n t h e f o r m a t i o n of t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n of t h e G u l f of G e o r g i a r e g i o n . M i g r a t i o n t h e o r i e s h a v e also b e e n r e c e n t l y d e v e l o p e d to e x p l a i n differences  f o u n d t h r o u g h time at s i t e s l o c a t e d to t h e n o r t h of t h e a r e a  discussed in this thesis.  M i t c h e l l (1988:279-285)  suggests  a prehistoric  m i g r a t i o n f r o m t h e n o r t h sometime n e a r t h e e n d of t h e O b s i d i a n c u l t u r e t y p e (the e n t i r e p e r i o d e n c o m p a s s e s 5000 to 2500 B P ) .  T h e time p e r i o d of  Obsidian c u l t u r e t y p e is r o u g h l y contemporaneous  to t h e C h a r l e s a n d L o c a r n o  B e a c h c u l t u r e t y p e s (4500 to 2200 B P ) .  the  The Queen C h a r l o t t e S t r a i t c u l t u r e  t y p e follows t h e O b s i d i a n c u l t u r e t y p e u n t i l t h e time of c o n t a c t . that the Obsidian c u l t u r e t y p e represents a " S a l i s h a n " p a t t e r n  He of  suggests resource  use while the Queen Charlotte S t r a i t c u l t u r e t y p e r e p r e s e n t s a " W a k a s h a n " p a t t e r n of r e s o u r c e u s e .  T h i s i m p l i e s a p r e h i s t o r i c m i g r a t i o n of " W a k a s h a n "  s p e a k e r s down t h e c o a s t at a time c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s Locarno Beach phase.  to t h e C h a r l e s a n d  Would t h i s m i g r a t i o n be r e f l e c t e d  i n the artifact  assemblages? M i g r a t i o n t h e o r i e s , s u c h as t h o s e p r o p o s e d b y B o r d e n , l o s t p o p u l a r i t y o n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast b e c a u s e a r c h a e o l o g i s t s now f a c e d w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t  differences  i n a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s b e t w e e n two o r more s i t e s o f t e n a t t r i b u t e  the differences  to s i t e f u n c t i o n r a t h e r t h a n to c u l t u r a l m i g r a t i o n .  This is a  lesson learned from C u l t u r a l Ecology w h i c h , w i t h i t s focus on the environment, l e a d a r c h a e o l o g i s t s away f r o m t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e t o w a r d s t h e s e t t i n g i n w h i c h t h e a r t i f a c t s a n d t h e p r e h i s t o r i c p e o p l e w h o made them o p e r a t e d .  There  a r e e x c e p t i o n s to t h i s g e n e r a l p a t t e r n of movement a w a y from m i g r a t i o n t h e o r i e s (see p r e v i o u s p a r a g r a p h ) .  A n o t h e r e x c e p t i o n to t h i s t r e n d i s B u r l e y  a n d B e a t t i e ( B u r l e y 1980:73-74) who s u g g e s t t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e of a c u l t u r a l m i g r a t i o n t h r o u g h t h e F r a s e r C a n y o n t o w a r d s t h e F r a s e r Delta d u r i n g t h e L o c a r n o - M a r pole p h a s e t r a n s i t i o n .  This hypothesis is based on information  w h i c h , at t h e time, p o i n t e d to t h e e a r l i e s t g r o u n d stone k n i v e s e v o l v i n g i n t h e C a n y o n a l o n g w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of w i n d d r y i n g a n d s t o r i n g of s u r p l u s salmon ( B u r l e y 1980:74).  T h i s t h e s i s a r g u e s t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t g r o u n d stone  k n i v e s ( w h i c h come from t h e Eayem p h a s e i n t h e F r a s e r C a n y o n ) a r e i n t r u s i v e a n d b e l o n g to t h e y o u n g e r B a l d w i n p h a s e c o m p o n e n t .  Secondly,  t e c h n o l o g y was p r e s e n t d u r i n g t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e a n d t h e r e f o r e ,  storage storage  was  exploited much earlier i n Northwest Coast p r e h i s t o r y t h a n p r e v i o u s l y thought. A l o n g w i t h t h o s e a r c h a e o l o g i s t s w h o h y p o t h e s i z e t h a t m i g r a t i o n was a n i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t of p r e h i s t o r i c C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h p r e h i s t o r y , some c o n t e n d t h a t t h e e v o l u t i o n of t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n s l o w l y took place i n t h e G u l f of G e o r g i a r e g i o n o v e r s e v e r a l t h o u s a n d y e a r s (see example M a t s o n 1976).  for  R e c e n t l y , S u t t l e s (1987) a n d K i n k a d e (1989) h a v e  argued that linguistic evidence  reflects a scenario where Salishan languages  o r i g i n a t e d o n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast a n d b o t h t h e y a n d t h e i r s p e a k e r s to t h e i n t e r i o r r a t h e r t h a n t h e r e v e r s e  scenario originally proposed  migrated by  a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s s u c h as F r a n z Boas (1905) a n d C h a r l e s B o r d e n (1975).  To p r o p e r l y a d d r e s s t h e q u e s t i o n of i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n of t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n of N o r t h w e s t C o a s t c u l t u r e s i n t h e G u l f of G e o r g i a r e g i o n , one m u s t examine t h e e a r l y c u l t u r a l p e r i o d s to a s c e r t a i n w h e t h e r i s e v i d e n c e of d r a m a t i c c u l t u r a l c h a n g e a t t r i b u t a b l e to a m i g r a t i o n of  there  new  c u l t u r a l i d e a s o r p e o p l e (for example t h e " W a k a s h a n " from t h e n o r t h e r n a r e a s of t h e N o r t h w e s t C o a s t ) .  If t h e r e w e r e s u c h e v i d e n c e , t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c  p a t t e r n of t h e C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h c o u l d not be c o n s i d e r e d to h a v e d e v e l o p e d as a n i n s i t u G u l f of G e o r g i a phenomena.  Instead, the ethnographic pattern  c o u l d be s e e n as b e i n g i n f l u e n c e d b y c u l t u r a l t r a i t s m o v i n g i n t o t h e a r e a a n d p r o c e e d i n g to c h a n g e t h a t w h i c h was o r i g i n a l l y p r e s e n t . verify  F u r t h e r m o r e , to  i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n , one m u s t p r o v e t h a t a n y major d i f f e r e n c e s  i n the  artifact assemblages r e s u l t from c h a n g i n g site function or environmental differences. To e x p l o r e t h i s q u e s t i o n of i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n of t h e Centred C o a s t S a l i s h e t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n , one m u s t f i r s t examine a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s f r o m s i t e s k n o w n to h a v e s i m i l a r s i t e f u n c t i o n s d u r i n g t h e d e s i r e d time p e r i o d .  Holding  s i t e f u n c t i o n a n d time p e r i o d c o n s t a n t allows one to examine t h e a r t i f a c t s a n d discover what, if any, significant differences  remain that are explainable by  o t h e r s o u r c e s of c u l t u r e c h a n g e . T h e e a r l i e s t p r e h i s t o r i c p e r i o d o n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast i s d e f i n e d C a r l s o n (1990:62) as t h e P e b b l e Tool T r a d i t i o n .  by  M a t s o n (1976) c a l l s t h i s p e r i o d  t h e Old C o r d i l l e r a n P a t t e r n , w h i l e F l a d m a r k (1986:27) t e r m s t h i s e a r l i e s t p e r i o d the L i t h i c Stage.  M i t c h e l l (1971:59) a l s o u s e s t h e t e r m " l i t h i c " i n h i s t e r m f o r  t h e e a r l i e s t p e r i o d o n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast ( L i t h i c C u l t u r e T y p e ) .  In the Gulf  of G e o r g i a r e g i o n t h e e a r l i e s t p e r i o d of p r e h i s t o r y i s most commonly k n o w n a s t h e Old C o r d i l l e r a n p e r i o d ( B o r d e n 1975), a l t h o u g h as one c a n see t h e r e  are  many d i f f e r e n t t e r m s u s e d to define t h i s c u l t u r a l s t a g e . of G e o r g i a r e g i o n c o n t a i n e a r l y c o m p o n e n t s .  Few s i t e s i n t h e G u l f  The best p u b l i s h e d evidence  for  t h e e a r l y p e r i o d comes from t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y s i t e (Matson 1976) a n d f r o m t h e B e a r C o v e s i t e i n N o r t h e r n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ( C a r l s o n 1979). e n d s sometime b e t w e e n 5000 a n d 4400 y e a r s  This period  ago.  A f t e r t h e Old C o r d i l l e r a n p e r i o d t h e r e i s a p r o l i f e r a t i o n of s i t e s , b u t a p a u c i t y of p u b l i s h e d d a t a u n t i l one r e a c h e s t h e M a r p o l e c u l t u r e t y p e , w h i c h h a s b e e n examined b y D a v i d B u r l e y (1979, 1980).  B o r d e n (1975:96) d e f i n e d a  r e g i o n a l p h a s e t h a t he c a l l e d t h e C h a r l e s p h a s e f o r t h e p a r t of t h i s p o s t - O l d C o r d i l l e r a n time p e r i o d r a n g i n g f r o m 5500 to 3000 y e a r s ago.  B o r d e n (1975:97)  named t h e p h a s e i n h o n o u r of A n d r e w C h a r l e s f r o m M u s q u e a m who  discovered  a n d c o n d u c t e d t e s t e x c a v a t i o n s at t h e S t . M u n g o C a n n e r y s i t e (a s i t e i n c l u d e d in later discussion).  Charles donated his p r e l i m i n a r y work (field notes and  a r t i f a c t s ) to t h e L a b o r a t o r y of A r c h a e o l o g y ,  U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ,  p r o m p t i n g f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s at S t . M u n g o a n d t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y s i t e ( a n o t h e r s i t e to be d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s t h e s i s ) .  T h e C h a r l e s p h a s e , as o r i g i n a l l y  d e f i n e d b y B o r d e n , e n c o m p a s s e s t h e r e g i o n f r o m E s i l a o v i l l a g e ( n e a r Yale) to the Gulf Islands. "phase".  Three specific phases have been defined w i t h i n t h i s  In the F r a s e r C a n y o n , there is the Eayem phase (Borden  1975:72).  In the F r a s e r Delta, lies the best k n o w n phase called St. Mungo (Matson 1976:283), w h i l e o n t h e G u l f I s l a n d s , t h e M a y n e p h a s e has b e e n ( C a r l s o n 1970).  I n these s u b r e g i o n s t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s  defined  i n t h e time frsune  r e p r e s e n t e d b y t h e C h a r l e s p h a s e as w e l l as i n t h e artifgict a s s e m b l a g e s . The t e r m ' C h a r l e s p h a s e ' was o r i g i n a l l y u s e d b y B o r d e n i n d e s c r i b i n g a r e g i o n a l c u l t u r e c o m p r i s e d of t h e S t . M u n g o , M a y n e a n d Eayem l o c a l p h a s e s . T h e r e has been d e b a t e o v e r t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of t h e t e r m ' p h a s e ' i n  N o r t h w e s t Coast p r e h i s t o r i c l i t e r a t u r e s i n c e B o r d e n ' s f i r s t u s e of expression 'Charles phase'.  the  A b b o t t (1972) d i s c u s s e s t h e s h o r t c o m i n g s of  t e r m p h a s e as does B u r l e y (1980:11-18).  B o r d e n d e f i n e d a l l of t h e  the  phases  c o m p r i s i n g t h e F r a s e r D e l t a s e q u e n c e a c c o r d i n g to the c l a s s i c a r c h a e o l o g i c a l text, Method a n d T h e o r y i n American Archaeology  (Willey a n d P h i l l i p s 1958).  A c c o r d i n g to Willey a n d P h i l l i p s (1958) a ' p h a s e ' c a n n o t c o n t a i n ' p h a s e s ' . T h e r e f o r e , t h e t e r m ' c u l t u r e ' w i l l be u s e d to d i f f e r e n t i a t e  between the  regional  C h a r l e s c u l t u r e a n d l o c a l E a y e m , S t . M u n g o a n d Mayne p h a s e s , a n i d e a o r i g i n a l l y p r o p o s e d b y B u r l e y (1980:15).  Another appropriate term for  the  r e g i o n a l C h a r l e s c u l t u r e w o u l d be t h e ' C h a r l e s C u l t u r e T y p e ' , a t e r m f i r s t u s e d b y M i t c h e l l (1971:56-57) a n d s t i l l u s e d b y a r c h a e o l o g i s t s  (Ham 1984:38).  RESEARCH QUESTIONS DEFINED One s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n i n t h i s t h e s i s i s t h e d e g r e e of v a r i a b i l i t y i n t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e n e a r t h e m o u t h of t h e F r a s e r r i v e r .  The  Glenrose  C a n n e r y , St. M u n g o C a n n e r y , a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e s may a l l c o n t a i n St. M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s a n d h a v e t h e b e s t a v a i l a b l e p u b l i s h e d i n f o r m a t i o n to a d d r e s s q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e d e g r e e of c u l t u r e v a r i a b i l i t y memifest i n t h e mainland Charles c u l t u r e .  T h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e at t h e S t . M u n g o a n d G l e n r o s e  sites shows c o n t i n u i t y i n technology  and faunal remains w i t h the  Old C o r d i l l e r a n component (Boehm 1973, M a t s o n 1976). inter-assemblage  preceding  However, a detailed  a n a l y s i s of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i t s e l f h a s not b e e n  done.  The a r t i f a c t a n a l y s e s from G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o show s i m i l a r s i t e f u n c t i o n s , a n d t h e c l o s e n e s s of t h e s i t e s to e a c h o t h e r (less t h a n 1000 metres) also suggests  minimal e n v i r o n m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s .  There is agreement that the St.  M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s from G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o a r e v e r y s i m i l a r , b u t how  do  t h e y compare to t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e component p r e s e n t at C r e s c e n t Beach? t h e s e t h r e e m a i n l a n d s i t e s a r e examples of c o n t i n u i n g i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n of  If the  e t h n o g r a p h i c N o r t h w e s t C o a s t p a t t e r n , t h e y w i l l h a v e a h i g h d e g r e e of i n t e r assemblage similarity. R i c h a r d P e r c y (1974) b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t c o m p o n e n t at t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e i n Delta was a m a n i f e s t a t i o n of t h e M a y n e p h a s e .  Roy  C a r l s o n f i r s t d e f i n e d t h i s p h a s e f r o m h i s e x c a v a t i o n a t t h e Helen P o i n t s i t e o n M a y n e I s l a n d w h i c h l i e s i n t h e G u l f I s l a n d s ( C a r l s o n 1970).  The Mayne  phase  has r e c e n t l y b e e n d e f i n e d as d a t i n g from 5000 to 4000 B P ( C a r l s o n 1985, 1986). The phase shares many c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h the St. Mungo phase, b u t its e a r l i e r dates s u g g e s t t h a t maybe S t . M u n g o a n d t h e f o l l o w i n g L o c a r n o B e a c h a n d Marpole phases, evolved from the Mayne phase a n d the Gulf Islands. C r e s c e n t B e a c h does not lie i n t h e G u l f I s l a n d s a n d i f a f f i l i a t e d w i t h t h e M a y n e p h a s e , i t i s one of few M a i n l a n d C h a r l e s c u l t u r e s i t e s g i v e n s u c h a n affiliation.  D u r i n g P e r c y ' s w o r k at C r e s c e n t B e a c h , t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e h a d  not b e e n f o r m a l l y d e f i n e d , b u t i n f o r m a t i o n p e r t a i n i n g to i t was a v a i l a b l e (Calvert  1970, Boehm 1973).  comparison purposes.  P e r c y , h o w e v e r , d i d not u s e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n  for  Given the debate between the Mayne a n d St. Mungo  p h a s e s , i t i s i m p o r t a n t to d i s c o v e r w h e t h e r C r e s c e n t B e a c h ' s M a y n e i s s i m i l a r to o r d i f f e r e n t  component  f r o m t h e St. M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s a t G l e n r o s e a n d S t .  Mungo. R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n N u m b e r One i s : What i s t h e d e g r e e of c u l t u r e v a r i a b i l i t y manifest i n t h e t h r e e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s Glenrose Cannery, St. Mungo Cannery, and Crescent Beach sites?  from  the  For this  r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n , t h e b i g g e s t a s s u m p t i o n i s t h a t time a n d s i t e f u n c t i o n a r e constant.  If t h e r e a r e p r o b l e m s i n d o i n g t h i s i n t e r - a s s e m b l a g e c o m p a r i s o n , i t  w i l l be due to d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g  what process is responsible for a n y v a r i a b i l i t y  present. Few s i t e s o n t h e m a i n l a n d c o n t a i n b o t h a C h a r l e s a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t a n d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e two p h a s e s i s n o t w e l l k n o w n .  At  C r e s c e n t B e a c h t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e f o r c o n t i n u o u s o c c u p a t i o n from t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e to t h e M a r p o l e p h a s e , m a k i n g t h i s s i t e t h e p e r f e c t place to look  for  a n s w e r s c o n c e r n i n g i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n of t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h pattern.  A c o m p a r i s o n of t h e C h a r l e s a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s  at  Crescent Beach could indicate whether i n situ c u l t u r a l evolution has taken place i n the F r a s e r Delta from the Old C o r d i l l e r a n phase o n w a r d .  If i t i s  d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h ' s C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t i s most s i m i l a r to M a y n e phase assemblages  f r o m t h e G u l f I s l a n d s , how does t h i s G u l f I s l a n d i n f l u e n c e d  p h a s e compare to M a i n l a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h ?  Do t h e d i f f e r e n c e s  between the  two c o m p o n e n t s s u g g e s t e v i d e n c e f o r a c u l t u r a l i n f l u x j u s t p r i o r to 3300 y e a r s ago?  From this c u l t u r a l influx did the C e n t r a l Coast Salish  ethnographic  pattern evolve? R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n Two a s k s , What i s t h e e x a c t r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e Charles and Locarno Beach phases at Crescent Beach?  This research  question  must be h a n d l e d c a r e f u l l y , as i t w i l l e a s i l y g r o w o u t of my c o n t r o l w i t h t h e many p o s s i b l e p e r m u t a t i o n s a n d c o m p a r i s o n s .  I hope to c o l l e c t  further  i n f o r m a t i o n to e i t h e r c o n f i r m o r n e g a t e t h e g e n e r a l r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n ; Was t h e E t h n o g r a p h i c C e n t r a l Coast S a l i s h P a t t e r n a n i n s i t u e v o l u t i o n s l o w l y t a k i n g place w i t h l i t t l e e v i d e n c e of m i g r a t i n g c u l t u r a l g r o u p s d e s c e n d i n g i n t o t h e F r a s e r Delta, i n t e r r u p t i n g or d i s p e r s i n g the c u l t u r e s a l r e a d y p r e s e n t d u r i n g the C h a r l e s c u l t u r e ?  S i n c e B o r d e n f i r s t p r o p o s e d t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e as a r e g i o n a l  phase,  t h e r e h a v e b e e n q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of s u c h a n u n i t .  I will  examine t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e o n t h e r e g i o n a l l e v e l a n d d i s c u s s w h e t h e r a t r u l y r e g i o n a l c u l t u r e i s m a n i f e s t at t h i s time p e r i o d . R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n T h r e e a s k s , What i s t h e p l a u s i b i l i t y of t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e e x i s t i n g o n the regional level?  M y i n t e r e s t i n t h i s t o p i c stems f r o m a n  e a r l i e r g e n e r a l s t u d y of t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e ( P r a t t 1988).  This question could  l e a d to i t s o w n t h e s i s , so I w i l l c o n c e n t r a t e o n p r e s e n t i n g a c o n c i s e summation of t h e r e g i o n a l C h a r l e s c u l t u r e a n d a s s e s s i n g w h e t h e r a p h a s e s u c h a l a r g e time p e r i o d a n d so m a n y d i f f e r e n t  encompassing  environments really is a  feasible c u l t u r a l marker. T h e r e s t of t h i s t h e s i s i s o r g a n i z e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g m a n n e r .  Chapter  Two p r e s e n t s t h e a n a l y s i s u s e d to examine r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n one a n d i t s resulting hypothesis.  T h e r e i s a d i s c u s s i o n of t h e d e f i n i t i o n of t h e S t . M u n g o  a n d Mayne phases, pointing out differences  a n d s i m i l a r i t i e s b e t w e e n t h e two.  S e c o n d l y , t h e r e i s a n i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h e t h r e e s i t e s u s e d f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s to d e t e r m i n e t h e f u n c t i o n a l s i m i l a r i t y of t h e s e s i t e s so t h a t a p p a r e n t c h a n g e s i n the a r t i f a c t assemblages  a r e a t t r i b u t a b l e to a c u l t u r a l r a t h e r t h a n a f u n c t i o n a l  or environmental difference.  T h i r d l y , the artifact classification is described.  The a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n t h i s t h e s i s a d d r e s s e s q u e s t i o n s a b o u t i n t e r a s s e m b l a g e v a r i a b i l i t y , t h e e s s e n c e of t h e f i r s t r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n . C h a p t e r T h r e e f o c u s e s o n r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n two a n d i t s r e s u l t i n g hypothesis.  T h e c h a p t e r f i r s t examines t h e two e a r l i e s t c o m p o n e n t s from t h e  C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e to i l l u m i n a t e t h e s i m i l a r i t y o r d i s s i m i l a r i t y of s i t e f u n c t i o n d u r i n g t h e two c u l t u r a l p h a s e s .  Once t h i s e x e r c i s e i s c o m p l e t e d ,  the  r e l a t i o n s h i p of t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e i s c l a r i f i e d u s i n g  the a r t i f a c t classification a n d the a n a l y t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s developed i n C h a p t e r Two.  A b r i e f c o m p a r i s o n of t h e a r t i f a c t s f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h c o m p o n e n t  two  w i t h t h o s e from t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h s i t e i s a l s o u n d e r t a k e n to examine similarities between Crescent Beach's Locarno Beach artifact assemblage the o r i g i n a l typesite.  and  This determines whether Crescent Beach's Locarno  B e a c h a r t i f a c t assemblage  is representative  of t h e L o c a r n o Beewjh C u l t u r e T y p e .  Chapter Four presents research question three and it's resulting hypothesis.  T h i s c h a p t e r i n t r o d u c e s the Eayem phase w h i c h along w i t h the  St. Mungo and Mayne phases comprise the Charles c u l t u r e .  The  second  s e c t i o n of C h a p t e r F o u r i n t r o d u c e s severed s i t e s t h o u g h t to h a v e C h a r l e s components.  These artifact assemblages  Charles components.  a r e d i s c u s s e d a n d c o m p a r e d to k n o w n  T h e finsil s e c t i o n of C h a p t e r F o u r u s e s t h e d a t a  gathered  i n t h i s t h e s i s a n d some simple s t a t i s t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s to d i s c u s s t h e f e a s i b i l i t y of t h e r e g i o n a l C h a r l e s c u l t u r e . Chapter Five evaluates the r e s e a r c h hypotheses a n d p r o v i d e s alternative explanations. chapter.  possible  Recommendations f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h c o n c l u d e t h e  CHAPTER  TWO  RESEARCH QUESTION ONE: The Relationship Between Three Charles Components and Their Artifact A s s e m b l a i s  R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n N u m b e r One examines t h e d e g r e e of c u l t u r a l v a r i a b i l i t y manifest i n t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s  b e l o n g i n g to t h e C h a r l e s  c u l t u r e from the C r e s c e n t Beach, Glenrose C a n n e r y a n d St. Mungo sites. this research question I developed interassemblage  From  the following hypotheses that deal with  variability:  N u l l H y p o t h e s i s N u m b e r One:  T h e d e g r e e of v a r i a b i l i t y b e t w e e n t h e  p r e v i o u s l y defined St. Mungo phase artifact assemblages  two  from Glenrose a n d St.  M u n g o a n d t h e M a y n e p h a s e a s s e m b l a g e from C r e s c e n t B e a c h w i l l be minimal, i m p l y i n g t h a t t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s a r e from a s i m i l a r c u l t u r a l tradition. A l t e r n a t e H y p o t h e s i s N u m b e r One: is different  The C r e s c e n t Beach Mayne  component  from t h e o t h e r two c o m p o n e n t s a n d b e l o n g s to a n o t h e r c u l t u r a l  t r a d i t i o n o r i g i n a t i n g from the Gulf Islands. To a n s w e r t h i s h y p o t h e s i s , t h e f i r s t s e c t i o n of t h i s c h a p t e r  describes  the St. Mungo and Mayne phases, d i s c u s s i n g p e r t i n e n t similarities a n d differences  c l a r i f y i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e two c u l t u r a l p h a s e s .  description focuses on differences  in artifact  assemblages.  To s t a n d a r d i z e t h e q u a n t i t y of d a t a r e q u i r e d f o r t h i s t h e s i s , I o r g a n i z e d my d i s c u s s i o n of e a c h s i t e i n t o t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s : S i t e L o c a t i o n (sometimes  This  have  S i t e Name,  t h e s e two s u b - s e c t i o n s a r e m e r g e d i n t o one  section).  E t h n o g r a p h i c C u l t u r e A r e a , C h r o n o l o g y , A r t i f a c t A s s e m b l a g e , Raw M a t e r i a l ,  F a u n a l Remains a n d F e a t u r e s .  E a c h c a t e g o r y was c h o s e n f o r i t s i m p o r t a n c e i n  p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n p e r t i n e n t to my r e s e a r c h  questions.  S e c o n d l y , t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e s i t e s u s e d i n t h e t h e s i s w i l l be i n t r o d u c e d : G l e n r o s e (DgRr 6), S t . M u n g o (DgRr 2) a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h (DgRr 1).  This  d i s c u s s i o n f o c u s e s o n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e s i m i l a r i t y of t h e s e s i t e s i n t e r m s of  site  function, based on a l l n o n - a r t i f a c t u a l data compiled. The f i n a l s e c t i o n of t h i s c h a p t e r i n t r o d u c e s t h e a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d u s e s t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n to compare a n d c o n t r a s t t h e t h r e e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e artifact assemblages from Glenrose, St. Mungo a n d Crescent Beach.  THE ST. MUNGO AND MAYNE PHASES I n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n of t h e S t . M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e s , o n l y s i t e s w i t h r e l i a b l y dated components are i n c l u d e d i n the analysis. p r e s e n t s more c o n t r o v e r s i a l C h a r l e s c u l t u r e c o m p o n e n t s .  Chapter Four Chapter F o u r also  d i s c u s s e s c o m p o n e n t s t h o u g h t to b e l o n g i n t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e b u t h a v e not yet been formally placed into the St. Mungo, Mayne or Eayem phases.  The St. Mungo Phase Site Names and Locations The S t . M u n g o p h a s e i s named a f t e r t h e S t . M u n g o C a n n e r y S i t e ( D g R r 2) w h e r e t h e p h a s e was f i r s t d i s c o v e r e d i n 1968 i n e x c a v a t i o n s d i r e c t e d Gay C a l v e r t (1970), who d e s c r i b e d t h e e x c a v a t e d (Boehm 1973).  by  m a t e r i a l i n h e r M.A. t h e s i s  A t t h e time, no n e a r b y c o m p o n e n t s w e r e d a t e d to t h e same  as t h e E a r l y component from S t . M u n g o (Boehm named t h e o l d e s t component the site, the E a r l y component). component into a c u l t u r a l p e r i o d .  T h e r e f o r e , Boehm d i d n o t p l a c e t h e E a r l y I n t h e s p r i n g of 1969 a small s a l v a g e  age at  p r o j e c t , u n d e r t h e d i r e c t i o n of R i c k P e r c y (1972), was u n d e r t a k e n a t t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y S i t e ( D g R r 6).  T h e r e w e r e 199 a r t i f a c t s r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h i s  e x c a v a t i o n a n d some w e r e s i m i l a r to t h e a r t i f a c t s f r o m t h e S t . M u n g o E a r l y component ( P e r c y 1972:164-174).  Major excavations at Glenrose o c c u r r e d i n  1972 a n d 1973, w i t h t h e m a i n e x c a v a t i o n r e p o r t e d b y R.G. M a t s o n (1976). Based on the c a r b o n dates, artifact assemblage a n d f a u n a l remains, Matson p r o p o s e d t h a t b o t h C o m p o n e n t Two a t G l e n r o s e a n d t h e E a r l y component St, M u n g o b e l o n g e d i n t h e same c u l t u r a l p h a s e (Matson 1976:283).  from  He c a l l e d  t h i s new p h a s e S t . M u n g o a f t e r t h e s i t e w h e r e i t was f i r s t d i s c o v e r e d .  The  two s i t e s a r e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1000 m e t e r s a p a r t o n t h e s o u t h b a n k of t h e main a r m of t h e F r a s e r R i v e r (See F i g u r e 2.1).  St. Mungo a n d Glenrose are the two  best known sites for the St. Mungo phase.  Ethnographic Culture Area E t h n o g r a p h i c a l l y , t h e two s i t e s f a l l i n t h e t e r r i t o r y of t h e M a i n l a n d Halkomelem s p e a k i n g g r o u p s w h o l i v e d a l o n g t h e F r a s e r R i v e r a n d w e r e as a g r o u p c a l l e d t h e S t a l o (Duff  1952).  S u t t l e s (1987:47) h a s p l a c e d s e v e r a l of t h e  Coast S a l i s h g r o u p s t o g e t h e r i n t o one g r o u p c a l l e d t h e C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h . The G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y a n d S t . M u n g o s i t e a r e l o c a t e d i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y of the K w a n t l e n s u b - g r o u p of t h e Halkomelem s p e a k i n g S t a l o .  A P P R O X I M A T E BOUNDARY OF STRAITS AND H A L K O M E L E M SPEAKERS AT CONTACT  1  DgRr 6  Glenrose  3280-4240 B.P.  2  DgRr 2  St Mungo  3970-4310 B.P.  F i g u r e 2,1  Map of S t . M u n g o Components (Based o n Ham 1982: F i g u r e 2 - 2 4 )  Chronology Not a l l r a d i o c a r b o n d a t e s h a v e b e e n c a l i b r a t e d .  To minimize c o n f u s i o n ,  a l l dates q u o t e d i n t h i s t h e s i s a r e u n c a l i b r a t e d . Table 2.1  Glenrose  St. Mungo  St. Mungo and Glenrose Charles Component Radiocarbon Dates Summarized Uncorrected Dates (Before Present) 3280±105 (GaK 4863) 3570±95 (Gak 4867) R e j e c t e d 4185±105 (S 788) 42401110 (GaK 4648)  U n i t A:3000±60 4050±50 4120150 4190160 4330185 4170170  (WSU (WSU (WSU (WSU (WSU (WSU  U n i t 6:4185190 (WSU 4260175 (WSU 4290185 (WSU 43751105 (WSU U n i t C:3340165 3370190 3380170 3410175 3420170 3455160  2736) R e j e c t e d 2779) 2780) 2781) 2782) R e j e c t e d 6147B) 2816) 2814) 2813) 2815) R e j e c t e d  Date  Date  Date  Date  (WSU 2842) (WSU 2812) (WSU 2840) (WSU 2841) (WSU 2843) (WSU 2811)  U n i t D:4480190 (WSU 2857) U n i t E:4440180 (WSU 2858) R e j e c t e d  Date  A s Table 2.1 i n d i c a t e s , t h e maximum time frame c o v e r e d b y t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i s 4570 to 3175 B P , b a s e d o n C14 d a t e s f r o m G l e n r o s e 1976:16-19) a n d S t . M u n g o (Ham 1984:114). c l e a r e r t h a n i t s t e r m i n a t i o n date.  (Matson  T h e b e g i n n i n g date of S t . M u n g o i s  If more S t . M u n g o p h a s e c o m p o n e n t s  are  d i s c o v e r e d , t h e r e may be movement t o w a r d s a b e g i n n i n g date of 4600 o r 4500 B P , b u t t h e c u r r e n t dates s u g g e s t a s t a r t i n g date of 4400 B P . t e r m i n a t i o n date l i e s somewhere  b e t w e e n 3300 a n d 3100 B P .  The  At St. Mungo, the  St. M u n g o p h a s e a n d t h e f o l l o w i n g L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e may b o t h be  present  i n e x c a v a t i o n u n i t C a n d i t i s d i f f i c u l t to t e l l f r o m t h e dates w h e r e S t . M u n g o ends and Locarno Beach begins.  T h e dates f r o m U n i t C a r e n o t as o l d as t h e  o t h e r dates from t h e s i t e ( t h e y r a n g e f r o m 3340 to 3455 B P ) .  There are  dates  from b o t h M o n t a g u e H a r b o u r ( M i t c h e l l 1971) a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h (Matson e t a l . 1991) of a b o u t 3300 B P f o r t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e s u c c e e d i n g L o c a r n o B e a c h phase.  B a s e d o n t h e l a t e n e s s of t h e s e dates a n d t h e a r t i f a c t u a l d a t a ( w h i c h  show s i m i l a r i t i e s w i t h b o t h t h e S t . M u n g o a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e s ) I d e c i d e d not to i n c l u d e U n i t C w i t h my a n a l y s i s of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e .  I think Unit  C i s more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e t h e n i t i s of t h e S t . Mungo phase.  Therefore,  I o m i t t e d d a t a from U n i t C.  A t G l e n r o s e , 3280±105  B P (Gak 4863) i s t h e l a t e s t date f o r t h e S t . M u n g o component.  There is a  h i a t u s i n s i t e o c c u p a t i o n a t G l e n r o s e a f t e r t h e S t . M u n g o component a n d b e f o r e t h e f o l l o w i n g M a r p o l e component.  Artifact  Assemblage  T h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s p r e s e n t from G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o a r e similar on both a general and specific level. a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s of b o t h s i t e s . t h r o u g h o u t the phase.  Core a n d f l a k e tools a r e common  F o r t h e f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n of a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s ,  the data is d i v i d e d into general categories with each category  C h i p p e d s t o n e tools dominate t h e  d e v i s e d from my a r t i f a c t  t r e a t e d as a s u b s e c t i o n of t h e a r t i f a c t  typology,  assemblage.  Unshaped C h i p p e d Stone U n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone implements s u c h as hammerstones a n d tools a r e not as common as i n e a r l i e r time p e r i o d s b u t t h e y a r e  pebble  present.  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e F l a k e Tools U n s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e f l a k e tools a r e p r o b a b l y t h e l a r g e s t a n d most common g e n e r a l c a t e g o r y of c h i p p e d stone t o o l s . category  Artifacts comprising this  i n c l u d e : u t i l i z e d f l a k e s , s t e e p a n d n a r r o w - a n g l e d r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s , as  w e l l as b i f a c i a l l y r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s . T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e of a b i p o l a r q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h i c i n d u s t r y a t e i t h e r G l e n r o s e o r S t . M u n g o , n o r i s t h e r e e v i d e n c e of a p r e p a r e d b l a d e technology.  core  T h e dominance of u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone tools ( b o t h c o r e a n d  f l a k e t y p e s ) s u g g e s t s a t e c h n o l o g y of e x p e d i e n t l y p r o d u c e d t o o l s . S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Tools S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Tools c o n t a i n s t h e c a t e g o r i e s unifaces and bifaces.  I have called formed  F o r m e d s t e e p (edge a n g l e g r e a t e r t h a n 45 d e g r e e s ) a n d  n a r r o w - a n g l e d (edge a n g l e l e s s t h a n 45 d e g r e e s ) u n i f a c e s a r e not a s common as t h e i r u n s h a p e d c o u n t e r p a r t s . at b o t h s i t e s .  N a r r o w - a n g l e d formed unifaces are  present  T h e y a r e made from a good q u a l i t y v i t r e o u s b a s a l t w i t h a l l  flake margins exhibiting careful and continuous r e t o u c h .  This artifact  type  may be a s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r f o r t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e . S h a p e d b i f a c e s , u n l i k e s h a p e d u n i f a c e s , a r e m u c h more common t h a n bifacially retouched flakes.  T h e r e a r e two g e n e r a l c a t e g o r i e s of s h a p e d  b i f a c e s p r e s e n t i n t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e , l e a f - s h a p e d a n d c o n t r a c t i n g stem. Leaf-shaped bifaces are a s t y l e f i r s t used i n o l d e r components, a n d c o n t i n u i n g to be w e l l r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e .  C o n t r a c t i n g stem  bifaces  (both with and without developed  shoulders) are a style introduced d u r i n g the  St. M u n g o p h a s e a n d almost as common as l e a f - s h a p e d  bifaces.  Ground Stone Implements C h i p p e d a n d g r o u n d s t o n e i m p l e m e n t s a r e n o t common d u r i n g t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e a n d n e i t h e r a r e g r o u n d s t o n e implements.  This is also a  r e f l e c t i o n of t h e dominance of a n e x p e d i e n t c h i p p e d s t o n e t o o l t e c h n o l o g y as i t i s a s s u m e d t h a t g r o u n d s t o n e o b j e c t s t a k e more time a n d c a r e to c r e a t e . G r o u n d stone t e c h n o l o g y i s f i r s t d i s c o v e r e d i n t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e , b u t g r o u n d s t o n e tools do not become common u n t i l t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e . A b r a s i v e s t o n e s , r e q u i r e d f o r t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of g r o u n d stone i m p l e m e n t s , a r e p r e s e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i n low n u m b e r s , w i t h both shaped and unshaped styles are present. necessarily indicate a g r o u n d stone technology.  T h e i r p r e s e n c e does n o t P a t e n a u d e (1985) notes t h a t  a b r a d e r s c o u l d be u s e d f o r t h e m a k i n g of bone a n d a n t l e r t o o l s .  There  are  no g r o u n d stone p o i n t s p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o , w h i l e G l e n r o s e h a s two n e a r l y complete l e a f - s h a p e d g r o u n d s t o n e p o i n t s . G r o u n d s t o n e k n i v e s a r e not common.  T h e r e i s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of t h e i r  presence at both sites, b u t the evidence is not conclusive.  At Glenrose  (Matson 1976) t h r e e g r o u n d s t o n e k n i v e s t e n t a t i v e l y p l a c e d i n t h e S t . M u n g o component are p r o b a b l y i n t r u s i v e from the Marpole component  (Matson  1976:286).  A t S t . M u n g o t h e r e a r e no complete g r o u n d s t o n e k n i v e s (Ham et  aL 1986).  G r o u n d stone d i s c b e a d s a r e p r e s e n t , b u t a r e n o t common.  One s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r f o r t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i s a g r o u p of o b j e c t s from a m e t a m o r p h o s e d s e d i m e n t a r y r o c k . e v i d e n c e of g r i n d i n g , b u t a r e s h a p e d .  T h e s e o b j e c t s a r e t h i n , s h o w no  T h e r e i s a l w a y s a n element of  made  decoration p r e s e n t u s u a l l y on the outer margin. objects.  Both sites have  these  P e c k e d a n d g r o u n d stone implements a r e r a r e . Bone and A n t l e r A r t i f a c t s  O r g a n i c p r e s e r v a t i o n was good at St. M u n g o a n d G l e n r o s e .  In  t h e bone a n d a n t l e r i n d u s t r i e s show a n u m b e r of d i f f e r e n t a r t i f a c t  general, types  p r e s e n t , b u t i n c o m p a r i s o n to t h e bone a n d a n t l e r a r t i f a c t t y p e s p r e s e n t i n L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s , S t . M u n g o p h a s e bone a n d a n t l e r a r t i f a c t s do not d i s p l a y as m u c h v a r i e t y n o r as m u c h f i n i s h i n g .  E x p e d i e n t l y made bone a n d  a n t l e r t o o l s , s u c h as s p l i n t e r awls a n d a n t l e r w e d g e s , dominate t h e S t . M u n g o phase. A subcategory  of s p l i n t e r awls e x i s t s i n t h e two c o m p o n e n t s .  At both  G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o many s p l i n t e r awls a r e made from b i r d bone. B e a c h p h a s e b i r d bone awls a r e d i f f e r e n t , f o r t h e y a r e made f r o m  Locarno  complete  b i r d bone, w h i l e b i r d bone s p l i n t e r a w l s at G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o u t i l i z e small s p l i n t e r s of b i r d  bone.  N e i t h e r n o n - u t i l i t a r i a n g o o d s n o r p e r s o n a l d e c o r a t i o n a r e common.  A  d i s t i n c t i v e bone p e n d a n t s t y l e f o u n d at b o t h s i t e s i s f l a t , t h i n a n d r e c t a n g u l a r i n shape.  O t h e r n o n - u t i l i t a r i a n g o o d s p r e s e n t i n c l u d e b i r d bone t u b e s , a comb  a n d o t h e r s t y l e s of p e n d a n t s .  A n interesting object called a G r u b is found at  both Glenrose and St. Mungo.  The e n t i r e s u r f a c e of t h e s e small b i p o i n t e d  bone o b j e c t s  is incised with parallel grooves.  a n d w e r e o r i g i n a l l y d e f i n e d b y B o r d e n (1975).  They resemble insect  cocoons  Grubs are another stylistic  m a r k e r of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e f o r t h e y d i s a p p e a r b e f o r e t h e b e g i n n i n g of Locarno Beach phase.  the  I n d i c a t i o n s of w o o d w o r k i n g wedges and antler wedges.  i n c l u d e a n a b u n d a n c e of bone c h i s e l s ,  Bone c h i s e l s a r e common a n d come i n a v a r i e t y  of  sizes. B a r b e d f i x e d p o i n t s of bone o r a n t l e r a r e n o t common.  A  complete  example of a b a r b e d h a r p o o n i s not p r e s e n t a t G l e n r o s e o r S t . M u n g o .  Both  unilaterally and bilaterally barbed fixed points are found, but in all categories o n l y one a r t i f a c t i s p r e s e n t e x c e p t f o r two u n i l a t e r a l l y b a r b e d f i x e d from S t . M u n g o .  points  P e r h a p s t h e a b s e n c e of e v i d e n c e f o r s p e c i a l i z e d f i s h i n g  p r o c u r e m e n t r e f l e c t s t h e p e r i s h a b l e n a t u r e of t h e f i s h i n g t e c h n i q u e s u s e d d u r i n g S t . M u n g o times.  I n c o m p a r i s o n to t h e p a u c i t y of s h a p e d  bone/antler  tools u s e d f o r f i s h i n g , t h e r e i s a r e l a t i v e a b u n d a n c e of s h a p e d c h i p p e d bifaces t h a t c o u l d be u s e d f o r h u n t i n g .  stone  If one l o o k e d at t h e a r t i f a c t  assemblages without examining the f a u n a l remains, the a r t i f a c t s would o v e r emphasize t h e i m p o r t a n c e of l a n d mammals.  T h e o r g a n i c n a t u r e of  specialized  f i s h i n g implements b i a s e s t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e a g a i n s t t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n of s p e c i a l i z e d f i s h i n g tools. Shell Objects S h e l l a r t i f a c t s a r e t h e l e a s t common a r t i f a c t s f o u n d d u r i n g t h e S t . Mungo phase. fragments.  T h e most common a r t i f a c t t y p e i s m i s c e l l a n e o u s g r o u n d s h e l l  M a t s o n (1976) r e p o r t e d one s h e l l a d z e b l a d e from t h e S t . M u n g o  component at G l e n r o s e , h o w e v e r , w h e n I r e - a n a l y z e d t h e c o m p o n e n t I d i d not i n t e r p r e t the a r t i f a c t as a s h e l l a d z e b l a d e .  Shell adze blades are  not  common; t h e r e a r e two from St. M u n g o a n d (if one a c c e p t s M a t s o n ' s o r i g i n a l a n a l y s i s ) one f r o m G l e n r o s e . association with a burial.  S h e l l b e a d s a r e p r e s e n t at G l e n r o s e o n l y i n  Discussion of St. Mungo Artifact Assemblage T h e r e i s a d i v e r s i t y of a r t i f a c t t y p e s a n d p o s t u l a t e d c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s present d u r i n g the St. Mungo phase. all other artifact types present.  E x p e d i e n t c h i p p e d s t o n e tools  dominate  S t y l i s t i c markers present for the St. Mungo  p h a s e i n c l u d e : n a r r o w - a n g l e d f o r m e d u n i f a c e s , d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d s t o n e , flat a n d r e c t a n g u l a r s h a p e d bone p e n d a n t s a n d g r u b s .  A s more a n d more S t .  M u n g o a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s a r e e x c a v a t e d a n d p u b l i s h e d , some t r a i t s o r i g i n a l l y t h o u g h t to be i n d i c a t i v e of one s p e c i f i c p h a s e may be i n d i c a t i v e of either or both.  T h e r e i s a l w a y s a n a s s o c i a t e d d a n g e r of r e l y i n g too  o n a r t i f a c t t y p e s to h e l p define d i s t i n c t i v e c u l t u r a l g r o u p s .  heavily  Cultural  p r o c e s s e s s u c h as p r o c u r e m e n t s t r a t e g i e s , t r a d e a n d s e a s o n a l r o u n d , a l o n g with natural processes  s u c h as e n v i r o n m e n t a n d r e s o u r c e a v a i l a b i l i t y , a l l  influence the archaeological r e c o r d .  It i s t h e j o b of t h e a r c h a e o l o g i s t  to  a s c e r t a i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of one p a r t i c u l a r a r t i f a c t t y p e a n d i t s p r e s e n c e a b s e n c e from a n a r t i f a c t  or  assemblage.  Raw Materials B a s a l t of v a r y i n g q u a l i t y i s t h e d o m i n a n t c h i p p e d stone r a w m a t e r i a l . Mammal bone i s t h e most common o r g a n i c r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e , a l t h o u g h S t . M u n g o h a s a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of b i r d bone as w e l l .  Faunal Remains F a u n a l r e m a i n s from t h e two c o m p o n e n t s s u g g e s t t h a t a v a r i e t y species were exploited.  E v e n at t h i s e a r l y time p e r i o d i n N o r t h w e s t  p r e h i s t o r y , r e s o u r c e s from t h e sea form a n i m p o r t a n t p a r t of t h e remains.  of Coast  subsistence  A c o m p a r i s o n of f a u n a l r e m a i n s from t h e s i t e s m u s t p r o c e e d  with  c a u t i o n a n d a w a r e n e s s of t h e d i f f e r e n t  s i t e a c t i v i t i e s t h a t may h a v e o c c u r r e d .  Many f i s h resources were exploited i n c l u d i n g : flatfish ( s t a r r y  flounder),  h e r r i n g , e u l a c h o n , s t u r g e o n , p e a m o u t h , s u c k e r , c h u b a n d salmon.  S e a mammals  w e r e t a k e n w h e n a v a i l a b l e as t h e r e m a i n s of s e a l a r e p r e s e n t a t b o t h G l e n r o s e and St. Mungo.  T h e a b u n d a n c e of M y t i l u s at G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o i n d i c a t e s  a f o c u s o n o b t a i n i n g a n d e x p l o i t i n g s h e l l f i s h d u e to i t s r e l i a b i l i t y as a food resource.  Deer was t h e most i m p o r t a n t l a n d mammal e x p l o i t e d at t h i s time,  w h i l e w a p i t i a n d b e a v e r a r e a l s o f a i r l y common.  Features Ham's o r i g i n a l St. M u n g o r e p o r t i n d i c a t e d t h e p r e s e n c e of h o u s e i n t h e S t . M u n g o component.  F o r r e a s o n s t h a t w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t h e St.  M u n g o site d e s c r i p t i o n , t h e r e i s no c o n c l u s i v e e v i d e n c e of p e r m a n e n t remains from the St. Mungo phase.  house  There are indications from both Glenrose  a n d S t . M u n g o t h a t l i v i n g f l o o r s a r e p r e s e n t a n d many d i f f e r e n t place.  floors  a c t i v i t i e s took  P o s t m o l d s r e c o v e r e d a r e too s m a l l to be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l a r g e  p l a n k h o u s e s , s u g g e s t i n g t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of l e s s p e r m a n e n t d w e l l i n g s .  scale Hearth  f e a t u r e s a r e not a l w a y s w e l l d e f i n e d , n o r i s t h e r e a n y p a r t i c u l a r d o m i n a n t s t y l e , b u t t h e y a r e t h e most common There is an unusual feature  feature.  p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o c a l l e d a c l a y - l i n e d p i t .  T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e i n t h e p i t of b u r n i n g n o r a r e a n y o t h e r associated with it.  materials  I t s f u n c t i o n i s not k n o w n , b u t i t may be s i m i l a r to o t h e r  f e a t u r e s f o u n d at P i t t R i v e r ( P a t e n a u d e  1985).  Complete b u r i a l s a r e p r e s e n t from G l e n r o s e , a n d i n t e r m e n t v a r i e s the G l e n r o s e site d e s c r i p t i o n f o r f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n ) .  (see  Few grave goods are  p r e s e n t w i t h no e v i d e n c e of c r a n i a l d e f o r m a t i o n o r l a b r e t w e a r o n a n y of  the  s k e l e t o n s s u g g e s t i n g t h a t s t a t u s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i s not y e t a p p a r e n t , at l e a s t t h r o u g h t r a d i t i o n a l e t h n o g r a p h i c methods of s t a t u s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n .  St. Mungo Phase Conclusions T h i s somewhat g e n e r a l d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i s b a s e d o n i n f o r m a t i o n from two s i t e s w i t h c o m p o n e n t s d a t i n g to t h e same time p e r i o d . The d a t a g a t h e r e d so f a r i n d i c a t e t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e from a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4500 o r 4400 B P u n t i l i t s demise sometime a f t e r 3300 B P ( g i v e o r take a h u n d r e d years).  T h i s p h a s e l a s t s f o r j u s t o v e r one t h o u s a n d y e a r s ,  y e t o n l y t h e s e two s i t e s c o n t a i n t r o u b l e f r e e c o m p o n e n t s .  C l e a r l y , work must  be f o c u s o n o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e e a r l i e r p r e h i s t o r i c p e r i o d s o n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast. E x p e d i e n t c h i p p e d s t o n e tools dominate t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e .  Ground  stone t e c h n o l o g y i s f i r s t i n t r o d u c e d d u r i n g t h i s time p e r i o d , b u t g r o u n d s t o n e a r t i f a c t s a r e few.  Bone a n d a n t l e r a r t i f a c t s a r e common w h e n p r e s e r v a t i o n  a l l o w s , b u t o n c e a g a i n , e x p e d i e n t t o o l s dominate.  S t y l i s t i c m a r k e r s for St.  M u n g o i n c l u d e : n a r r o w - a n g l e d f o r m e d u n i f a c e s , c o n t r a c t i n g stem b i f a c e s  (with  o r w i t h o u t s h o u l d e r s ) , d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d s t o n e , r e c t a n g u l a r bone p e n d a n t s a n d grubs.  O t h e r a r t i f a c t t y p e s t h a t c o u l d be s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r s i n c l u d e ; s h e l l  beads a n d s h e l l a d z e b l a d e s . F a u n a l r e m a i n s s h o w a n e x p l o i t a t i o n of a v a r i e t y of r e s o u r c e s i n c l u d i n g l a r g e l a n d mammals ( d e e r a n d e l k ) , f i s h ( f l o u n d e r a n d salmon t h e most i m p o r t a n t ) a n d s h e l l f i s h ( M y t i l u s b y f a r t h e most i m p o r t a n t ) .  A s of  resource specialization is absent, but already d u r i n g this early  yet,  Northwest  Coast time p e r i o d , r e s o u r c e s from t h e sea f o r m a n i m p o r t a n t p a r t of t h e d i e t w i t h t h i s i m p o r t a n c e i n c r e a s i n g t h r o u g h time.  C h i s h o l m (1986) s h o w s t h a t  maritime r e s o u r c e s a r e a major p a r t of p r e h i s t o r i c N o r t h w e s t Coast d i e t from the Charles c u l t u r e onwards. F e a t u r e s a r e d o m i n a t e d b y h e a r t h s w i t h no t r e n d i n s t y l e .  Postmolds  a r e f o u n d b u t t h e i r s i z e i n d i c a t e s no e v i d e n c e of p e o p l e o c c u p y i n g p l a n k h o u s e s at t h i s time.  large  C l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e s f r o m S t . M u n g o may be i n d i r e c t  e v i d e n c e of p l a n t p r o c e s s i n g ( P a t e n a u d e do not i n d i c a t e s t a t u s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n .  1985).  B u r i a l s f r o m t h i s time p e r i o d  I n t e r m e n t s t y l e does not go b e y o n d a  p r e f e r e n c e f o r i n - g r o u n d b u r i a l a n d f l e x i n g of most b u r i a l s .  The Mayne  Phase  S i t e Names a n d L o c a t i o n s T h e M a y n e p h a s e i s named f o r t h e b a s a l c o m p o n e n t of t h e Helen P o i n t S i t e (DfRu 8) l o c a t e d o n A c t i v e P a s s a t t h e n o r t h e n d of M a y n e I s l a n d i n t h e s o u t h e r n p a r t of t h e S t r a i t of G e o r g i a .  Roy C a r l s o n (1970, 1975)  directed  e x c a v a t i o n s at Helen P o i n t i n 1968, w h e r e he f i r s t d i s c o v e r e d a n d d e f i n e d Mayne phase.  A t t h e time, no o t h e r n e a r b y c o m p o n e n t s o n t h e G u l f  the  Islands  w e r e d a t e d to t h e same age as t h e e a r l y component at H e l e n P o i n t (also k n o w n as Helen P o i n t  I).  S a l v a g e e x c a v a t i o n s u n d e r t a k e n b y R i c k P e r c y i n t h e S p r i n g of 1972 ( P e r c y 1974) at t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h S i t e (DgRr 1) u n c o v e r e d t h r e e components.  A l t h o u g h P e r c y c o n s i d e r e d h i s e a r l i e s t component a member of  t h e M a y n e p h a s e , he d i d t h i s b e f o r e t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e was proposed  different  (Matson 1976).  formally  F o r t h i s d i s c u s s i o n of t h e M a y n e p h a s e , i n f o r m a t i o n  from P e r c y ' s o r i g i n a l e x c a v a t i o n i s i n c l u d e d , b u t t h e a f f i l i a t i o n of t h e  earliest  C r e s c e n t B e a c h component i s t h e f o c u s of t h e f i r s t r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n i n t h i s thesis, and is open for discussion.  F i g u r e 2.2 d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e o n l y s i t e w i t h a r a d i o c a r b o n dated Mayne phase  component.  Ethnographic Culture Area E t h n o g r a p h i c a l l y , Helen P o i n t f a l l s i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y of t h e S a a n i c h people, a s u b - g r o u p i n t h e S t r a i t s S a l i s h l a n g u a g e g r o u p .  The  C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e i s o n t h e c u r r e n t b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n t h e Halkomelem s p e a k i n g N i c k o m e k l a n d t h e S t r a i t s s p e a k i n g Semiahmoo.  Both sites are  g r o u p e d i n t o t h e C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h c u l t u r e a r e a d e f i n e d b y S u t t l e s (1990).  Chronology The b e s t p u b l i s h e d i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h i s p h a s e comes from Helen Point and Crescent Beach.  Both sites have dated evidence for the Mayne  p h a s e as w e l l as s u b s t a n t i a l a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s . The s m a l l s i z e of t h e p o s s i b l e M a y n e c o m p o n e n t f r o m P e n d e r C a n a l does not a l l o w f o r i t s i n c l u s i o n i n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n of t h e M a y n e p h a s e , b u t i t w i l l be a n a l y z e d i n C h a p t e r Four. The maximum time frame f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s 5650 to 3850 B P , b a s e d o n C14 dates f r o m Helen P o i n t ( C a r l s o n 1975:2) a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h ( P e r c y 1974:267).  T h i s i s a l a r g e r time s p a n t h a n t h a t f o r t h e S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s .  It i s b a s e d o n f o u r dates ( t h r e e from H e l e n P o i n t a n d one from C r e s c e n t Beach). C a r l s o n (1970:115) o r i g i n a l l y d e f i n e d t h e M a y n e p h a s e as e x i s t i n g from 5000 to 3000 B P .  The most r e c e n t d e s c r i p t i o n o f M a y n e p h a s e  chronology  comes from the P e n d e r C a n a l p r e l i m i n a r y r e p o r t s ( C a r l s o n 1985, 1986).  In  these r e p o r t s , t h e time p e r i o d of 5000 B P to 4000 B P is d e f i n e d as t h e Mayne  Figure  2.2  Map of M a y n e C o m p o n e n t s (Based o n Ham 1982: F i g u r e 2 - 2 4 )  p h a s e ( C a r l s o n 1985:60) w h i l e t h e time p e r i o d of 4000 B P to 2500 B P i s as t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e ( C a r l s o n 1985:60).  defined  T h e r e i s no e x p l a n a t i o n of  why  t h e time s p a n o r i g i n a l l y d e f i n e d f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s now d i v i d e d i n t o two s e p a r a t e p h a s e s w i t h p a r t of t h e o r i g i n a l time p e r i o d now m e r g e d w i t h t h e Locarno Beach phase. I s u g g e s t t h e f o l l o w i n g p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e c h a n g e i n time s p a n covered b y the Mayne phase.  D u r i n g t h e p e r i o d a f t e r t h e Helen P o i n t  e x c a v a t i o n , t h e r e was minimal p u b l i s h e d e v i d e n c e of p r e - L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e components.  M i t c h e l l ' s (1968, 1971), A r c h a e o l o g y  of t h e G u l f of G e o r g i a A r e a . A  N a t u r a l R e g i o n a n d i t s C u l t u r a l T y p e s amalgamated t h e c u r r e n t i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t time) c o n c e r n i n g t h e c u l t u r e t y p e s p r e s e n t o n t h e N o r t h w e s t  Coast  t h r o u g h o u t p r e h i s t o r y , w i t h a focus on the Locarno Beach C u l t u r e Type. d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h C u l t u r e T y p e s t a t e s , " C a r l s o n ' s M a y n e c a n also be i n c l u d e d i n t h e c u l t u r e t y p e ( L o c a r n o Beach) as d e s c r i b e d ( M i t c h e l l 1971:57). representative  (at  His phase  here"  He s t a t e s t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t c o m p o n e n t f r o m H e l e n P o i n t i s  of t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h C u l t u r e T y p e ( M i t c h e l l 1971:65).  c a n be i n t e r p r e t e d as a g r e e i n g  Mitchell  w i t h C a r l s o n t h a t t h e time p e r i o d f r o m 5000 to  2500 B P was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h one c u l t u r a l p h a s e , b u t M i t c h e l l c a l l e d t h i s p h a s e Locarno Beach r a t h e r than Mayne. B a s e d o n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e f r o m Helen P o i n t at t h a t time, t h e r e was l i t t l e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e e a r l i e s t Helen P o i n t c o m p o n e n t  artifact  assemblage a n d a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s f r o m G u l f I s l a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s s u c h as t h e c o m p o n e n t f r o m t h e M o n t a g u e H a r b o u r s i t e ( w h e r e Mitchell had excavated).  One e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e s i m i l a r i t y of  artifact  a s s e m b l a g e s i s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t b e i n g p r e s e n t i n t h e e a r l y Helen P o i n t component.  T h i s p o s s i b l e m i x i n g of two  separate  c o m p o n e n t s w o u l d c r e a t e a n a r t i f a c t assemblage almost i d e n t i c a l to L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s , e x p l a i n i n g w h y at t h e time of M i t c h e l l ' s p u b l i c a t i o n , he l u m p e d t h e M a y n e a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e s t o g e t h e r .  If  the  Helen P o i n t p r e - L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t w e r e s e p a r a t e d a n d c o m p a r e d o n i t s o w n to t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h C u l t u r e T y p e , w o u l d i t s t i l l be s i m i l a r o r i t w o u l d be a b l e to s t a n d o n i t s o w n as a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  of t h e M a y n e C u l t u r e T y p e ?  T h e most r e c e n t d e f i n i t i o n of C a r l s o n ' s M a y n e a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e recognizes  the o r i g i n a l decision b y Mitchell that Mayne a n d Locarno Beach  a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s a r e s i m i l a r , b u t C a r l s o n , b y d e f i n i n g t h e M a y n e p h a s e as 5000 to 4000 B P , i s a l s o a r g u i n g t h a t i t e x i s t s as i t s o w n c u l t u r a l  phase  d i s t i n c t i v e from L o c a r n o B e a c h . M i t c h e l l ' s h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e Mayne a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e s a r e  part  of a c o n t i n u u m i s n e i t h e r p r o v e d n o r d i s p r o v e d as a complete a n d d e t a i l e d c o m p a r i s o n of t h e two p h a s e s has n o t been  done.  When R. M u r r a y (1982) a n a l y z e d t h e D u k e P o i n t s i t e she adso l u m p e d i n t o one c o m p o n e n t p r e - L o c a r n o a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h a g e d d e p o s i t s .  I think that  w h i l e i t was a p p r o p r i a t e at t h e time of M i t c h e l l ' s p u b l i c a t i o n . A r c h a e o l o g y  of  t h e G u l f of G e o r g i a a r e a , a N a t u r a l R e g i o n a n d i t s C u l t u r e T y p e s (1971) to l u m p t h e M a y n e p h a s e (he does not s t a t e t h a t i t i s o k a y to l u m p t h e St. M u n g o o r Eayem p h a s e s ) w i t h L o c a r n o B e a c h d u e to t h e l a c k of p u b l i s h e d i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e p r e - L o c a r n o B e a c h time p e r i o d , i t i s no l o n g e r v a l i d to do so w i t h o u t f i r s t p r o v i n g t h e v a l i d i t y of s u c h a g r o u p i n g . B a s e d o n t h e a b o v e m e n t i o n e d i n f o r m a t i o n , I t h i n k C a r l s o n h a s now d i v i d e d the o r i g i n a l M a y n e p h a s e i n t o two p h a s e s b e c a u s e of t h e made b y M i t c h e l l a f t e r t h e o r i g i n a l Helen P o i n t e x c a v a t i o n s . (as of 1986) s p a n s 5000 to 4000 B P .  suggestion  The M a y n e  phase  The L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e s p a n s 4000 to  3000 B P ( w h i c h w o u l d o v e r l a p w i t h t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e o n t h e M a i n l a n d ) . T r a d i t i o n a l l y , t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e i s t h o u g h t to s p a n 3400 to 2200 B P  (see  f o r example Ham 1986:84). The d a t a f r o m t h e s e c o n d major e x c a v a t i o n at Helen P o i n t was p u b l i s h e d b y J o h n M c M u r d o (1974) f o r h i s MA t h e s i s .  M c M u r d o ' s excavation u n i t s were  l o c a t e d i n t h e c e n t r a l a n d w e s t e r n p o r t i o n s of t h e s i t e . took place a l o n g t h e e a s t e r n e d g e of t h e s i t e .  Carlson's  excavations  M c M u r d o (1974:19) s t a t e s t h a t  h i s e a r l i e s t c o m p o n e n t (Helen P o i n t l b ) , "... i n d i c a t e s r e l a t i o n s h i p s t o b o t h t h e Mayne p h a s e a n d to l a t e r a s s e m b l a g e s Beach phase".  d e s c r i b e d as c o m p o n e n t s of t h e  I n o t h e r w o r d s , Helen P o i n t l a (the c o m p o n e n t d e f i n e d  Locarno by  C a r l s o n as b e l o n g i n g to t h e Mayne p h a s e ) s h o w s a f f i n i t y to t h e M a y n e  phase,  w h i l e Helen P o i n t l b i s a n e v o l u t i o n a r y stage b e t w e e n t h e M a y n e a n d L o c a r n o phases.  Helen P o i n t II i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  of t h e M a r p o l e p h a s e .  It i s p o s s i b l e  t h a t b o t h Helen P o i n t l a a n d l b a r e mixed p r e - L o c a r n o a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s , w h i c h i s w h y b o t h s h a r e s i m i l a r i t i e s to e a c h o t h e r a n d to t h e Mayne a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e s .  While b o t h Helen P o i n t l a a n d l b  share  s i m i l a r i t i e s w i t h t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e , t h e r e i s no L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e component d e f i n e d f o r t h e Helen P o i n t s i t e .  One c o u l d a r g u e t h a t t h e r e i s a  h i a t u s i n s i t e o c c u p a t i o n b e t w e e n Helen P o i n t l b a n d Helen P o i n t II,  but  a c c o r d i n g to t h e p h y s i c a l s t r a t i g r a p h y , t h i s i s not t h e case ( M c M u r d o 1974:1318).  It w o u l d be u s e f u l to e i t h e r p r o v e o r d i s p r o v e t h e p r e s e n c e of a L o c a r n o  B e a c h component at Helen P o i n t .  At this point, I would tentatively  suggest  t h a t Helen P o i n t l b i s a L o c a r n o B e a c h component. C a r l s o n [1975:2 ( F i g u r e Helen P o i n t .  1)], p r e s e n t s a t a b l e of t h e c o m p i l e d dates  from  The b e g i n n i n g date of t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s b a s e d o n a date of  54201230 B P (Gak 4938), r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e b a s a l d e p o s i t at Helen P o i n t  (depth  of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 130 cm). hearth feature  S i t u a t e d 5 cm d i r e c t l y a b o v e t h i s sample i s a  d a t e d at 3950±260 B P (WSU 1191).  The f i n a l date  from H e l e n P o i n t i s one of 39801130 B P (Gak 3201), r e c o v e r e d h e a r t h f e a t u r e at a d e p t h of 89 cm. o r t h e s e c o n d o l d e s t date too y o u n g . i n 5 cm of d e p o s i t i s not l i k e l y . too o l d .  recovered  from a n o t h e r  I t may be t h a t t h e o l d e s t date i s too o l d , A time s p a n of 1500 y e a r s  compressed  If t r u e , t h e sample r e t r i e v e d f r o m 89 cm i s  T h e b e g i n n i n g date f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e c a n n o t be c l a r i f i e d at  C r e s c e n t B e a c h b e c a u s e P e r c y o b t a i n e d one date of 4270180 B P (Gak 4925) from t h e l o w e r s e c t i o n of h i s e a r l y component.  T h e t e r m i n a t i o n date of t h e Mayne  p h a s e i s not b a s e d o n a c a r b o n date so t h e e x a c t time s p a n i s y e t to be ascertained. If t h e o l d e s t date from H e l e n P o i n t i s f o r t h e time b e i n g i g n o r e d , t h e two o t h e r dates f a l l w i t h i n t h e r a n g e of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e , as does P e r c y ' s date f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  T h e t e r m i n a t i o n date of 3000 B P i s y o u n g e r t h a n  S t . M u n g o ' s of 3200 B P , b u t t h e t e r m i n a t i o n date of t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s d e p e n d e n t o n t h e d i s c o v e r y of d a t e d C14 d e p o s i t s .  T h i s l a t e r t e r m i n a t i o n of  t h e M a y n e p h a s e a l s o a s s u m e s t h a t t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e does n o t emerge on the Gulf Islands u n t i l after i t f i r s t appears on the Mainland.  The  oldest  date f r o m t h e M o n t a g u e H a r b o u r s i t e o n G a l i a n o I s l a n d i n t h e G u l f I s l a n d s ( M i t c h e l l 1971:63) i s 31601130 B P (GSC-347) a n d i t f a l l s at t h e s t a r t of the Locarno Beach phase.  A s p r e v i o u s l y m e n t i o n e d , t h e most r e c e n t t e r m i n a t i o n  date f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e , s u g g e s t e d  b y C a r l s o n , i s 4000 B P w h i c h i s m u c h  e a r l i e r t h a n t h e t e r m i n a t i o n date f o r S t . M u n g o .  The l u m p i n g of p o t e n t i a l  Mayne a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e c o m p o n e n t s makes t e r m i n a t i o n d a t e s  vague.  A t t h i s p o i n t , t h e dates f r o m t h e S t . M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e s o v e r l a p e a c h o t h e r , b u t t h e u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t t h e a c t u a l time frame r e p r e s e n t e d  by  t h e M a y n e p h a s e makes c o m p a r i s o n d i f f i c u l t .  Artifact  Assemblage  The a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s from H e l e n P o i n t a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h s h a r e similarities, but there are also important differences.  Unless otherwise  stated,  t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e a r t i f a c t assemblage from t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s b a s e d o n C a r l s o n (1975, 1985 a n d 1986) a n d P e r c y (1974).  C h i p p e d stone tools  dominate b o t h a s s e m b l a g e s w i t h b o t h c o r e a n d f l a k e tools  present.  U n s h a p e d Chipped Stone Tools (including Flake Tools) U n s h a p e d tools s u c h as p e b b l e tools a n d h a m m e r s t o n e s a r e a l t h o u g h not common.  present  A t Helen Point, C a r l s o n states that flake tools are  p r o b a b l y u n d e r r e p r e s e n t e d b e c a u s e at the time of p u b l i c a t i o n L a y e r / L e v e l b a g s h a d not b e e n s e a r c h e d f o r u t i l i z e d f l a k e s a n d o t h e r m i n i m a l l y m o d i f i e d a r t i f a c t s ( C a r l s o n 1975:7).  On t h e o t h e r h a n d , a f t e r r e - a n a l y z i n g t h e a r t i f a c t s  from P e r c y ' s e x c a v a t i o n , a n u m b e r of m i n i m a l l y modified a r t i f a c t s d e f i n e d  by  P e r c y w e r e deemed d e b i t a g e a n d e l i m i n a t e d f r o m t h e f i n a l a r t i f a c t t a l l y . N e v e r t h e l e s s , i n b o t h c a s e s , e x p e d i e n t l y made c h i p p e d s t o n e f l a k e dominate t h e  tools  assemblages.  Q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s a r e p r e s e n t at b o t h s i t e s (one a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h , f o u r at Helen P o i n t ) , b u t t h e i r n u m b e r s a r e n e g l i g i b l e a n d c o u l d r e s u l t f r o m c o m p o n e n t m i x i n g d u e to e x c a v a t i o n b y a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s a n d / o r t h e p r e s e n c e  of  a l a t e r component w i t h q u a r t z c r y s t a l p r e s e n t s u c h as t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  C a r l s o n also l i s t s t h e p r e s e n c e of one q u a r t z  c r y s t a l microblade and three obsidian microblades.  No c o r e s w e r e  discovered.  With no e v i d e n c e  of a p r e p a r e d m i c r o b l a d e c o r e a n d o n l y a small n u m b e r of  m i c r o b l a d e s , t h e p r e s e n c e of a m i c r o b l a d e t e c h n o l o g y  is debatable.  My own  p e r s o n a l o b s e r v a t i o n s of b i p o l a r p e r c u s s i o n a n d e x p e r i m e n t s done b y (for  others  example Magne 1981, Ham 1982:82) i n d i c a t e s t h a t b l a d e - l i k e f l a k e s a n d  m i c r o b l a d e s a r e p r o d u c e d d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e of f l i n t k n a p p i n g . evidence  There  is  of b i p o l a r p e r c u s s i o n i n t h e M a y n e c o m p o n e n t a n d b l a d e - l i k e  as w e l l as b l a d e s may be b y - p r o d u c t s of t h e b i p o l a r r e d u c t i o n  flakes  sequence.  Q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s a r e u s u a l l y seen as i n d i c a t o r s of a L o c a r n o B e a c h  component,  as i s t h e p r e s e n c e of m i c r o b l a d e s (made from b o t h q u a r t z c r y s t a l a n d obsidian).  T h e i r a p p e a r a n c e at Helen P o i n t may be a r e s u l t of t h e p r e s e n c e  a n o r i g i n a l l y u n d e t e c t e d L o c a r n o B e a c h component.  of  A n o t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n may  be t h a t q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s a n d o b s i d i a n m i c r o l i t h s a r e p r e s e n t i n t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e c o r d b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e good a r t i f a c t s f o r c u t t i n g f i s h a n d t h e p r o c u r e m e n t of f i s h was t h e main f u n c t i o n of t h e s i t e .  This second  e x p l a n a t i o n does n o t f i t t h e d a t a from Helen P o i n t as w e l l as o t h e r s i t e s example see the P i t t R i v e r s i t e i n C h a p t e r F o u r ) b e c a u s e f a r f e w e r microliths are present at Helen Point. m i c r o l i t h s may h e l p f i l l i n t h e Without better evidence apparent difference technology  quartz  T h e p r e s e n c e of p o s s i b l e o b s i d i a n  gap. f o r t h e p r e s e n c e of a b l a d e t e c h n o l o g y ,  between t h e S t . M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e ' s  c a n n o t be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y  this  blade  confirmed.  S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone I n the c a t e g o r y  (for  Tools  of s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone t o o l s , s h a p e d b i f a c e s a r e  most common a r t i f a c t t y p e at b o t h s i t e s .  the  Several styles are present, but leaf-  s h a p e d a n d c o n t r a c t i n g stem ( w i t h o r w i t h o u t s h o u l d e r s ) forms  dominate.  A l t h o u g h I h a v e not p e r s o n a l l y examined t h e b i f a c e s from Helen P o i n t , t h o s e f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h a r e s i m i l a r to G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o b i f a c e s .  The  b i f a c e s i n F i g u r e 34 from C a r l s o n (1970:116) a l s o look s i m i l a r to St. M u n g o phase bifaces.  C h i p p e d slate implements a r e f o u n d a t Helen P o i n t , b u t not at  Crescent Beach. Ground Stone Implements F o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e i n g e n e r a l , C a r l s o n (1970, 1975) d e f i n e s  ground  slate as p r e s e n t a n d he h a s more a r t i f a c t t y p e s of g r o u n d slate t h a n f o u n d i n the St. Mungo phase.  One e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e h i g h e r n u m b e r of slate a r t i f a c t s  p r e s e n t at Helen P o i n t may be r e l a t e d to t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of slate.  Abraders  are both u n s h a p e d a n d shaped. One complete  g r o u n d slate p o i n t ( r e s e m b l i n g  stem p o i n t ) was r e c o v e r e d f r o m Helen P o i n t .  a c h i p p e d stone c o n t r a c t i n g  This similarity in ground  stone  a n d c h i p p e d stone p o i n t f o r m s p a r a l l e l s G l e n r o s e ' s c h i p p e d a n d g r o u n d  stone  leaf-shaped  points.  L a b r e t s a r e a n o t h e r p o s s i b l e g r o u n d s t o n e s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r of t h e M a y n e phase.  Two w e r e f o u n d at Helen P o i n t , none a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  traditionally associated with Locarno Beach deposits.  Labrets are  Their presence i n the  Mayne p h a s e may be a n o t h e r i n d i c a t i o n of a p o s s i b l e m i x i n g of c o m p o n e n t s  at  t h e s i t e , b u t i t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e use of l a b r e t s f i r s t o r i g i n a t e d d u r i n g t h e M a y n e p h a s e o n t h e G u l f I s l a n d s as t h e r e i s n o n - a r t i f a c t u a l d a t a from Pender Canal s u p p o r t i n g this second explanation.  The exact p r o v e n i e n c e  of  t h e l a b r e t s from H e l e n P o i n t i s not k n o w n . Bone and Antler Implements U n s h a p e d a n d f r a g m e n t s of w o r k e d bone a n d a n t l e r a r t i f a c t s a r e most common a r t i f a c t t y p e s made from o r g a n i c r a w m a t e r i a l s .  the  Bone c h i s e l s a n d  wedges are p r e s e n t i n the Mayne phase.  C u l t u r a l t r a i t s s u c h as l o n g bone  p o i n t s a n d bone p e n d a n t s m u s t be examined i n p e r s o n i n o r d e r  to  c o m p a r e / c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e bone p o i n t s a n d r e c t a n g u l a r s h a p e d bone p e n d a n t s . A n important s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r for the Mayne phase is bilaterally b a r b e d h a r p o o n s made of a n t l e r .  T h i s a r t i f a c t t y p e was n o t f o u n d at C r e s c e n t B e a c h  a n d i t was n o t common at Helen P o i n t ( o n l y n i n e of 693 a r t i f a c t s w e r e as b i l a t e r a l l y b a r b e d p o i n t s a n d h a r p o o n s [ C a r l s o n 1975:12]).  defined  Two b i l a t e r a l l y  b a r b e d a n t l e r p o i n t s a r e p r e s e n t from S t . M u n g o a l o n g w i t h one b i l a t e r a l l y b a r b e d bone p o i n t f r o m G l e n r o s e .  As with the St. Mungo phase, s t y l i s t i c  s h a p e d a r t i f a c t s , c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e Mayne p h a s e , a r e n o t common a n d p l a c i n g e m p h a s i s o n s u c h a small p r o p o r t i o n of t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e estimates a p a r t i c u l a r a r t i f a c t t y p e ' s o v e r a l l i m p o r t a n c e .  over-  Stylistic markers  must be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o a more g e n e r a l a n a l y s i s of t h e s i t e i n o r d e r a s c e r t a i n site f u n c t i o n a n d p r o v i d e k n o w l e d g e  concerning whether an artifact  i s a s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r of a c u l t u r a l g r o u p , o r a m a r k e r of a s p e c i f i c activity.  to  site  The p a u c i t y of b a r b e d p o i n t s a n d h a r p o o n s i n c o m p a r i s o n to s h a p e d  b i f a c e s , as p r e v i o u s l y s u g g e s t e d ,  may i n d i c a t e l e s s e m p h a s i s o n s e a  ( u n l e s s implements u s e d to p r o c u r e s e a r e s o u r c e s w e r e made f r o m  resources  perishable  material).  D i s c u s s i o n of M a y n e P h a s e A r t i f a c t  Assemblage  T h e r e a r e two p r o b l e m s a p p a r e n t i n d i s c u s s i n g t h e a r t i f a c t p r e s e n t from t h e M a y n e p h a s e .  Of t h e two s i t e s w i t h d a t e d  assemblage  components  a t t r i b u t e to t h e M a y n e p h a s e , o n l y C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s f u l l y r e p o r t e d . l a c k of f u l l y r e p o r t e d , d a t e d a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s  This  makes my c o m p a r i s o n s  b e t w e e n t h e S t . M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e s somewhat t e n u o u s .  One r e s e a r c h  goal of t h i s t h e s i s i s a d e t a i l e d c o m p a r i s o n of t h e M a y n e p h a s e a r t i f a c t assemblage from C r e s c e n t B e a c h w i t h two S t . M u n g o p h a s e a r t i f a c t  assemblages  i n o r d e r to d e t e r m i n e i f t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h a r t i f a c t assemblage b e l o n g s to t h e Mayne o r S t . M u n g o p h a s e .  If t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e from C r e s c e n t B e a c h  shows a g r e a t e r s i m i l a r i t y to t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s from o t h e r S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s , C a r l s o n ' s Helen P o i n t M a y n e p h a s e component w i l l c o n t a i n t h e o n l y s u b s t a n t i a l Mayne phase artifact  assemblage.  T h e r e are problems w i t h the a r t i f a c t assemblage from the Mayne phase component at H e l e n P o i n t .  M a n y of t h e a r t i f a c t s u s e d to define t h i s p h a s e  (for example: q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s , m i c r o b l a d e s , c h i p p e d s t o n e p o i n t s , g r o u n d stone p o i n t s a n d l a b r e t s ) a r e more o f t e n u s e d to define t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h phase.  T h i s implies that either the Mayne phase is i n c o r p o r a t e d into the  L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e , o r i t m u s t be r e - e x a m i n e d f o r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of t h e p r e s e n c e of a L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t .  A t h i r d possible explanation is that  t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s t h e s o u r c e of t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e .  Based on the  dates C a r l s o n (1985:60) g i v e s f o r t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e i n h i s P e n d e r C a n a l r e p o r t (4000 - 2500 B P ) , t h e r e i s movement t o w a r d s i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e  two  phases on the Gulf Islands. I n C h a p t e r F o u r t h e d e b a t e a b o u t t h e S t . M u n g o a n d Mayne p h a s e s c o n t i n u e s a l o n g w i t h t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e t h i r d p h a s e (Eayem).  St. Mungo,  Mayne a n d Eayem a r e t h e t h r e e s u b p h a s e s c o m p r i s i n g t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e . The d i v e r s i t y i n a r t i f a c t t y p e s r e p r e s e n t e d i n the Mayne phase  suggests  a g r e a t d e a l of s i t e a c t i v i t i e s took p l a c e at Helen P o i n t a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h , E x p e d i e n t made tools ( b o t h c h i p p e d a n d bone) dominate t h e a s s e m b l a g e .  The  d e g r e e of o v e r l a p between t h e S t , M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e c u l t u r a l m a r k e r s  c a n n o t be a s c e r t a i n e d w i t h o u t a close e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e a r t i f a c t  assemblages.  Q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g a r t i f a c t t y p e s t h o u g h t to be c u l t u r a l m a r k e r s f o r  the  M a y n e p h a s e l e a d s to d i s c u s s i o n of w h i c h a r t i f a c t t y p e s a r e u n i q u e to t h e M a y n e p h a s e a n d w h i c h a r e p r e s e n t i n b o t h t h e Mayne a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h phase.  B i l a t e r a l l y b a r b e d h a r p o o n s a n d p o i n t s of a n t l e r a r e one s t y l i s t i c  m a r k e r b u t t h e y a r e not u n i q u e to t h e Mayne p h a s e ( u n l i k e t h e  narrow-angled  f o r m e d u n i f a c e s f r o m t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e ) as t h e y a r e a l s o p r e s e n t i n t h e Locarno Beach phase.  Two b i l a t e r a l l y b a r b e d p o i n t s of a n t l e r a r e  present  from S t . M u n g o a n d one i s p r e s e n t at G l e n r o s e .  Raw M a t e r i a l s A t Helen P o i n t , o b s i d i a n was u t i l i z e d as a r a w m a t e r i a l , b u t no o b s i d i a n was f o u n d a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  One major d i f f e r e n c e  perceived  between St.  M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e c o m p o n e n t s i s the p r e s e n c e of q u a r t z a n d o b s i d i a n as raw materials. s t o n e tools.  A t b o t h s i t e s b a s a l t was t h e d o m i n a n t r a w m a t e r i a l f o r  chipped  Mammal bone dominated t h e o r g a n i c r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s .  F a u n a l Remains A f a u n a l a n a l y s i s has not y e t been completed f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e a t Helen P o i n t , b u t M c M u r d o (1974:131-139) excavation units.  How r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  p r e s e n t s f a u n a l d a t a from h i s  t h e s e r e m a i n s a r e of t h e o l d e r  Mayne  p h a s e (Helen P o i n t la) i s u n c e r t a i n , b u t t h e a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n a l l o w s some t e n t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n s . during Percy's  for  T h e r e was no f a u n a l a n a l y s i s at C r e s c e n t B e a c h  excavations.  I n t h e mammal c a t e g o r y , b o t h l a n d a n d s e a mammals a r e w i t h C o a s t d e e r , dog a n d b e a v e r t h e most common ( M c M u r d o  represented  1974:133-134).  S e a mammals ( e i t h e r s e a l s o r s e a l i o n s ) a r e p r e s e n t b u t r a r e .  Two  fragments  of whale bone w i t h a d z e m a r k s w e r e f o u n d i n Component l b . Salmon, r o c k f i s h a n d l i n g c o d a r e a l l p r e s u m e d to be p r e s e n t d u r i n g t h e Mayne p h a s e as t h e y a r e p r e s e n t i n Component l b ( M c M u r d o 1974:135-136). None of M c M u r d o ' s f i s h remeiins r e c o v e r e d  from h i s e a r l y c o m p o n e n t w e r e  a b u n d a n t i n c o m p a r i s o n to t h e l a t e r c o m p o n e n t s , b u t a v a r i e t y of f i s h w e r e found.  U n l e s s Helen P o i n t l a was a s p e c i a l i z e d a c t i v i t y s i t e (a d o u b t f u l  inference  g i v e n t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e ) , one c a n assume t h a t s e v e r a l  species  of f i s h w e r e e x p l o i t e d . S h e l l f i s h a r e common a n d s e v e r a l v a r i e t i e s of clams a r e w e l l r e p r e s e n t e d . M y t i l u s i s a b s e n t ( M c M u r d o 1974:131-132).  C a r l s o n (1970:114) s t a t e s t h a t t h e  only s h e l l p r e s e n t i n his Mayne phase component is h i g h l y  fragmented.  S e a s o n a l i t y i n d i c a t o r s c a n n o t be d e t e r m i n e d at t h i s time b u t t h e v a r i e t y of food r e s o u r c e s u t i l i z e d s u g g e s t s more t h a n one s e a s o n of o c c u p a t i o n .  Features The dominant feature for the Mayne phase is h e a r t h s , with C a r l s o n (1970:115) s t a t i n g t h a t c i r c u l a r h e a r t h s a r e p r e s e n t . (1974:25-29)  At Crescent Beach, Percy  s t a t e s t h a t two b a r e l y d i s c e r n i b l e h e a r t h s w e r e p r e s e n t i n  Component 1 (as named b y  Percy).  Carlson states that r o c k slab features are also p r e s e n t d u r i n g the Mayne p h a s e .  He does n o t d e s c r i b e one, b u t M c M u r d o (1974:123) does f o r  Helen P o i n t l b component.  the  McMurdo excavated a c l a y - l i n e d bowl-like  d e p r e s s i o n , o n t h e bottom of w h i c h was a l a r g e f l a t s a n d s t o n e s l a b w i t h a l e n s of d a r k c h a r c o a l a n d c l a y .  covered  The f u n c t i o n of s u c h a f e a t u r e i s n o t  known, but McMurdo postulates it is a cooking feature.  F o u r similar features  were u n e a r t h e d i n C o m p o n e n t 1 at C r e s c e n t B e a c h . P o s t m o l d s w e r e o b s e r v e d w i t h t h e f e a t u r e f r o m Helen P o i n t l b a n d w i t h one of t h e f e a t u r e s from C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  T h e r e i s no d i s c u s s i o n of  postmolds  from C a r l s o n ' s C o m p o n e n t l a . A t H e l e n P o i n t Component l b , M c M u r d o u n c o v e r e d t h e r e m a i n s of a p o s s i b l e l i v i n g f l o o r w i t h two h e a r t h s c a t t e r s a n d two a s s o c i a t e d p o s t m o l d s .  It  i s q u i t e l i k e l y t h a t s i m i l a r f e a t u r e s w e r e f o u n d i n Component l a . T h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n of how r e p r e s e n t a t i v e M c M u r d o ' s f e a t u r e s i n Component l b a r e of C a r l s o n ' s i n Component lau  The c l a y - l i n e d b o w l  feature  w i t h t h e s a n d s t o n e s l a b i n C o m p o n e n t l b s h a r e s some s i m i l a r i t i e s w i t h f e a t u r e s from C r e s c e n t B e a c h , so C a r l s o n ' s f e a t u r e s i n Component l a c o u l d be s i m i l a r . T h e f e a t u r e s p r e s e n t f r o m M c M u r d o ' s e x c a v a t i o n i n Component l b a r e of t h e same t y p e as t h o s e f o u n d i n S t . M u n g o w i t h the p o s s i b l e e x c e p t i o n of sandstone slab.  the  E x t r a p o l a t i n g from t h e Component l b d a t a , t h e r e i s l i t t l e  i n d i c a t i o n of f e a t u r e d i f f e r e n c e s  between the Mayne a n d St. Mungo phase  f e a t u r e s e x c e p t f o r t h e h i g h n u m b e r of c l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Mayne c o m p o n e n t s .  This difference  i s not s u b s t a n t i a l b e c a u s e t h e r e i s a  s i m i l a r f e a t u r e p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o ( t h e r e was a c l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e  also  e x c a v a t e d from t h e P i t t R i v e r s i t e , i t w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r F o u r ) t h i s i s not a u n i q u e M a y n e p h a s e  so  feature.  C a r l s o n ' s l i s t of c u l t u r a l t r a i t s f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e (1970:115) i n c l u d e s e x t e n d e d b u r i a l s , b u t does not i n d i c a t e t h e n u m b e r of b u r i a l s i n v o l v e d a n d whether this pattern is exclusive. 1974:128-130) a r e s e m i - f l e x e d .  The b u r i a l s from Component l b ( M c M u r d o  Two of t h e b u r i a l s i n Component l b h a v e a  s i n g l e s l a b of r o c k a s s o c i a t e d w i t h them a n d t h e b u r i a l s a r e i n - g r o u n d  i n t e r m e n t s ( M c M u r d o 1974:128-129).  T h e r e was no e v i d e n c e of g r a v e g o o d s .  T h r e e of P e r c y ' s b u r i a l s d a t e d to t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e , b u t none w e r e recovered  from s t r a t i g r a p h i c a l l y c o n t r o l l e d e x c a v a t i o n s ( P e r c y 1974:33).  t h e p o s i t i o n of one b u r i a l was d e t e r m i n e d a n d i t was s e m i - f l e x e d 1980:209-212).  Only  (Beattie  T h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e of g r a v e g o o d s b u t my d e t a i l e d  d i s c u s s i o n of t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h site i n t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n e x p l a i n s w h y g r a v e g o o d s a n d t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n to t h e b u r i a l s i s q u e s t i o n a b l e . evidence  the  T h e r e i s no  g a t h e r e d so f a r s u g g e s t i n g e x t e n d e d b u r i a l s a r e a c u l t u r a l f e a t u r e  of  the e a r l y p e r i o d s on the Northwest Coast.  Mayne Phase Conclusions Once c o m p o n e n t s a t t r i b u t e d to t h e M a y n e p h a s e a r e more f u l l y p u b l i s h e d one c a n a t t e m p t a more t h o r o u g h c o m p a r i s o n of t h e M a y n e p h a s e a n d t h e S t . Mungo phase.  A t t h i s point Helen Point is the o n l y site w i t h a l a r g e  component a r t i f a c t assemblage.  From the evidence  Mayne  p r e s e n t e d so f a r , i t i s  p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e Mayne component from H e l e n P o i n t i s i n t e r m i x e d w i t h a L o c a r n o B e a c h component.  Without t h e f i n a l d e s c r i p t i o n f r o m H e l e n P o i n t ,  d e f i n i t e c o n c l u s i o n s a n d s t a t e m e n t s c a n n o t be made a t t h i s p o i n t i n time.  The  a r e a e n c o m p a s s e d b y t h e M a y n e p h a s e may i n c l u d e b o t h t h e M a i n l a n d a n d t h e G u l f I s l a n d s o r p e r h a p s t h e G u l f I s l a n d s alone.  Other undated artifact  a s s e m b l a g e s may date to t h e Mayne p h a s e (for example B l i s s L a n d i n g ) , b u t o n l y t h o s e w i t h C14 dates a n d s i g n i f i c a n t a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s w e r e d i s c u s s e d . The M a y n e p h a s e may b e g i n as e a r l y as 5450 B P , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e o l d e s t date at Helen P o i n t . known for sure.  T h e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e p h a s e i s not  It i s not u n l i k e l y t h a t as time goes o n , t h e d a t e s f o r  the S t . M u n g o a n d Mayne p h a s e w i l l o v e r l a p more a n d more.  both  P e r h a p s t h e g r e a t e s t c o n t r o v e r s y of t h e M a y n e p h a s e c o n c e r n s t h e artifact assemblage.  On a g e n e r a l l e v e l t h e a r t i f a c t s r e s e m b l e S t . M u n g o  a r t i f a c t s i n t h a t b o t h a s s e m b l a g e s a r e dominated b y u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone a n d bone t o o l s .  Well-made t o o l s f o r m a d e f i n i t e m i n o r i t y i n t h e  assemblages  w i t h c h i p p e d stone b i f a c e s t h e most common w e l l - m a d e s h a p e d t o o l .  In both  p h a s e s l e a f - s h a p e d a n d c o n t r a c t i n g stem b i f a c e s a r e t h e d o m i n a n t s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone b i f a c e s t y l e s .  G r o u n d stone technology is present i n both  p h a s e s , b u t may be more common d u r i n g t h e M a y n e p h a s e .  Stylistic ground  s t o n e t o o l s f o r t h e M a y n e p h a s e may o r may n o t i n c l u d e g r o u n d s t o n e p o i n t s , g r o u n d stone k n i v e s a n d l a b r e t s (As w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r , none of  these  t h r e e a r t i f a c t t y p e s w e r e d i s c o v e r e d i n t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t at C r e s c e n t Beach). There are differences  i n the a r t i f a c t t y p e s present.  Microblades and  q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s a r e b o t h p r e s e n t i n t h e M a y n e p h a s e a n d almost e n t i r e l y a b s e n t i n S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s (As w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r , one m a c r o b l a d e l i k e f l a k e a n d one q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h w e r e d i s c o v e r e d i n t h e C h a r l e s component at C r e s c e n t B e a c h ) .  O b s i d i a n m i c r o b l a d e s a r e f o u n d at H e l e n P o i n t , w h i l e  obsidian objects are nearly absent from St. Mungo components.  The g r o u n d  stone t e c h n o l o g y of t h e M a y n e p h a s e i s more a p p a r e n t a n d i n c l u d e s b o t h g r o u n d s t o n e k n i v e s a n d l a b r e t s , n e i t h e r of w h i c h a r e p r e s e n t i n S t . M u n g o a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s (or t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h ) . W i t h more i n f o r m a t i o n , t h e d e l i n e a t i o n of t h e c o m p o n e n t s p r e s e n t a t Helen P o i n t c a n be u n d e r t a k e n , a n s w e r i n g q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g how m u c h of t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e from H e l e n P o i n t C o m p o n e n t l a r e s u l t s f r o m t h e Mayne c o m p o n e n t a n d how m u c h f r o m a p o s s i b l e L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t . i s p i v o t a l i n o u r s e a r c h f o r i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e e v o l u t i o n of  This site the  C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h E t h n o g r a p h i e P a t t e r n a n d we m u s t g l e a n as m u c h i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m i t as i s p o s s i b l e . T h e f a u n a l r e m a i n s f r o m H e l e n P o i n t h a v e not b e e n f u l l y p u b l i s h e d , b u t i n f o r m a t i o n g a t h e r e d f r o m t h e component f o l l o w i n g t h e M a y n e suggests  component  a s u b s i s t e n c e base i n c l u d i n g l a n d a n d s e a r e s o u r c e s c o m p r i s i n g  mammals ( b o t h l a n d a n d sea), f i s h a n d s h e l l f i s h .  M c M u r d o (1974:136)  suggests  l a n d mammals (Coast d e e r ) w e r e t h r e e times more i m p o r t a n t t h a n s e a mammals. T h e f e a t u r e s p r e s e n t i n t h e M a y n e p h a s e may c o n t a i n one new type not p r e v i o u s l y encountered.  F r o m Helen P o i n t l b h o r i z o n t a l s a n d s t o n e  s l a b s w e r e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o a c l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e a n d two b u r i a l s . C a r l s o n (1970:115)  feature  Although  states t h a t rock slab features are p r e s e n t i n the Mayne  c o m p o n e n t , he does not s p e c i f y t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h o t h e r f e a t u r e s .  On t h e  G u l f I s l a n d s , s a n d s t o n e c o m p r i s e s m u c h of t h e n a t u r a l g e o l o g y a n d to see i t u s e d i s not s u r p r i s i n g . difference  between  W h e t h e r t h e u s e of s a n d s t o n e s l a b s i m p l i e s a c u l t u r a l  the Mayne phase a n d the St. Mungo is u n c l e a r .  T h e b u r i a l i n f o r m a t i o n p u b l i s h e d to date s u g g e s t s with b u r i a l s p a r t i a l l y flexed, were the p r e f e r r e d  form.  i n - g r o u n d interment  Carlson originally suggested  Until such evidence  extended  is p u b l i s h e d , the  burials  burial  p a t t e r n s of t h e M a y n e a n d St. M u n g o p h a s e s c a n n o t be d i s t i n g u i s h e d . A n i m p o r t a n t s i m i l a r i t y between evidence  t h e two p h a s e s i s t h e l a c k of  f o r h i g h s t a t u s v e r s u s low s t a t u s i n d i v i d u a l s .  The l a b r e t s  definitive associated  w i t h t h e Helen P o i n t M a y n e c o m p o n e n t a r e t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e i n d i c a t i o n of status differentiation.  Other evidence  of p o s s i b l e s t a t u s d i f f e r e n c e s  comes  from l a b r e t wear o n one s k e l e t o n at P e n d e r C a n a l a n d two a t T s a w w a s s e n be d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r F o u r ) ,  The l a c k of g r a v e g o o d s , low n u m b e r s of  p e r s o n a l o r n a m e n t s a n d l a c k of p h y s i c a l l y modified s k e l e t o n s l e a d s to t h e  (to  conclusion that the c u l t u r a l groups p r e s e n t d u r i n g the St. Mungo and Mayne p h a s e a r e not y e t r a n k e d i n t e r m s of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . Now t h a t t h e S t . M u n g o a n d M a y n e p h a s e s h a v e b e e n i n t r o d u c e d , t h e t h r e e s i t e s to be u s e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r c a n be p r e s e n t e d f o r  further  discussion.  Site Descriptions The Glenrose C a n n e r y Site Site Location The G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y S i t e ( D g R r 6) i s l o c a t e d o n t h e e d g e of the F r a s e r R i v e r Delta w i t h i n t h e c i t y b o u n d a r i e s of V a n c o u v e r , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . site has b e e n e x c a v a t e d excavation history).  The f o l l o w i n g  b a s e d o n M a t s o n (1976). a r m of t h e F r a s e r R i v e r . the site:  s e v e r a l times (see  The  M a t s o n 1976:1 f o r a r e v i e w of i t s  site d e s c r i p t i o n , u n l e s s otherwise  stated is  T h e s i t e i s l o c a t e d o n t h e s o u t h b a n k of t h e main T h e r e a r e n a t u r a l b o u n d a r i e s o n t h e t h r e e s i d e s of  to t h e n o r t h i s t h e F r a s e r R i v e r , to t h e s o u t h i s P a n o r a m a R i d g e  w h i c h i s a h i g h r i d g e of g l a c i a l t i l l ( A r m s t r o n g  1956 a n d 1957), a n d to t h e  w e s t i s a small s t r e a m r u n n i n g off P a n o r a m a R i d g e . n a t u r a l b o u n d a r y o n t h e e a s t e r n s i d e of t h e s i t e .  T h e r e i s no d i s t i n c t i v e A l t h o u g h the o r i g i n a l site  b o u n d a r i e s h a v e b e e n d i s t u r b e d b y t h e b u i l d i n g of t h e a d j a c e n t  Great  N o r t h e r n R a i l w a y t r a c k s , t h e a p p r o x i m a t e s i t e a r e a i s 260 m e t e r s l o n g (east of t h e small stream) a n d a b o u t 60 meters o n t h e n o r t h - s o u t h a x i s (Matson 1976, E l d r i d g e 1991).  T h e maximum d e p t h of p r e h i s t o r i c d e p o s i t s a t t h e s i t e i s  almost 6 meters. Present vegetation  i s m u c h m o d i f i e d b u t M a t s o n (1976:3-7) g i v e s a b r i e f  d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e f l o r a f o u n d o n s i t e a n d t h o u g h t to be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  of  the  natural vegetation.  The site's flora a n d location s u g g e s t that the site exists  now a n d i n p r e h i s t o r i c times o n t h e p e r i p h e r y of a c o a s t a l D o u g l a s f i r  forest.  Ethnographic Culture Area The G l e n r o s e s i t e f a l l s w i t h i n t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c b o u n d a r i e s of t h e K w a n t l e n t e r r i t o r y of t h e H a l k o m e l e m - s p e a k i n g C o a s t S a l i s h I n d i a n s  (Duff  1952:23).  Excavation Procedures The f o l l o w i n g d e s c r i p t i o n of e x c a v a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s a n d s i t e s t r a t i g r a p h y i s a c o n d e n s e d v e r s i o n of M a t s o n ' s (1976:8-15) o r i g i n a l r e p o r t . directed and excavated by different  T h e s i t e was  people, t h u s e x c a v a t i o n methods w e r e n o t  t h e same d u r i n g t h e two f i e l d s e a s o n s s p e n t a t G l e n r o s e . excavation u n i t s were randomly chosen.  In both years the  The m i d d e n was e x c a v a t e d i n 2X2  meter u n i t s e x c e p t f o r U n i t s 1 a n d 5 w h i c h o r i g i n a l l y h a d a one meter b a u l k s e p a r a t i n g them.  I n t h e s e c o n d s e a s o n , t h i s b a u l k was e x c a v a t e d a n d c a l l e d  U n i t 55 (1X2).  T h e t o t a l a r e a of t h i s s e c t i o n of t h e e x c a v a t i o n was a 5X2  meter t r e n c h .  F i g u r e 2.3 r e p r o d u c e s t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s .  e x c a v a t i o n was b y 10 cm a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s .  Artifacts found i n situ were  All  given  three dimensional provenience for both seasons, but i n the f i r s t season, they were not keyed into features.  Some e x c a v a t e d m a t e r i a l i n t h e f i r s t f i e l d  season was d r y s i f t e d e i t h e r t h r o u g h 1/4 o r 1/8 i n c h s c r e e n mesh.  I n the  s e c o n d y e a r , o n l y 1/8 i n c h s c r e e n mesh was u s e d a n d some m a t e r i a l was w a t e r s c r e e n e d as o p p o s e d to d r y  screened.  L i k e a l l l a r g e s h e l l m i d d e n s i t e s , t h e s t r a t i g r a p h y at G l e n r o s e i s complex and changes dramatically t h r o u g h o u t the units.  The d e p t h of t h e c u l t u r a l  ^ eDGrM5Â!^^^5Ei5^^§t_:---^ -4.0 RAILWAY  TRACKS  —  40 • ^0G£-OF RAILWAY GRAVEL  EDGE -  OF -  8Ar4K  d e p o s i t s r a n g e d from 2 to 5.5 m e t e r s . s t r a t i g r a p h y comes from t h e 2 X 5 1/5, a n d 5 (Matson 1976:10).  The b e s t p i c t u r e of o v e r a l l s i t e  meter t r e n c h w h i c h c o n s i s t e d of u n i t s 1,  T h e S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t was composed of a  m i x t u r e of many m a t e r i a l s , b u t t h e s h e l l of M y t i l u s e d u l i s material found i n the s t r a t i g r a p h y .  dominated a l l o t h e r  The l a r g e q u a n t i t y of M y t i l u s e d u l i s  s u g g e s t s a r o c k y f o r e s h o r e was close b y (Matson 1976:15),  Chronology Of t h e f o u r d a t e s o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e St, M u n g o c o m p o n e n t t h e r e i s one q u e s t i o n a b l e date, w h i l e t h e o t h e r t h r e e c o n c u r (See Table 2,1),  The  two  o l d e s t dates (41851105 [S 788], a n d 42401110 B P [Gak 4648]) w e r e o b t a i n e d f r o m b a s a l d e p o s i t s i n t h e c o m p o n e n t s u g g e s t i n g a n i n i t i a l b e g i n n i n g date no e a r l i e r t h a n 4400 B.P (see M a t s o n 1976:16,19).  A date of 3280+105 B P (Gak 4863) was  o b t a i n e d from t h e u p p e r m o s t p o r t i o n of t h i s c o m p o n e n t p u t t i n g t h e t e r m i n a t i o n date of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e a t no l a t e r t h a n 3100 B P .  T h e one  questionable  date (3570195 [Gak 4867]) comes from a sample 1.8 meters d i r e c t l y below t h e 3280 B P date.  The d e p t h of t h e d e p o s i t from w h i c h t h e sample was t a k e n , a n d  t h e o t h e r two b a s a l d e p o s i t d a t e s i m p l y t h i s date i s too y o u n g  (Matson  1976:19).  F a u n a l Remains The e x c a v a t i o n of a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s at G l e n r o s e a n d t h e c o m p l e x i t y of i t s stratigraphy, " . . .  d i d not allow f o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n of a s e a s o n o r s e a s o n s of  occupation represented  b y e a c h l a y e r o r l e n s e n c o u n t e r e d " (Imamoto 1976:32).  I n s t e a d , s e a s o n a l i t y was, " d e t e r m i n a b l e o n l y f o r t h e major c o m p o n e n t s i n g e n e r a l " (Imamoto 1976:32).  F r o m t h e f a u n a l r e m a i n s p r e s e n t , summer a n d f a l l  o c c u p a t i o n of t h e s i t e w e r e d e f i n i t e , a l o n g w i t h a p r o b a b l e w i n t e r o c c u p a t i o n . (Imamoto 1976:40). F a u n a l r e m a i n s p r e s e n t i n t h e S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t i n c l u d e sedmon, e l k a n d d e e r ( i n c l u d i n g j u v e n i l e s ) , s e a l , b e a v e r , a n d v a r i o u s s p e c i e s of b i r d s . Elk, seal, a n d deer remains were found i n all three components a n d it is a r g u e d t h a t a l l mammals f o u n d at G l e n r o s e o c c u r i n t h e same p r o p o r t i o n s i n a l l t h r e e c o m p o n e n t s (Matson 1976:91).  E l k i s t h e most i m p o r t a n t mammal, w i t h  s e a l a n d d e e r b e i n g of e q u a l i m p o r t a n c e v i s - a - v i s e a c h o t h e r , b u t o n l y a t h i r d as i m p o r t a n t c o m p a r e d to e l k (Matson 1976:96).  B i r d remains change  significantly i n p r o p o r t i o n between the Old C o r d i l l e r a n a n d St. Mungo deposits. T h i s may r e f l e c t a c h a n g e i n e n v i r o n m e n t , a n i n c r e a s e d p u r s u i t of a v i a n s p e c i e s , o r i t may r e f l e c t a c h a n g e i n b o t h n a t u r a l a n d c u l t u r a l  processes.  F i s h remains for the St. Mungo component exhibit a v e r y large c o m p a r e d to t h e O l d C o r d i l l e r a n component.  increase  M a t s o n (1976:96) s u g g e s t s  that  salmon may r e p r e s e n t t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a u n a l r e s o u r c e f o r t h e S t . M u n g o component.  S e v e r a l o t h e r s p e c i e s of f i s h a r e p r e s e n t i n t h e  i n c l u d i n g the f o l l o w i n g : stickleback.  component  flounder, peamouth, s t u r g e o n , eulachon a n d  I n t e r m s of c a l o r i c i m p o r t a n c e , salmon i s most i m p o r t a n t followed  b y s t u r g e o n w i t h m i n n o w / s u c k e r s a n d f l o u n d e r s , as a g r o u p , t h e t h i r d most i m p o r t a n t (Matson 1976:94).  E u l a c h o n was of t h e l e a s t i m p o r t a n c e , b u t was  s t i l l p r e s e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o m p o n e n t (Matson 1976:94).  The p r e s e n c e  of  e u l a c h o n a n d s t i c k l e b a c k s u g g e s t s a late s p r i n g , summer o c c u p a t i o n w i t h salmon s u g g e s t i n g t h e p r e s e n c e of a f a l l o c c u p a t i o n as w e l l (Matson 1976:96). T h e s h e l l f i s h a n a l y s i s p r e s e n t e d t h e most i m p o r t a n t i n f o r m a t i o n of a l l t h e f a u n a l r e m a i n s r e c o v e r e d from t h e S t . M u n g o component.  Ham (1976:52)  states t h a t M y t i l u s e d u l i s i s at l e a s t as i m p o r t a n t as e l k as a food s o u r c e ,  based on conservative  meat estimates f o r t h e s h e l l f i s h .  Ham's a n a l y s i s p r o v e d  t h a t d u r i n g t h e e a r l y p e r i o d of N o r t h w e s t C o a s t p r e h i s t o r y , m u s s e l s were a m u c h more i m p o r t a n t food s o u r c e t h a n p r e v i o u s l y t h o u g h t .  The g r o w t h  rings  of b o t h i n t a c t m u s s e l s a n d clams i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e site was o c c u p i e d d u r i n g v a r i o u s s e a s o n s t h r o u g h o u t t h e y e a r (Ham 1976:78).  Features While a f u n c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s of t h e f e a t u r e s e x c a v a t e d at G l e n r o s e w o u l d be d e s i r a b l e , i t was not p o s s i b l e b e c a u s e of t h e e x c a v a t i o n b y a r t i f i c i a l l e v e l s w h i c h meant t h a t a r t i f a c t a n d f a u n a l r e m a i n s r e l a t i o n s h i p s to f e a t u r e s not a l w a y s a p p a r e n t . together  were  E x c a v a t i o n b y a r t i f i c i a l l e v e l w o u l d also t e n d to l u m p  l a y e r s w h i c h w e r e i n d i r e c t a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h l a y e r s w h i c h w e r e not.  E i g h t h e a r t h f e a t u r e s w e r e e x c a v a t e d f r o m t h e S t . M u n g o component, ". . a n d i n a l l c a s e s , t h e y w e r e c o m p o s e d of c h a r c o a l a n d f i r e - c r a c k e d r o c k i n a w e l l d e f i n e d a r e a of q u i t e r e g u l a r s i z e " (Gose 1976:190). these features  represent repeated  Gose a s s u m e s t h a t  i n s i t u b u r n i n g o n a n a r e a of a l i v i n g  A s Gose p o i n t s o u t , t h e s e f e a t u r e s may a c t u a l l y be t h e r e m n a n t s of used elsewhere  and redeposited  floor.  hearths  into the midden.  T h e r e w e r e two o c c u r r e n c e s of p o s t m o l d s e x c a v a t e d f r o m S t . M u n g o , one g r o u p of s i x , a n d a n o t h e r g r o u p of f o u r small (10 cm diameter) a s s o c i a t e d w i t h one l a r g e (20 cm d i a m e t e r ) (Gose 1976:193). One g r o u p of f e a t u r e s  from G l e n r o s e w e r e d e f i n e d as ' L i v i n g F l o o r s ' .  A l l of t h e s e f e a t u r e s a r e composed of t h i n c o m p a c t e d l a y e r s of s i l t a n d f i n e l y crushed shell.  O f t e n , o t h e r f e a t u r e s i n c l u d i n g s e v e n b u r i a l s from L i v i n g F l o o r  #5, a r t i f a c t s a n d f a u n a l r e m a i n s w e r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e s e L i v i n g F l o o r s . Gose notes t h a t some L i v i n g F l o o r s w e r e p r o b a b l y not d e t e c t e d  during  e x c a v a t i o n b e c a u s e no o t h e r o b v i o u s f e a t u r e s w e r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e m , m a k i n g them look l i k e a t h i n compact l a y e r .  F u r t h e r difficulties i n detecting  L i v i n g F l o o r s w h i l e e x c a v a t i n g w o u l d r e s u l t f r o m t h e t y p e of e x c a v a t i o n b e i n g u n d e r t a k e n w h i c h was i n d e e p , d a r k a n d small u n i t s , w h e r e d e t e c t i n g l a y e r c h a n g e s w o u l d not be  subtle  easy.  N i n e t e e n b u r i a l s of v a r i o u s c o m p l e t e n e s s w e r e r e c o v e r e d f r o m G l e n r o s e a n d of t h o s e , e l e v e n a r e a s s o c i a t e d ^with t h e S t . M u n g o component.  The  b u r i a l s i n c l u d e s e v e n a d u l t s , one s u b - a d u l t , two c h i l d r e n a n d one i n f a n t .  All  w e r e i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r m e n t s w i t h s e v e n r e c o v e r e d from U n i t s 1, 1/5 a n d 5 ( S t y l e s 1976:203).  Some of t h e s k e l e t o n s w e r e p l a c e d i n c y s t - l i k e d e p r e s s i o n s ,  w i t h some d e g r e e of f l e x u r e a n d many i n d i v i d u a l s w e r e p l a c e d o n t h e i r left s i d e ( S t y l e s , p.203-204).  G r a v e i n c l u s i o n s w e r e n o t common w i t h f i v e b u r i a l s  from t h e S t , M u n g o component c o n t a i n i n g g r a v e g o o d s b u t o n l y i n two (an a d u l t female a n d a c h i l d ) were more t h a n one a r t i f a c t p r e s e n t . female  ( b u r i a l 5) h a d a n e c k l a c e of s m a l l d r i l l e d s h e l l b e a d s a n d a  cases  The a d u l t perforated  bone p e n d a n t w h i l e t h e c h i l d h a d f r a g m e n t s of a bone t o o l a n d a n u l n a tool. T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e of c r a n i a l d e f o r m a t i o n o r l a b r e t w e a r o n a n y of burials.  the  T h u s , t h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e of s t a t u s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n a t t h i s time.  Glenrose N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data Conclusions G l e n r o s e was l o c a t e d to t a k e a d v a n t a g e of b o t h l a n d a n d w a t e r r e s o u r c e s , f o r i t was o n t h e b a n k of t h e F r a s e r R i v e r at t h e e d g e o f a c o a s t a l Douglas f i r forest.  The s i t e i s l a r g e , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t i n i t s r e a l m , a g r e a t  many a c t i v i t i e s took p l a c e .  The s t r a t i g r a p h i e sequence shows c o n t i n u o u s site  d e p o s i t i o n t h r o u g h the S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t w i t h o u t i n d i c a t i o n of d r a m a t i c change.  T h e S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t dates a r e i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h e a c h o t h e r c o n c e r n i n g t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e S t . M u n g o o c c u p a t i o n .  T h e t e r m i n a t i o n date  also f i t s t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e time r a n g e . The e v i d e n c e from f a u n a l , f i s h a n d s h e l l f i s h r e m a i n s s u g g e s t t h e s i t e was o c c u p i e d o n a r e g u l a r b a s i s t h r o u g h o u t t h e S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t , a n d was u s e d to some e x t e n t d u r i n g a l l f o u r s e a s o n s .  T h e w i d e v a r i e t y of f a u n a l  r e m a i n s p o i n t s to a s i t e f u n c t i o n of a p o s s i b l e b a s e camp u s e d i n t h e summer a n d f a l l a l o n g w i t h a p r o b a b l e w i n t e r o c c u p a t i o n as w e l l . The w i d e v a r i e t y of f e a t u r e s , t h e p r e s e n c e of b u r i a l s a n d t h e  relative  a b u n d a n c e of b o t h also s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s i t e was u s e d as more t h a n a l i m i t e d a c t i v i t y site.  From the evidence accumulated from the site report, it is  a p p r o p r i a t e to s u g g e s t t h a t t h e s i t e f u n c t i o n of t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y site d u r i n g t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i n c l u d e d a n u m b e r of p r o c u r e m e n t a c t i v i t i e s t h a t i n v o l v e d e x t r a c t i n g r e s o u r c e s from b o t h l a n d a n d w a t e r , t h r o u g h o u t t h e Although problems with excavation strategy  year.  h i n d e r t h e a n a l y s i s of s i t e  f u n c t i o n o n a more d e t a i l e d l e v e l , ample d a t a i s a v a i l a b l e to allow f o r a g e n e r a l c o m p a r i s o n a n d d i s c u s s i o n of s i t e f u n c t i o n f o r t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y , S t . Mungo Cannery and Crescent Beach sites.  The St. Mungo C a n n e r y Site Site Location The St. M u n g o C a n n e r y S i t e i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1000 meters from t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y S i t e ( M a t s o n 1976:2). been e x c a v a t e d s e v e r a l times.  downstream  L i k e Glenrose, St. Mungo has  Ham et a l . (1986:43-45) o v e r v i e w  these  e x c a v a t i o n s a n d t h e i r r e s u l t s i n t e r m s of time p e r i o d s d i s c o v e r e d o r  defined.  U n l e s s o t h e r w i s e s t a t e d , t h e site d e s c r i p t i o n i s b a s e d o n Ham et a l . (1986).  T h e site i s l o c a t e d o n t h e s o u t h b a n k of t h e main a r m of t h e F r a s e r River.  The o n l y o b v i o u s n a t u r a l b o u n d a r i e s a r e P a n o r a m a R i d g e to t h e s o u t h ,  a n d t h e F r a s e r R i v e r to t h e n o r t h .  To t h e w e s t a n d e a s t , n a t u r a l b o u n d a r i e s  w e r e l o w - l y i n g m a r s h y g r o u n d (Boehm 1973:14-15) a n d a p r e h i s t o r i c stream c u t t i n g t h r o u g h a n d s e p a r a t i n g a s e c t i o n of t h e e a s t e r n p o r t i o n of t h e m i d d e n (Ham et a l . 1986:45).  Boehm (1973:15) s u g g e s t s t h a t d u r i n g i n i t i a l s i t e  o c c u p a t i o n , i t was almost o n s a l t w a t e r a n d f l a t g r o u n d . boundaries have been greatly building.  Original site  disturbed through residential and cannery  A s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n was b u l l d o z e d i n t o t h e r i v e r a n d b o t h R i v e r  Road a n d t h e G r e a t N o r t h e r n R a i l w a y c u t t h r o u g h t h e d e p o s i t s (Boehm  1973:8).  Boehm e s t i m a t e d t h a t t h e o r i g i n a l s i t e b o u n d a r y e x t e n d e d o n t h e e a s t - w e s t axis a b o u t 275 m e t e r s a n d o n t h e n o r t h - s o u t h a x i s a b o u t 91 meters. Ham n o r Boehm i n d i c a t e how m u c h of t h e m i d d e n i s l o c a t e d east of  Neither the  p r e h i s t o r i c s t r e a m c h a n n e l , a l t h o u g h Ham i n d i c a t e s t h a t i t i s o n a h i g h e r t e r r a c e t h a n t h e w e s t e r n d e p o s i t s a n d i s more d i s t u r b e d t h a n t h e r e s t of s i t e (Ham et a l . 1986:45).  the  T h e maximum d e p t h of p r e h i s t o r i c d e p o s i t s at t h e  s i t e i s 2 meters (Ham et a l . 1986:73). S i t e d i s t u r b a n c e h a s g r e a t l y modified t h e n a t u r a l v e g e t a t i o n ,  b u t Ham et  a l . (1986:12-22) d e s c r i b e s p a s t p l a n t communities p r e s e n t i n t h e a r e a .  The  g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n i s t h a t S t . M u n g o , l i k e G l e n r o s e , i s o n t h e p e r i p h e r y of a coastal Douglas f i r forest.  F i g u r e 2.4 s h o w s t h e many h i s t o r i c ( a n d a s s u m e d  p r e h i s t o r i c ) e c o l o g i c a l c o m m u n i t i e s p r e s e n t i n t h e St. M u n g o a r e a . r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n d i c a t e s how a d v a n t a g e o u s l y  located St. Mungo and Glenrose  were f o r p r o c u r i n g a v a r i e t y of r e s o u r c e s from v a r i o u s n e a r b y habitats.  This visual  ecological  Ham et a l . (1986:12-22) p a r t i a l l y l i s t d e s i r e d r a w m a t e r i a l s a n d food  present i n seven ecological communities.  The d i v e r s i t y i n t h e l i s t i s  t  1>^1 ^^•^  tphagnum  - - _ - *  groïïlond  m PSffl  boq  grasslond-shru6  F i g u r e 2.4  •:+:+:•! » 4 » i ( * i l  * i l  »  « «4  • * ' 4 « « A  A  riwerbank  coniferog*  forest  1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 * 1 4 , 1 t 1 1 1 • fi 1 1 4 1 i 1 * i 4 1 . • 1 1 » • t 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 * « • • * i i i i l * i  • l t « r Mort» » ' •'. I » ? 9  fortji  woodland  4  E c o l o g i c a l C o m m u n i t i e s A v a i l a b l e to G l e n r o s e , • St. Mungo a n d Crescent Beach (Based o n Ham et a l . 1986: F i g u r e 2.5)  impressive.  T h i s p r o x i m i t y to so m u c h e c o l o g i c a l d i v e r s i t y , i n my o p i n i o n ,  f u r t h e r s u p p o r t s my i n f e r e n c e c o n c e r n i n g t h e m u l t i - f u n c t i o n a l n a t u r e of  these  two s i t e s .  Ethnographic Culture Area The S t . M u n g o s i t e i s l o c a t e d o n l a n d f a l l i n g w i t h i n t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c t e r r i t o r y of t h e K w a n t l a n p e o p l e who a r e H a l k o m e l e m - s p e a k i n g C o a s t S a l i s h I n d i a n s (Duff  Excavation  1952:23).  Procedures  T h e f o l l o w i n g d e s c r i p t i o n of e x c a v a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s a n d s i t e s t r a t i g r a p h y i s a c o n d e n s e d v e r s i o n o f Ham e t a l . (1986:71-113).  A p o r t i o n of t h e s i t e was  t h r e a t e n e d w i t h d e s t r u c t i o n due to t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e A n n a c i s I s l a n d bridge across the F r a s e r River.  It was e x c a v a t e d d u r i n g A u g u s t 1982 a n d  A p r i l 1983 b y a c r e w u n d e r t h e d i r e c t i o n of L e o n a r d Ham.  The f i r s t o b j e c t i v e  of t h e e x c a v a t i o n was to o b t a i n a n o v e r a l l v i e w of t h e c u l t u r a l a n d n a t u r a l deposits present on site.  A 190 meter b a c k h o e s l i t t r e n c h was  excavated  a r o u n d t h e e n t i r e p e r i m e t e r of t h e d e p o s i t s u n d e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n (Ham et a l . 1 9 8 6 : F i g u r e 4.1).  B a s e d u p o n t h e a n a l y s i s of s t r a t i g r a p h y e x p o s e d b y t h e  b a c k h o e a n d p r o f i l e maps f r o m p a s t e x c a v a t i o n s , a map d e t a i l i n g t h e i n t e g r i t y a n d e x t e n t of c u l t u r a l d e p o s i t s p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o was c o m p i l e d (Ham et a l . 1 9 8 6 : F i g u r e 4.2).  Once a n o v e r v i e w of s i t e s t r a t i g r a p h y was o b t a i n e d ,  excavation units were s u b j e c t i v e l y selected i n locations where s t r a t i g r a p h y suggested  the p r e s e n c e of p o s s i b l e h o u s e f l o o r s .  B l o c k s A to E w e r e set u p  a n d r a n g e d i n s i z e from 2X5 meters (block A) to 2X3 meters ( b l o c k s B a n d C) a n d 2X1 meters ( b l o c k s D a n d E).  F i g u r e 2.5 r e p r o d u c e s t h e l o c a t i o n of  e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s at S t . M u n g o .  S i d e s of u n i t s n o t e x p o s e d b y t h e o r i g i n a l 190  meter s l i t t r e n c h w e r e e x p o s e d b y s h o v e l to e n a b l e a complete f o u r s i d e d v i e w of e a c h u n i t ' s s t r a t i g r a p h y (Ham et a l . 1986:90),  A l l i n t a c t m a t e r i a l was  e x c a v a t e d b y n a t u r a l l a y e r s , w i t h t h i c k e r l a y e r s c r o s s c u t b y 10 cm l e v e l s . A l l e x c a v a t e d m a t e r i a l was w a t e r s c r e e n e d t h r o u g h 1/8 i n c h mesh. d i m e n s i o n a l p r o v e n i e n c e was g i v e n t o a l l a r t i f a c t s f o u n d i n s i t u . amount of p r o v e n i e n c e  Three The  exact  g i v e n to i n s i t u f a u n a l r e m a i n s i s u n c l e a r .  To g i v e some i d e a a b o u t t h e c o m p l e x i t y of e x c a v a t i n g a s h e l l m i d d e n s i t e b y n a t u r a l l a y e r s , 644 u n i q u e l a y e r s w e r e u n c o v e r e d , d e f i n e d , a n d m a p p e d a t St, M u n g o ,  A l t h o u g h t h e n u m b e r of l a y e r s may seem i n d i c a t i v e of a g r e a t  amount of d i v e r s i t y i n t h e m i d d e n m a t e r i a l . Ham et a l . (1986:117) note a h i g h d e g r e e of h o m o g e n e i t y  i n the s t r a t i g r a p h y w i t h sand, a s h and M y t i l u s edulis  s h e l l t h e t h r e e most v i s i b l e c o n s t i t u e n t s .  The h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of M y t i l u s  edulis s u p p o r t s the hypothesis that a r o c k y foreshore 1976:15). meters.  was close b y  (Matson  The d e p t h of t h e c u l t u r a l d e p o s i t s r a n g e from 0.50 to j u s t o v e r 2.0 Ham et a l . p r o v i d e p r o f i l e maps f o r e x c a v a t i o n u n i t s A, B , a n d C (Ham  et a l . 1986:97,101 a n d 104).  U n i t s D, E , a n d F w e r e i n t e n d e d as e x p l o r a t o r y  t r e n c h e s , a n d w h i l e t h e s t r a t i g r a p h y i s d e s c r i b e d (Ham et a l . l 9 8 4 : 1 1 0 - 1 1 3 ) , t h e r e i s no v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of t h e t h r e e  units.  Ham w e n t b e y o n d d e l i n e a t i n g n a t u r a l l a y e r s a n d g r o u p e d s e v e r a l i n t o a House Component w h i c h ,  layers  ". . , i d e n t i f i e s a c o m p o n e n t as c o n t a i n i n g  house f l o o r l a y e r s , b u t i t may also c o n t a i n l a y e r s from o u t s i d e t h e h o u s e " (Ham et a l , 1984:94).  Ham t h o u g h t t h e r e was e v i d e n c e of s e v e r a l h o u s e  components i n e a c h of t h e u n i t s e x c a v a t e d ,  I was u n a b l e to d i s c o v e r  t h i c k n e s s a n d d e p t h of t h e h o u s e c o m p o n e n t s p e r l a y e r o r u n i t .  the  Although  R o o d  mop a f t « r  §  1968/69 excavation  ^  site  fini  1982/83 excavation  * •  site h o r i z o n t a l  vertical  â  Highways  dot u m = 5 . 8 2 2 m a.s.l. d a t u m = NO, EG  1982/83 trenches F i g u r e 2.5  Transportation  S t . M u n g o a n d L o c a t i o n of E x c a v a t i o n U n i t s (Based o n Ham et a L 1986: F i g u r e ??  196  t h e r e a r e s t r a t i g r a p h i e p r o f i l e s , i t w o u l d be e a s i e r to compare t h e s i z e a n d d e p t h of h o u s e c o m p o n e n t s i f m e t r i c i n f o r m a t i o n was a v a i l a b l e .  Chronology Ham o b t a i n e d 18 r a d i o c a r b o n dates from t h e S t . M u n g o s i t e . four were rejected  Of t h e s e ,  b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e e i t h e r too o l d o r too y o u n g i n  c o m p a r i s o n to dates o b t a i n e d from o t h e r u n i t s . 4050 to 4480 B P (see T a b l e  A c c e p t a b l e dates r a n g e  from  2.1).  U n i t C has the youngest dates, with U n i t s A, B, D a n d E following i n that order.  The dates from u n i t C r a n g e from 3340 to 3455 B P s u g g e s t i n g  p o s s i b l e p r e s e n c e of a L o c a r n o B e a c h component.  the  The dates f o r U n i t C a r e  s e v e r a l h u n d r e d y e a r s l a t e r t h a n dates from t h e r e s t of t h e s i t e .  T h i s was  one r e a s o n I d i d n o t i n c l u d e the i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m U n i t C w i t h my a n a l y s i s of S t . M u n g o ( r e f e r to t h e e a r l i e r S t . M u n g o p h a s e i n t r o d u c t i o n f o r  further  d i s c u s s i o n a b o u t U n i t C). The dates from U n i t A r a n g e f r o m 4050 to 4170 B P , dates f a l l i n g w e l l w i t h i n t h o s e from G l e n r o s e .  T h e dates from U n i t B a r e a b i t o l d e r t h a n U n i t  A, r a n g i n g from 4185 to 4290 B P .  The o l d e s t date from t h e s i t e came from  U n i t D a n d i s 4480±90 B P (WSU 2857).  The o n l y date r e t r i e v e d f r o m U n i t E  was d i s m i s s e d b e c a u s e i t was t h o u g h t to be too o l d . While Ham does not s a y , I assume t h a t a l l c a r b o n samples w e r e c o l l e c t e d in situ.  Boehm's dates (1973:11) a r e i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h Ham's a n d M a t s o n ' s .  H e r e x c a v a t i o n u n i t was l o c a t e d almost d i r e c t l y b e t w e e n Ham's U n i t s B a n d D. Two dates from Boehm's b a s a l d e p o s i t were 4240±105 (I 4688) a n d 4310+110  (I  4053) B P w i t h a date from t h e u p p e r middle of t h e d e p o s i t of 3970±105 B P (I 4685).  Ham's o l d e s t date of 4480 B P comes from a b a s a l d e p o s i t b u t i s s l i g h t l y  o l d e r t h a n b o t h Boehm's a n d M a t s o n ' s .  It i s r e a s o n a b l e to s u g g e s t a s t a r t i n g  date f o r St. M u n g o c l o s e r to 4500 B P , b a s e d o n Ham's e a r l i e s t date.  The o n l y  p r o b a b l e t e r m i n a t i o n date f o r t h e S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t comes from U n i t C w h e r e a n y of t h e s i x dates o b t a i n e d c o u l d be t e r m i n a t i o n dates.  F a u n a l Remains Due to t h e d i f f e r e n t  e x c a v a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s p u r s u e d at St. M u n g o ,  s e a s o n a l i t y of t h e s i t e i s o n a f i n e r l e v e l t h a n t h a t a t G l e n r o s e .  It was a n d i s  t h e o r e t i c a l l y p o s s i b l e to d e t e r m i n e t h e s e a s o n of o c c u p a t i o n f o r e a c h l a y e r e n c o u n t e r e d at S t . M u n g o . other sites with different  B u t , b e c a u s e t h i s s i t e i s b e i n g c o m p a r e d to two e x c a v a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s , I examined t h e f a u n a l r e m a i n s  to a n s w e r g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g s i t e f u n c t i o n . Ham b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e s e a s o n a l i t y e v i d e n c e s u g g e s t s  t h a t S t . M u n g o was  a f i s h i n g camp o c c u p i e d d u r i n g t h e summer a n d f a l l s e a s o n s .  I cannot  p r o p e r l y t e s t h i s h y p o t h e s i s due to my i n e x p e r i e n c e w i t h f a u n a l a n a l y s i s a n d s e a s o n a l i t y s t u d i e s , b u t t h e f a u n a l r e m a i n s p r e s e n t show m u l t i - s e a s o n a l i n d i c a t o r s of summer, s p r i n g a n d a p o s s i b l e f a l l o c c u p a t i o n . The o n l y major d i f f e r e n c e  i n f a u n a l r e m a i n s from S t . M u n g o a n d  G l e n r o s e i s a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of b i r d r e m a i n s p r e s e n t a t St. M u n g o . m i g h t be due to S t . M u n g o ' s b e t t e r l o c a t i o n v i s - a - v i s G l e n r o s e .  This  St. Mungo is  c l o s e r to o p e n w a t e r w h e r e l a r g e r f l o c k s of m i g r a t i n g w a t e r a n d s h o r e b i r d s w o u l d be p r e s e n t , a n d i t i s also c l o s e r to more m a r s h l a n d w h i c h i s o p t i m a l bird habitat. The f a u n a l r e m a i n s i n c l u d e salmon, e l k a n d d e e r , s e a l , b e a v e r a n d v a r i o u s s p e c i e s of b i r d s w i t h l a r g e r b i r d s s u c h as s w a n s a n d geese most frequently  present.  Ham does not t h i n k t h e p r e s e n c e of t h e s e l a r g e r  birds  i n d i c a t i v e of a s p r i n g o c c u p a t i o n f o r t h e s i t e .  I n s t e a d , he a r g u e s  that  because h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e e v i d e n c e f o r s i t e o c c u p a t i o n i n d i c a t e s a May to S e p t e m b e r o c c u p a t i o n , p e r h a p s t h e p r e h i s t o r i c h a b i t s of t h e s e b i r d s w e r e different,  a n d t h e s e b i r d s w e r e o b t a i n e d i n A u g u s t b e c a u s e t h e r e was a  b r e e d i n g population p r e s e n t i n the delta g r a s s l a n d s . could reflect  his preconceived  Ham's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  c o n v i c t i o n of St. M u n g o as a f a l l f i s h i n g camp  f o r c i n g him to i n t e r p r e t a l l d a t a as b e i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e camp.  of a f a l l f i s h i n g  B o t h Boehm a n d Imamoto a r e l e s s a s s e r t i v e i n t h e i r a n a l y s i s of  s e a s o n a l i t y , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t among some g r o u p s of a n i m a l s , i n c l u d i n g b i r d s , t h e p r e s e n c e of f a u n a l r e m a i n s c o u l d r e s u l t from e i t h e r a s p r i n g o r f a l l o c c u p a t i o n of t h e s i t e . A s w i t h G l e n r o s e , e l k i s t h e most i m p o r t a n t mammal, w i t h d o g , d e e r a n d s e a l as a g r o u p t h e next most common mammals p r e s e n t .  beaver, Once a g a i n ,  t h i s s e c o n d a r y g r o u p of mammals a r e e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t v i s - a - v i s e a c h  other,  b u t o n l y a t h i r d as i m p o r t a n t c o m p a r e d to e l k (Ham et a l . 1986:136). The f i s h r e m a i n s from St. M u n g o s u g g e s t t h a t salmon c o n s t i t u t e s t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a u n a l r e s o u r c e f o r t h e s i t e , w h i l e f o u r t e e n c l a s s e s of f i s h w e r e i d e n t i f i e d (Ham et a l . 1986:122). identifiable f i s h remains.  Salmon r e m a i n s w e r e 50% of  the  T h e o t h e r common f i s h s p e c i e s p r e s e n t r a n k e d from  most to l e a s t f r e q u e n t a r e : f l o u n d e r , s t u r g e o n , e u l a c h o n (a s p r i n g i n d i c a t o r ) , h e r r i n g (a late w i n t e r i n d i c a t o r ) , s u c k e r a n d d o g f i s h .  Although f i s h head  bones a n d b o d y elements a r e p r e s e n t . Ham s u g g e s t s t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n i s h e a v i l y s k e w e d t o w a r d s b o d y elements (salmon 97% a n d f l o u n d e r Ham i n t e r p r e t s t h e f i s h s p e c i e s i n a d i f f e r e n t (1976).  76%).  fashion than Matson  Ham s t a t e s t h a t s t i c k l e b a c k , m i n n o w s , s c u l p i n a n d p e a m o u t h , w h i c h  r e p r e s e n t b e t w e e n 5% a n d 1% of t h e i d e n t i f i e d f i s h r e m a i n s , are not f i s h t h a t  w e r e eaten.  Ham et a l . (1986:124)  states that these f i s h entered the  t h r o u g h t h e stomachs of p r e d a t o r y o r s c a v e n g e r  site  fish found in larger  numbers.  He a r g u e s t h a t a l l of t h e f i s h s p e c i e s p r e s e n t e x c e p t f o r h e r r i n g w o u l d be p r e s e n t i n the p r e f r e s h e t  r u n s of late May a n d J u n e o n t h e F r a s e r R i v e r .  I researched information about eulachon for an undergraduate  paper.  F r o m t h a t p a p e r I h a v e t a k e n t h e f o l l o w i n g quote s u g g e s t i n g a n a l t e r n a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s i t e o c c u p a t i o n at S t . M u n g o : . . . many animals f e d o n t h e e u l a c h o n w h e n t h e e u l a c h o n b e g a n to c o n g r e g a t e a n d e n t e r f r e s h w a t e r (see f o r example B a r r a c l o u g h 1964). M a n y k i n d s of f i s h , s e a mammals a n d b i r d s w o u l d h a v e been available along with the spawning eulachon. Included i n the l i s t of animals t h a t p r e y e d o n t h e s p a w n i n g e u l a c h o n is t h e l a r g e s t f i s h a v a i l a b l e to t h e S t a l o people. This f i s h is called the w h i t e s t u r g e o n ( A c i p e n s e r t r a n s m o n t a n u s ) a n d i t has been k n o w n to r e a c h w e i g h t s of o v e r 1300 l b s i n t h e F r a s e r R i v e r ( S c o t t a n d G r o s s m a n 1973) [ P r a t t 1989a:9-10]. E u l a c h o n s p a w n from m i d - M a r c h to m i d - M a y (Northcote  1974) a n d p e r h a p s  some  of t h e f i s h f o u n d as St. M u n g o r e f l e c t a n e a r l i e r s p r i n g o c c u p a t i o n e x p l o i t i n g the eulachon r u n .  T h e p r e s e n c e of seals w o u l d also s u p p o r t t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e  e x p l a n a t i o n , as t h e y too took a d v a n t a g e  of t h e s p a w n i n g e u l a c h o n .  Ham also  a r g u e s that the h e r r i n g remains p r e s e n t t h r o u g h o u t the site indicate that the people who came to f i s h t h e p r e f r e s h e t  r u n s came d i r e c t l y from a r e a s s i t u a t e d  n e a r t h e s p a w n i n g g r o u n d s of t h e h e r r i n g a n d b r o u g h t t h e i r h e r r i n g w i t h them.  Ham et a l . (1986:126-127)  b e l i e v e t h a t t h e salmon r e m a i n s s u g g e s t  an  A u g u s t a n d S e p t e m b e r o c c u p a t i o n of t h e s i t e , a l t h o u g h a l l f i v e s p e c i e s of salmon a r e p r e s e n t a n d salmon do m i g r a t e from e a r l y s p r i n g to late f a l l . While Ham h a s c h o s e n to a r g u e f o r two v e r y  p a r t i c u l a r time p e r i o d  o c c u p a t i o n s i n t h e summer a n d f a l l s e a s o n s , t h e r e is l i t t l e a r g u m e n t i n m e r e l y s t a t i n g t h a t t h e St. M u n g o s i t e was o c c u p i e d f o r l o n g p e r i o d s of c o n t i n u o u s multi-season occupation.  T h e s h e l l f i s h a n a l y s i s c a n n o t c o n t r i b u t e to t h e debate o v e r s i t e o c c u p a t i o n b e c a u s e t h e m u s s e l s h e l l p r e s e n t was too f r a g m e n t a r y  a n d Ham f e l t  t h a t t h e clam s h e l l s w e r e a s m a l l b i a s e d sample (Ham et a l , 1986:122). a n a l y s i s of meat estimates f o r M y t i l u s e d u l i s p u t s i t i n t e r m s of  The  dietary  i m p o r t a n c e b e h i n d salmon, e l k , d e e r a n d s e a l (Ham et a l . 1986:Table 4.4).  From  t h e s h e l l f i s h a n a l y s i s , M y t i l u s at S t . M u n g o i s not as i m p o r t a n t a food r e s o u r c e as i t was at G l e n r o s e , a l t h o u g h d i f f e r e n t  measurements a r e u s e d .  A t G l e n r o s e , Ham (1976:52) u s e d u s e a b l e meat c a l c u l a t e d from minimum n u m b e r of i n d i v i d u a l s f o r t h e mammals c o m p a r e d w i t h s h e l l meat f o r Mytilus.  the  A t S t . M u n g o , he u s e d s h e l l meat f o r t h e M y t i l u s as w e l l as a s e c o n d  t o t a l w e i g h t c a l c u l a t i o n b a s e d o n l i v e w e i g h t (Ham et a l . 1986:122).  F o r the  mammals at St. M u n g o u s e u s e a b l e meat c a l c u l a t e d from minimum n u m b e r of i n d i v i d u a l s was n o t u s e d .  I n s t e a d , he c a l c u l a t e d l i v e w e i g h t of a l l t h e f a u n a l  r e m a i n s as w e l l as s h e l l f i s h .  Therefore,  a p r o p e r c o m p a r i s o n of i m p o r t a n c e of  p a r t i c u l a r r e s o u r c e s c a n n o t be a t t e m p t e d .  M y q u e s t i o n i s , how r e l i a b l e l i v e  w e i g h t v a l u e s a r e c o m p a r e d to u s e a b l e meat v a l u e s ?  Features T h e a n a l y s i s of f e a t u r e s p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o d i f f e r s from G l e n r o s e . F o r example, almost e v e r y l a y e r f r o m e a c h u n i t i s g r o u p e d t o g e t h e r  and  d e f i n e d as b e i n g p a r t of some f e a t u r e , be i t h o u s e c o m p o n e n t o r d r y i n g r a c k . I n d i v i d u a l f e a t u r e s s u c h as h e a r t h s o r p o s t m o l d s a r e not p r e s e n t e d i n a l a y e r by layer d i s t r i b u t i o n .  A l l s i n g l e f e a t u r e s are g r o u p e d i n t o h o u s e c o m p o n e n t s .  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , Ham does not s t a t e t h e d e p t h o r a r e a c o v e r e d b y h i s many house c o m p o n e n t s , so some c o n t r o l of p r o v e n i e n c e i s l o s t .  T h e r e w i l l be  d e b a t e c o n c e r n i n g Ham's a s s e r t i o n s t h a t he has " h o u s e c o m p o n e n t s " (27 i n total).  T h e r e a r e a l t e r n a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s to w h a t he c a l l s h o u s e f l o o r s . A b e t t e r t e r m f o r h i s f e a t u r e s may be l i v i n g f l o o r s , f o r e v e n Ham et a l .  (1986:94) state t h a t t h e r e was i n s u f f i c i e n t time f o r a h o r i z o n t a l a n a l y s i s of t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of c u l t u r a l r e m a i n s p r e s e n t i n s i d e a n d o u t s i d e t h e h o u s e components.  It i s h a r d to see how one c o u l d p r o p e r l y define a h o u s e  without a horizontal distribution analysis.  floor  Boehm (1973:11) s t a t e s t h a t l i v i n g  f l o o r s a r e p r e s e n t t h r o u g h o u t h e r e x c a v a t i o n a n d d e f i n e s them as ". . . marked by hearth clusters and extensive ash deposits".  S h e makes no  mention of p o s t m o l d s . To r e t u r n to Ham's c o n c e p t of house c o m p o n e n t , w h i l e most h o u s e c o m p o n e n t s c o n t a i n e v i d e n c e of p o s t m o l d s , t h e n u m b e r s r a n g e f r o m 55 to 0. Without i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of the p o s t m o l d s i t i s p r e m a t u r e to state t h a t t h e p r e s e n c e of a g r o u p of p o s t m o l d s i n d i c a t e s a n a v e r a g e h o u s e s i z e of 4.5X4 meters (Ham et a l . 1986:85).  T h i s a s s e r t i o n of  h o u s e s i z e i s e v e n more q u e s t i o n a b l e w h e n one r e e x a m i n e s Ham's statement c o n c e r n i n g t h e l a c k of time a v a i l a b l e to enable s e p a r a t i o n of l a y e r s f o u n d i n s i d e o r o u t s i d e of house c o m p o n e n t s .  T h i s e s t i m a t i o n of h o u s e s i z e i s also  s u r p r i s i n g c o n s i d e r i n g Ham's l a r g e s t u n i t was U n i t A a t 2X5 m e t e r s . i m p l i e s t h a t a complete h o u s e was not c o m p l e t e l y  This  excavated.  B e s i d e s p o s t m o l d s , t h r e e c l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e s , a n d one h e a r t h w e r e also excavated. Ham et a l . i n d i c a t e t h a t s e v e r a l h e a r t h complexes a n d h e a r t h l a y e r s w e r e e n c o u n t e r e d a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e two.  Some of  w h a t Ham v i e w s as i n s i t u h o u s e components c o u l d be r e m n a n t s of  redeposited  hearths used elsewhere,  p o i n t e d o u t b y Gose (1976:190)  w h e n he d i d t h e  f e a t u r e a n a l y s i s at G l e n r o s e . Debate a b o u t t h e n u m b e r of f e a t u r e s a n d w h a t t h e y r e p r e s e n t  will  c o n t i n u e , b u t s u f f i c e i t to s a y t h a t t h e f e a t u r e s p r e s e n t i n d i c a t e s e m i p e r m a n e n t site o c c u p a t i o n . One complete U n i t C, t h e r e f o r e , uncertain.  s k e l e t o n was r e c o v e r e d  from St. M u n g o .  T h i s came from  i t ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p to t h e o l d e r S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s  The d i f f e r e n c e  i n t h e n u m b e r of b u r i a l s r e c o v e r e d  is  at St. Mungo  v e r s u s G l e n r o s e (one v e r s u s 11) may be n o t e w o r t h y , o r i t may be d u e to chance.  S e v e n of t h e 11 St. M u n g o c o m p o n e n t b u r i a l s a t G l e n r o s e w e r e  u n c o v e r e d from t h e same u n i t .  Scattered human remains were found  t h r o u g h o u t U n i t s A a n d B , w i t h none r e c o v e r e d Ham et a l . (1984:181)  from D, E o r F at S t . M u n g o .  s u g g e s t t h e a b s e n c e of h u m a n r e m a i n s i s due to  above g r o u n d inhumations either i n tree b u r i a l s or bentwood  boxes.  Boehm  (1970:59) s t a t e s t h a t at l e a s t f o u r b u r i a l s w e r e p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o i n t h e M a r p o l e component w h i c h was l o c a t e d d i r e c t l y a b o v e t h e C h a r l e s  component.  These b u r i a l s were found i n a large s a n d y p i t t h a t had been excavated the main d e p o s i t .  into  I n l i g h t of t h e i n - g r o u n d b u r i a l s p r e s e n t at G l e n r o s e a n d  t h e l a t e r component at S t . M u n g o , Ham et a l . ' s e x p l a n a t i o n i s u n l i k e l y . P e r h a p s a b e t t e r e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t people who d i e d at t h e St. M u n g o site were b u r i e d e l s e w h e r e  on site.  C o m p a r i s o n of c u b i c m e t e r s of  excavated  m a t e r i a l from t h e two d i g s show them to be r o u g h l y t h e same s i z e (36 f o r S t . M u n g o a n d 38 f o r G l e n r o s e )  so p e r h a p s sample e r r o r i s n o t a p r o b l e m .  P e r h a p s the s c a t t e r e d h u m a n r e m a i n s f o u n d t h r o u g h o u t S t . M u n g o a r e a f u r t h e r s u g g e s t i o n t h a t some of Ham's House C o m p o n e n t s a r e a r e a s r e f u s e from l i v i n g f l o o r s w e r e d i s c a r d e d .  where  T h e a b s e n c e of b u r i a l s at St. M u n g o  may i m p l y t h e s i t e was l e s s h e a v i l y u t i l i z e d r e l a t i v e to G l e n r o s e . o n l y s u g g e s t i o n of a d i f f e r e n c e  It i s t h e  i n s i t e f u n c t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e two s i t e s .  St. Mungo N o n - a r t i f a c t u a l Data Conclusions L i k e G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o was s i t u a t e d i n a n a r e a t h a t a l l o w e d f o r e x p l o i t a t i o n of b o t h l a n d a n d sea r e s o u r c e s .  the  S e v e n b i o l o g i c a l communities  ( i n c l u d i n g t h e F r a s e r R i v e r b u t not t h e ocean) a r e close to t h e s i t e .  Site  b o u n d a r i e s a r e l a r g e , a l t h o u g h not q u i t e as l a r g e as G l e n r o s e b u t n e i t h e r sites' boundaries suggest a s h o r t term limited a c t i v i t y site.  The  stratigraphy  d e m o n s t r a t e s c o n t i n u o u s o c c u p a t i o n of t h e s i t e t h r o u g h o u t t h e S t . M u n g o phase.  Most l i k e l y , s i t e o c c u p a t i o n e x t e n d s i n t o t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e  Locarno  B e a c h p h a s e i n at l e a s t one p o r t i o n of t h e s i t e ( U n i t C). Dates f r o m S t . M u n g o a r e i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h G l e n r o s e w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n of t h e o l d e s t date from U n i t D w h i c h p u s h e s b a c k t h e date of t h e St. M u n g o p h a s e to a b o u t 4500 B P .  possible  beginning  The t e r m i n a t i o n date f o r  the  S t . M u n g o p h a s e at S t . M u n g o i s l e s s c l e a r , b u t M a t s o n ' s s u g g e s t i o n of 3300 BP i s n o t d i s p u t e d . While t h e e v i d e n c e f r o m the f a u n a l , f i s h a n d s h e l l f i s h r e m a i n s at St. Mungo suggest multi-season occupation on a regular basis, there are with the data assumptions, presentation and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s l e a v i n g concerning seasonality and subsistence.  The major d i f f e r e n c e  problems questions  between  G l e n r o s e a n d St. M u n g o i n t e r m s of s u b s i s t e n c e i s i n p r o p o r t i o n r a t h e r t h a n in kind.  The major food r e s o u r c e s w e r e e l k , d e e r , s e a l , b e a v e r , l a r g e b i r d s ,  salmon a n d M y t i l u s .  Differences  M y t i l u s (more common at G l e n r o s e )  i n b i r d (more common at St. M u n g o ) a n d p r o p o r t i o n s a r e t h e most d r a m a t i c , b u t a l l  major f a u n a l r e m a i n s a r e p r e s e n t at b o t h s i t e s .  The wide v a r i e t y of food r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e a n d t h e l a r g e n u m b e r of d e s i r a b l e r a w m a t e r i a l s i n w a l k i n g r a n g e s u g g e s t b o t h s i t e s w e r e base c a m p s , as does t h e p r e s e n c e of a l a r g e n u m b e r of f e a t u r e s a n d t h e i r r e l a t i v e abundance. T h e f e a t u r e s at S t . M u n g o a n d G l e n r o s e compliment e a c h o t h e r w i t h o n l y one u n i q u e f e a t u r e p r e s e n t - t h r e e c l a y - l i n e d p i t s e x c a v a t e d from S t . M u n g o . F r o m t h e e v i d e n c e a c c u m u l a t e d from t h e s i t e r e p o r t s , i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e to s u g g e s t t h a t t h e s i t e f u n c t i o n s of t h e G l e n r o s e C a n n e r y a n d S t . M u n g o C a n n e r y s i t e s d u r i n g t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e i n c l u d e d a l a r g e n u m b e r of p r o c u r e m e n t a c t i v i t i e s i n v o l v i n g h u n t i n g a n d g a t h e r i n g r e s o u r c e s f r o m many different  habitats.  possibly all year.  T h e s e a c t i v i t i e s w e n t o n t h r o u g h more t h a n one s e a s o n , I n c o n c l u s i o n , t h e r e i s no r e a l i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e s i t e  f u n c t i o n s of G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o a r e  different.  The Crescent Beach Site Site Location The C r e s c e n t B e a c h S i t e ( D g R r 1) i s s i t u a t e d i n M u d B a y at t h e m o u t h of the N i c k o m e k l r i v e r i n t h e b o u n d a r i e s of C r e s c e n t B e a c h w h i c h i s p a r t of t h e M u n i c i p a l i t y of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a .  The s i t e o r i g i n a l l y  extended  some 18 h a , b u t t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e s e d e p o s i t s a r e now d e s t r o y e d o r disturbed.  C r e s c e n t B e a c h has been e x c a v a t e d s e v e r a l times (see  1991 f o r a r e v i e w of i t s e x c a v a t i o n h i s t o r y ) .  greatly  M a t s o n et a l .  There are n a t u r a l boundaries on  a l l s i d e s of the s i t e : to t h e n o r t h i s M u d B a y a n d i t s a c c o m p a n y i n g t i d a l f l a t s a l o n g w i t h the N i c k o m e k l R i v e r , to t h e s o u t h .  West is B o u n d a r y B a y a n d i t s  a c c o m p a n y i n g t i d a l f l a t s , a n d to t h e east i s a g e o l o g i c a l f o r m a t i o n k n o w n as t h e White Rock U p l a n d s ( u p o n w h i c h t h e r e i s i n d i c a t i o n of s h e l l m i d d e n  [personal observation]).  The White Rock U p l a n d s , l i k e P a n o r a m a R i d g e , is  composed of u n c o n s o l i d a t e d P l e i s t o c e n e  m a t e r i a l (Ham 1982:14).  Specific  m e a s u r e m e n t s of s i t e b o u n d a r i e s a r e not a v a i l a b l e , b u t l i k e G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o , t h e s i t e r u n s a l o n g t h e b e a c h face w i t h t h e n a r r o w axis r u n n i n g the water towards d r y land. Present vegetation  from  Maximum d e p t h of d e p o s i t s i s a b o u t 270 cm.  i s m u c h m o d i f i e d , b u t Ham (1982:19-50) g i v e s a  d e t a i l e d o u t l i n e of t h e f o u r t e e n major p l a n t / e c o l o g i c a l communities p r e s e n t i n the adjacent area.  T h i s n u m b e r i s e x a c t l y d o u b l e t h o s e communities f o u n d  near Glenrose and St. Mungo, suggesting  e v e n more d i v e r s i t y i n t h e r a w  material and resources available for procurement.  Most of t h i s a d d e d  d i v e r s i t y comes f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h ' s p h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y to a v a s t e x t e n t of o p e n w a t e r a n d t i d a l f l a t s , r e g i o n s a b s e n t from G l e n r o s e a n d St. M u n g o . of t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g e c o l o g i c a l communities s h o u l d be r e g a r d e d  Some with  some s u s p i c i o n b e c a u s e B o u n d a r y B a y was not formed u n t i l t h e e n d of t h e St. M u n g o p h a s e (Ham 1982:13), so t h e exact e c o l o g i c a l communities a v a i l a b l e t h e w a t e r may be d i f f e r e n t .  from  L i k e Glenrose and St. Mungo, Crescent Beach is  o n t h e p e r i p h e r y of a c o a s t a l D o u g l a s f i r f o r e s t (Ham 1982:22).  F i g u r e 2.4  shows t h e e c o l o g i c a l c o m m u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e i n t h e p r o x i m i t y of t h e t h r e e  sites.  T h e c l o s e n e s s of a l l t h r e e s i t e s to so m u c h e c o l o g i c a l d i v e r s i t y i s t h e f i r s t i n d i c a t i o n of p o s s i b l e site f u n c t i o n s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e t h r e e  sites.  Ethnographic Culture Area C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s l o c a t e d i n t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c t e r r i t o r y of two Coast S a l i s h g r o u p s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d , t h e Halkomelem s p e a k i n g N i c k o m e k l p e o p l e a n d t h e S t r a i t s S a l i s h s p e a k i n g Semiahmoo people.  Ham (1982:70) s t a t e s t h a t  e t h n o g r a p h i c a l l y . C r e s c e n t B e a c h was a v i l l a g e s i t e f o r t h e N i c k o m e k l .  C u r r e n t l y , C r e s c e n t B e a c h l i e s i n Semiahmoo t e r r i t o r y a n d as P e r c y (1974:13) p o i n t s o u t , t h i s i s p r o b a b l y a more r e c e n t movement o n t h e p a r t o f  the  Semiahmoo who moved i n t o t h e M u d B a y a r e a a f t e r t h e N i c k o m e k l became e x t i n c t i n t h e mid 1800s. The h i s t o r i c e t h n o g r a p h i c r e c o r d may h a v e l i t t l e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e prehistoric archaeological record, but speaking in general terms, all three s i t e s ( G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t Beach) a r e l o c a t e d i n t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c b o u n d a r i e s of l a n d u s e d b y C e n t r a l C o a s t S a l i s h g r o u p s a n d i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t proto-Halkomelem s p e a k i n g people o r i g i n a l l y i n h a b i t e d a l l three sites.  A worst  case s c e n a r i o w o u l d have t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h s i t e p o s s i b l y o c c u p i e d b y  proto-  S t r a i t s s p e a k i n g people while Glenrose and St. Mungo were o c c u p i e d b y Halkomelem s p e a k i n g people.  N e v e r t h e l e s s , a l l h a v e common a n c e s t r y .  m u c h time i t w o u l d t a k e f o r t h e l a n g u a g e a n d c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s  protoHow  to evolve  b e t w e e n two c l o s e l y r e l a t e d g r o u p s s u c h as Halkomelem a n d S t r a i t s S a l i s h s p e a k e r s c a n o n l y be a n s w e r e d b y a l i n g u i s t .  Based o n statements b y Suttles  (1990) i t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e r e was e a s y e x c h a n g e b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s .  Excavation  Procedures  The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n i s a c o n d e n s e d v e r s i o n of P e r c y (1974) a n d M a t s o n et a l . (1990,1991) a n d P r a t t et a l . (1991).  Percy's work is first  introduced and then supplemented. P e r c y directed a salvage excavation on Bayview street i n the s p r i n g and summer of 1972.  S i x t r e n c h e s (A to F) r a n g i n g from 1.5 (B, C a n d F ) to 1.7  (A) a n d 2.0 (E a n d F) meters wide a n d from 4 (A,B,C a n d E) to 6 (D a n d F) meters l o n g w e r e e x c a v a t e d a c r o s s B a y v i e w s t r e e t i n a n a r e a to be d i s t u r b e d b y the b u i l d i n g of s e w e r l i n e c o n n e c t o r .  E x c a v a t i o n s w e r e b y 10 cm a r b i t r a r y  levels.  No t h r e e d i m e n s i o n a l p r o v e n i e n c e  of a r t i f a c t s was k e p t .  All excavated  m a t e r i a l was d r y s c r e e n e d u s i n g a 1/4 i n c h s c r e e n mesh. I n t h e summer of 1989 a n d 1990 R.G. M a t s o n d i r e c t e d two f i e l d of w o r k at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  season's  M a t s o n was i n t e r e s t e d i n C r e s c e n t B e a c h i n p a r t  b e c a u s e i n t h e s p r i n g of 1988 I h a d w r i t t e n a p a p e r c o n c e r n i n g t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e ( P r a t t 1988) a n d i n t h i s p a p e r I p o i n t e d o u t t h a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h was t h e o n l y k n o w n s i t e o n t h e M a i n l a n d to c o n t a i n b o t h L o c a r n o B e a c h a n d Charles c u l t u r e components.  Matson's research focused on r e t r i e v i n g  i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e , w h i l e my r e s e a r c h l a y i n o b t a i n i n g more i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e . SSHRC f o r a two y e a r g r a n t a n d r e c e i v e d R e s e a r c h commenced i n May 1989.  more  interest  M a t s o n a p p l i e d to  f u n d i n g i n t h e s p r i n g of 1989.  We e x c a v a t e d  i n t h e v i c i n i t y of  Percy's  o r i g i n a l t r e n c h e s to allow f o r b e t t e r c o m p a r i s o n of o u r d a t a w i t h h i s . E x c a v a t i n g n e a r h i s t r e n c h e s also g a v e u s t h e a d v a n t a g e advanced knowledge f i n a l r e p o r t (See  of h a v i n g  some  of s t r a t i g r a p h y , b a s e d o n w h a t he h a d w r i t t e n i n t h e  F i g u r e 2.6 f o r a map of o u r e x c a v a t i o n s v i s - a - v i s  Percy's  a n d some of t h e o t h e r e x c a v a t i o n s t h a t h a v e t a k e n p l a c e at C r e s c e n t  Beach).  Two 2X8 meter t r e n c h e s d e s i g n a t e d N o r t h a n d S o u t h w e r e l a i d o u t . E x c a v a t i o n s w e r e b y n a t u r a l l a y e r s , w i t h t h i c k e r l a y e r s c r o s s c u t b y 10 cm a r b i t r a r y levels.  Artifacts, large faunal remains and features found i n situ  were g i v e n t h r e e d i m e n s i o n a l p r o v e n i e n c e .  E x c a v a t e d m a t e r i a l was  water  s c r e e n e d t h r o u g h 1/8 i n c h s c r e e n m e s h . T h e n a t u r e of P e r c y ' s e x c a v a t i o n (an e m e r g e n c y  salvage  dig on a  s t r i c t time b u d g e t ) , lead to t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of minimal s t r a t i g r a p h i e ( P e r c y 1974:24b).  Nevertheless,  to e x p e c t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  very  profiles  h i s w o r k g a v e u s some i d e a c o n c e r n i n g  what  We d i d n o t h a v e to d i g s l i t t r e n c h e s a r o u n d o u r  e x c a v a t i o n p i t s i n o r d e r to see w a l l p r o f i l e s ; we p l a c e d t h e S o u t h t r e n c h so t h a t a s e c t i o n of t h e e x c a v a t i o n h i t t h e o l d s e w e r t r e n c h hole.  We w o r k e d o u r  way toward the deposit u n t i l the interface between d i s t u r b e d a n d i n t a c t m i d d e n was e n c o u n t e r e d , c l e a n e d a n d p r o f i l e d . T h e s t r a t i g r a p h y s h o w e d more d i v e r s i t y t h a n p r e s e n t at e i t h e r or St. Mungo.  Glenrose  T h e r e w e r e m a n y k i n d s of c l a m s , f i s h a n d s h e l l f i s h r e m a i n s a n d  t h e s o i l m a t r i x r a n g e d from a s h , to s a n d , to g r a v e l , to c l a y .  O u r u s e of  n a t u r a l l a y e r s p a i d off i n t h a t we e a s i l y i s o l a t e d a n d c o n t r o l l e d S o u t h T r e n c h provenience.  I n t h e N o r t h t r e n c h , d i s t u r b a n c e was g r e a t a n d we d i d not  e n c o u n t e r i n t a c t d e p o s i t s u n t i l 195 cm below d a t u m .  We e x c a v a t e d  t e s t u n i t c a l l e d F n w a n d from 195 cm to 270 cm we u n c o v e r e d a homogenous  a 1X1 meter  somewhat  d a r k , s a n d y , m a t r i x w i t h l i t t l e s h e l l p r e s e n t , b u t t h a t w h i c h was  p r e s e n t was M y t i l u s .  We w e r e f o r c e d to d i g i n 10 cm a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s i n F n w  b e c a u s e we w e r e i n t h e c l a s s i c ' p h o n e b o o t h ' s i t u a t i o n m u c h l i k e t h a t a t G l e n r o s e w i t h l i t t l e l i g h t to h e l p g u i d e o u r s e a r c h f o r s t r a t i g r a p h i e b r e a k s . To make t h i n g s e v e n more d i f f i c u l t i n F n w we also h a d to w o r k a r o u n d a n i n t a c t j u v e n i l e b u r i a l a n d two small c l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e s .  T h e d e p t h of  c u l t u r a l m a t e r i a l i n t h e a r e a of t h e s i t e i n w h i c h P e r c y a n d we w o r k e d from 200 to 270 cm.  the ranged  The d e p t h of d e p o s i t s at C r e s c e n t B e a c h f a l l i n b e t w e e n  t h o s e from G l e n r o s e a n d St. M u n g o . I n the summer of 1990 we c o n t i n u e d w o r k i n g i n b o t h t h e N o r t h a n d South trenches.  In the North t r e n c h a backhoe operator removed  o v e r b u r d e n w i t h i n the b o u n d a r i e s of t h e 1989 N o r t h t r e n c h . i n t a c t d e p o s i t s w e r e c a p p e d off  190 cm of  We k n e w t h a t t h e  b y a t h i c k s t e r i l e l a y e r of c l a y , of w h i c h t h e  backhoe operator removed approximately  half.  U n i t F n w was r e o p e n e d a n d t h e j u v e n i l e b u r i a l was r e m o v e d .  The walls  w e r e p r o f i l e d a n d t h e s t r a t i g r a p h i e i n f o r m a t i o n was u s e d to e x c a v a t e t h e o t h e r units.  E x c a v a t i o n e f f o r t s c o n c e n t r a t e d o n s e c t i o n s of U n i t s D, E a n d F.  The  d e p o s i t s were e x c a v a t e d b y n a t u r a l l a y e r s a n d t h e same p r o c e d u r e s were followed as i n t h e S o u t h t r e n c h .  Chronology P e r c y has one date f o r t r e n c h E of 4270+80 B P (Gak 4925), between  recovered  180 to 190 cm d e p t h below s u r f a c e i n Component One (the name P e r c y  used for his earliest component). from w h i c h i t was r e c o v e r e d .  I t h i n k t h i s date i s too o l d f o r t h e d e p t h  I t s h o u l d be c l o s e r to 3300 B P , b u t i t dates  Component One to t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e . We r e c o v e r e d  s e v e r a l d a t e s from o u r two s e a s o n s of e x c a v a t i o n .  c a r b o n samples u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e s t a t e d were r e c o v e r e d  i n situ.  t r e n c h t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t t e r m i n a t i o n date l i e s somewhere 32101110 B P (WSU 4247) a n d 3590185 B P (WSU 4245).  The  In the South between  The 3210 B P date  comes  from a l a y e r almost at t h e base of t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t , w h i l e the 3590 B P date comes from n e a r t h e t o p of t h e C h a r l e s component.  T h e e n d of  t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t i n t h e S o u t h t r e n c h f a l l s i n t h e same time p e r i o d as t h e t e r m i n a t i o n dates from G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o C h a r l e ' s component.  The  t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t i n t h e N o r t h t r e n c h f a l l s i n a l a r g e r time p e r i o d , p r i o r to 3060180 B P ( S F U 727) a n d a f t e r 3710180 B P (WSU 4244). o l d e s t date from o u r e x c a v a t i o n was 4440180 ( S F U 795) B P from a w a t e r s c r e e n e d sample r e c o v e r e d  from F n w l e v e l 240 to 250 cm.  The  F a u n a l Remains P e r c y d i d n o t do a f a u n a l a n a l y s i s of t h e r e m a i n s r e c o v e r e d Crescent Beach.  from  He s t a t e s , " V a r i o u s t y p e s of s u b s i s t e n c e a c t i v i t i e s s u c h as  l a n d mammal h u n t i n g , b i r d s n a r i n g , f i s h i n g a n d s h e l l g a t h e r i n g a r e also i m p l i e d " ( P e r c y 1974:267). O u r f a u n a l a n a l y s i s f o r t h e 1989 f i e l d s e a s o n was c a r r i e d o u t b y ID i n V i c t o r i a .  A t t h e time of w r i t i n g we do n o t as of y e t h a v e  Pacific  complete  r e s u l t s of t h e f a u n a l a n a l y s i s of b i r d s a n d mammals f o r t h e 1990 s e a s o n .  The  f o l l o w i n g i s t a k e n f r o m t h e f a u n a l a n a l y s i s done b y P a c i f i c I.D. ( S u s a n C r o c k f o r d a n d R e b e c c a Wigen 1990b) f o r the 1989 C r e s c e n t B e a c h f i e l d  season.  None of t h e 1989 d e p o s i t s i n t h e S o u t h t r e n c h w e r e S t . M u n g o i n age. I n t h e N o r t h t r e n c h t h e d e p o s i t below a p p r o x i m a t e l y 220 cm was S t . M u n g o i n age.  We d i d not r e a l i z e t h a t two d i f f e r e n t  trench.  phases were present i n the North  The f a u n a l a n a l y s i s f o r the N o r t h t r e n c h was t r e a t e d as one  component a n d t h e two c o m p o n e n t s w e r e mixed i n t h e a n a l y s i s .  Furthermore,  1989 e x c a v a t i o n s i n t h e N o r t h t r e n c h w e r e b y a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s a n d m i x i n g of d e p o s i t s was u n a v o i d a b l e .  T h e sample of mammal a n d b i r d r e m a i n s from  N o r t h t r e n c h i s v e r y small (57 N I S P w i t h 33.3 % i d e n t i f i a b l e ) .  The  the  identified  r e m a i n s a r e t h e f o l l o w i n g : r a c c o o n (12.3%), b e a v e r (8.8%), h a r b o u r s e a l (5.3%), elk (1.8%) a n d dog (1.8%).  Of t h e 66.7 % u n i d e n t i f i a b l e p i e c e s , 12.3%  c l a s s i f i e d as l a r g e l a n d mammal a n d 1.8 % l a r g e s e a mammal.  W i t h s u c h small  n u m b e r s i t i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e to make a n y g r a n d i o s e c o n c l u s i o n s .  There are  s e v e r a l s p e c i e s p r e s e n t , w i t h b o t h l a n d a n d s e a mammals r e p r e s e n t e d t h e i r r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e c a n n o t be d e t e r m i n e d at t h i s time. bone were i d e n t i f i e d a n d t h e f o l l o w i n g s p e c i e s r e p r e s e n t e d :  were  although  Six p i e c e s of  bird  Common l o o n (one),  l a r g e g r e b e (one), small g u l l (one), r o b i n (one), medium d u c k (one), a n d r a v e n (one). T h e r e w e r e some s e a s o n a l i n d i c a t o r s p r e s e n t .  Bones from v e r y  r a c c o o n a n d h a r b o u r s e a l i n d i c a t e summer d e p o s i t i o n .  young  As well, s u b a d u l t  r e m a i n s of b e a v e r a n d e l k a l s o i n d i c a t e summer c o l l e c t i o n .  T h i s small sample  s u g g e s t s t h a t at l e a s t a p o r t i o n of t h e s i t e was u s e d d u r i n g t h e late s p r i n g / e a r l y summer s e a s o n c o n s i s t e n t l y o v e r a l o n g p e r i o d of time. F r o m t h e r a t h e r w i d e r a n g e of s p e c i e s p r e s e n t f o r s u c h s m a l l samples of mammals a n d b i r d s , the u s e of t h e s e animals was o p p o r t u n i s t i c . The following  d i s c u s s i o n of f i s h r e m a i n s i s a summation of t h e w o r k  done b y S u s a n C r o c k f o r d a n d R e b e c c a Wigen a t P a c i f i c ID (1990a a n d 1991a a n d 1991b) o n b o t h s e a s o n s of e x c a v a t i o n s .  T h e f i s h r e m a i n s from t h e C h a r l e s  component at C r e s c e n t B e a c h e x h i b i t a g r e a t v a r i e t y of s p e c i e s i n c l u d i n g a l l those p r e v i o u s l y found at Glenrose and St. Mungo.  present F l a t f i s h (with  S t a r r y f l o u n d e r b e i n g t h e a s s u m e d s p e c i e s ) a r e t h e most common f i s h r e m a i n s f o u n d i n Component One, w i t h salmon s e c o n d .  S u c k e r / c h u b are also  present  as w e l l as h e r r i n g . T h e r e i s a c h a n g e i n f l o u n d e r a n d salmon b u t c h e r i n g t e c h n i q u e s t h r o u g h time at t h e s i t e .  However, this difference  present  in butchering techniques  does n o t t a k e p l a c e u n t i l t h e e n d of C o m p o n e n t One i n t h e S o u t h t r e n c h ( i n a p p r o x i m a t e l y l a y e r CV).  C r o c k f o r d a n d Wigen (1990a, 1991a, 1991b) c o n c l u d e  that flounder head parts are u n d e r r e p r e s e n t e d  at t h e s i t e due to t h e i r  f r a g i l i t y , b u t n e v e r t h e l e s s , 27.2% of f l o u n d e r r e m a i n s w e r e head p a r t s , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t f l o u n d e r w e r e p r o c e s s e d a n d / o r c o n s u m e d whole o n s i t e .  On  t h e o t h e r h a n d , salmon head p a r t s a r e almost e n t i r e l y a b s e n t a f t e r l a y e r CX ( l a y e r CV u p w a r d s ) i n the S o u t h t r e n c h .  This processing and/or consumption  difference  b e t w e e n salmon a n d f l o u n d e r does not e x i s t u n t i l t h e t r a n s i t i o n  from C o m p o n e n t One to Component Two at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  T h r o u g h o u t most of  C o m p o n e n t One, f l o u n d e r a n d salmon h a v e p r o p o r t i o n s of h e a d - b o n e s b a c k b o n e s i n d i c a t i n g t h e s p e c i e s e n t e r e d t h e d e p o s i t s as whole  to  fish.  Salmon a n d f l o u n d e r c r a n i a l p a r t s a r e p r e s e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e e a r l i e s t c o m p o n e n t at S t . M u n g o (Ham et a l . 1986:126).  A t S t . M u n g o , t h e p r o p o r t i o n of  f l o u n d e r h e a d to b o d y elements i s almost t h e same as at C r e s c e n t B e a c h (24% h e a d v e r s u s 76% b o d y ) .  Ham i n f e r s t h a t f l o u n d e r head a n d b o d y p a r t s w e r e  processed and/or consumed separately.  Salmon h e a d p a r t s a r e l o w e r at S t .  M u n g o (3% of t o t a l salmon elements) t h a n f l o u n d e r . T h e s i m i l a r i t y i n the f i s h r e m a i n s a n d t h e i n d i c a t i o n of  different  p r o c e s s i n g methods f o r d i f f e r e n t f i s h at b o t h s i t e s d u r i n g p a r t of t h e same time p e r i o d i s s t r i k i n g .  F o r now, I am i n c l i n e d to follow C r o c k f o r d ' s l o g i c a n d  state t h a t f l o u n d e r head p a r t s a r e m i s s i n g f r o m S t . M u n g o not b e c a u s e t h e h e a d s w e r e p r o c e s s e d s e p a r a t e l y , b u t b e c a u s e t h e head p a r t s a r e f r a g i l e a n d do not s u r v i v e as w e l l as t h e b o d y p a r t s .  A t Crescent Beach, besides the  s h i f t i n l a y e r CV away from p r o c e s s i n g a n d o r c o n s u m p t i o n of salmon o n s i t e as whole f i s h t o w a r d s t h e p r o c e s s i n g a n d o r c o n s u m p t i o n of salmon o n s i t e w i t h a b s e n t h e a d p a r t s , s o m e t h i n g else t a k e s p l a c e .  L a y e r s CX to CY c o n t a i n  s i m i l a r p r o p o r t i o n s of f l o u n d e r to salmon ( w i t h b o t h c o m p r i s i n g o n a v e r a g e 40% to 45% of t h e t o t a l N I S P p e r l a y e r ) .  F r o m l a y e r CW u p w a r d t h e r e i s a move  away f r o m f l a t f i s h t o w a r d salmon w i t h t h e r a t i o b e i n g a n y w h e r e from 60% salmon to o v e r 80% salmon i n l a y e r CO, while t h e p r o p o r t i o n of d e c r e a s e s to a f a i r l y s t e a d y 20% w i t h minor v a r i a t i o n s .  flounder  Besides a change i n  p r o c u r e m e n t a n d o r c o n s u m p t i o n p a t t e r n f o r salmon, we a l s o see a m a r k e d i n c r e a s e i n d e p e n d e n c e o n salmon v i s - a - v i s f l a t f i s h .  It is t e m p t i n g to c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e c h a n g e s a t t h e e n d of t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t r e s u l t from t h e i n v e n t i o n a n d use of s t o r a g e t e c h n i q u e s f o r salmon. Boehm (1973:95) s t a t e s t h a t i f salmon w e r e p r e p a r e d f o r p r e s e r v i n g i n e a r l i e r times as t h e y w e r e p r e p a r e d b y t h e U p p e r S t a l o e t h n o g r a p h i c a l l y , t h e w e r e r e m o v e d b e f o r e p r e s e r v a t i o n (Duff  1952:63-64).  heads  If t h e m a j o r i t y of salmon  were eaten d r i e d or smoked, archaeologists would f i n d a n i n c r e a s e d percentage of p o s t c r a n i a l s k e l e t a l elements r e l a t i v e to c r a n i a l elements.  In other  words,  the l a c k of head elements v i s - a - v i s b o d y elements at a s i t e may i n d i c a t e a winter or early s p r i n g occupation.  T h i s same c o n c l u s i o n i s also r e a c h e d  by  C r o c k f o r d a n d Wigens (1990a, 1991a, 1991b) as w e l l as C r o c k f o r d et a l . (1990) a n d M a t s o n (1992). On t h e o t h e r h a n d , i t may be u n w i s e to o v e r e m p h a s i z e  t h e l a c k of  head  salmon h e a d p a r t s , b e c a u s e t h e y too a r e f r a g i l e a n d t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n s c a n be low, e v e n at s i t e s e t h n o g r a p h i c a l l y k n o w n to be p l a c e s w h e r e t h e y processed  (Matson 1992).  were  T h i s does n o t h e l p i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e b e g i n n i n g of  s t o r i n g salmon. From the information gathered  so f a r , one c o u l d c o n c l u d e t h a t d u r i n g  t h e l a t e r p a r t of t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d S t . M u n g o , salmon w e r e p r o c e s s e d d i f f e r e n t l y  f r o m o t h e r f i s h b e c a u s e salmon w e r e a l r e a d y  b e i n g d r i e d a n d s t o r e d f o r w i n t e r food.  This is an important finding with  major r e p e r c u s s i o n s f o r t h e o r i e s c o n c e r n i n g t h e e v o l u t i o n of t h e  Northwest  Coast E t h n o g r a p h i c p a t t e r n . C r o c k f o r d c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e l a c k of s e l e c t i v i t y i n f l o u n d e r s i z e at Crescent Beach indicates the f i s h were t a k e n o n a r e g u l a r basis.  This  s u g g e s t s t h a t the f l o u n d e r w e r e e x p l o i t e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e y e a r r a t h e r t h a n d u r i n g one s p e c i f i c s e a s o n .  It s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t s t a r r y f l o u n d e r  (which  w e r e f o u n d i n t h e f a u n a l r e m a i n s ) a r e e a s i e r to c a t c h d u r i n g i n t h e s p r i n g (Matson et a l . 1991).  O t h e r s e a s o n a l m a r k e r s w o u l d h a v e to be f o u n d i n o r d e r  to s u p p o r t t h i s s u g g e s t i o n .  The f l o u n d e r were t a k e n b y either beach seines  o r t i d a l t r a p s w h i c h w o u l d also t r a p o t h e r s p e c i e s s u c h as s u c k e r / c h u b . C r o c k f o r d a n d Wigen (1990a, 1991a a n d 1991b) s t a t e t h a t t h e f i s h r e m a i n s from C r e s c e n t B e a c h a r e s u g g e s t i v e of a late s p r i n g / s u m m e r o c c u p a t i o n at C r e s c e n t B e a c h , w i t h a p r o b a b l e w i n t e r o c c u p a t i o n as w e l l . The s h e l l f i s h a n a l y s i s h a s r e c e n t l y b e e n c o m p l e t e d b y L i s a R a n k i n (1991a, 1991b). reached.  S h e l l f i s h s e a s o n a l i t y i s o n g o i n g b u t no c o n c l u s i o n s h a v e  been  R a n k i n a n a l y z e d 28 s h e l l f i s h samples from t h e two s e a s o n s of f i e l d  w o r k at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  S h e l l f i s h i n the N o r t h t r e n c h are dominated b y  M y t i l u s t h r o u g h o u t t h e time p e r i o d r e p r e s e n t e d .  In the S o u t h t r e n c h , the  C h a r l e s c u l t u r e c o m p o n e n t i s also d o m i n a t e d b y M y t i l u s . R a n k i n d i s c o v e r e d f r o m t h e s h e l l f i s h a n a l y s i s of C o m p o n e n t One t h a t t h e r e was some v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s h e l l f i s h r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e sample s c r e e n s from w h i c h she d r e w h e r s h e l l f i s h d a t a .  A l l of t h e s h e l l f i s h samples  w e r e s c r e e n e d t h r o u g h n e s t e d 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 a n d 1/16 t h i n c h s c r e e n s .  With  the s h e l l f i s h samples from t h e o l d e s t c o m p o n e n t , most of t h e s h e l l f i s h was recovered  from t h e 1/8 t h i n c h s c r e e n .  T h i s i s due to t h e f r a g i l e n a t u r e of  M y t i l u s w h i c h c r u m b l e s m u c h more e a s i l y t h a n o t h e r s h e l l f i s h s p e c i e s . I n t h e N o r t h t r e n c h R a n k i n (1991a:47) s t a t e s t h a t t h e a b s o l u t e v a l u e s of s h e l l f i s h f o r t h e l o w e r c o m p o n e n t s h e l l f i s h samples a r e v e r y c o m p a r i s o n to t h e S o u t h t r e n c h .  weight small i n  T h e s e v a l u e s r a n g e f r o m 1.0 to 17.0 grams.  She s t a t e s t h a t t h i s is p a r t i a l l y due to t h e f r a g i l e n a t u r e of M y t i l u s w h i c h w o u l d be e a s i l y c r u s h e d a n d w a s h e d t h r o u g h t h e w a t e r s c r e e n s .  To p r o v e o r  d i s p r o v e t h i s t h e o r y she took a s o i l sample f r o m Component One i n t h e N o r t h  T r e n c h a n d screened it i n the lab.  F r o m t h i s sample 65% of t h e s h e l l f i s h  sample was M y t i l u s a n d t h e a b s o l u t e w e i g h t f e l l j u s t a b o v e those of t h e o t h e r s h e l l f i s h samples t a k e n f r o m t h e N o r t h t r e n c h (23 g r a m s ) .  The s h e l l f i s h  samples t a k e n from Component One i n t h e S o u t h t r e n c h do n o t r e l y q u i t e as h e a v i l y o n M y t i l u s , t h e r e i s a l i t t l e b i t more d i v e r s i t y , b u t M y t i l u s i s s t i l l t h e dominant s h e l l f i s h .  It s h o u l d be r e i t e r a t e d t h a t one p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r  t h e homogeneity of t h e s h e l l f i s h samples from t h e N o r t h t r e n c h i s d u e to t h e excavation by a r b i t r a r y levels d u r i n g the f i r s t season, w h i c h would distort n a t u r a l boundaries between l a y e r s .  To me, t h e most i n t e r e s t i n g f a c t  c o n c e r n i n g t h e s h e l l f i s h f r o m Component One at C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s t h e l a c k of it, especially i n the North T r e n c h .  The a b s o l u t e w e i g h t s of t h e s h e l l f i s h i n  t h e N o r t h t r e n c h a r e v e r y low e s p e c i a l l y w h e n c o m p a r e d to t h e l a t e r components.  It i s d i f f i c u l t to compare R a n k i n ' s a n a l y s i s w i t h t h o s e f r o m  Glenrose and St. Mungo because different a n a l y t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s were p u r s u e d . T h e r e i s l i t t l e e v i d e n c e at C r e s c e n t B e a c h t h a t M y t i l u s e d u l i s was t h e most i m p o r t a n t food r e s o u r c e .  While m u s s e l was u t i l i z e d , i t was not t h e  d o m i n a n t r e s o u r c e a n d i t seems a n u n l i k e l y r e a s o n w h y p r e h i s t o r i c p e o p l e were at C r e s c e n t B e a c h ,  I n t e r m s of s e a s o n a l i t y , m u s s e l i s u s u a l l y s e e n as a  p r o b a b l e w i n t e r food s o u r c e , b u t i n t h e case of t h e N o r t h t r e n c h , i t seems to have been u t i l i z e d d u r i n g t h e s p r i n g as w e l l .  Features P e r c y d i s c o v e r e d many f e a t u r e s from h i s C h a r l e s component. c l a y - l i n e d features were uncovered.  Three  Two w e r e c o n s t r u c t e d o n f l a t g r o u n d a n d  had b u i l t u p w a l l s , w h i l e t h e t h i r d was a c l a y - l i n e d d e p r e s s i o n .  Associated  w i t h a l l t h r e e f e a t u r e s w e r e f i r e c r a c k e d r o c k , a l t h o u g h t h e c l a y d i d not show  s i g n s of f i r i n g .  One f e a t u r e also h a d a h e a p e d u p c o n c e n t r a t i o n of h i g h l y  p u l v e r i z e d white shell.  A s e c o n d f e a t u r e h a d two s m a l l postmolds o n t h e r i m  directly opposite each other.  A f o u r t h probable c l a y - l i n e d feature  was  e n c o u n t e r e d b u t i t h a d b e e n p r e v i o u s l y d i s t u r b e d a n d i t s exact n a t u r e i s u n k n o w n ( P e r c y 1974:27-29).  P e r c y p o s t u l a t e s t h a t a p o s s i b l e f u n c t i o n of  these f e a t u r e s was r e l a t e d to t h e p o s s i b l e c u l t i v a t i o n of n a t i v e t o b a c c o .  Lime  was mixed w i t h t h e t o b a c c o w h e n c h e w e d , a n d P e r c y h y p o t h e s i s e s t h a t t h e c l a y - l i n e d f e a t u r e s w e r e u s e d to steam clam s h e l l s w h i c h w e r e t h e n p u l v e r i z e d i n t o a p o w d e r y c o n s i s t e n c y a n d a d d e d to t o b a c c o ( P e r c y 1974:26). Two h e a r t h f e a t u r e s w e r e e n c o u n t e r e d , b o t h s u r r o u n d e d b y f i r e c r a c k e d r o c k w i t h q u a n t i t i e s of b u r n t s h e l l a n d f l e c k s of c h a r c o a l .  One also c o n t a i n e d  a m i x t u r e of a g r e a s y s o i l c o n t a i n i n g s i z e a b l e q u a n t i t i e s of f i s h r e m a i n s . T h e r e i s no q u e s t i o n t h a t l i v i n g f l o o r s w e r e p r e s e n t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h , b u t t h e n a t u r e of t h e e x c a v a t i o n d i d not allow f o r t h e e x c a v a t i o n  procedures  r e q u i r e d to e n c o u n t e r a n d d e f i n e s u c h i n t a n g i b l e f e a t u r e s . P e r c y u n c o v e r e d s e v e r a l b u r i a l s , t h r e e of w h i c h he p l a c e d i n t o t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t , a l t h o u g h none of t h e s e w e r e a c t u a l l y r e c o v e r e d excavation trenches.  They were recovered  from h i s  when the S u r r e y Municipality work  c r e w was d i g g i n g t h e s e w e r t r e n c h , so p r o v e n i e n c e i s s k e t c h y . L o c a r n o c o m p o n e n t b u r i a l s may be C h a r l e s c u l t u r e i n age.  Some of h i s  One b u r i a l was  complete e n o u g h to c o n c l u d e t h a t i t was a s e m i - f l e x e d a d u l t female.  The  p r e s e r v a t i o n f a c t o r s of t h e o t h e r two b u r i a l s was v e r y p o o r ; b o t h w e r e a d u l t s w i t h one b e i n g female (Beattie 1980:209—212).  Grave goods were i n c l u d e d w i t h  a l l t h r e e b u r i a l s , one h a d a s p l i n t e r a w l , c o b b l e - c o r e  tool a n d a u t i l i z e d f l a k e .  The s e c o n d h a d a bone a w l a n d a s h e l l a d z e b l a d e , w h i l e t h e t h i r d h a d a cobble-core tool.  The l a c k of s t r a t i g r a p h i e c o n t r o l makes one s u s p i c i o u s  c o n c e r n i n g the p r e s e n c e  of g r a v e g o o d s , t h e y c o u l d h a v e come f r o m  somewhere else.  Due to the s a l v a g e n a t u r e of t h e s e b u r i a l ' s r e c o v e r y , no  b u r i a l pits were  evident.  Our excavations  u n c o v e r e d two small c l a y - l i n e d d e p r e s s i o n s i m i l a r to  P e r c y ' s second t y p e w h i c h had been scooped out a n d lined with clay. was n o t h i n g a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e s e two f e a t u r e s w i t h i n 20 cm of e a c h  which were horizontally  There located  other.  One h e a r t h f e a t u r e  was u n c o v e r e d .  It was d e f i n e d  by an  encirclement  of f i r e c r a c k e d r o c k a n d a p r o f u s i o n of a s h a n d c h a r c o a l s c a t t e r e d  throughout  the r o c k s . T h e j u v e n i l e b u r i a l was r e c o v e r e d from a d e p t h of a p p r o x i m a t e l y l o c a t e d i n a s m a l l b u r i a l p i t i n close a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e two depressions.  T h i s s m a l l c h i l d was i n a s e m i - f l e x e d  associated g r a v e goods.  210 cm  clay-lined  p o s i t i o n a n d t h e r e was no  The p r e s e n c e of t h e s e f o u r i n - g r o u n d b u r i a l s  c o o r d i n a t e w i t h t h o s e f r o m G l e n r o s e a n d a d d f u r t h e r e v i d e n c e to n e g a t e Ham's h y p o t h e s i s of a b o v e g r o u n d b u r i a l s o c c u r r i n g at S t . M u n g o .  C r e s c e n t B e a c h N o n - A r t i f a c t u a l Data C o n c l u s i o n s L i k e both Glenrose and St. Mungo, Crescent Beach is situated i n an area from w h i c h many p r o c u r e m e n t a c t i v i t i e s c o u l d t a k e p l a c e .  Fourteen  communities e x i s t c l o s e to C r e s c e n t B e a c h , m a k i n g i t more d i v e r s e G l e n r o s e o r St. M u n g o .  ecological  than either  The t h r e e s i t e s a r e l a r g e , a l t h o u g h d a t a a b o u t  C h a r l e s component at C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s not as a c c u r a t e as t h a t f o r  the  Glenrose  a n d St. M u n g o . E t h n o g r a p h i c a l l y , t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e t h a t a l l t h r e e s i t e s w e r e occupied by closely related groups.  The r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n h i s t o r i c a n d  p r e h i s t o r i c g r o u p s i s s o m e t h i n g t h a t may become c l e a r e r a f t e r I h a v e p u r s u i n g my r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s .  S u f f i c e i t to s a y t h a t somewhere  of t h e s e t h r e e s i t e s p r o t o - H a l k o m e l e m s p e a k e r s  finished  i n the a r e a  existed.  The s t r a t i g r a p h i e s e q u e n c e i n d i c a t e s c o n t i n u o u s s i t e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h no h i a t u s b e t w e e n t h e C h a r l e s a n d L o c a r n o B e a c h c o m p o n e n t s , at l e a s t i n t h e South Trench. between  T h e r e i s some i n d i c a t i o n of a b r i e f h i a t u s i n t h e N o r t h T r e n c h  Component One a n d Two.  Therefore,  occupation t h r o u g h o u t the Charles c u l t u r e .  a l l t h r e e s i t e s show c o n t i n u o u s A b a n d o n m e n t of G l e n r o s e a n d St.  M u n g o was p r o b a b l y d u e to t h e p h y s i c a l c h a n g e s e x h i b i t e d as t h e F r a s e r D e l t a b u i l t u p a n d made a c c e s s to o p e n w a t e r more d i f f i c u l t , w h i l e also c h a n g i n g ecological community associated with the n e a r b y Rocky  the  Foreshore.  Dates from C r e s c e n t B e a c h do n o t i n d i c a t e a d e f i n i t e t e r m i n a l date, b u t t h e C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t i s p r e s e n t b y 4440 B P a n d t e r m i n a t e s sometime 3590 a n d 3210 B P .  The o n l y c o n f l i c t of dates comes f r o m t h e date  o b t a i n e d a n d t h e d a t e s we o b t a i n e d .  between  Percy  P e r c y ' s date of 4270 B P i s too o l d i n  r e l a t i o n s h i p to o u r s , b u t i t s t i l l f a l l s i n t h e time frame f o r t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e . The faunal a n a l y s i s from Crescent Beach shows a similarity between  the  p r o c e s s i n g of f l a t f i s h a n d salmon f o r b o t h C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d S t . M u n g o . Crescent Beach also shares w i t h Glenrose a n d St. Mungo a s i m i l a r i t y i n the v a r i e t y of s p e c i e s r e c o v e r e d  and presumably processed and/or consumed i n  t h e site b o u n d a r i e s . To date, t h e e v i d e n c e  from t h e f a u n a l , f i s h a n d s h e l l f i s h  r e m a i n s at C r e s c e n t B e a c h s u g g e s t a m u l t i - s e a s o n o c c u p a t i o n o n a r e g u l a r basis.  The major d i f f e r e n c e  i n subsistence between  the three sites is i n  proportion rather than in kind. The n u m b e r of r a w m a t e r i a l s a n d food r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e close Crescent Beach suggests  to  a base camp s i t e f u n c t i o n as does t h e p r e s e n c e  of  t h e v a r i e t y of f e a t u r e s a n d t h e i r r e l a t i v e a b u n d a n c e . Glenrose and St. Mungo.  T h i s i s also t r u e f o r  T h e r e a r e no u n i q u e f e a t u r e s p r e s e n t at C r e s c e n t  B e a c h , e a c h t y p e i s f o u n d at t h e o t h e r two s i t e s .  One f e a t u r e t y p e m i s s i n g  from C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s t h e p r e s e n c e of l i v i n g f l o o r s .  P e r c y d i d n o t have time  to look f o r l i v i n g f l o o r s , a n d h i s e x c a v a t i o n b y a r b i t r a r y l e v e l s c r o s s c u t a n y layers r e s u l t i n g from human a c t i v i t y .  We d i d n o t f i n d l i v i n g f l o o r s  because  our excavation i n the Charles component only began i n the South t r e n c h midway t h r o u g h the second season, while the Charles component i n the N o r t h t r e n c h was e x c a v a t e d d u r i n g t h e f i r s t s e a s o n , i t was a 1x2 meter p i t a n d d u r i n g t h e s e c o n d s e a s o n t h e c o m p o n e n t was e x c a v a t e d at a s l o w e r r a t e the Field School.  by  T h e r e i s s t i l l a g r e a t deal of i n t a c t C h a r l e s c o m p o n e n t  at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  left  The n u m b e r of f e a t u r e s p r e s e n t d u r i n g t h e C h a r l e s  component at C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s t h e r e f o r e  under-represented.  Non-Artifactual Conclusions for Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach F r o m t h e a c c u m u l a t i o n of e v i d e n c e g a t h e r e d from s i t e r e p o r t s , i t i s plausible that the Glenrose Cannery, St. Mungo Cannery and Crescent Beach sites d u r i n g the C h a r l e s c u l t u r e s h a r e d similar site functions i n the sense.  general  E a c h was u s e d as a base camp f o r two o r more s e a s o n s a n d p o s s i b l y  t h r o u g h o u t the year.  A l a r g e n u m b e r of a c t i v i t i e s took p l a c e at e a c h s i t e .  While s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s p r e s e n t at e a c h site may not c o r r e l a t e p e r f e c t l y  with  each o t h e r , o n t h e g e n e r a l l e v e l , t h e s i t e s w e r e p r i v y to s i m i l a r g r o u p s of activities.  T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e s i t e s were s p a r s e l y o c c u p i e d d u r i n g  the same p e r i o d o v e r a n d o v e r a g a i n f o r t h e p r o c u r e m e n t of one s p e c i f i c resource.  The s u b s i s t e n c e p o i n t s to many r e s o u r c e s b e i n g e x p l o i t e d .  food  There is  also no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t s p e c i a l i z e d n o n - r e s o u r c e r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s w e r e the p r i m e motive f o r t h e o c c u p a t i o n of t h e s e s i t e s .  T h i s c o n c l u d e s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h e t h r e e s i t e s u s e d f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s . Now t h a t i t has b e e n deemed p l a u s i b l e t h a t t h e t h r e e s i t e s s h a r e d s i m i l a r s i t e f u n c t i o n s , t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s f o r t h e t h r e e s i t e s c a n be i n t r o d u c e d . B e i n g able to h o l d site f u n c t i o n r e l a t i v e l y c o n s t a n t f o r a l l t h r e e s i t e s , I c a n examine t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s f o r e v i d e n c e of c h a n g e a n d assume t h a t any evidence  d i s c o v e r e d i s n o t a r e s u l t of major d i f f e r e n c e s  i n site function.  Artifact Classification  T h e r e a r e two s u b s e c t i o n s i n t h i s f i n a l p o r t i o n of C h a p t e r Two.  In  s e c t i o n one, t h e v a r i a b l e s u s e d to r e c o r d i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e a r t i f a c t assemblages are i n t r o d u c e d a n d reasons for the choices d i s c u s s e d . section p r e s e n t s the c o d i n g format used for t h i s a n a l y s i s .  The  first  S e c t i o n two  d e s c r i b e s t h e a r t i f a c t t y p e s f o r e a c h s i t e ' s a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e a n d also c o n t i n u e s a d i s c u s s i o n of t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e o n a g e n e r a l l e v e l i n o r d e r to p r o v i d e more i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t  assemblages.  Variables and Artifact Coding Format T h e t a s k of o r g a n i z i n g t h e v a r i a b l e s was g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e w o r k of a r c h a e o l o g i s t s s u r r o u n d i n g me, e s p e c i a l l y P r o f e s s o r s R.G. M a t s o n .  David Pokotylo and  F r o m t h e i r w o r k I l e a r n e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e of c a r e f u l l y  and d e f i n i n g the v a r i a b l e s needed for a n a l y s i s .  choosing  The information used i n this  a n a l y s i s was d e v e l o p e d a s s u m i n g t h e a n a l y s i s w o u l d u s e a c o m p u t e r f o r of t h e w o r k .  most  A d b a s e c l o n e p r o g r a m m e c a l l e d P C F I L E ( B u t t o n 1990) was u s e d  to s t o r e a l l t h e e n t r i e s f r o m e a c h s i t e .  The d a t a w e r e a l s o t r a n s f e r r e d  S Y S T A T ( W i l k i n s o n 1990) f o r most of t h e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s .  to  Appendix A  i n c l u d e s t h e c o d i n g format k e y u s e d i n t h i s a n a l y s i s . General artifact provenience  was r e c o r d e d u s i n g f o u r v a r i a b l e s : S i t e  Name ( B o r d e n D e s i g n a t i o n ) , E x c a v a t i o n U n i t , L a y e r a n d L e v e l . variables focused on different  a s p e c t s of t h e a r t i f a c t s .  r e c o r d e d the o r i g i n a l catalogue  The remaining  Artifact Number  number.  D e f i n i n g t h e v a r i a b l e A r t i f a c t T y p e r e q u i r e d t h e most time a n d e f f o r t i n t e r m s of t h e e n t i r e a n a l y s i s .  A r t i f a c t T y p e i s k e y b e c a u s e a l l a n a l y s i s was  b a s e d o n t h i s v a r i a b l e a n d i f i t was not e x p l i c i t , f u r t h e r w o r k w o u l d o n l y c o n f u s e t h e matter.  The a r t i f a c t c l a s s e s w e r e a r r a n g e d i n t o a two  tiered  s y s t e m w i t h g e n e r a l c l a s s e s s u c h a s : c h i p p e d s t o n e , g r o u n d s t o n e , bone, a n t l e r and shell r e p r e s e n t i n g the f i r s t tier.  Specific artifact classes were  given  d e t a i l e d names. T h e g e n e r a l a n d s p e c i f i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e d a t a a l l o w e d analysis on several  for  levels.  A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b l e i s Raw M a t e r i a l b e c a u s e i t , a l o n g w i t h A r t i f a c t T y p e , i s k e y f o r l o o k i n g at i n t e r - a s s e m b l a g e  variability.  used for all lithic raw materials were based on geological terms.  The  names  Raw m a t e r i a l s  were organized i n s u c h a way that raw materials created t h r o u g h similar p r o c e s s e s o r f r o m s i m i l a r animals w e r e g r o u p e d i n t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e  following  classes: Mineral, Igneous, Sedimentary, Metamorphic, Bone, Tooth, A n t l e r and Shell.  I n t h i s w a y , r a w m a t e r i a l s w e r e o r g a n i z e d i n two t i e r s , a l l o w i n g  a n a l y s i s of b o t h g e n e r a l r a w m a t e r i a l c l a s s e s v i s - a - v i s e a c h o t h e r a n d s p e c i f i c r a w m a t e r i a l c l a s s e s v i s - a - v i s e a c h o t h e r ( s i m i l a r to t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of artifact types).  the  T a b l e 2.2 l i s t s a l l of t h e r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s f o u n d a t G l e n r o s e ,  St. M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h . F o r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e d e g r e e of w o r k i n g o n some of t h e c h i p p e d stone a v a r i a b l e c a l l e d C o r t e x C o v e r was c r e a t e d . c o m p a r i s o n of s t a g e s of c h i p p e d s t o n e a r t i f a c t  This variable allows  for  manufacture.  A l l artifacts were weighed and measured for L e n g t h , Width and Thickness.  Weight was i n grams a n d r e c o r d e d to t h e 10th of a g r a m .  was d e f i n e d as t h e maximum d i m e n s i o n . d i m e n s i o n p e r p e n d i c u l a r to L e n g t h . a n g l e to L e n g t h a n d W i d t h .  W i d t h w a s d e f i n e d as t h e g r e a t e s t  T h i c k n e s s was d e f i n e d as b e i n g at a r i g h t  A l l measurements w e r e i n c e n t i m e t r e s  r e c o r d e d to a 10th of a c e n t i m e t r e .  Length  and  Table  Raw M a t e r i a l T y p e s  2.2  MINERAL; 10. U n k n o w n M i n e r a l 11. Quartz Crystal 12. Chalcedony 13. Nephrite 14. Vein quartz IGNEOUS; 20. U n k n o w n I g n e o u s 21. Granite 22. Rhyolite 23. Andésite 24. Basalt 25. Obsidian SEDIMENTARY: 31. Sandstone 32. Siltstone 33. Mudstone 34. Breccia 35. Chert  30. U n k n o w n  Sedimentary  METAMORPHIC; 41. Greenstone 42. Quartzite 43. Slate 44. Schist 45. Gneiss 46. Steatite  40. U n k n o w n  Metamorphic  BONE; 51. 52. 53. 54. 55.  50. U n k n o w n Bone Mammal Bird B u r n e d Bone B u r n e d Mammal T u r t l e Bone  TOOTH: 60. U n k n o w n 61. Rodent Incisor 62. Mammal T o o t h 63. S e a Mammal T o o t h 64. Dog C a n i n e ANTLER;  Tooth  70. U n k n o w n A n t l e r  SHELL; 80. U n k n o w n S h e l l 81. Clam 82. California Mussel  Terminology  To d i f f e r e n t i a t e  between  m e a s u r e m e n t s t a k e n o n complete v e r s u s  broken  a r t i f a c t s a Q u a l i t y of M e a s u r e m e n t v a r i a b l e was g i v e n f o r L e n g t h , W i d t h a n d Thickness.  In t h i s way, I could single out a l l artifacts w i t h intact margins  v e r s u s those without.  W i t h some a r t i f a c t t y p e s i t i s d i f f i c u l t to  determine  c o m p l e t e n e s s of t h e t o o l , a n d i n t h e s e c a s e s a l l m e a s u r e m e n t s w e r e as o b t a i n a b l e b u t n o t  recorded  complete.  Artifact Classification and Analysis To a n s w e r my r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n i n g i n t e r - a s s e m b l a g e between  variability  the Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach artifact assemblages,  was i m p o r t a n t to c r e a t e a n d u s e a n a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n able to i n f o r m a t i o n a l l o w i n g f o r c o m p a r i s o n between t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t  it  provide  assemblages.  One i m p o r t a n t measure of v a r i a b i l i t y i s t h e p r e s e n c e a n d o r a b s e n c e c e r t a i n c l a s s e s of a r t i f a c t s o r r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s .  The M a y n e p h a s e  of  was  o r i g i n a l l y d e f i n e d o n t h e b a s i s of t h e p r e s e n c e o r a b s e n c e of c e r t a i n a r t i f a c t t y p e s t h o u g h t to be u n i q u e to t h a t p h a s e . assemblages or absent.  A n y c o m p a r i s o n of  must involve looking for differences  artifact  i n the artifact types  present  The A r t i f a c t T y p e s a r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h t h i s p u r p o s e i n m i n d .  T h e a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n e m p l o y e d to o r g a n i z e a n d p r e s e n t t h e  artifacts  u s e d i n t h i s t h e s i s e v o l v e d from t h e s i t e r e p o r t s w h e r e t h e a r t i f a c t s w e r e f i r s t p u b h s h e d (Ham 1984, M a t s o n 1976, M a t s o n et aL 1990, P e r c y 1974 a n d P r a t t et aJ. 1991).  T h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was also i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e p a s t  t r a d i t i o n s of a r c h a e o l o g i s t s w h o h a v e w o r k e d i n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast. t r a d i t i o n s have focused on c r e a t i n g technological artifact categories tools, a n d f u n c t i o n a l a r t i f a c t c a t e g o r i e s s i t e r e p o r t s c o v e r two d i f f e r e n t  These  for  stone  f o r bone, a n t l e r a n d s h e l l t o o l s .  The  decades and changes i n archaeological  perspectives, making comparisons between artifacts difficult unless the p h y s i c a l artifacts were available for comparison a n d analysis. Dealing w i t h data from three sites r e q u i r e s s e a r c h i n g for similarities i n a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n o r d e r to h e l p o r g a n i z e a n d p r e s e n t t h e d a t a . is agreement between the artifact typologies.  A l l use the following  There  general  a r t i f a c t c a t e g o r i e s ; c h i p p e d s t o n e , g r o u n d s t o n e , bone, a n t l e r a n d s h e l l . f i r s t s t e p was c r e a t i n g t h e s e same c a t e g o r i e s .  My  The p r e s e n t a t i o n of the data  from t h e r e p o r t s i s v e r y d i f f e r e n t , w i t h M a t s o n a n d P e r c y p r e s e n t i n g d a t a i n t h e ' c l a s s i c ' t r a d i t i o n of a r t i f a c t t y p e s f o u n d i n t h e g e n e r a l c a t e g o r i e s of s t o n e , b o n e , a n t l e r o r s h e l l .  aforementioned  Ham u s e s m a n y t r a d i t i o n a l t e r m s  a n d c a t e g o r i e s , b u t he p r e s e n t s h i s d a t a i n ' f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p s ' w h i c h a r e as follows; Tool m a n u f a c t u r e , W o o d w o r k i n g , F i b r e a n d S k i n W o r k i n g , D e c o r a t i v e a n d C e r e m o n i a l , H u n t i n g , F i s h i n g , B u t c h e r i n g a n d Tool F r a g m e n t s .  These  d i f f e r i n g a p p r o a c h e s to d a t a p r e s e n t a t i o n r e q u i r e d me to make a d e c i s i o n c o n c e r n i n g how I s h o u l d p r e s e n t my d a t a . I n s p i t e of t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a t t h e a r t i f a c t l e v e l i s t h e same f o r a l l t h r e e r e p o r t s . " L i k e goes w i t h l i k e " .  S i m i l a r a t t r i b u t e s a r e u t i l i z e d as i s t h e motto  I n t h e N o r t h w e s t C o a s t t h i s t y p e of o r g a n i z a t i o n has  i t s r o o t s i n m o n o g r a p h s c o n c e r n i n g e a r l y p r e h i s t o r y o n t h e N o r t h w e s t Coast s u c h as B o r d e n (1970), C a r l s o n (1960, 1970), M a t s o n (1976) a n d M i t c h e l l (1971). T h i s t y p o l o g y i s o r g a n i z e d o n t h e same g e n e r a l l e v e l as M a t s o n (1976) a n d P e r c y (1974).  I n e a c h of t h e major g r o u p i n g s of o b j e c t s  ( c h i p p e d stone,  c h i p p e d a n d g r o u n d s t o n e , g r o u n d s t o n e , p e c k e d a n d g r o u n d s t o n e , bone, antler and shell) the a r t i f a c t t y p e s have been o r d e r e d i n a specific manner. I n e a c h of the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d g e n e r a l c a t e g o r i e s , t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s t a r t s w i t h minimally modified o b j e c t s  ( s u c h as p e b b l e c o r e t o o l s , a b r a s i v e s t o n e s a n d  w o r k e d bone f r a g m e n t s ) a n d g r a d u a l l y w o r k s t h r o u g h more a n d more artifact types, e n d i n g w i t h a miscellaneous category fragments  containing those  not c l a s s i f i a b l e b e y o n d t h e g e n e r a l l e v e l .  l o o k e d u p o n as h i e r a r c h i c a l i n n a t u r e .  complex  T h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n be  I n some of t h e c h i p p e d  c a t e g o r i e s , a p a r a g r a p h i n t r o d u c e s a g r o u p of o b j e c t s  stone  (for example  Formed  C h i p p e d Stone B i f a c e s ) w h i c h a r e t h e n s u b g r o u p e d a n d s p e c i f i c s u b g r o u p s discussed separately.  are  The s u b g r o u p s f o r t h e l i t h i c tools a r e b a s e d o n s h a r e d  t e c h n o l o g i c a l a t t r i b u t e s s u c h as g e n e r a l s h a p e , d e g r e e of a n g l e r e t o u c h a n d amount of w o r k i n g .  T h i s t y p e of a r r a n g e m e n t was also a t t e m p t e d f o r  implements, but the o r g a n i z a t i o n is f i r s t a n d foremost  organic  based on functional  s i m i l a r i t y , b e c a u s e t e c h n o l o g i c a l s i m i l a r i t y i s n o t as w e l l u n d e r s t o o d . T h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n of c r e a t i n g a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n e x p l i c i t i n i t s d e f i n i t i o n of t h e d i f f e r e n t  artifact  categories  traditionally used for Northwest Coast artifacts. A p p e n d i x B p r e s e n t s t h e complete a r t i f a c t t y p e d e s c r i p t i o n s f o r a l l t h r e e sites.  The t a b l e s of s u m m a r y s t a t i s t i c s from A p p e n d i x B a r e o c c a s i o n a l l y  referred  to t h r o u g h o u t t h i s c h a p t e r .  T h e f i r s t l i n e of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r  A r t i f a c t T y p e c o n t a i n s t h e A r t i f a c t T y p e name.  each  Secondly, a paragraph  compares and discusses similarities and differences  in each artifact class.  T h e s e d i s c u s s i o n s a r e t h e f i r s t s t e p of t h e a n a l y s i s .  This discussion is based  o n T a b l e 2.3 w h i c h p r e s e n t s t h e n u m b e r s a n d p r o p o r t i o n s of a l l of t h e A r t i f a c t T y p e s f o u n d at e a c h s i t e . differences  Sometimes t h e r e i s a s e c o n d p a r a g r a p h d i s c u s s i n g  i n r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s a m o n g s t t h e t h r e e artifaxit  assemblages.  T a b l e s o r b a r g r a p h s d e m o n s t r a t e some of t h e r a w materied t y p e The a r t i f a c t c a t e g o r i e s  differences.  are defined u s i n g specific parameters e n s u r i n g  t h a t f u t u r e a r c h a e o l o g i s t s c a n compare my a r t i f a c t c a t e g o r y  definitions with  their own.  Quite o f t e n , t h i s i s not p o s s i b l e w i t h t h e a r t i f a c t d a t a from c e r t a i n  archaeological reports.  B a s e d o n t h e d e f i n i t i o n of a r t i f a c t c l a s s e s alone, i t c a n  be d i f f i c u l t to t e l l w h y a n a r c h a e o l o g i s t p l a c e d a c e r t a i n a r t i f a c t i n t o a c e r t a i n artifact category.  O f t e n , a v i s u a l e x a m i n a t i o n o r a t l e a s t a c l e a r i l l u s t r a t i o n of  t h e a r t i f a c t i s n e e d e d i n o r d e r to u n d e r s t a n d w h a t k i n d s of a r t i f a c t s t h e author is classifying.  I n m a k i n g my a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n d e f i n i t i o n s e x p l i c i t ,  my a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t t h e d a t a a r e e v i d e n t a n d t h e r e f o r e  available  for  discussion and comparison. The s e p a r a t i o n of N o r t h w e s t C o a s t a r t i f a c t s i n t o c h i p p e d s t o n e , s t o n e , p e c k e d a n d g r o u n d s t o n e , bone, a n t l e r a n d s h e l l c a t e g o r i e s  ground  reflects  commonly u s e d t r a d i t i o n a l d i v i s i o n b a s e d o n t e c h n o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s .  This  t y p e of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o c u s e s o n t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g p r o c e s s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r final artifact.  a  the  Raw m a t e r i a l i s a n i m p o r t a n t p a r t of t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g p r o c e s s ,  i n f a c t , r a w m a t e r i a l d e f i n e s w h a t t e c h n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s c a n a n d c a n n o t be utilized.  This emphasis on raw material is reflected  i n t h e names of  a r t i f a c t c l a s s e s ; g r o u n d s t o n e k n i f e a n d a n t l e r w e d g e a r e two s u c h  some examples.  The a t t r i b u t e s u s e d to d e f i n e t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l a r t i f a c t c l a s s e s a r e a l s o t r a d i t i o n a l ones s u c h as s h a p e , e d g e - a n g l e a n d s i z e . Once i t i s d e t e r m i n e d a n o b j e c t i s a n a r t i f a c t a n d t h e p r o d u c t of a manufacturing process (rather than a by product which is called debitage), the n e x t stage i s to define t h e o b j e c t as s h a p e d o r u n s h a p e d . U n s h a p e d tools h a v e b e e n modified b y p r o c e s s e s  s u c h as c h i p p i n g o r  g r i n d i n g , b u t t h e o r i g i n a l s h a p e of t h e o b j e c t i s s t i l l d i s c e r n i b l e .  The  m a j o r i t y of u n s h a p e d implements a r e c h i p p e d s t o n e , b u t some b o n e , a n t l e r a n d shell objects  c a n also be c o n s i d e r e d u n s h a p e d a r t i f a c t s .  G r o u n d stone o r  p e c k e d a n d g r o u n d stone a r t i f a c t s c a n n o t be c o n s i d e r e d u n s h a p e d , u n l e s s t h e  t e c h n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s t h a t c r e a t e d them h a v e n o t b e e n u s e d o v e r t h e e n t i r e s u r f a c e of t h e a r t i f a c t , a n d t h e o r i g i n a l f o r m of t h e r o c k c a n be It i s i m p o r t a n t to d i f f e r e n t i a t e s h a p e d tools "... r e f l e c t (Sanger  between  determined.  u n s h a p e d a n d s h a p e d tools  because  d e l i b e r a t e s h a p i n g o n t h e p a r t of t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r "  1970:76) a n d t h i s d e s i r e f o r a s p e c i f i c s h a p e s u g g e s t s t h e item was  created for a specific function.  This relationship between  s h a p e d tools a n d  s p e c i f i c f u n c t i o n s i s b a s e d o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of  shaped  tools, w h e n c o m p a r e d to u n s h a p e d t o o l s , r e q u i r e s a g r e a t e r i n v e s t m e n t of time and energy, and therefore,  t h e r e was some s p e c i f i c p u r p o s e i n m i n d ( B i n f o r d  1979, 1980, C h a p m a n 1977, H a y d e n 1986).  Furthermore, given the invested  time  a n d e f f o r t , s h a p e d tools h a d a l o n g e r use—life a n d w e r e c u r a t e d ( B i n f o r d 1973, 1979), b o t h h a v i n g major i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r N o r t h w e s t C o a s t  archaeologists.  T a b l e 2.3 p r e s e n t s a s u m m a r y of t h e A r t i f a c t T y p e s p r e s e n t at e a c h s i t e , t h e p r o p o r t i o n of e a c h a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e a l o n g w i t h t h e n u m b e r of a r t i f a c t s .  represented  The percentage  b y each A r t i f a c t  Type,  for each artifact type i n  C r e s c e n t B e a c h was c a l c u l a t e d w i t h o u t i n c l u d i n g g r o u n d stone d i s c a n d s h e l l b e a d s d u e to t h e h i g h n u m b e r s of t h e s e two a r t i f a c t t y p e s w h i c h skewed the percentages  a n d d i d not allow f o r a m e a n i n g f u l c o m p a r i s o n  between the three artifact assemblages.  The p r o p o r t i o n s for g r o u n d  disc a n d shell beads have been calculated based on the entire assemblage  recovered  greatly  stone  artifact  from C r e s c e n t B e a c h (1197).  The A r t i f a c t T y p e s  d e s c r i p t i o n c o m p r i s e s a major p o r t i o n of t h e r e s t of  this chapter.  T h e t o t a l n u m b e r of a r t i f a c t s f o r t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t  are different  from t h o s e n u m b e r s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e o r i g i n a l r e p o r t s .  several reasons for this.  assemblages There  are  P r o b a b l y t h e most i m p o r t a n t one i s t h e p h y s i c a l  d i s a p p e a r a n c e of some of t h e C r e s c e n t B e a c h a r t i f a c t s .  Of c o u r s e , t h i s means  Table 2.3  Artifacts From Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach Charles Culture Components  Artifact Type Core Bipolar Implement TOTAL NUMBER  Glenrose Number X 54 7.1 4 .5 58 7.6  St. Mungo Number % 49 6.8 26 3.6 75 10.4  Crescent Beach Number X 9.6 55 49 8.6 104 18.2  Chipped Stone Implements Unshaped Chipped Stone Implements Hammerstone Anvilstone Hammerstone Anvilstone Pebble Tool Unifar^ Pebble Tool Biface TOTAL NUMBER C. S. IMPLEMENTS  13 1  1.7 .1  14 1  2.0 .1  16 7 37  2.1 .9 4.8  16 3 34  2.2 .4 4.7  1.5 10.8  3 44  .4 6.1  5.9 .3 11.3 1.6 .4  17 14  -  Unshaped Chipped Stone Flake Tools 11 Cortex Spall Utilized Flake 82 Quartz Microlith 45 Unifac. Steep-Angled Retouch. Flake Notched >-Angled Unifac. Ret. Flake 2 Unifac. <-Angled Retouched Flake 86 Bifacially Retouched Flake 12 3 Microblade-Like Flake Macroblade-Like Flake TOTAL NUMBER C. S. F. TOOLS 241 * >=Steep-angled <=Narrow-angled Shaped Chipped Stone Tools Microblade 1 Graver 2 Drill 1 Steep-Angled Formed Uniface 10 30 Narrow-Angled Formed Uniface Leaf-Shaped Biface 19 Square-Tang Stemmed Biface 1 Contracting Stem Biface No Shoulders 1 Contract. Stem Biface With Shoulders 2 Biface Proximal Fragment 7 Biface Medial Fragment 5 Biface Distal Fragment 4 13 Unidentifiable Biface Fragment Chipped <-Angled Tabular Bifare Obj. Chipped/Ground Biface Leaf-Shaped 1 Chipped/Ground Biface Medial Frag. Chipped/Ground Biface Distal Frag. Chipped and Ground Stone Fragment 97 TOTAL NUMBER SHAPED C. S. TOOLS TOTAL NUMBER CHIPPED STONE TOOLS 433  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  57  .7 .7 .2 2.8 .5 4.9  2.4  14 118 1 28  2.4 20.6 .2 4.9  7.9 2.0  19 2  3.3 .4  183  .2 32.0  -  -  -  31.8  135  18.8  .1 .3 .1 1.3 3.9 2.5 .1 .1 .3 .9 .7 .5 1.7  -2  .3  18 7  2.5 1.0  12.6 .1  56.8  -  4 4 1 16 3 28  -5 8 3 7 1 16  -  -1 1 1 70 314  -  .7 1.1 .4 1.0 .1 2.2  -  -  .1 .1 .1 9.6 43.5  -  -1  -  -  -  -  -3  .5  7  1.2  4 3 3  .4 .7 .5 .5  1  1.4 .2  -2 -8  31 346  -  -  -  -  5.4 60.5  Table 2.3 Continued Artifact Type Ground Stone Implements Abrasive Stone Formed Abrasive Stone Leaf-Shaped Ground Stone Biface Ground Stone Biface Proximal Frag. Ground Stone Disc Bead Decorated Ground Stone Miscellaneous Ground Stone TOTAL NUMBER G. S. I. (NO BEADS) TOTAL NUMBER G. S. I. (WITH BEADS)  Glenrose Number % 16 2 2 1 5 6 8 40 40  2.1 .3 .3 .1 .7 .8 1.1 5.4 5.4  Pecked and Ground Stone Implements Mortar Pipe 1 TOTAL NUMBER P. AND G. S. IMPLEMENTSl  .1  -  Bone Implements Worked Bone Medial Fragment Worked Bone E n d Fragment Rodent Incisor Net Mesh Spacer Peg Bone Hook Object Perforat^ed Bone Pendemt Ground Molar Tooth Pendant Bone Bead Ring Tube Whistle Splinter Bone Awl SpKt Rib Awl Formed Bone Awl Metapodial Awl Bird Bone Awl Ulna Awl Blanket Pin Bone DrUl Unipoint Bipoint Pointed Bone Object Fragment Bone Chisel With Unilat. Taper End Bone Wedge Non-Facetted Point Lanceolate-Shaped Non-Facetted Point No Central Cavity Non-Fac. Point With Central Cavity Non-Facetted Point Fragment  .1  72 30 1  9.5 3.9 .1  -1 13 -8 -1 -27 24 -3 -8  1.7 1.1 .1  -  .1  3.6 3.2 -  .4  -  1.1  1 1 24 1 5  .1 .1 3.2 .1 .7  -1 -  .1  -  -  St. Mungo Number X  Crescent Beach Number %  10 2  1.4 .3  4 4 5 26 26  .1 .6 .6 .7 3.7 3.7  1  .1  -  -  118 41 3 1 1  16.4 5.7 .4 .1 .1  80 35 3  14.0 6.1 .5  -1  -.2  1  .2  -1  -1  -  13 4 8 2  -2 1 36  -  13 1 1 1 1  -3 2  -  21 1 2 1 5 2  -  .1  -  1.8 .6 1.1 .3  -  13 5  2.3 .9  (508)  (42.4)  1 1 20 528  .2 .2 3.6 3.6  -2  -  4  .4 .7  -  -  .3 .1 5.0  -15  2.6  -  6 12  1.1 2.1  1.8 .1 .1 .1 .1  .4  -2 2  -1  .3  4 1  -  10  2.9 .1 .3 .1 .7 .3  -  .4 .4  -  .2 .7 .2  -4  .7  1  .2  -  1.8  Table 2.3 Continued Artifact Type Bone Implements Continued Unid. Wedge, Chisel, Point, Fragment Unilaterally Barbed Fixed Point Frag. Unilaterally Barbed Harp/Point Bilaterally Barbed Fixed Point Bone Barb Fish Hook Shank Decorated Bone Object Grub TOTAL NUMBER B. IMPLEMENTS Antler Implements Worked Antler Medial Fragment Worked Antler End Fragment Punch Antler Unipoint Antler Bipoint Antler Wedge Unilaterally Barbed Fixed Point Frag. Unilat. Barbed Fixed Pt./Harp. Bilaterally Barbed Fixed Point Antler Haft Anthropomorphic Object Comb TOTAL NUMBER A, IMPLEMENTS  Glenrose Number % 7  -1  -  19 1 1  2.7 .1 .1  1 3  .1 .1 .4  1 235  .1 .1 30.8  3 3 312  .1 .4 .4 43.0  5 2 7  .7 .3 .9  11 12 4  1.5 1.7 .6  32  4.2  27  3.8  1 1  .1 .1  2  .3  -1 49  .1 6.4  -1  Shell Artifacts Shell Pendant Shell Bead 1(135) Shell Adze Blade Misc. Ground Shell Fragment 2 TOTAL NO. S. ARTIFACTS (no beads) 3 3 TOTAL NO. S. ARTIFACTS (with beads)  -  TOTAL NO. ARTIFACTS (no beads) TOTAL NO. ARTIFACTS (with beads)  .9  St. Mungo Number X  761 896  -  .3 .1 .4 .4  99.9  -  -1  -  Crescent Beach Number X 12  -1 —  -  197  34.8  1 2 1 1 1 1  .2 .4 .2 .2 .2 .2  1  .3 .1  60  .1 8.4  -1 -8  -2  .3  1 (116) 1  3 5 5  .4 .7 .7  718 718  99.8 99.8  -2 -1  -  2.1  -2  .2  —  1.6.2 (9.7) .2  .2  -  .4  118  573 1197  100.2  -  t h a t some c o m p a r i s o n s a r e n o t c o m p l e t e l y a c c u r a t e i n d i c a t o r s of differences  i n the artifact assemblages.  Another reason for differences  n u m b e r s of a r t i f a c t s p r e s e n t i s due to d i f f e r e n c e s artifacts.  the  i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n of  I n t h e St. M u n g o r e p o r t , many p i e c e s of bone d e b i t a g e  i n c l u d e d i n the artifact tally.  i n the  were  I have omitted these objects for t h i s a n a l y s i s  b e c a u s e t h e y a r e b y - p r o d u c t s r a t h e r t h a n a r t i f a c t s a n d t h e y w e r e not a n a l y z e d f o r t h e o t h e r two s i t e s .  Lithic Artifacts In early Northwest Coast p r e h i s t o r i c sites, lithic artifacts are the category  of a r t i f a c t s e x c a v a t e d .  T h e r a n g e a n d v a r i e t y of l i t h i c a r t i f a c t s i s  g r e a t a n d t h e r e a r e many d i f f e r e n t m a n u f a c t u r e (for  largest  t e c h n o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s of  artifact  example p e r c u s s i o n f l a k i n g , g r i n d i n g o r p e c k i n g ) .  Some  a r t i f a c t s r e c e i v e v e r y l i t t l e m o d i f i c a t i o n , a n d some r e c e i v e m o d i f i c a t i o n i n v e r y s p e c i f i c a r e a s s u c h as t h e i r e d g e .  Some a r t i f a c t s h a v e b e e n so  completely  modified t h a t t h e y no l o n g e r e x h i b i t a n y s i m i l a r i t y to t h e i r o r i g i n a l u n m o d i f i e d state.  I h a v e d i v i d e d l i t h i c tools i n t o t h e f o l l o w i n g g e n e r a l  c h i p p e d s t o n e , g r o u n d stone a n d p e c k e d a n d g r o u n d  categories:  stone.  C h i p p e d Stone Two c a t e g o r i e s  of a r t i f a c t s i n t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n do n o t r e a l l y q u a l i f y  tools b e c a u s e t h e y a r e u s u a l l y t h o u g h t of as b y - p r o d u c t s . and bipolar cores. assemblage  These are  as  cores  In determining information about site function a n d i n t e r -  v a r i a b i l i t y , cores are an important artifact class.  are i n c l u d e d i n t h i s artifact d e s c r i p t i o n .  Therefore,  cores  CORE: T a b l e 2.3 l i s t s t h e v a r i e t y of c o r e s p r e s e n t at t h e t h r e e s i t e s .  Table 2.4  s h o w s t h e r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s c o r e s c o n s i s t of f r o m G l e n r o s e , S t . M u n g o a n d Crescent Beach.  Basalt is the overwhelming  preferred  raw material for  cores,  a c c o u n t i n g f o r 79.6% at G l e n r o s e , 75.5% at St. M u n g o , a n d 76.4% a t C r e s c e n t Beach.  A t G l e n r o s e , q u a r t z i t e i s t h e n e x t most p o p u l a r r a w m a t e r i a l (7.4%)  w h i l e a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h c h e r t i s t h e s e c o n d most p o p u l a r r a w m a t e r i a l (9.1%). A t S t . M u n g o t h e s e c o n d most p o p u l a r r a w m a t e r i a l i s c o m p r i s e d of a n u n k n o w n i g n e o u s r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e (18.4%).  G l e n r o s e has t h e most v a r i e t y i n  c o r e r a w m a t e r i a l s w i t h s e v e n t y p e s w h i l e C r e s c e n t B e a c h has s i x a n d S t . Mungo has four.  I expected  more v a r i e t y i n t h e c o r e r a w m a t e r i a l s from  C r e s c e n t B e a c h (due to i t s h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of c o r e s ) , b u t t h i s i s not t h e case.  T h e r e i s minimal e v i d e n c e  between  the three sites.  of a d i f f e r e n c e  i n preference  of r a w m a t e r i a l s  C h e r t i s more p o p u l a r a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h , b u t i t o n l y  c o m p r i s e s f i v e of 55 c o r e s .  None of t h e r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s p r e s e n t c o u l d be  c o n s i d e r e d p a r t i c u l a r l y exotic, b u t note t h e one v e i n q u a r t z c o r e p r e s e n t at Glenrose.  T h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e  v e i n q u a r t z was u t i l i z e d as a r a w m a t e r i a l  w h e n i t was p r e s e n t , b u t i t was n o t a c t i v e l y s o u g h t at t h e t h r e e Table 2.4  sites.  Raw Material Types for Cores From Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach  Raw Material Type Vein Quartz Unknown Igneous Granite Andésite Basalt Unknown Sedimentary Breccia Chert Greenstone Quartzite  Glenrose %  St. Mungo %  Crescent Beach X  1.9 1.9 3.7 3.7 79.6 0 0 1.9 0 7.4  0 18.4 0 0 75.5 0 2 0 0 4.1  0 5.5 0 0 76.4 1.8 0 9.1 1.8 5.5  BIPOLAR IMPLEMENT: There are differences  a p p a r e n t i n T a b l e 2.3.  p a u c i t y of b i p o l a r implements a t G l e n r o s e . significant.  most o b v i o u s i s t h e  T h i s c o u l d be s t a t i s t i c a l l y  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , debate i n archaeology  ( i n c l u d i n g the n u m b e r of d i f f e r e n t  The  over bipolar  implements  artifact types and their functions)  l i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r me to p l a y w i t h .  leaves  B i p o l a r r e d u c t i o n i s u s e d i n l a t e r time  p e r i o d s f o r t h e c r e a t i o n of q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s .  It i s i n t e r e s t i n g b u t n o t  s u r p r i s i n g that bipolar reduction is present earlier in prehistory than usually thought.  Bipolar r e d u c t i o n shares a close r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h raw material  b e c a u s e i t i s b e s t u s e d f o r r e d u c i n g small p e b b l e s .  One c o u l d a r g u e t h a t t h e  difference  i n raw material availability  i n bipolar technology  at the t h r e e s i t e s .  reflects  differences  T h i s a r g u m e n t does not w o r k f o r t h e d i f f e r e n c e  Glenrose and St. Mungo w h i c h are v i r t u a l l y identical  between  environmentally.  L o o k i n g at t h e r a w m a t e r i a l s f r o m w h i c h the b i p o l a r implements made, b a s a l t i s t h e d o m i n a n t r a w m a t e r i a l f o r a l l t h r e e s i t e s . f o u r b i p o l a r i m p l e m e n t s a r e made f r o m b a s a l t . implements a r e made f r o m b a s a l t .  The o t h e r t h r e e b i p o l a r implements a t St.  of 49 b i p o l a r implements a r e made f r o m b a s a l t .  A t C r e s c e n t B e a c h 45  Of the f o u r o t h e r  i m p l e m e n t s , two a r e made of c h e r t , one i s made of a n u n k n o w n  raw m a t e r i a l of c h o i c e .  At Glenrose,  A t S t . M u n g o , 23 of 26 b i p o l a r  M u n g o a r e made from c h a l c e d o n y , c h e r t a n d q u a r t z i t e .  a n d one i s made from q u a r t z i t e .  are  bipolar  metamorphic,  A s w i t h the c o r e s , b a s a l t i s o b v i o u s l y  the  When t h e r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s of b i p o l a r implements  are  c o m p a r e d to the r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s of c o r e s , i t i s a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e r e i s l e s s v a r i e t y i n the t y p e of r a w m a t e r i a l d e s i r e d f o r the m a n u f a c t u r e of implements.  bipolar  While t h e r e i s one v e i n q u a r t z c o r e from G l e n r o s e , t h e r e a r e  no  q u a r t z b i p o l a r implements f r o m a n y of the s i t e s .  This further illustrates that  q u a r t z was not r e g u l a r l y u t i l i z e d d u r i n g t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e o n t h e M a i n l a n d .  C o r e a n d B i p o l a r Implements:  Conclusions  L o o k i n g at t h e c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implement t a b u l a t i o n , t h e r e was a g r e a t d e a l more c o r e a n d b i p o l a r r e d u c t i o n o c c u r r i n g a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h , e s p e c i a l l y w h e n c o m p a r e d to G l e n r o s e (18.2% v e r s u s 7.6%). towards a similarity with Glenrose. implies a difference and Crescent Beach.  S t . M u n g o at 10.4% i s l e a n i n g  This difference  amongst the three  i n f l i n t k n a p p i n g activities between Glenrose, St. Mungo One w a y to t e s t t h i s h y p o t h e s i s of d i f f e r e n t  emphasis i n  f l i n t k n a p p i n g a c t i v i t i e s w o u l d be to examine t h e d e b i t a g e from t h e artifact  sites  three  assemblages.  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone  Implements  I n t h i s l a r g e c a t e g o r y , a d i v i s i o n i s made b e t w e e n u n s h a p e d stone implements t h a t a r e c o b b l e c o r e tools a n d t h o s e d e r i v e d from by-products or  chipped unshaped  flakes.  C O B B L E CORE T O O L S C o b b l e tools ( i n c l u d i n g p o s s i b l e c o r e s ) a r e made of l a r g e c o b b l e s are discussed first.  T h e s e a r t i f a c t s c a n be f u r t h e r s e p a r a t e d  t h e d e g r e e of m o d i f i c a t i o n . f l a k e d c o b b l e c o r e tools.  and  depending  The two c a t e g o r i e s a r e modified c o b b l e s  and  on  MODIFIED COBBLES HAMMERSTONE: C r e s c e n t B e a c h has t h e most b i p o l a r implements b u t t h e f e w e s t hammerstones.  What was b e i n g u s e d f o r b i p o l a r r e d u c t i o n ?  T h e d o m i n a n t r a w m a t e r i a l f o r a l l hammerstones i s i g n e o u s p e b b l e s o r c o b b l e s e a s i l y r e t r i e v e d from t h e b e a c h f r o n t a t a l l t h r e e s i t e s .  At Glenrose  ID of t h e 13 hammerstones a r e made from i g n e o u s r a w m a t e r i a l , i n c l u d i n g made f r o m b a s a l t .  four  A t S t . M u n g o 11 of t h e 14 h a m m e r s t o n e s a r e made from  i g n e o u s s t o n e , i n c l u d i n g one made f r o m b a s a l t .  A t C r e s c e n t B e a c h t h r e e of  t h e f o u r h a m m e r s t o n e s a r e of a n u n k n o w n i g n e o u s m a t e r i a L  T h e r e s t of t h e  hammerstones a r e made from m e t a m o r p h i c s t o n e s w i t h q u a r t z i t e d o m i n a t i n g ( t h r e e q u a r t z i t e at G l e n r o s e , a n d two a t S t . M u n g o ) .  U n k n o w n metamorphic  c o m p r i s e t h e r e s t of t h e m e t a m o r p h i c c a t e g o r y . ANVILSTONE a n d HAMMER ANVILSTONE: One w o u l d e x p e c t more a n v i l s t o n e s at t h e s i t e w i t h t h e most b i p o l a r r e d u c t i o n , y e t t h e r e s h o u l d be more a n v i l s t o n e s a t C r e s c e n t Bea<;h.  The o n l y  h a m m e r s t o n e / a n v i l s t o n e p r e s e n t i s f o u n d at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  FLAKED COBBLE CORE TOOLS PEBBLE TOOL UNIFACE a n d PEBBLE TOOL BIFACE: C o b b l e tools a r e p r e s e n t at a l l s i t e s .  U n i f a c i a l c o b b l e t o o l s a r e more  common w h e n c o m p a r e d to b i f a c i a l c o b b l e tools. A t G l e n r o s e n i n e of 16 u n i f a c i a l p e b b l e c h o p p e r s a r e made f r o m b a s a l t w h i l e S t . M u n g o has t h r e e of 16, a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h h a s f o u r o f 16. t h e o n l y major d i f f e r e n c e  This is  i n p e b b l e tool raw m a t e r i a l t y p e s f o r t h e t h r e e s i t e s .  I g n e o u s a n d metamorphic r a w m a t e r i a l s a r e u s e d f o r a l l p e b b l e t o o l s .  A l l of  t h e p e b b l e tools ( b o t h u n i f a c i a l a n d b i f a c i a l ) a r e composed of r a w m a t e r i a l s from w h i c h c o r e s h a v e a l s o b e e n m a n u f a c t u r e d .  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e Implements: C o n c l u s i o n s A r t i f a c t s i n c l u d e d i n U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Implements a r e not n u m e r o u s i n a n y of t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s .  T h e p e r c e n t s a r e a l l w i t h i n ,2%  of e a c h o t h e r , w i t h C r e s c e n t B e a c h h a v i n g t h e h i g h e s t p e r c e n t a g e  (4.9%) of  t h e s e implements w h i l e G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o (4.8% a n d 4.7%) a r e v e r y behind.  T h i s s i m i l a r i t y i s somewhat s u r p r i s i n g b e c a u s e I e x p e c t e d  close  Crescent  B e a c h to have more h a m m e r s t o n e s a n d a n v i l s t o n e s d u e to t h e h i g h e r percentage  of c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements  present.  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e F l a k e Tools Debitage a n d u n s h a p e d f l a k e s a r e d i f f e r e n t i a t e d o u t e r m a r g i n s of d e b i t a g e  b y edge treatment.  The  h a v e not b e e n e x t e n s i v e l y u t i l i z e d o r r e t o u c h e d ,  while t h o s e of u n s h a p e d f l a k e s do e x h i b i t e i t h e r u t i l i z a t i o n o r r e t o u c h .  COBBLE F L A K E TOOLS CORTEX S P A L L : U n l i k e b i p o l a r implement p r o p o r t i o n s w h e r e S t . M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h w e r e more s i m i l a r , c o r t e x s p a l l p r o p o r t i o n s show G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h to be more a l i k e .  W h e t h e r t h e i r p r e s e n c e r e f l e c t s t h e e m p h a s i s of a n y  s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t y a t t h e s i t e s i s d i f f i c u l t to s a y w i t h o u t a more d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of t h e s e a r t i f a c t s . T h e r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s f o r c o r t e x s p a l l tools show some v a r i e t y site to s i t e .  G l e n r o s e has c o r t e x s p a l l tools made from f i v e d i f f e r e n t  from raw  m a t e r i a l s : u n k n o w n i g n e o u s (one), andésite (one), b a s a l t ( f o u r ) , (four) a n d g n e i s s (one).  quartzite  T h e t h r e e c o r t e x s p a l l tools from St. M u n g o a r e  from u n k n o w n igneous, basalt a n d quartzite.  made  At Crescent Beach quartzite is  t h e d o m i n a n t r a w m a t e r i a l ( e i g h t of 14 a r e made from i t ) , w i t h b a s a l t (five tools) a n d c h e r t (one tool) c o m p r i s i n g t h e r e s t of t h e r a w m a t e r i a l  assemblage.  The v a r i e t y of r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s from G l e n r o s e may o r may not be d u e to a w i d e r u t i l i z a t i o n of d i f f e r e n t  raw material types present at or near the site.  Some of t h i s v a r i e t y c o u l d be due to n o n - c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s s u c h as m i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w h i c h i s a p r o b l e m w i t h so many u n s h a p e d a n d n o n s t y l i s t i c c h i p p e d stone  tools.  UTILIZED F L A K E TOOLS UTILIZED FLAKE: I t i s u n c l e a r to me t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e s m a l l p r o p o r t i o n of u t i l i z e d f l a k e s at S t . M u n g o . T h e r e i s a f a i r d e g r e e of d i v e r s i t y i n t h e r a w m a t e r i a l s f o u n d i n t h e u t i l i z e d f l a k e c a t e g o r y as d e m o n s t r a t e d i n T a b l e 2.5.  Basalt is the dominant  r a w m a t e r i a l c o m p r i s i n g 75.6% (62 of 82) of t h e u t i l i z e d f l a k e s at G l e n r o s e , 90.9% (40 of 44) a t S t . M u n g o , a n d 72% (85 of 118) at C r e s c e n t B e a c h . s e c o n d a n d t h i r d most common r a w m a t e r i a l s f o r t h e t h r e e s i t e s a r e  The  the  f o l l o w i n g : q u a r t z i t e (14.6% o r 12), andésite (3.7% o r t h r e e ) at G l e n r o s e ; slate (4.6% o r two), b o t h b r e c c i a a n d q u a r t z i t e (2.3% o r one f o r each) a t S t . M u n g o ; q u a r t z i t e (16.1% o r 19), u n k n o w n i g n e o u s (5.1% o r six) at C r e s c e n t B e a c h . Both Glenrose and Crescent Beach have eight raw material types p r e s e n t S t . M u n g o has f o u r .  T h e r e i s once a g a i n minimal v a r i e t y b e t w e e n t h e  m a t e r i a l t y p e s p r e s e n t at t h e t h r e e  sites.  while  raw  Table 2.5  Raw Material Types for Utilized Flakes From Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach  Raw Material Type  Glenrose %  St. Mungo %  Crescent Beach X  1.2 1.2 3.7 75.6 1.2 0 0 1.2 0 0 14.6 0 1.2  0 0 0 90.9 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 2.3 4.6 0  0 5.1 0 72 .9 .9 0 2.5 .9 1.7 16.1 0 0  Vein Quartz Unknown Igneous Andésite Basalt Obsidian Mudstone Breccia Chert Unknown Metamorphic Greenstone Quartzite Slate Schist  RETOUCHED  FLAKE TOOLS  QUARTZ MICROLITH: Quartz microliths are not an important presence. example from C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  I t was d i s c o v e r e d  There is a single  1.5-1.7 meters below t h e  s u r f a c e b u t i t i s n o t c l e a r w h e t h e r i t was f o u n d i n s i t u i n U n i t B l . were found i n the Charles component  None  d u r i n g t h e 1989 a n d 1990 e x c a v a t i o n s .  Q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s a r e not common i n t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e a c c o r d i n g to t h i s data.  Q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s as a s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r of the L o c a r n o B e a c h p h a s e , at  least i n q u a n t i t y , s t i l l s t a n d s .  UNIFACLALLY RETOUCHED UNIFACIALLY STEEP-ANGLED RETOUCHED UNIFACIALLY RETOUCHED The p r e s e n c e  FLAKES  FLAKE and NOTCHED STEEP-ANGLED  FLAKE:  of s t e e p - a n g l e d  r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s i s f a i r l y s u b s t a n t i a l at  G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h (6.2% a n d 4.9%)  b u t not at S t . M u n g o (2.4%).  the f u n c t i o n s of c o r t e x s p a l l tools a n d s t e e p - a n g l e d  retouch flakes  overlap.  If  note t h a t b o t h of t h e s e a r t i f a c t t y p e s a r e not common at S t . M u n g o .  This  i m p l i e s t h a t s c r a p i n g a c t i v i t i e s w e r e n o t as common at S t . M u n g o as t h e y w e r e at G l e n r o s e o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h . T h e two n o t c h e d s t e e p - a n g l e d  r e t o u c h f l a k e s from G l e n r o s e a r e  made  from basalt.  Table 2.6 d i s p l a y s t h e r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s f o r t h e u n i f a c i a l l y  steep-angled  retouched flakes.  Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , b a s a l t i s t h e major  raw  m a t e r i a l t y p e f o r e a c h s i t e (64.4% o r 26 of 45 a t G l e n r o s e , 70.6% o r 12 of 17 a t S t . M u n g o , a n d 67.9% o r 19 of 28 a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h ) . different  raw m a t e r i a l t y p e s r e p r e s e n t e d .  Glenrose has six  Quartzite is the second  most  common l i t h i c t y p e , w i t h 10 of 45 a r t i f a c t s o r 22.2% made from i t . other raw material t y p e s besides basalt a n d q u a r t z i t e are the  The  four  following:  andésite (6.7%, t h r e e ) , o b s i d i a n (2.2%, one), slate (2.2%, one) a n d s c h i s t (2.2%, one).  Why w o u l d a k n o w n e x o t i c r a w m a t e r i a l s u c h as o b s i d i a n be u s e d as a n  u n s h a p e d f l a k e tool?  P e r h a p s i t was so uncommon as a r a w m a t e r i a l , t h a t  w h e n e n c o u n t e r e d p e o p l e e x p e r i m e n t e d w i t h i t a n d made a r t i f a c t s f r o m i t t h a t w o u l d n o t be made f r o m o b s i d i a n i n l a t e r times.  Another explanation is that  d u r i n g t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of a f o r m e d t o o l , a piece of d e b i t a g e was t h a t was a p p r o p r i a t e f o r a n e x p e d i e n t t o o l t y p e .  produced  The s t r u c t u r e of o b s i d i a n i s  s u c h t h a t i t s o p t i m a l f u n c t i o n w o u l d be as a c u t t i n g t o o l w h e r e t h e r e w o u l d be l e s s d a n g e r of t h e m a r g i n s h a t t e r i n g a n d l e s s n e e d of e d g e r e t o u c h .  The  t h r e e o t h e r l i t h i c t y p e s f r o m S t . M u n g o a r e : c h a l c e d o n y (5,9%, one), u n k n o w n igneous  (17,7%, t h r e e ) a n d q u a r t z i t e (5,9%, one).  The t h r e e n o n - b a s a l t l i t h i c  t y p e s f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h a r e : u n k n o w n i g n e o u s (7.1%, two), c h e r t (7.1%, a n d q u a r t z i t e (17,9%, f i v e ) .  two)  One small p a t t e r n I see i s t h e l a c k of d i v e r s i t y i n  r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s , w i t h l i t t l e u t i l i z a t i o n of n o n - b a s a l t l i t h i c  types.  Table 2.6  Raw Material Types for Steep-Angled Retouched Flakes From Glenrose, St. Mungo and Crescent Beach  Raw Material Types Chalcedony Unknown Igneous Andésite Basalt Obsidian Chert Quartzite Slate Schist  Glenrose %  St. Mungo %  Crescent Beach X  0 0 6.7 64.4 2.2 0 22.2 2.2 2.2  5.9 17.7 0 70.6 0 0 5.9 0 0  0 7.1 0 67.9 0 7.1 17.9 0 0  UNIFACIALLY NARROW-ANGLED RETOUCHED FLAKE: T h e i n f o r m a t i o n i n Table 2.3 s h o w s a major d i f f e r e n c e  between  the  p r o p o r t i o n s of n a r r o w - a n g l e d r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s p r e s e n t a t t h e t h r e e s i t e s , b u t t h i s may be p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n e d b y t h e l a r g e r p r o p o r t i o n of u t i l i z e d f l a k e s at Crescent Beach. T h e r e i s l e s s d i v e r s i t y i n t h e n u m b e r of r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s  for  u n i f a c i a l l y n a r r o w - a n g l e d r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s w h e n c o m p a r e d to t h o s e unifacially steep-angled  retouched flakes.  for  At Glenrose six lithic types were  u s e d to c r e a t e n a r r o w - a n g l e d r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s (the same n u m b e r f o r a n g l e d i m p l e m e n t s ) , b u t a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of n a r r o w - a n g l e d implements a r e made from b a s a l t (83.7%, 72 of 86).  steep-  retouched  Quartzite is the second  most p o p u l a r r a w m a t e r i a l , b u t i t i s o n l y h a l f t h e p r o p o r t i o n i t was w i t h steep-angle  r e t o u c h e d implements (11.6%, 10 of 86 v e r s u s 22.2%, 10 of 45).  T h e r e i s a s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n a t S t . M u n g o w h e r e b a s a l t a c c o u n t s f o r 96.5% of t h e l i t h i c m a t e r i a l t y p e s (55 of 57 a r t i f a c t s ) .  T h i s i s a l s o t h e case  for  C r e s c e n t B e a c h w h e r e b a s a l t c o m p r i s e s 79% of t h e l i t h i c m a t e r i a l t y p e s (15 of 19 a r t i f a c t s ) .  When t h e p r o p o r t i o n s of c o r t e x s p a l l s , u t i l i z e d f l a k e s , q u a r t z m i c r o l i t h s , unifacially steep-angled retouched flakes and notched steep-angled unifacially r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s a r e a d d e d to n a r r o w - a n g l e d r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s , t h e p r o p o r t i o n s p o i n t to f e w e r e x p e d i e n t f l a k e tools at S t . M u n g o (16.8%) w i t h G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h b o t h h a v i n g l a r g e r p r o p o r t i o n s (29.8% a n d 31.4%).  One  q u e s t i o n i s w h y a r e G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o d i f f e r e n t from e a c h o t h e r i n t e r m s of e x p e d i e n t f l a k e t o o l s ? T u r n i n g o n c e a g a i n to u n i f a c i e d l y n a r r o w - a n g l e d r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s , i t i s e a s y to see how one c o u l d m i s i n t e r p r e t t h e d a t a from t h i s s i n g l e a r t i f a c t t y p e if i t w a s p r e s e n t e d o n i t s o w n w i t h o u t d a t a f r o m o t h e r a r t i f a c t t y p e s .  The  d a t a i m p l i e s t h a t S t . M u n g o a n d G l e n r o s e h a v e a s i m i l a r p r o p o r t i o n of n a r r o w angled retouched flakes while Crescent Beach has a much smaller number. Y e t , o v e r a l l . C r e s c e n t B e a c h h a s a m u c h h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of u n i f a c i a l l y r e t o u c h e d f l a k e t o o l s i n c o m p a r i s o n to S t . M u n g o .  BIFACIALLY RETOUCHED  FLAKES  BIFACIALLY RETOUCHED FLAKE: U p to now, S t . M u n g o has n o t h a d t h e l a r g e s t p r o p o r t i o n s of a s i n g l e a r t i f a c t t y p e among t h e u n s h a p e d f l a k e t o o l s , b u t h e r e among t h e b i f a c i a l l y r e t o u c h e d f l a k e tools we see S t . M u n g o w i t h s l i g h t l y more t h a n G l e n r o s e . B i f a c i a l l y r e t o u c h f l a k e s w e r e not v e r y i m p o r t a n t a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h , a l t h o u g h they are  present.  T h e b i f a c i a l l y r e t o u c h e d f l a k e s from C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d G l e n r o s e a r e made from b a s a l t .  A t S t . M u n g o , 10 of 14 a r e made f r o m b a s a l t , two a r e of  u n k n o w n i g n e o u s , one i s of r h y o l i t e a n d one i s of c h e r t .  B L A D E - L I K E TOOLS MICROBLADE-LIKE FLAKE and MACROBLADE-LIKE FLAKE: T h e low n u m b e r of o b j e c t s r e p r e s e n t e d i n m i c r o b l a d e - l i k e a n d m a c r o b l a d e - l i k e f l a k e s s u g g e s t s t h e a b s e n c e of a p r e p a r e d b l a d e t e c h n o l o g y  at  a n y of t h e t h r e e s i t e s .  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Tools: Conclusions L i k e t h e c o r e a n d b i p o l a r implement d a t a , t h e d a t a from t h e  category  U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d S t o n e F l a k e Tools c o n t a i n s some u n a n t i c i p a t e d r e s u l t s . most u n e x p e c t e d b e i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e s  The  b e t w e e n G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o (in t h e  p a s t t h e y w e r e c o m p a r e d b a s e d more o n s i m i l a r i t i e s a n d l e s s o n d i f f e r e n c e s the artifact assemblages).  in  T h e r e a r e almost t w i c e as many u n s h a p e d f l a k e  tools at G l e n r o s e w h e n c o m p a r e d to S t . M u n g o (31.8% v e r s u s 18.8%).  The d a t a  from c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements does n o t i n d i c a t e s u c h a s u b s t a n t i a l difference  i n flake tools.  N e i t h e r does t h e d a t a f r o m t h e o t h e r  u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e implements.  non-flake  Another r e s u l t not suggested  b y the  c o r e a n d b i p o l a r implement d a t a , i s t h e s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e p r o p o r t i o n of f l a k e tools from G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h (31.8% v e r s u s 32%).  A third  c o n u n d r u m i s w h y S t . M u n g o , w i t h t h e s e c o n d h i g h e s t p r o p o r t i o n of c o r e s a n d bipolar implements, lags b e h i n d the other sites i n u n s h a p e d flake tools. L o o k i n g at t h e s t a t i s t i c s f o r c o r e s i n A p p e n d i x B one m i g h t a s k i f t h e c o r e s from G l e n r o s e a r e s m a l l e r ( i m p l y i n g t h e y w e r e c o m p l e t e l y e x h a u s t e d b e f o r e a b a n d o n m e n t ) t h a n t h o s e from C r e s c e n t B e a c h ?  T h e s m a l l e r s i z e of  the  G l e n r o s e c o r e s w o u l d compensate f o r t h e s i m i l a r i t y to C r e s c e n t B e a c h i n t e r m s of a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of u n s h a p e d f l a k e tools (31.8% v e r s u s 32%) b u t a s l i g h t l y lower p r o p o r t i o n of c o r e s t h a n i s p r e s e n t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h (7.1% v e r s u s  9.6%).  T h e d a t a f o r mass does not i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e c o r e s at G l e n r o s e a r e o n  average smaller t h a n those from C r e s c e n t Beach.  Does t h i s i m p l y t h a t at  G l e n r o s e , many u n s h a p e d f l a k e tools w e r e b r o u g h t i n t o t h e s i t e ( h a v i n g made e l s e w h e r e ) ?  been  The h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of u n s h a p e d f l a k e tools a t C r e s c e n t  B e a c h i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements b e c a u s e f l a k e tools c o u l d be p r o d u c e d d u r i n g p r e l i m i n a r y c o r e o r b i p o l a r reduction.  There is a negative  r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e p r o p o r t i o n of  u n s h a p e d f l a k e tools a n d c o r e s / b i p o l a r i m p l e m e n t s at S t . M u n g o a l t h o u g h t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s n o t so s t r o n g .  S t . M u n g o h a d t h e s e c o n d h i g h e s t p r o p o r t i o n of  c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements w h i l e t h e p r o p o r t i o n of u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone implements i s b a r e l y h a l f of t h a t f o r G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  Perhaps  some of t h e u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e i m p l e m e n t s m a n u f a c t u r e d a t S t . M u n g o w e r e c u r a t e d to a n d u s e d at G l e n r o s e .  There is a strong negative  correlation  b e t w e e n t h e p r o p o r t i o n of u n s h a p e d f l a k e tools a n d c o r e s / b i p o l a r implements at G l e n r o s e . One g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n of t h e a n a l y s i s so f a r i s t h a t t h e a c t i v i t i e s at t h e t h r e e s i t e s d i d not r e q u i r e a s p e c i a l i z e d l i t h i c t e c h n o l o g y .  The  m u l t i f u n c t i o n a l n a t u r e of many of t h e s e t o o l s a l s o i l l u s t r a t e s a l a c k of s p e c i a l i z e d c h i p p e d stone i m p l e m e n t s a t t h i s time i n N o r t h w e s t prehistory.  coast  S p e c i a l i z e d c h i p p e d s t o n e tools a r e c u r a t e d , r e p a i r e d w h e n b r o k e n  (rather t h a n d i s c a r d e d ) , and maintained for a longer life, a n d a l l of  these  f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e to s k e w i n g t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e c o r d to show a b u n d a n t e x p e d i e n t tools a n d t h e r e f o r e , p o s s i b l e o v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e i r i m p o r t a n c e i n site activities.  Therefore,  my s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t s i t e a c t i v i t i e s a n d t h e l a c k  of s p e c i a l i z e d l i t h i c a r t i f a c t s s h o u l d be t e s t e d b e f o r e a d e f i n i t i v e c a n be made.  The p e r c e n t a g e s  from a l l t h r e e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s  statement indicate  f l a k e tools of a n e x p e d i e n t a n d u n s h a p e d n a t u r e p l a y a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n each site's activities. A n o t h e r g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n f r o m t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e tools i s t h e s i m i l a r i t y i n r a w m a t e r i a l t y p e s u t i l i z e d at e a c h s i t e . a r e some v a r i a t i o n s i n p r o p o r t i o n s b u t t h e r e a r e no m e a n i n g f u l  There  differences.  T h e r e a r e no d i s c e r n i b l e p a t t e r n s i n t h e r a w m a t e r i a l d a t a b e y o n d  basalt  b e i n g a r a w m a t e r i a l u s e d f o r t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of almost e v e r y a r t i f a c t  type  present i n this section.  Shaped Chipped Stone  Tools  S h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e tools a r e modified o v e r most of t h e i r s u r f a c e s a n d t h e o r i g i n a l mass of m a t e r i a l i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r e d ( K o r n b a c h e r  1989:105).  C h i p p e d stone s h a p e d implements a r e o f t e n s y m m e t r i c a l i n p l a n e v i e w . shaped objects are often p r o d u c e d differently  f r o m u n s h a p e d tools.  These Sullivan  a n d R o z e n (1985) p o i n t o u t t h a t c o r e r e d u c t i o n a n d s h a p e d t o o l m a n u f a c t u r e are different  reduction strategies.  Many u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone a r t i f a c t s  are  p r o d u c e d from t h e b y p r o d u c t s of c o r e r e d u c t i o n , w h i l e many s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e tools a r e t h e d e s i r e d e n d p r o d u c t of many s t e p s of s p e c i a l i z e d a n d c a r e f u l s h a p e d tool m a n u f a c t u r e .  T h e r e i s more t h o u g h t a n d p l a n n i n g  r e q u i r e d i n t h e p r o d u c t i o n of s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e tools.  B L A D E TOOLS MICROBLADE: With t h e d a t a from b l a d e - l i k e a n d m i c r o b l a d e implements p o o l e d t h e r e i s l i t t l e s u g g e s t i o n of a p r e p a r e d c o r e a n d b l a d e t e c h n o l o g y a n y of t h e t h r e e s i t e s .  together,  e x i s t i n g at  A s d i s c u s s e d i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h e M a y n e  phase  a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e , b l a d e - l i k e a n d b l a d e tools a r e sometimes p r o d u c e d u n i n t e n t i o n a l l y d u r i n g lab e x p e r i m e n t s i n v o l v i n g f l i n t k n a p p i n g .  T h e r e m u s t be  more s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e f o r a p r e p a r e d c o r e a n d b l a d e t e c h n o l o g y t h a n t h e s i n g l e item p r e s e n t e d  here.  GRAVER a n d DRILL: T h e r e l a t i v e l a c k of g r a v e r s a n d d r i l l s a t t h e s e s i t e s c o u l d r e s u l t f r o m s p e c i f i c f u n c t i o n s b e i n g p e r f o r m e d b y u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e f l a k e tools. T h i s i s n o t t h e c a s e , as b o t h a r t i f a c t t y p e s a r e f o u n d o n l y at G l e n r o s e w h i c h h a d a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n of u n s p e c i a l i z e d f l a k e t o o l s .  FORMED C H I P P E D STONE U N I F A C E S S T E E P - A N G L E D FORMED U N I F A C E : If s t e e p - a n g l e d  f o r m e d u n i f a c e s a r e a d d e d to c o r t e x s p a l l s a n d  unifacially steep-angled retouched flakes, Glenrose has the highest p r o p o r t i o n (8.7% v e r s u s 7.3% f o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d 3.1% f o r S t . M u n g o ) of implements with steep-angled edges.  I am u n s u r e w h e t h e r t h e p r e s e n c e of 10 s t e e p -  a n g l e d formed u n i f a c e s r e f l e c t s t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e a c t i v i t y t h e tools w e r e used for.  T r a d i t i o n a l l y , s t e e p - a n g l e d tools a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s c r a p i n g h i d e s  of l a r g e l a n d mammals.  T h e s e a n i m a l s w e r e a p a r t of t h e s u b s i s t e n c e p a t t e r n  at G l e n r o s e , b u t t h e y w e r e n o t t h e most i m p o r t a n t r e s o u r c e . NARROW-ANGLED FORMED U N I F A C E : There is a difference f o u n d at each s i t e .  i n t h e n u m b e r of n a r r o w - a n g l e d f o r m e d  Could this difference  unifaces  be r e l a t e d to r a w m a t e r i a l ?  P e r h a p s , b u t once a g a i n (as w i t h t h e b i p o l a r implements) G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o a r e from v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l e n v i r o n m e n t s so d i f f e r e n c e s  i n raw material  a c q u i s i t i o n w o u l d be minimal ( b a s e d o n e n v i r o n m e n t a l f a c t o r s , not c u l t u r a l ) . Because n a r r o w - a n g l e d formed unifaces are a suggested  stylistic marker for  t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e , t h e i r p r e s e n c e a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s more i m p o r t a n t t h a n suggested  b y t h e t a b l e alone.  While w o r k i n g o n my a r t i f a c t t y p o l o g y , I d i s c o v e r e d a p r o b l e m c o n c e r n i n g t h e d i f f i c u l t y of d e f i n i n g u n s h a p e d v e r s u s s h a p e d u n i f a c e s .  The  d e f i n i t i o n of s h a p e d v e r s u s u n s h a p e d u n i f a c e s c a n be s u b j e c t i v e , a n d comparisons between different  s i t e s m u s t be done t h r o u g h a v i s u a l examination  of t h e d a t a .  FORMED CHIPPED STONE BIFACES LEAF-SHAPED  BIFACE:  Is t h e h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of l e a f - s h a p e d b i f a c e s p r e s e n t at G l e n r o s e f u r t h e r s u g g e s t i o n f o r t h e i m p o r t a n c e of l a n d mammals a s a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of the s u b s i s t e n c e base? held knives?  Is i t p o s s i b l e some of t h e s e o b j e c t s w e r e u s e d as h a n d  The b i f a c e s f r o m G l e n r o s e a r e more d i v e r s e i n s i z e (Table B.22).  A l l of t h e l e a f - s h a p e d b i f a c e s from G l e n r o s e a r e made from b a s a l t .  Six  of S t . M u n g o ' s l e a f - s h a p e d b i f a c e s a r e made f r o m b a s a l t a n d t h e o t h e r one i s made from o b s i d i a n .  A t C r e s c e n t B e a c h f i v e of s e v e n l e a f - s h a p e d b i f a c e s  are  m a n u f a c t u r e d f r o m b a s a l t w i t h t h e o t h e r two m a n u f a c t u r e d of c h e r t a n d greenstone.  C h e r t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h was u s e d f o r a v a r i e t y of a r t i f a c t t y p e s ,  both unshaped and shaped. SQUARE-TANG STEMMED BIFACE, CONTRACTING STEM NO SHOULDERS BIFACE a n d CONTRACTING STEM WITH SHOULDERS BIFACE: Stemmed b i f a c e s a r e not common at t h e t h r e e s i t e s , b u t t h e y a r e l e a s t common at G l e n r o s e (.5%)  w h i c h h a d t h e h i g h e s t p r o p o r t i o n of u n s t e m m e d l e a f -  shaped bifaces.  A t S t . M u n g o stemmed b i f a c e s a r e o n l y s l i g h t l y more common  t h a n u n s t e m m e d ones (1.8%),  A t C r e s c e n t B e a c h , stemmed b i f a c e s a r e f o u n d  i n almost t h e same p r o p o r t i o n as u n s t e m m e d t y p e s  (1.1%).  The c o n t r a c t i n g stem b i f a c e s of G l e n r o s e a r e made from b a s a l t . a l s o t r u e f o r S t . M u n g o e x c e p t f o r one c o n t r a c t i n g stem b i f a c e s h o u l d e r s made f r o m c h a l c e d o n y . B e a c h a r e made of  This is  without  The c o n t r a c t i n g stem b i f a c e s f r o m  Crescent  basalt.  The v a r i a t i o n i n stemmed b i f a c e s at G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o (one  could  even argue that this is stylistic variation) is interesting considering that the two s i t e s a r e so s i m i l a r to e a c h o t h e r i n t e r m s of n o n - a r t i f a c t u a l d a t a . Whether t h i s difference  is statistically significant is unclear.  Crescent Beach  does n o t have as many b i f a c e s as e i t h e r of t h e o t h e r s i t e s , b u t t h o s e i t does h a v e a r e forms f o u n d at b o t h G l e n r o s e a n d S t , M u n g o . categories  does i t h a v e t h e l e a s t n u m b e r s  I n none of  the  present.  INCOMPLETE FORMED BIFACES BIFACE PROXIMAL, MEDIAL, DISTAL a n d UNIDENTIFIABLE The d a t a f r o m t h e biface f r a g m e n t c a t e g o r i e s f o r the s h a p e d biface c a t e g o r y . biface f r a g m e n t s (2.4%).  FRAGMENTS:  agrees with previous data  G l e n r o s e has a s l i g h t l y h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of  (3,8%), v e r s u s e i t h e r S t . M u n g o (3.7%) o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h  W i t h i n t h e t y p e s of b r o k e n b i f a c e s p r e s e n t at e a c h s i t e , as w i t h t h e  unstemmed v e r s u s stemmed b i f a c e s , G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o dominate categories  w i t h G l e n r o s e h a v i n g t h e most p r o x i m a l f r a g m e n t s  different  (.9% v e r s u s .4%  f o r St. M u n g o a n d .5% f o r C r e s c e n t Beach) a n d S t . M u n g o h a v i n g t h e most medial f r a g m e n t s  (1.0% v e r s u s .7% f o r G l e n r o s e a n d .5% f o r C r e s c e n t  Beach).  F o r a l l s h a p e d biface c a t e g o r i e s , G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o a r e e s s e n t i a l l y e q u a l (6.8% v e r s u s 6.5%), w h i l e C r e s c e n t B e a c h h a s t h e l o w e s t (4.7%).  proportion  Does t h e l o w e r n u m b e r o f b i f a c e s a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h r e f l e c t a c u l t u r a l  difference?  T h i s k i n d of v a r i a t i o n c o u l d r e s u l t from sample s i z e , o r  emphasis of site activities.  different  F r o m t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f bifeices a t G l e n r o s e a n d S t .  M u n g o t h e r e i s l i t t l e s u g g e s t i o n (based o n t h e a r t i f a c t t y p e s alone) t h a t l a r g e l a n d mammals w e r e more i m p o r t a n t a t G l e n r o s e .  A l l types of bifaces a r e  p r e s e n t a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h , b u t t h e y a r e n o t common. bifaces from the three sites are v e r y  similar.  Stylistically , the  I n comparison to the u n s h a p e d  c h i p p e d s t o n e f l a k e t o o l s , i t i s o b v i o u s how uncommon s h a p e d b i f a c e s of a n y shape o r size a r e at a n y of the sites.  SHAPED CHIPPED AND GROUND STONE IMPLEMENTS CHIPPED SLATE NARROW-ANGLED TABULAR BIFACE OBJECT: This is a n u n u s u a l object from Crescent Beach w i t h i t s closest parallel to a g r o u p of i m p l e m e n t s f o u n d a t t h e L o c a r n o B e a c h s i t e w h i c h o n l y d i f f e r i n shape a n d not manufacture.  CHIPPED AND GROUND STONE BIFACE LEAF-SHAPED:  This artifact from  G l e n r o s e i s t h e o n l y example of a c h i p p e d a n d g r o u n d s t o n e p o i n t .  C H I P P E D AND GROUND S T O N E B I F A C E F R A G M E N T S C H I P P E D AND GROUND S T O N E B I F A C E M E D I A L , D I S T A L AND U N I D E N T I F I A B L E FRAGMENTS: T h e r e i s a p a u c i t y of c h i p p e d a n d g r o u n d stone implements i n t h e artifact assemblages.  T h i s was not a n i m p o r t a n t t e c h n o l o g y  at t h e s e  three  sites  d u r i n g the Charles c u l t u r e .  Shaped C h i p p e d Stone Tools: Conclusions I n c o m p a r i s o n to t h e h i g h n u m b e r s a n d p r o p o r t i o n s of U n s h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone F l a k e Tools, t h e t o t a l n u m b e r a n d p r o p o r t i o n of a l l S h a p e d C h i p p e d Stone Tools i s m u c h lower.  This is not unexpected.  Glenrose has  12.6% w h i l e S t . M u n g o has 9.6% a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h , at 5.4%, i s a d i s t a n t t h i r d . G l e n r o s e has a h i g h n u m b e r of b o t h s h a p e d a n d u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d implements.  stone  On t h e o t h e r h a n d , at S t . M u n g o t h e r e i s a h i g h n u m b e r of  s h a p e d tools.  One p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e p a u c i t y of u n s h a p e d implements  i s t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n m a k i n g b e t t e r f o r m e d a n d more s p e c i a l i z e d c h i p p e d stone tools.  A t C r e s c e n t B e a c h one c o u l d make t h e o p p o s i t e  argument.  U n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone implements a r e more d e s i r e d f o r o n - s i t e a c t i v i t i e s a n d few s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone implements a r e r e q u i r e d .  C h i p p e d Stone Tools: Conclusions T h e h i g h e s t p r o p o r t i o n of a l l c h i p p e d stone tools i n a s i n g l e assemblage  i s at C r e s c e n t B e a c h , w h e r e 60.5% of t h e a r t i f a c t s p r e s e n t a r e  from c h i p p e d stone. assemblage  artifact  Of t h a t p r o p o r t i o n o n l y 5.4% of t h e t o t a l a r t i f a c t  c o n s i s t s of a r t i f a c t t y p e s of a s h a p e d ( v e r s u s u n s h a p e d )  This suggests  made  nature.  t h a t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h , e x p e d i e n t c h i p p e d stone tools were t h e  d o m i n a n t a r t i f a c t t y p e ( w h e n c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements a r e e x c l u d e d , 36.9% of a l l c h i p p e d s t o n e tools f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h a r e u n s h a p e d ) a n d s t y l i s t i c a l l y distinctive or diagnostic artifacts are i n v e r y short supply.  T h e r e c o u l d be  o t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n s w h y s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone implements a r e uncommon at C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d two of t h e most o b v i o u s e x p l a n a t i o n s a r e c u r a t i o n p r a c t i c e s a n d t h e l a c k of s p e c i a l i z e d s i t e a c t i v i t i e s . A t G l e n r o s e , 56.8% of t h e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e i s c o m p r i s e d of c h i p p e d stone implements.  T h i s n u m b e r i s almost as h i g h as C r e s c e n t B e a c h , a n d i n  f a c t , may be more m e a n i n g f u l b e c a u s e of t h e l a r g e r a r t i f a c t excavated  at G l e n r o s e ,  assemblage  Of t h i s 56.8%, 12,6% of t h e t o t a l a r t i f a c t  assemblage  c o n s i s t s of s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e t o o l s , l e a v i n g 36.9% of a l l c h i p p e d implements u n s h a p e d ( e x c l u d i n g c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements). p r o p o r t i o n of G l e n r o s e ' s t o t a l a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e c h i p p e d stone tools.  is represented  S i n c e m a n y of G l e n r o s e ' s s h a p e d c h i p p e d  implements a r e b i f a c e s , i s t h i s s u g g e s t i v e of a d i f f e r e n c e  stone  A larger by  shaped  stone  i n procurement  a c t i v i t i e s b e t w e e n G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h w i t h t h e r e b e i n g more of a f o c u s o n l a n d mammals at G l e n r o s e ?  While G l e n r o s e a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h s h a r e  s i m i l a r p r o p o r t i o n s of u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d s t o n e t o o l s , t h e d i f f e r e n c e s  in  p r o p o r t i o n s of c o r e s / b i p o l a r implements a n d s h a p e d tools p o i n t t o v a r i a t i o n between Glenrose and Crescent Beach, The b i g g e s t d i f f e r e n c e  e x h i b i t e d i n t h e d a t a so f a r i s t h a t b e t w e e n S t .  M u n g o a n d t h e o t h e r two s i t e s . assemblage  A t S t . M u n g o 43.5%, of t h e t o t a l a r t i f a c t  is c o m p r i s e d of c h i p p e d stone.  When c o r e s a n d b i p o l a r implements  a r e s u b t r a c t e d , o n l y 23.5% of t h e a r t i f a c t s b e l o n g i n t h e u n s h a p e d c a t e g o r y (compared  to 36.9% f o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h a n d 36.6% f o r G l e n r o s e ) .  of t h e 43.5%, 9.6% of t h e t o t a l a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e  Furthermore,  b e l o n g to s h a p e d c h i p p e d  stone a r t i f a c t c a t e g o r i e s .  T h e r e i s a l o w e r r a t i o of u n s h a p e d c h i p p e d stone  v e r s u s c h i p p e d s t o n e implements at S t . M u n g o w h e n c o m p a r e d to G l e n r o s e a n d Crescent Beach.  There are several possible explanations for this  pattern including curation practices, a different and/or a different  different  emphasis on site a c t i v i t i e s ,  focus on procurement strategies.  This difference  in  c h i p p e d stone t o o l p r o p o r t i o n s b e t w e e n S t . M u n g o a n d G l e n r o s e s u g g e s t s w h i l e G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o a r e s i m i l a r to e a c h o t h e r i n t e r m s of a s s e m b l a g e s , some d i f f e r e n c e s  G r o u n d Stone  that  artifact  p r e s e n t are not easily explained.  Implements  Grinding is a technique which can strengthen a rounded surface and h e l p smooth t h e s u r f a c e of a n a r t i f a c t ( C r a b t r e e  1972:68).  p r o c e s s may r e s u l t i n e x t e n s i v e a n d i n t e n t i o n a l m o d i f i c a t i o n 1989:105).  The g r i n d i n g (Kornbacher  T h e g r i n d i n g p r o c e s s r e q u i r e s t h a t more time a n d e n e r g y  be  i n v e s t e d i n t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of t h e a r t i f a c t c o m p a r e d to u n s h a p e d , more e x p e d i e n t , c h i p p e d stone tools.  B e c a u s e the g r i n d i n g p r o c e s s c h a n g e s  o r i g i n a l s h a p e of t h e r a w m a t e r i a l , a l l g r o u n d s t o n e implements a r e definition shaped rather than unshaped.  Slate i s t h e p r e f e r r e d  for many g r o u n d stone tools, and t h i s is reflected names s u c h as g r o u n d slate k n i f e .  the  by  raw material  in traditional descriptive  S l a t e has one s t r o n g c l e a v a g e p l a n e a n d  b e c a u s e i t c a n be b r o k e n i n t o r e l a t i v e l y t h i n t a b u l a r p i e c e s , i t was a compatible choice for g r i n d i n g and a b r a d i n g .  ABRASIVE STONES ABRASIVE STONE: A b r a d e r s , l i k e many c h i p p e d s t o n e t o o l s , a r e m u l t i f u n c t i o n a l .  Their  p r e s e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t g r o u n d s t o n e t e c h n o l o g y was p r e s e n t at a l l t h r e e s i t e s , b u t t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h i s t e c h n o l o g y c a n n o t be a s s e s s e d f r o m t h e a b r a d e r s alone.  T h e r e a r e m a n y s i z e s of a b r a d e r s p r e s e n t (see T a b l e  2.3).  FORMED ABRASIVE STONE: C o m p a r e d to u n s h a p e d a b r a s i v e s t o n e s , f o r m e d a b r a s i v e s t o n e s a r e n o t common. technology  T h i s may be a n o t h e r r e f l e c t i o n of t h e u n i m p o r t a n c e of g r o u n d stone d u r i n g the Charles c u l t u r e .  C r e s c e n t Beach has the  largest  p r o p o r t i o n a n d n u m b e r of f o r m e d a b r a s i v e s t o n e s (.9%, f i v e ) , y e t i t a l s o has t h e l o w e s t amount of g r o u n d stone i m p l e m e n t s w i t h one i m p o r t a n t e x c e p t i o n ( g r o u n d stone d i s c  beads).  FORMED GROUND STONE LEAF-SHAPED GROUND STONE  BIFACES  BIFACE:  Two g r o u n d stone b i f a c e s a r e p r e s e n t a t G l e n r o s e , w h i l e t h e r e a r e no examples from e i t h e r S t . M u n g o o r C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  GROUND STONE BIFACE GROUND STONE BIFACE PROXIMAL  FRAGMENTS  FRAGMENT:  T h e r e i s a r a r i t y of g r o u n d s t o n e b i f a c e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n c o m p a r i s o n to Locarno Beach phase artifact  assemblages.  GROUND STONE DISC BEAD: If t h e i n f o r m a t i o n from g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c b e a d s was n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h i s a n a l y s i s , t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w o u l d be t h a t g r o u n d s t o n e t e c h n o l o g y b a r e l y p r e s e n t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h .  T h e p r e s e n c e of l a r g e n u m b e r s of  was  beads  s u g g e s t s t h a t g r o u n d stone t e c h n o l o g y was most a p p a r e n t at C r e s c e n t B e a c h . The p r o p o r t i o n s f o r g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c b e a d s h a v e b e e n c a l c u l a t e d b a s e d o n t h e e n t i r e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e r e c o v e r e d f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h (1197), b u t t h e p r o p o r t i o n s f o r a l l o t h e r a r t i f a c t t y p e s w e r e c a l c u l a t e d w i t h g r o u n d stone and shell beads excluded.  I n t h i s w a y , t h e o t h e r a r t i f a c t t y p e s c a n be  c o m p a r e d more a c c u r a t e l y to t h e o t h e r a r t i f a c t t y p e s f r o m G l e n r o s e a n d S t . Mungo.  A l l s i t e s u s e d t h e same s c r e e n s i z e , b u t some of t h e d i f f e r e n c e  r e s u l t from different excavation a n d r e c o v e r y  methods i n t h e f i e l d .  could  For  example, b e c a u s e P e r c y ' s d i g was a s a l v a g e p r o j e c t , t h e r e was i n s u f f i c i e n t time to c o n c e n t r a t e o n p r o c u r a i of small o b j e c t s , w h i c h w o u l d s l i p t h r o u g h t h e inch screens.  T r a c e ' s e x c a v a t i o n (1981) u n c o v e r e d 198 g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c  beads so we k n e w t h a t o u r l a r g e n u m b e r of b e a d s was n o t u n u s u a l f o r site.  G r o u n d stone d i s c b e a d s a r e i m p o s s i b l e to see w h e n e x c a v a t i n g  midden soil.  1/4  G r o u n d stone d i s c b e a d s a r e a l s o d i f f i c u l t to see w h e n  the  dark wet  screening, and they easily slip t h r o u g h screens. A s beads a r e c o n s i d e r e d p e r s o n a l a d o r n m e n t a n d p o t e n t i a l s t a t u s markers, the difference  i n t h e t h r e e a r t i f a c t a s s e m b l a g e s c o u l d be a r e s u l t of  two d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s p r e s e n t at G l e n r o s e / S t . M u n g o a n d C r e s c e n t B e a c h . T h i s i s t h e f i r s t i n d i c a t i o n of a major d i f f e r e n c e  between the three sites.  more i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c b e a d s from C r e s c e n t B e a c h see Thom (1991a a n d 1991b).  For  T h e b e a d s a r e not c o m p r i s e d of a s i n g l e r a w m a t e r i a l , n o r i n g e n e r a l , a r e t h e y as w e l l made as b e a d s from l a t e r c u l t u r a l p h a s e s .  But, the  presence  of b e a d s does not i n d i c a t e t h a t C r e s c e n t B e a c h s o c i e t y d u r i n g t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e was s t r a t i f i e d .  The beads were recovered  t h r o u g h o u t the deposits and  t h e r e w e r e no s p e c i f i c c o n c e n t r a t i o n s of beads a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e b u r i a l . l a r g e n u m b e r of g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c b e a d s w e r e r e c o v e r e d  A  from C h a r l e s c u l t u r e  d e p o s i t s at the T s a w w a s s e n s i t e ( A r e a s 1991), b u t t h e y w e r e p o s i t i v e l y associated with burials.  C l e a r l y , t h e exact p l a c e of g r o u n d s t o n e d i s c beads  i n t h e C h a r l e s c u l t u r e m u s t be c l a r i f i e d . f i r s t i n d i c a t o r of p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s  G r o u n d stone d i s c beads are the  between the three sites.  DECORATED GROUND STONE: Please note t h a t t h e d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d s t o n e f r o m C r e s c e n t B e a c h i s a fragmentary  piece of s l a t e w i t h i n c i s e d l i n e s .  t h a t f o u n d at G l e n r o s e a n d S t . M u n g o .  It i s not o f t h e same t y p e as  The d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d s t o n e s u b c l a s s  f o u n d at S t . M u n g o c o m p o n e n t s (see A p p e n d i x B) does n o t a p p e a r a t C r e s c e n t Beach. While g r o u n d stone d i s c beads a r e not c o n s i d e r e d s t y l i s t i c m a r k e r s of t h e S t . M u n g o p h a s e , d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d stone o b j e c t s a r e .  There is a fair  ( c e r t a i n l y not a b u n d a n t ) q u a n t i t y of these implements p r e s e n t at G l e n r o s e ( f o u r of t h e s i x d e c o r a t e d g r o u n d stone i m p l e m e n t s b e l o n g i n t h i s  subgroup)  b u t , t h e r e is o n l y one p r e s e n t at S t . M u n g o f r o m u n d i s t u r b e d d e p o s i t s a r e r e p o r t e d b y Boehm 1973). think.  (three  T h e s e o b j e c t s a r e not as common as one m i g h t  D e c o r a t e d g r o u n d stone o b j e c t s a r e a l s o f o u n d i n t h e F r a s e r C a n y o n  d u r i n g the Eayem p h a s e .  Perhaps, t h e i r presence i n St, Mungo components is  a n i n d i c a t o r of close t r a d i n g a n d c u l t u r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h c u l t u r a l  groups  l i v i n g up the F r a s e r River.  Therefore,  m a r k e r s as i n c i s e d m e t a m o r p h o s e d  it is possible that such stylistic  s l a t e t a b l e t s a r e i n d i c a t o r s of a  difference  i n t r a d e r e l a t i o n s h i p s r a t h e r t h a n i n d i c a t i o n s of c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s Glenrose, St. Mungo a