Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An examination of relationships between artifact classes and food resource remains at Deep Bay, DiSe.. 1977

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1977_A1 M65.pdf
UBC_1977_A1 M65.pdf [ 25.6MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0058413.json
JSON-LD: 1.0058413+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0058413.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0058413+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0058413+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0058413+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0058413.ris

Full Text

AN EXAMINATION OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ARTIFACT CLASSES AND FOOD RESOURCE REMAINS AT DEEP BAY, DiSe 7 by GREGORY GERALD MONKS B.A., University of Victoria, 1967 M.A., University of Victoria, 1973 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of British Columbia) We accept this dissertation as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June, 1977 © Gregory Gerald Monks, 1977 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Brit ish Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Anthropology and fionlplngy The University of Brit ish Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date 6 September 1977 i i ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the idea that ethnographically reported relationships between artifact classes and faunal food resource remains can be detected in an archaeological context. A detailed site report i s presented for Deep Bay (DiSe 7), including analyses of the artifact and faunal assemblages, and quantitative techniques are employed to search for associations between faunal and artif a c t variables in this s i t e . The results of four analyses are compared, and the recurring associations of variable pairs are interpreted in the light of ethnographic and ecological data. The various lines of evidence relevant to the most l i k e l y season of site occupation are also examined. It i s concluded that some of the ethnographically reported food resource procurement patterns can successfully be detected in the archaeological record. Evidence i s presented that suggests the existence of food resource procurement systems centered around herring, deer, sea mammal, and migratory waterfowl. The site was most l i k e l y occupied during the late winter and early spring, primarily for deer hunting and herring fishing, and secondarily for sea mammal and waterfowl hunting. The acquisition of molluscs i s considered to be a given. This subsistence pattern appears to have varied l i t t l e over the past 2000 years. It is also concluded that the same techniques could be used profitably for similar studies i n the future. I l l TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I - Aims 1 Chapter II - Background To The Study 21 Site Location and Description 21 Vegetation . . . . 26 Resources . . . . . . 26 Cultural Deposits • • 31 Historic Site Use 32 Excavation Procedure 36 Chapter III - Stratigraphy and Chronology k2 Grouping of Strata ^ 2 Interpretation of Strata 5^ Chronology 6 0 Chapter IV - Description of Artifacts 70 Historic Artifacts ?° Aboriginal Artifacts . . . . . 75 Chipped Stone °° Ground Stone 99 Pecked Stone Incised Stone Bone Y° Antler }?« Shell Mineral W" Metal 1J8 Wood Variations in the Artifact Inventory . . . . . . . . L ^ Chapter V - Features 1 6 6 Chapter VI - Faunal Remains 179 i v Chapter VII - Delineation of Components 207 Component I . . . . . . . 207 Components II and III • • 209 Chapter VIII - Associations of Artifact and Faunal Data 245 Quantitative Analyses - Method 246 Quantitative Analyses - Results « . . . 256 Theoretical Framework • . 270 Synthesis of Results . • 274 Verification of Results 282 Conclusion 287 Chapter IX - Seasonal Aspects of Site Use 290 Faunal Evidence • 291 Chapter X - Conclusion . . . . . 302 Bibliography . . . e • . . 308 Appendix I - Soil Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 pH Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 Granulometric Analysis . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . 331 Appendix II - Burials 354 Appendix III - L i t h i c Debris 369 Lot 81 . 369 Lot 73 372 Appendix IV - Clam Shell Seasonality « 374 Appendix V - Composition of Transformed Artifact Classes, Lot 73 385 V LIST OF TABLES I. Wentworth S c a l e , P h i S c a l e , and D e s c r i p t i v e Labels of Grain S i z e s used i n Granulometric A n a l y s i s . . 55 I I . Raw and R e l a t i v e Frequencies of Recorded H i s t o r i c A r t i f a c t s , Lot 7 31 DiSe 7 72 I I I . A r t i f a c t Classes by Excavation U n i t and N a t u r a l Stratum, Lot 731 DiSe 7 77-78 IV. A r t i f a c t Classes by Excavation Unit and N a t u r a l Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7 79 V. Dimensions and Weights of Leaf Shaped P o i n t s with Asymmetric Edges, DiSe 7 86 VI, Dimensions and Weights of U n i f a c i a l Chopping Tools, DiSe 7 89 V I I , Dimensions and Weights of B i f a c i a l Chopping Tools, DiSe 7 90 V I I I . Dimensions and Weights of Cores, DiSe 7 . . . . . 92 IX. Dimensions and Weights of Medium Duty U n i f a c i a l l y Retouched Flakes, DiSe 7 95 X. Dimensions and Weights of Medium Duty B i f a c i a l l y Retouched F l a k e s , DiSe 7 96 XI. Dimensions and Weights of Medium Duty U t i l i z e d F l a k e s , DiSe 7 97 X I I . Dimensions and Weights of L i g h t Duty U t i l i z e d F l a k e s , DiSe 7 98 X I I I . Dimensions and Weights of Apparently Complete Abrasive Stones, DiSe 7 . . . 101 XIV. Dimensions and Weights of T r i a n g u l a r Ground S l a t e P o i n t s , DiSe 7 108 XV. Dimensions and Weights of Corner Notched Ground S l a t e P o i n t s , DiSe 7 109 v i XVI. Dimensions and Weights of Bird Bone Bipoints, DiSe 7 124 XVII. Dimensions and Weights of Mammal Bone Bipoints, DiSe 7 . . . . . . . . . . 124-126 XVIII. Dimensions and Weights of Split Bone Awls, DiSe 7 128 IX. Dimensions and Weights of Wedge Base Bone Points, DiSe 7 129 XX. Dimensions and Weights of Bird Bone Points, DiSe 7 131 XXI. Dimensions and Weights of Antler Composite Toggling Harpoon Valves, DiSe 7 • 144 XXII. Comparison of Distinctive Archaeological Features of Three Culture Types from the Gulf of Georgia Area with Artifact Class Distribution Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . 163-165 XXIII. L i s t of Generic and Common Names of Species Found in Tables XXIV through XXX, Lots 73 and 81, DiSe 7 182-183 XXIV. Weight of Faunal Remains by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7 . . . . . 184 XXV. Estimated Weight of Usable Meat for each Identifiable Mammal and Bird Species by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7 185 XXVI. Weight of Mammal and Bird Remains Not Present in at Least Two Excavation Units by Natural Stratum and Arbitrary Level, Lot 81, DiSe 7 . 186 XXVII. Weight of Fish and Mollusc Remains Not Present in at Least Two Samples by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7 188 XXVIII. Weight of Faunal Remains by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . . . 192-193 XXIX. Weight of Mammal, Bird, Fish, and Mollusc Remains Deleted from Table XXVIII, Lot 73, DiSe 7 194-196 v i i XXX. Estimated Weight of Usable Meat for each Identifiable Mammal and Bird Species by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . 2 0 1 - 2 0 3 XXXI. Artifact Classes Significant at °<=.05 Kruskal-Wallis Test of Cultural Components by Artifact Classes, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . . 219 XXXII. Artifact Class Frequencies by Component, Lot 73, DiSe 7 222-22*1- XXXIII. Variable Pairs Significant at *<&.05 in Two or More Analyses, Artifact Class by Faunal Species, Lot 73, DiSe 7 2 5 4 - 2 5 5 XXXIV. Pairs of Selected Artifact Classes, Lot 73, DiSe 7 <*^.05 . . 283 XXXV. Pairs of Selected Faunal Species, Lot 73, DiSe 7 <k^,05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 XXXVI. Variable Pairs Involving Deer and Selected Faunal Species, Lot 73, DiSe 7 «<^.05 . . . 2 8 5 XXXVII. Soil pH, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . j2k XXXVIII. Soil pH, Lot 81, DiSe 7 325 XXXIX. Weight of Granulometric Constituents by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7 3 3 ^ XL. Weight of Granulometric Constituents by Natural Stratum, Soil Sample Data, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . • • • • • 335-337 XLI. DiSe 7 Burials 3 5 5 - 3 5 8 XLII. Weight of Lithie Debris by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7 . . . . 370 XLIII. Weight of Lithic Debris by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . . 372 XLIV. Relative Frequencies of Butter Clam Valves in each Growth Percentage Category, DiSe 7 . 383 v i i i LIST OF FIGURES 1. Map of Gulf of Georgia showing Deep Bay in relation to selected archaeological sites . . . 22 2. Map of Deep Bay, Baynes Sound, and Mapleguard Point 23 3. Map of Mapleguard Point subdivision 34 4. Contour map of Lots 1 and 2, DiSe 7 37 5. Contour map of Lot 73, DiSe 7 , 38 6. Contour map of Lot 81, DiSe 7 39 7. Stratigraphic profiles of Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . 46-47 8. Stratigraphic profiles of Lot 81, DiSe 7 . . . 49 9. Selected frequency distributions of granulometric constituents, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . 57 10. Radiocarbon dates, DiSe 7 6 l 11. Chipped stone, DiSe 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 12. Chipped stone points, DiSe 7 83 13. Chopping tools, DiSe 7 88 14. Abrasive stones, DiSe 7 • . . . . 103 15. Ground stone points, DiSe 7 . . . . . . . . . . 106 16. Ground slate knives and celts, DiSe 7 « . . . • ±±± 17. Miscellaneous artifacts, DiSe 7 . . . . . . . . 1 1 7 18. Bone points and awls, DiSe 7 121 19. Miscellaneous bone artifacts, DiSe 7 132 20. Antler artifacts, DiSe 7,. . • 139 i x x 21. Rock wall f i s h trap, DiSe 7 ^57 22. Historic feature showing cement blocks, Lot 73, DiSe 7 23. Features and burials, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . . 24. Dog remains in cairn of Burial 5, Lot 73, DiSe 7 17^ 25. Compacted sand, gravel, and clay floor, Lot 73, DiSe 7 176 26. Depression in natural stratum D, Lot 81, DiSe 7 177 27. Dendrogram of Gulf of Georgia Components and Components II and III, Lot 73, DiSe 7 . . . . 228 28. Relationships among selected artifact classes, Lot 73, DiSe 7 284 29. Relationships among selected faunal species, Lot 73, DiSe 7 284 30. Soil pH, Lot 73, DiSe 7 330 31. Furthest Neighbor Cluster Analysis. Granulometric data, Lot 81, DiSe 7 . . . . . 342 32. Metric Multidimensional Scaling based on Torgerson^s B* Matrix. Granulometric data, Lot 81, DiSe 7 344 33. Furthest Neighbor Cluster Analysis. Granulometric data, Lot 73, DiSe 7 346 34. Cluster membership by natural stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7 348 35. Metric Multidimensional Scaling based on Torgerson's B* Matrix. Granulometric data, Lot 73, DiSe 7 351 36. Burial 1, Lot 73, DiSe 7 359 37. Burials, Lot 73, DiSe 7 360 X 38. Burial 9, Lot 73, DiSe 7 39. Burial 4, Lot 73, DiSe 7 363 40. Burial 3, Lot 73, DiSe 7 354 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT While the prose of this dissertation was written by myself, the labor of many people i s incorporated herein* F i r s t , I would li k e to thank my committee members for their assistance and encouragement. They are David F. Aberle, J.E. Michael Kew, R.G. Matson (advisor), Donald H, Mitchell, Richard J . Pearson, and E l v i Whittaker. I would also l i k e to thank my f i e l d crew for a very pleasant and profitable summer. They are Mona Childe, Ann-Marie Fenger, Yvonne Heagle, Don Howes, Helen Lemon, Dan MacPherson, Heather Maximea, Laura Ann Recalma, Judy Reid, Ruby Reid, Val Sizertz (nee Patenaude), and Arlene Yip. My thanks also to the many employees of the British Columbia Provincial Museum and the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board and a l l the volunteers who contributed their efforts to the project. Thanks are also due to the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board of British Columbia for granting me an excavation permit and funds for the project. I further wish to express my appreciation to the Qualicum and Comox Bands for permission to excavate in their territory, and to Mr. and Mrs. Tyerman (owners of Lot 73), Mr. and Mrs. Belyck (owners of Lot 81), and Mr. and Mrs. Thomas (owners of Lots 1 and 2) for permission to work on their properties. x i i My special thanks to Val Sivertz and Pat Miller for their valuable assistance with the faunal and skeletal analyses, to Dr. Michael Church and Mr, Hans Schreier of the Department of Geography for their assistance with the s o i l analysis, to Dr. C. Rowles of the Forestry Department for permission to test s o i l pH in the forestry laboratory, and to C. Moira Irvine for producing the figures and photo- graphs. Figure 1 was originally drawn by Nancy Condrashoff of the Archaeology Division of the British Columbia Provincial Museum. Finally, I would li k e to express my deepest appreciation to my wife, Linda, for her assistance with the analyses and for typing a l l drafts of this dissertation. Without her patience, encouragement, and hard work i t would not have been written. Any errors or omissions in this dissertation are entirely my responsibility. 1 CHAPTER I AIMS This study i s based on the analysis of data collected by the author from the site at Deep Bay (DiSe 7), which i s situated on the east coast of Vancouver Island approximately five miles north of Big Qualicum River. The research design called for a quantitative search for relationships between artifact and faunal variables. These relationships were then to be discussed in terms of relevant ecological and ethnographic analogues in order to gain some insights into the portion of the aboriginal subsistence round conducted at Deep Bay. The ethnographic and ecological literature relevant to the Gulf of Georgia area indicates that food resources avail- able to the Coast Salish were characterized by "1) a variety of types of food, including sprouts, roots, berries, shell- f i s h , fishes, waterfowl, land and sea mammals; 2) local variation in the occurrence of these types, due to irregular shore lines, broken topography, differences between fresh and salt water, local differences in temperature and precipi- tation; 3) seasonal variation, especially in vegetable foods and in anadromous fishes; 4) fluctuation from year to year, in part due to the regular cycles of the different populations 2 of f i s h , in part to less predictable changes, as in weather" (Siittles 1960:302; also Suttles 1962:527-529). In these two articles, Suttles builds the argument that an adaptive relat- ionship exists between variation in abundance of food resources, on one hand, and maintenance of complex systems of r e d i s t r i - bution and social rank on the other. In particular, variations in prestige are seen primarily as an indirect result of unpre- dictable variations in food resource a v a i l a b i l i t y . Another recent a r t i c l e has demonstrated at the .05 probability level that the rank of southern Ewakiutl local groups could be pre- dicted from the rank of salmon av a i l a b i l i t y in each local group fs territory (Donald and Mitchell 1975:344). The authors cited above have dealt with such variables as kinship, population, rank, and prestige in their discus- sions, but to date only one northwest coast study (Fladmark 1974) has examined cultural and environmental relationships in an archaeological context. No archaeological study has used quantitative methods to examine these relationships, nor have specific relationships between particular aspects of culture and environment been demonstrated archaeologically. This lack of close attention to specific ecological relation- ships has also meant that, u n t i l very recently, the faunal assemblages from archaeological excavations were largely ignored in either excavation or analysis. The consequent preoccupation with artifacts as the primary data base on which archaeological analyses were conducted has contributed to,: f i r s t , a number of d i f f i c u l t i e s in assigning assemblages 3 to their proper phases or culture types and establishing reliable correspondences between these units (see Mitchell 1971a,Table VI, Table XII) and, second, a tendency i n local archaeological research not to incorporate the proposed sources of environmental and cultural variation into arch- aeological interpretations. The in a b i l i t y of archaeology to keep abreast of current ethnological models has been labelled "paradigm lag" (Leone 1972:16). The yast majority of faunal remains recovered from Gulf of Georgia middens belong to species that were exploited as food resources by the Coast Salish. These remains are clearly not the entire range of exploited food resources, but they nevertheless are subject to the four types of vari- ation outlined by Suttles. If one accepts his contention that these variations are met by corresponding variations in culture, then i t i s l i k e l y that material culture, as well as kinship, prestige, rank, and population, w i l l also vary i n relation to some aspects of the environment. This variation may be temporal, resulting in the changing composition of artifact assemblages through time, or i t may be spatial, resulting in differing assemblages according to what a c t i v i - ties were being performed at particular sites at particular times of the year. The spatial and temporal variation of food resource variables was exploited by the Coast Salish by means of a seasonal subsistence round. Despite the loss and differential 4 placement of material cultural items through decay, i t is reasonable to argue that the items of material culture found at a food resource procurement site are primarily those that were used, broken, and/or lost during the acquisition, and/or processing, and/or consumption of food resources taken at that si t e . Thus, within a, local groups territory during a yearly round the artifact assemblages at the sites visited should exhibit variation according, in part, to the variation in the food resources dealt with at that s i t e . Many of the Coast Salish annual round ac t i v i t i e s are described in greater or lesser detail in the ethnographic literature, andsspecific relationships between artifacts and food resource species are also more or less well described. Because these analogues are available for comparison, the argument for the co-occurence of activity-related artifacts and faunal remains should appear in the archaeological record. The aim of this dissertation i s to test this hypo- thesis. The benefits to be derived from the testing of this idea are important for Gulf of Georgia prehistory. F i r s t , the results of this test should provide further^clues as to the uses to which arti f a c t classes were put by associating the artifact classes with specific food resource remains. Second, i t should further help establish the extent to which specific portions of the Coast Salish ethnographic literature 5 are applicable to the local archaeological record. This w i l l be done by examining associations between artifact and faunal variables i n terms of the ethnographic literature. Third, the results of this examination w i l l provide clues for the possible faunal associations of^previously excavated a r t i - fact assemblages that have not been associated with faunal assemblages. This type of clue w i l l help to place these artifact assemblages into an annual round context consistent with the sources of food resource va r i a b i l i t y noted by Suttles. In such a context the d i f f i c u l t i e s previously noted of assign- ing artifact assemblages of varying composition to a single phase or culture type and the d i f f i c u l t i e s in establishing distinctions between phases or culture types may be p a r t i a l l y overcome. The more general contribution to archaeology to be made by this study i s twofold. F i r s t , i t w i l l demonstrate statis- t i c a l l y in an archaeological context that specific cultural and environmental variables (artifact classes and food resource species) do covary. Second, i t w i l l provide a means by which culture-historical archaeological sequences can be re-appraised in more detailed ecological terms. The idea w i l l be tested with the aid of quantitative methods. Artifact variables and faunal variables w i l l be analyzed for independence or correlation within a universe of analytical units. Associations of paired artifact and faunal variables that are judged to be reliable w i l l be 6 examined i n the light of local ethnographic and ecological data to determine whether satisfactory analogues can be established for the archaeological associations. The ana- logues so established w i l l serve as a basis for an inter- pretation of that portion of the annual subsistence round centered at Deep Bay (DiSe 7). This interpretation w i l l test the hypothesis that relationships between artifact and faunal variables reported in the ethnographic literature can successfully be detected in an archaeological context. Detecting patterns of association between archaeological variables using quantitative techniques i s a relatively recent pursuit among archaeologists. Usually quantitative techniques are used to detect relationships among artifacts (Longacre 1970; Freeman 1973; Monks 1973), but rarely are such techniques used to treat faunal, f l o r a l , and palynological data as well. One instance in which the latter type of study was undertaken is James H i l l ' s dissertation on Broken K pueblo ( H i l l 1965). In his work H i l l sought to detect functional and s t y l i s t i c patterns of relationships between artifact and non-artifact variables by means of factor analysis. Another a r t i c l e (Koyama 1974) i s much more similar to the present study in terms of measures of association used and results sought. The correlation of specific artifact classes and faunal species was used to show that, on the basis of Hogup Cave data, at least certain Great Basin subsistence patterns were simple and consistent over the past 8500 years 7 (Koyama 1974:2£). This study and the one undertaken here are similar to the extent that they seek associations between faunal and artifact variables in an archaeological context, they use quantitative methods to find these associations, and;they resort to ethnographic analogues of a more or less specific nature to interpret and support archaeological associations. On the other hand, they are different in more ways than they are similar. The Hogup Cave study deals only with selected art i f a c t classes where the Deep Bay study examines a l l a r t i f a c t classes. The Hogup Cave study deals with the faunal data only in terms of minimum numbers of individuals of each species, but this study examines faunal species in terms of presence/absence, percentage of weight of bone, and percentage estimated weight of usable meat within each analytical unit as well. This study attempts to judge the r e l i a b i l i t y of variable pair associations not just in terms of s t a t i s t i c a l significance, but also in terms of whether a given variable pair i s found i n more than one analysis. That i s , i f variable pair A. i s found in both the presence/absence and minimum numbers of individuals analyses then i t is thought to be more reliable than i f i t were found significant in only one of these analyses. 8 The Hogup Cave study relies only on the s t a t i s t i c a l significance of correlated variables in a single analysis. The extent or detail of ethnographic analogues used to inter- pret the Hogup Cave associations are not reported, but i t i s implied that these analogues are of a general nature. The present study, on the other hand, seeks explicit analogues in the ethnographic literature for each association of vari- able pairs. Lastly, the Hogup Cave study uses the Pearson correlation coefficient as the measure of correlation between artifact and faunal variables. One potential shortcoming of this s t a t i s t i c i s noted by the author; namely, that the distributions in the data are assumed, not demonstrated, to be normal (Koyama 1974: 23). A second problem arises when the author treats the correlation coefficient as a proximity measure (Koyama 1974: 25). The use of Pearson's r as a measure of taxonomic re- semblance has been shown to be faulty (Eades 1965:98-100), and treating r as a proximity measure is i n effect the same as treating i t as a measure of taxonomic resemblance. Thus, although the results of the Hogup Cave study seem reasonable, i t i s not clear whether these results are an artifact of the s t a t i s t i c a l measure used or whether the results accurately reflect cultural patterning in the data. The potential d i f f i c u l t i e s in using parametric statistics in general are discussed in Bradley (1968:18). The present study, on the other hand, used non-parametric s t a t i s t i c a l 9 measures of correlation and independence, Spearman's rank order correlation, and the chi-squared test of independence to analyze the data. The latter test i s used i n analyzing the presence/absence data, while the former test i s used in analyzing the data pertaining to relative frequency and min- imum numbers of individuals. Thus, further r e l i a b i l i t y i s added to the results by dealing with observed, rather than assumed, population distributions. In summary, despite the apparent similarity of these studies, the method and results of the present study w i l l be substantially different in both r e l i a b i l i t y and d e t a i l . The interpretation of associated variable pairs by means of ethnographic analogues w i l l involve a discussion of pro- curement systems as outlined by Flannery (1972:222-234). One other study on the northwest coast has dealt with this concept as well (Roll 1974), and i t s relation to the present study should be made clear. Whereas Flannery perceives a procurement system as centering around a specific food resource, Roll contends that each site represents a procure- ment system (Roll 1974,V). While a definitional argument can be developed around the most reasonable boundary for a procurement system i t i s thought advisable in this study to examine the smallest unit of analysis f i r s t , namely the relationships bwtween individual artifact and faunal variables, before attempting to characterize an entire component or site as a system of any particular sort. 10 The divergences between the Deep Bay study and Roll's Minard study continue from this point. The latter study relies primarily on subjective assessment of relationships between artifact and faunal variables and on estimates of the relative abundance of faunal species within the site (Roll 1974:205). The basis on which this relative abundance is judged i s not made clear. The conclusion i s reached that the Minard s i t e , located on a spit at the mouth of Gray's Harbour, into which flows the Chehalis River, represents a river/estuarine procurement system (Roll 1974:277ff). The present study goes beyond Roll's Minard study by establishing which artifact and faunal variables are s t a t i s t i c a l l y and reliably associated, by inferring which specific a c t i v i t i e s occurred at the si t e , and by showing which specific ethno- graphic and ecological analogues are relevant to the assoc- iations found in the archaeological context. In short, the only real similarity between the two studies l i e s i n a common use of the term "procurement system". In this study I have made the assumption that the material by-products of specific activities w i l l tend to be deposited together in the archaeological record. Some attention has recently been devoted to this topic with respect to artifacts (Binford 1973; Hayden 1975) and cultural debris in general (Ascher 1968; Schiffer 1972, 1976). Binford argues that technological efficiency—judged by the degree to which artifacts are curated—has increased through time and that in highly curated technologies archaeological artifact assemblages w i l l tend to exhibit l i t t l e inter-assemblage va r i a b i l i t y (Binford 1973:249-250). Hayden, arguing that the Nunamiut observed by Binford are atypical hunters and gatherers because they possess technological items of an industrial culture (steel,axes, f i l e s , snowmobiles), con* eludes that artifact curation in a truly aboriginal context may not be nearly as important a factor in inter-assemblage var i a b i l i t y as Binford indicates (Hayden 1975:54). I tend to support the latter point of view for two reasons. F i r s t , i t is thought inappropriate to base models of hunter/gatherer artifact curation behavior on groups whose material culture and behavior has clearly been altered to a considerable extent by products from industrialized society. Consequently, the law-like statements based on Binford*s observations are generalizations that cannot legitimately be applied in an aboriginal context. Cultural remains, however, usually consist of more than just art i f a c t s . Artifacts, faunal remains, structured remains, and assorted debris are all^deposited (organized) during a habitation phase, modified (more or less disorganized) during a ghost phase, and observed (interrupted at a point in the process of disorganization) during an archaeological phase (Ascher 1968:46). To make inferences about past cultural behavior, the archaeologist must separate natural and human agencies of disorganization while working backwards from the archaeological phase through the ghost phase to the inhabited 12 phase. This task i s impeded by smearing and blending of remains, cycling of serviceable materials, and broadcasting of debris (Ascher 1968:50-51). Ascher contends that the observation of analogous behavior in contemporary communities can aid in reconstructing past habitation phases from present archaeological phases (Ascher 1968:52). in a more comprehensive treatment of cultural refuse* Schiffer (1972:156-165) defines a systemic context in which potential refuse is circulating within an ongoing behavioral system and an archaeological context which consists of refuse produced and deposited by a behavioral system (Schiffer 1972: 157, 1976:28). Refuse that is output from the systemic con- text into the archaeological context i s deposited by what is known as an S-A formation process. This process i s one of four cultural formation processes that affect the eventual deposition of material in the archaeological context. It i s the major cultural formation process, although there are archaeological-systemic (A-S), systemic-systemic (S-S), and archaeological-archaeological (A-A) formation processes (Schiffer 1976:28-40). Through S-A formation processes, primary, secondary, and de facto refuse are produced. Primary refuse i s discarded at i t s location^of use, secondary refuse is discarded away from i t s location of use, and de facto refuse i s useful material l e f t behind upon site abandonment (Schiffer 1972:160-161; 1976:30-33). The means by which refuse takes up i t s position in the archaeological context i s regulated by cultural and non- cultural mechanisms. In order to relate patterned deposition of variables in the archaeological record to specific systemic or non-cultural behavior, i t i s necessary to define principles of deposition that transform systemic behavior into archaeol- ogical patterning. These principles may be either statements of fact or hypotheses that seek to account for a specific formation phenomenon. Principles relating to the cultural influence on archaeological deposition are called C-transfofms. C-transforms " . . . permit an investigator to specify the ways in which a cultural system outputs the materials that eventually may be observed archaeologically. Application of these laws i s necessary to relate the past qualitative, quantitative, spatial, and associational attributes of mat- erials in systemic context to materials deposited by the cultural system" (Schiffer 1976:14). Examples of C-transforms are: as site population, or site size, and intensity of site use increases, a decreasing correspondence w i l l be found between use and discard locations of a l l elements of activities conducted at the site (Schiffer 1976:13); primary refuse i s most l i k e l y to be found at limited activity sites (Schiffer 1972:162). N-transforms are non-cultural formation processes. They permit " . . . the archaeologist to predict the interaction between variables of culturally deposited materials and vari- ables of the noncultural environment in which they are found" 14 (Schiffer 1976:15-16). An example of an N-transform i s the tendency of acid soils to preserve pollen but not bone (Schiffer 1976:15). Differing patterns of refuse deposition are thought to be the result of outputs from differing behavior within a systemic context. The two examples of C-transforms noted above are important to the following discussion. The f i r s t example suggests that the relative amount of secondary refuse increases as occupation intensity and site population or site size increases. The second example suggests the converse of the f i r s t ; namely, that the relative amount of primary refuse increases as intensity of occupation, and possibly site pop- ulation or site size, decreases. It i s the pattern of refuse deposition at limited activity sites that i s presently of concern. Within limited activity sites, the degree to which artifact and faunal by-products of ac t i v i t i e s tend to be found at their areas of use i s inversely related to the pop- ulation of the site (an indicator of site size) and the length of time the site i s occupied (C-transform). Thus, in small, seasonally occupied sites the archaeological record w i l l reveal that there i s repeated clustering of artifacts and faunal remains in discrete and overlapping locations (C-transform) (Schiffer 1972:162). These transforms assume that materials used together w i l l tend to be deposited together under certain specific conditions. Although i t is an improvement over previous archaeological practice to designate specific conditions under which the assumption i s true, i t i s nevertheless an assumption. Fortunately, i t can be operationalized and tested as an hypo- thesis, and some investigators are presently engaged in this pursuit. When selected results of R-mode analyses of a r t i - fact data from the three components at Glenrose Cannery were associated with appropriate faunal species, the Marpole and St. Mungo Component data indicated that deer and elk remains were negatively associated with artifacts that were l i k e l y to have been used for hunting or butchering (Matson 1976:250, 252). There was no association between elk and deer remains and hunting or butchering artifacts i n the Old Cordilleran Component (Matson 1976:257). The negative association of variables in the Marpole and St. Mungo Components may result from intensive site occupation (Matson 1976:257), in accord- ance with the C-transform set forth by Schiffer (1976:15). The lack of any association between artifact and faunal v a r i - ables in the Old Cordilleran Component i s not explained by this C-transform (Matson 1976:257). It should be remembered that much of the material was found at least partially in beach deposits that may have been subject to aquatic disutr- bance, that s o i l chemistry may have been less favorable to bone preservation in the beach gravels, and that the sample size (N=23 levels) was relatively small compared to the Marpole and St. Mungo sample sizes. The ethnographic pattern of site use on the lower Fraser 16 River indicates that many large winter villages were located there. Also, large influxes of people during salmon spawning runs would mean that many sites were intensively occupied by large populations. Judging from i t s dimensions, the Glenrose Cannery site may easily have been such a site i f the ethno- graphic pattern was maintained for a considerable period of time. It may not be surprising, then, to find negative associations between intuitively related artifact and faunal variables given Schiffer's hypothesized relationship between large site population and/or site size, intense occupation, and deposition of secondary refuse. If this relationship holds for a large, intensively occupied site, the converse may also be true for limited activity sites. In the case of these kinds of sites, the assumption that materials used to- gether are thrown away together may not be incorrect. Limited activity sites consist of such entities as k i l l sites, quarry sites, and seasonally occupied sites (Schiffer 1972:162). At such sites "curate behavior" i s present, but to a lesser extent than at large, intensively occupied sites (Schiffer 1976:56). The site to be examined by this study is in fact a discrete physiographic portion of an extensive habitation area; however, the chronological and spatial re- lationships between portions of this habitation area are unknown. That portion of the area examined in this study appears to have been used primarily for a seasonally specific, relatively brief, set of purposes. In this sense, occupation^ intensity of the portion under discussion appears to have been relatively low, at least in terms of duration. For these reasons i t i s argued that the portion of the habitation area investigated here can be treated as i f i t were a limited activity site that was occupied at a relatively low level of intensity for a relatively brief period of time. Apart from the curation of material by-products of cultural activities there are a number of other factors that w i l l tend to obscure relationships among by-products of a behavioral system. F i r s t , only a portion of the artifact and faunal remains are usually recovered in an archaeological excavation unless the whole site i s dug. Therefore an i n - complete record of by-product deposition must be dealt with, although this situation i s hardly new. Second, the type of material from which an artifact is made, as well as the use to which i t was put, w i l l affect the abundance of certain artifact classes at a site (N-transform). Fragile artifacts are proportionally more l i k e l y to be broken and l e f t behind in the archaeological record than are durable arti f a c t s . Third, the material of which cultural by-products consist w i l l affect their relative abundance in the s i t e . At one extreme of decomposability there i s stone, at the other extreme vegetable remains. Shell, bone, antler, and wood f a l l in between. Among these, some shells or bones decay more rapidly than others. Fourth, the use of bone and antler for artifacts has the effect of removing items from the 18 faunal assemblage and adding them to the artifact assemblage (C-transform). Artifacts of bone, antler, tooth, or shell can thus be analyzed as artifacts, modified faunal remains, or both. The research design of the study w i l l determine which of these alternatives is chosen. Fifth, both artifacts and faunal remains may tend not to be found at a site although the site inhabitants dealt commonly with them (C-transform). Examples of such items might be projectile points that were most often used in the pursuit of»game away from the site, or trunk bones of larger game animals that were obtained and dismembered away from a site with only certain portions, usually limb bones, being taken back to the s i t e . No implication is made that material by-products of cultural a c t i v i t y w i l l be found together, only that they w i l l tend to be found together. Clearly, the curation of artifacts and refuse within a site and between sites w i l l take place no matter how many people occupy a site or over what period of time a site i s occupied. When a considerable time dimension i s added, especially at\a seasonally occupied site , i t i s unreasonable to expect that exactly the same acti v i t i e s w i l l occur in exactly the same location year after year. The deposition of the by-products of; these ac t i v i t i e s w i l l therefore not occur in exactly the same place each year. Over ifcime, however, the deposition of the by-products from a consistent set of ac t i v i t i e s w i l l nevertheless tend to reflect the relationships between particular by-products. The foregoing arguments are phrased in terms of tendencies, and this i s not without reason. It i s i n recognition of the virtual absence of absolutes when dealing with archaeological interpretation that the tendency for events to co-occur in time and/or space i s stressed. The tentativeness with which archaeology i s able to interpret prehistoric behavior pat- terns has also led to the use of inferential s t a t i s t i c s in this study to aid in data analysis. These stati s t i c s deal with the likelihood of an event occurring by chance, and as such they lend themselves readily to statements of tendency. An attempt such as this to detect ethnographic patterns in the archaeological record i s confronted with the problem of using variables that correspond to recognizable units in the former cultural system that i s being investigated. In the case of faunal remains the d i f f i c u l t i e s of establishing correspondences between archaeological variables and units in the real world (species) i s generally not too d i f f i c u l t . Thus, faunal remains that can be identified as to species can j u s t i f i a b l y be thought of as meaningful variables. The r e l i a b i l i t y with which artifacts can be correspondingly classified i s unfortunately not as great. Several generations of debate have taken place concerning the classification of artifacts and what the products of such classifications are meant to signify. The magnitude of the problem faced by archaeologists i s 20 amply illustrated by an ̂ examination of Ingalik Material Culture (Osgood 1940). It i s clear from this work that no attempt at classification by an archaeologist could succeed in segregating artifacts on the same basis as they are segregated by the people who use them. Failing this, the archaeologist must classify the data as best he can in terms of the purposes of his research while at the same time avoid- ing doing violence to what he perceives as a reasonably emic classification. This situation in i t s e l f i s an important factor tending to obscure relationships between material by-products in an archaeological context. In'-the present study, the basic classification i s descriptive although functional aspects of artifact classes are employed second- a r i l y when they can be taken from the relevant ethnographic literature. \ 21 CHAPTER II BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY Introduction This chapter serves as a means of connecting the aims presented in Chapter I with the data presented in Chapter III and following. The site from which the data were recovered is described in terms of i t s morphology and human history. The physical and cultural context of the site i s also con- tinued, and a description of the excavation procedures i s given. Site Location and Description Located at 48*27' north latitude and 123°16' west longitude, the Deep Bay site i s designated DiSe 7 in the Borden system (Figure 1). It consists of cultural deposits resting on a spit that projects from the east coast of Vancouver Island into Baynes Sound. This spit, known as Mapleguard Point, and the curve of the eastern shoreline of Vancouver Island enclose the sheltered body of water called Deep Bay (Figure 2). The protection afforded Deep Bay by the spit and the island i s considerable and, as a result, a number of commercial fishing vessels and private craft moor at the government wharf 22 Figure 1 Map of Gulf of Georgia showing Deep Bay i n relation to selected archaeological sites» 23 PART OF AIRPHOTO B.C. 7766 Figure 2. Map of Deep Bay, Baynes Sound, and Mapleguard Point. 24 throughout the winter 0 Only on rare occasions does major disturbance occur within the bay 0 This disturbance takes the form of a violent west wind, called a "Qualicum", that sweeps over the island, presumably via the Alberni Canal and Home Lake route. On at least one occasion in liv i n g memory this wind has caused commercial f i s h boats to be torn from their moorings and washed ashore against the inside of the spit. Outside the spit i s the south end of Baynes Sound, the body of water that separates Vancouver Island from Denman Island. The spit continues to be built up of sand and gravel carried by the t i d a l current that flows northwest along the east side of Vancouver Island* The material being carried by the current comes from two sources. One i s gravel, sand, and sediment that i s carried along the shore in the continuing process of beach build up and decay. The other i s the eroding bluffs to the immediate southeast of the spite Some parts of these bluffs are composed of glacial clays, and other parts are composed of semi-consolidated glacial sands and gravels. These materials belong to the Bowser series of soils (Day, Farstad, and Laird 1959:Qualicum Alberni sheet, Soil Map of Vancouver Island). As these materials erode onto the beach they become part of the material borne by the t i d a l current. As the current proceeds along the coast of Vancouver Island i t encounters a small headland that forces the current into Baynes Sound0 With i t s direction deflected, the a b i l i t y of the current to transport material i s reduced, thereby causing depositional build up at the t i p of the headland0 This build up began as a submarine bar and, as the base of the bar came above water, continued as a combined spit and bar© Current direction and velocity and wave direction and velocity have combined over time to produce a spit that has i t s long axis aligned with the long axis of Baynes Sound (cf. Allen 1968:394ff; Zenkovich 1967:393, 439). It i s composed of well sorted sands, gravels, and cobbles along i t s outer edge* The beaches that flank the spit are different in composition within the intertidal zone0 The beach outside the spit i s subjected to far more forces of deposition and erosion than is the beach on the inside 0 The outer beach also varies more in composition than does the inside beach0 The outside beach matrix i s coarse, containing many cobbles and much coarse and fine gravel, especially at the base of the spit. Toward the point of the spit, the outside beach is composed of fine sand that l i e s in f l a t s immediately next to the spit body and cobble ridges that mark the lower edge of the intertidal zone. The inside beach is predominantly fine gravel, sands, and some s i l t * Relatively l i t t l e sorting of these materials has occurred except for a small area of steeply sloping fine sand just inside the tip of the spit and several areas of large boulders as one proceeds away from the spit along the shore of the bay. 26 Vegetation The present vegetation of the spit i s very limited. Only toward the base of the spit are there trees, mostly maples. They constitute the remains of the second growth that followed i n i t i a l logging activity. Grasses, mosses, and some scrub plants constitute the remaining natural vegetation, the only forms found on the dis t a l two-thirds of the spit. The small headland to which the spit i s attached is covered by the usual local second growth regime of f i r , hemlock, cedar, maple, blackberry, s a l a l , mosses, and, in the rooister areas near the creek, willow, alder, stinging nettle, fern, and c a t t a i l . Resources At the base of the spit, on the inside of the bay, a small stream debouches. This stream flows year around and thus provides a constant source of fresh water. Additional fresh water i s available from Cook Creek about a mile along the shore of the bay. The food resources available in the immediate v i c i n i t y of the site at various times throughout the year are consid- erable. A variety of molluscs are found in the wide range of beach matrices at the s i t e . Predominant among these are both species of horse clam (Tresus capax and Tresus n u t t a l l i ) , basket cockle (Clinocardium n u t t a l l i ) , butter clam (Saxidomus giganteus), l i t t l e neck clam (Protothaca staminea), edible mussel (Mytilus edulis), and, to a lesser extent, native oyster 27 (Ostrea lurida), moon snail (Polinices l e w i s i i ) , and several smaller species of marine snails (Carl 1965), These resources are available a l l year, as are crabs (Cancer sp 0), sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus sp.), cod (Gadus sp e), and rock fis h (Sebastodes sp.)» Some preferences i n the seasonal collection of these resources i s noted in the ethnographic literatures Herring (Clupea harengus p a l l a s i i ) are abundant, especially in early spring, at which time they spawn in large numbers along the beach at the base and to the southeast of the spit. The abundance of this resource can be inferred from the presence of a large stone walled f i s h trap in the intertidal zone just to the southeast of the base of the spit (see Figure 2) a One report mentions a school of herring one to one and a half miles long and twenty to twenty-five fathoms thick, with an estimated weight of over two thousand tons (Tester 1947)0 This school was observed in late November and early December and would probably winter in the Baynes Sound-Denman Island area, spawning the following Marchs Salmon of several species are present in local waters. The Baynes Sound, Chrome Island, Norris Rock area i s as abundant in Spring and Coho salmon as any of the better known salmon fishing areas in the Gulf of Georgia, especially in August and September6 Also, Mre Albert Recalma (1975,pers. comm) informed the writer that this area has long been known as one where salmon could always be obtainedo Many of the creeks and rivers draining the east coast of Vancouver Island 28 support spawning runs of dog salmon (Qncorhynchus keta) in late October or early November, among them Cook Creek and the small creek at the base of the spit (A e Recalma 1975, pers 9 comm). Harbour seals (phoca vitulina richardii) and northern sea lion (Eumetopias jubata) frequented Deep Bay as predators on the various f i s h species mentioned above0 Dogfish (Squalus suckleyi) were also very abundant in the waters around Deep Bay (Carl 1965). They are easily caught, and were of con- siderable aboriginal importance as a source of technological materialso Dogfish were sufficiently abundant in the area to warrant the operation of a dogfish liver o i l reduction plant at Deep Bay in the second quarter of this century e Coast deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) are common in the forest behind the base of the s i t e . Although no deer were seen while this project was in progress, i t can safely be inferred that i f the extent of habitation i n the area were reduced to a small section of the spit, then the abundance of deer would be more noticeable. Information on the ava i l a b i l i t y of birds at Deep Bay i s meagre. From the writer's observations, bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), seagull (Larus sp.), cormorant (Phalacrocoracidae), and heron (Ardea herodias) are present in the summer. A wide range of diving waterfowl are thought to winter at Deep Bay (Guiget 1977,pers. comm). According to the Christmas bird count of 1972-73 reported for the Comox area, the following species were among the total l i s t e d : loon (common, arctic, and red-throated), grebe (red-neck, horned, eared, pied- b i l l e d , and western), cormorant (double crested, brandt's, and pelagic), heron (great blue), swan (trumpeter), various ducks (mallard, p i n t a i l , green-winged teal, American widgeon, shoveller, canvasback, greater scamp, common goldeneye, Barrow's goldeneye, bufflehead, old squaw, and harlequin), scoter (white-winged, surf, and black), merganser (hooded, common, and red-breasted), bald eagle, gull (glaucous-winged and herring), common murre, pigeon guillemot, and marbled murrelet (Arbib 1973:179-180). Canada goose was not present in the 1973 count but was recorded in 1973-749 Among the participants in the 1972-73 count was Mrs. V. Chungranes, a resident of Deep Bay (Arbib 1973:180)0 Since the count covered 192 miles on foot and by car and involved 56 observer hours of counting, i t seems reasonable to assume that many of these species are found at Deep Bay during the winter. Vegetable foods would have been common at the si t e , but their former abundance or importance is d i f f i c u l t to assess• A number of species of seaweed are available a l l year in the intertidal zone, and salmonberries (Rubus spectabilis (Pursh)), huckleberries (Vaccinium sp e), salal berries (Gaultheria shallon (Pursh)), wild blackberries (Rubus sp.), wild rasp- berries (Rubus spe), wild strawberries (Fragaria sp 0), thimbleberries (Rubus parviflorus (Nutt)), bitter cherry (Prunus sp 8), skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum (Hulteh 30 and St. John)), and fern rhizomes (Pteridium and Polystichum), can be assumed to have been available in their respective seasons in the past* Technological resources available near the spit deserve some mention as well. Dogfish skin can be used as an abrasive when dried, as can scouring rushes (Barnett 1975: 111). Nettles (Urtica spe)» whose fiber i s used to make twine (Barnett 1975:88), are found at the spit, as are rushes that can be used for mats (Barnett 1975:122). Willow, alder, cedar, maple, f i r , and hemlock a l l provide useful wood and/ or bark. Bitter cherry i s also available to provide bark for bindings on marine implements (Anderson 1937:73j Barnett 1975:86). The vast majority of stone artifacts i n the Gulf of Georgia are made of either basalt or slate. The writer was told that quantities of slate were available along the west coast of Denman Island (B. Recalma 1975,pers. comm). Basalt occurs in the form of cobbles along the shore of the bay to the northwest of the base of the spit. An examination of the cobbles and boulders strewn on the beach gives the impression that more basalt cobbles have had large flakes removed from them than i s the case with the sandstone and granite rocks. In addition, the flakes removed from basalt rocks seem to be more numerous per rock and to be arranged in a more regular pattern vis-a-vis each other than i s the case for flakes removed from the other rocks 0 Undoubtedly, 31 a l l cobbles and boulders on this beach have been subjected to similar natural forces that remove random spalls, but, unless the basalt rocks break more easily with more regular flake scars as a result of these forces, there may be evidence of non-random cultural selection of raw material on the beach. As has just been mentioned, sandstone i s available on this and other local beaches. Bone and antler for the manufacture of artifacts was supplied as a by-product of the food quest. Since deer are locally available and can supply a substantial amount of bone per individual, there would be no problem acquiring this material. Antler would be less available, however, because males shed their antlers during the late winter and early spring. Cultural Deposits In the Gulf of Georgia, i t i s customary but erroneous to consider the limits of a shell midden deposit to be the limits of a s i t e . The problems arising from this f a c i l e equation are pointed out at Deep Bay. F i r s t , the midden deposits on the spit are contiguous with, i f not part of, midden deposits of varying depth that extend right along the shore of Deep Bay to Cook Creek and beyond. Thus, to c a l l the deposits on the spit "the s i t e " is to a r b i t r a r i l y give boundaries to an area of midden deposit that i s actually just a portion of a much more extensive habitation area. It i s not presently known how much of the total midden area 32 seems to be relatively restricted, nor is i t known to which time periods the various portions of deposit belong. This potential complexity must be remembered when referring to "the s i t e " that was excavated at Deep Bay. Second, the extent of shell midden is not the extent of habitation deposits, especially on the spit. Cultural remains have been found on and in sand deposits that extend beyond and underneath the midden proper. These findings suggest that the term "site" should encompass surrounding a c t i v i t y areas as well as the main area of cultural deposition. The def- init i o n of "the s i t e " under these new terms i s relatively easy on a spit where there are practical limits to the potential area for activity, but in situations where such limits do not exist, the task of defining " s i t e " boundaries becomes more d i f f i c u l t . In spite of problems recognized in the use of the term, "the s i t e " w i l l henceforth be taken to refer to the cultural deposits on the spit and on the headland at i t s base. The reason for this designation i s intuitive and pragmatic because that i s the area that seems most l i k e l y to have been used as a single habitation unit, and because that i s the area within which the salvage excav- ation, on which this report is based, was conducted. Historic Site Use Historic use of the site does not seem to have been considerable u n t i l this century. During the early part of 33 this century the bay was the site of a f i s h processing plant and a log dump. The effect of the f i s h processing plant on the site was minimal, consisting primarily of the construction on the ground surface of accomodations for plant workers. The plant i t s e l f stood on cement foundations that rested in the intertidal zone. The logging activity had a more disturbing effect. Logs were transported by r a i l , and the road bed for the tracks was cut through Lots 2, 3 , 4, 5, and 6 (Figure 3 ) . These tracks ran out onto a trestle from which the logs were dumped. The remains of this trestle are s t i l l visible to the north of the present government wharf. Also, a maintenance shop for the railroad was located on Lot 83, and i t caused considerable disturbance to the midden there. Another former log dump i s evident along the inside edge of the spit on Lots 71, 72, and 73. It i s not known whether this was a railroad dump or a truck dump, but the disturbance i s quite evident. This dis- turbance, though, was, i f not minor, then at least peripheral to the sit e . Hecently, however, the spit was purchased by Nanaimo Realty and subdivided into small lots that are now used for permanent homes or summer cabins (Figure 3 ) . The construction of roads, the installation of water mains, the excavation of foundations and septic tank fi e l d s , and clearing and lev e l - l i n g of the ground surface have disturbed the site well below the surface in some places. Large mounds of midden &REAS OF COBBLES • 0 B B © E A C H WITH PA ES *4. ̂0 SAN D AND FINE EL BEACH DEEP BAY 0 100 i i i METRES \76' 81 uj o o r <« CD m j> o O I 3 < cp T» m > (/> o T5j [T03 2 8 4 - NORTH 0 METRES WEST 0 METRES V Figure 3. Map of Mapleguard Point subdivision 35 and a complex of ditches associated with a f o r t i f i e d position have thus been destroyed,, L i t t l e i s known ethnographically about the s i t e apart from the mention of a trench embankment there (Barnett 1975: 23; Smith 1907:323). It l i e s within the territory known to have belonged to the S:uckan, a group of Pentlatch (pronounced "puntlitch") speakers, whose territory extended from Union Bay to Deep Baye This group was flanked to the north by the Pentlatch proper who held the territory from Union Bay to Kye Bay, To the south, the Saa Lam, also Pentlatch speakers, held the territory between Deep Bay and Englishman's River (Barnett 1975:23)« Equally lacking i s archaeological information on the s i t e e It has been surface collected for a number of years, and the trench embankment has been discussed by Newcombe (1932:7-8) and Buxton (1969:45). The 1975 excavations constitute the f i r s t archaeological examination of the site contents. The sit e i s situated within what has been defined as the northern gulf archaeological area (Mitchell 1971a, Fig.15), an area containing relatively few excavated sites compared to other archaeological areas in the Gulf of Georgia. Other excavated sites in the same area as Deep Bay are: Tsable River Bridge (Whitlam 1974), Buckley Bay (Mitchell 1973), Millard Creek (Capes 1964), Sandwick Midden (Capes 1964), Bliss Landing (Beattie 1971), Rebecca Spit (Mitchell 1968), L i t t l e Qualicum River (Bernick 1976), and Saltery Bay (Monks 1971). 36 Excavation Procedure The site was chosen for salvage by the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board of British Columbia because of the extensive disturbance that had occurred, or was about to occur, to the midden deposits e Since the writer's research purposes could be achieved at Deep Bay, a proposal was submitted, and an excavation permit was granted. Permission to excavate was requested from a l l owners of lots in the Nanaimo Realty development, but only the owners of Lots 1, 2, and 73 gave their permission. During the summer the writer obtained permission to examine a portion of Lot 81. Contour maps of these lots were drawn (Figures 4, 5, 6). No aboriginal sub-surface features were detected although historic disturbance was evident. To decide on the location of excavation units i t was necessary to consider several factors. Because the site was chosen a r b i t r a r i l y for salvage reasons, and because the lots where permission to dig was obtained were ar b i t r a r i l y selected, there seemed no point in devising an elaborate and supposedly unbiased means of selecting the location of excavation units. Furthermore, the apparent absence of aboriginal sub-surface features meant that no parts of any of the four lots ought to be selected for or against. For these reasons, excavation units were located using l o g i s t i c c r i t e r i a . On Lot 73, the excavation units were l a i d out so W DEEP BAY DRIVE Figure 4. Contour map of Lots 1 and 2, DiSe 7. Figure 5. Contour map of Lot 73, DiSe 7. Figure 6. Contour map of Lot 81, DiSe 7. 40 as to encounter what appeared to be the deepest part of the midden deposits while at the same time avoiding major trees and shrubso The excavation units on Lot 81 were situated so as to avoid inconvenience to the owner of the lot and so as to have a chance of detecting sub-surface features assoc- iated with the f o r t i f i c a t i o n that previously existed in the vi c i n i t y . Time did not permit excavation to be conducted on Lots 1 or 2, The five excavation units on Lot 73 were each 2m x 2m located so as to form a 2m x 10m trench, and the four units on Lot 81 were lm x 2m located end to end* The use of trenches on both lots was thought appropriate because i t is the most effective method of controlling complicated s t r a t i - graphy such as that evident at this s i t e a Excavation was carried out by means of mason's trowels, the excavated matrix being screened through 1/8H mesh. The matrix was removed according to a combination of 10 cm arbitrary levels and natural strata. Arbitrary levels were numbered according to their distance above datum (zero tide), and natural strata were given letters of the alphabet according to the order in which they were encountered. When an apparent lens ;?of material was found i n an already designated natural stratum, the lens was given a hyphenated number to indicate i t s a f f i l i a t i o n with the surrounding stratum ( i , e 0 A - l i s a lens in natural stratum A), Screening the material was meant not simply as a check 41 for artifacts missed during excavation s A l l land mammal, sea mammal, f i s h , bird, l i t h i c , and f l o r a l debris was removed and bagged separately, and in addition, large quantities of mollusc remains, especially unbroken or l i t t l e broken items, were placed in separate level bags0 The weight of firecracked rock for each natural stratum in each arbitrary level was recordedo Level notes, including a floor plan, were kept after the removal of each natural stratum of each arbitrary l e v e l 0 Carbon samples were collected and photographs were takeno S o i l samples two l i t r e s in volume were removed from each natural stratum of each excavation unit at the time the wall profiles were drawn0 42 CHAPTER III STRATIGRAPHY AND CHRONOLOGY Introduction The f i r s t of the empirical data are presented here. The stratigraphy and chronology of the site provide a spatial and temporal framework within which the subsequent data can be discussed. The section on stratigraphy contains the results of chemical and physical analyses of natural s o i l constituents. The details of these analyses are found in Appendix I, Grouping of Strata Figure 7 shows the profiles of the trench on Lot 73 and Figure 8 shows those df the trench on Lot 81. The s t r a t i - graphy on Lot 81 requires two points of c l a r i f i c a t i o n . F i r s t , natural stratum A i s overburden that has been bulldozed from other parts of the site as a part of land clearing. It is a very hard matrix, having been compacted by the weight of the bulldozer, and i t contains a mixture of aboriginal and recent historic material. Second, natural stratum D i s markedly different from the other strata because i t i s compact clay unlike the others which contain sand, gravel, charcoal, rocks, shell, and humus. On Lot 73, the stratigraphy can subjectively be divided 43. Code Key to Stratigraphy Lot 73, DiSe 7, Description Brown sandy humus s o i l with grass roots, some crushed mollusc shell, and some firecracked rock, Japanese oyster shells are found in this stratum. Concentrated crushed clam and mussel shell i n a grey sandy matrix; patches of less grey sandy matrix, more pea gravel, more barnacle, and some whole clam valves. Whole and crushed mollusc shell, scattered charcoal, and firecracked rock. Some shell i s charred, and the s o i l i s grey and sandy with some ash. Dark brown compact s o i l with crushed shell and ash, A lens of orange ash, charred crushed shell, firecracked rock, and flecks of charcoal i s found here. Concentrated crushed shell and much charred shell i n a grey sandy matrix with small, scattered pockets of ash. Grey sandy matrix; large quantities of herring remains and quantities of whole and crushed clam, mussel, and barnacle shell. Brown sandy s o i l with l i t t l e shell or firecracked rock. Fine grey sand Black s o i l and crushed mussel shell with some clam and barnacle s h e l l . Coarse grey-yellow sand containing herring remains and some native oyster sh e l l . 44 Key to Stratigraphy Lot 73 (continued) Description Black sandy s o i l with crushed mussel and clam shell and scattered charcoal s Dark brown to black stained fine sand. Dark brown to black compact sandy s o i l with almost no shell but quantities of firecracked rock. Dark brown to black compact sandy s o i l with dispersed crushed clam shell and firecracked rock e The amount of shell decreases with depth. Black compact sandy s o i l with l i t t l e shell and some firecracked rock. Dark brown sandy s o i l with large quantities of herring remains and firecracked rock and some crushed shell, A series of discontinuous lenses characterized by whole clam valves and large valve fragments, and loose grey sandy s o i l with some ash, A fine lens of black s o i l and crushed mussel shell was also noted, A series of discontinuous lenses characterized by compact black greasy s o i l and crushed mussel shell with several lenses of dark brown sandy s o i l with crushed clam and mussel shel l . Dark brown coarse sandy s o i l with some pebbles but no sh e l l . Loose grey sand with some crushed clam and mussel shell. ^5 Key to Stratigraphy Lot 73 (continued) Code Description . . p . o o o o| Black s o i l and crushed mussel shell, Coarse yellow-brown sand with gravel and cobbleso Coarse yellow-brown sand< Clay and sand floor. Ash,, Sand Charcoal 46 57 56 55 WEST 54 53 52 Figure 7(a). Stratigraphic profiles of Lot 73, DiSe 7; N218 wall, W52-62 and N62 wall, N216-218. Figure 7(b). Stratigraphic profiles of Lot 73, DiSe 7; N216 wall, W52-62 and W52 wall, N216-218. 48 Key to Stratigraphy Lot 81, DiSe 7» Description Disturbed matrix consisting of compact crushed mollusc shell and s o i l contain- ing grey ash and sand« Dark brown compact s o i l with crushed mollusc shell and firecracked rock e Black compact s o i l and pebbles with very l i t t l e shell« Crushed and charred clam shell and orange ash found as a lens i n C e Dark brown compact s o i l and large quantities of pebbles found as a lens in C„ Hard yellow-orange clay and fragments of crumbled sandstone« Brown s o i l with crushed clam s h e l l e Loose black s o i l with crushed mollusc shello Finely crushed charred shell and dark clay soilo Dark charred s o i l with no shells Ash Sand Charcoal 49 Figure 8. Stratigraphic profiles of Lot 81, DiSe 7; excavation unit 3, 50 into two zones, the lower zone being composed of strata containing sand, gravel, and cobbles to the virtual exclusion of other materials, and the upper zone, composed basically of sandy humus deposits with considerable but varying amounts of firecracked rock and cultural debris. Within the upper zone there appear, on closer observation, to be two possible stratigraphic subdivisions that might be made. The clearest of these i s the division between the upper strata, showing a tendency to contain heavy concentrations of mollusc shell (A, B & B-l, C, D, E, F, "G", I, J, K, M, N), and the lower strata containing relatively less concentrated mollusc remains (G/O, G with shell, G-2, dark G, H, H-l, Q, R, S). S t i l l further examination of the stratigraphy suggests that, within the topmost group of strata there may be yet another sub- division; that i s , between A, B & B-l, C, D, E, and F on one hand and "G", I, J, K, M, and N on the other. The fact that one stratum appears to be different from other strata that flank i t , and that groups of strata exhibiting internal similarity can be distinguished suggests that cultural and/or natural constituents of strata may vary over space or through time. The majority of archaeological reports usually examine the most obvious cultural debris and use these observations to separate and group strata into zones. This study moves beyond the subjective assessment of stratigraphic divisions by seeking empirical evidence for such divisions in the pH and grain size characteristics of each natural 51 stratum. The detailed results of these two analyses are presented in Appendix I. The results of these two analyses permit statements to be made concerning the grouping of natural strata and the geological interpretation of s o i l formation at the s i t e . The pH data for Lot 73 were useful in establishing that a s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant chemical boundary exists in the matrix. This boundary separates natural stratum Q and the complex of P and T strata from the overlying strata (see Appendix I, Figure 30) e There i s reason to suspect that more sophisticated tests, such as those outlined in Cook and Heizer (1965) and Cornwall (1958), would prove to be even more effective in distinguishing groups of strata. The analysis of the granulometric data provided tant- alizing suggestions about stratigraphic groupings, but i t provided no irrefutable division of stratigraphic groups. The scaling analysis provided a clear depiction i n two dimensions of the dendrogram results and assisted in identi- fying granulometric constituents that seem to be important in determining relationships between strata (see Appendix I, Figures 32 and 35). On Lot 73 the major distinction between cluster 1 and cluster 2 generally seems to divide lower * Cluster membership, Lot 73: cluster 1 = natural strata F, G/0, dark G, G-2, H. H-l, K, N, P, Q, R, S, T. cluster 2a = natural strata A, B & B-l, C, D, E cluster 2b = natural strata "G", G with shell, I, J. M 52 strata, with relatively l i t t l e shell, from upper strata containing substantial amounts of shell (see Appendix I, Figure 33)o Exceptions to this are strata F and G with shell* The former contains shell but belongs to the lower, less shelly cluster, and the latter i s a shelly stratum situated stratigraphically amongst strata containing less shells Since only granulometric data i s under consideration, however, i t appears that the abundance of shell i n a stratum and the relative proportions of granulometric constituents in that stratum may be related. Inspection of the weights of sample constituents in clusters 1 and 2 indicates that these two clusters d i f f e r most often in terms of .125mm and .063mm sieve constituents, cluster 2 having generally greater weights of them. This finding i s supported by the scaling analysis. The subdivision of cluster 2 into two parts appears to be based on the r e l - ative amounts of ©250mm, ,500mm, and 1mm sieve contents. A l l members of cluster 2a are separated from a l l other samples on the basis of weight of these constituents. The median weight of constituents for cluster 2a i s 29.9 gm, whereas the median weight for a l l other samples i s 84.9 gm. The clustering and scaling analyses of Lot 73 data indicate that in dimension 1 the .125mm and 0 63mm sieve contents are largely responsible for the division between cluster 1 and cluster 2. In dimension 2 the combined .250mm, .500mm, and 1mm sieve contents i s largely responsible for the further 53 division of cluster 2. Cluster 2 members generally contain more of the finer grades of constituents than do cluster 1 members. Within cluster 2 the members of cluster 2a contain less e250mm to 1mm material than do members of cluster 2b. The granulometric data can also provide information on the processes that have affected the deposition of natural constituents in the s i t e e So far the granulometric data have been referred to only in terms of mesh size 0 For subsequent interpretation a discussion of these mesh sizes and their descriptive labels i s useful. The system of using mesh sizes that are half the aperture of the next largest mesh size i s known as the Wentworth scale (Wentworth 1922). The ever decreasing difference between successive mesh sizes i s d i f f i c u l t to plot graphically, so another scale, known as the phi scale, was developed from the Wentworth scale. The conversion formula i s : phi = log„ D where D is the class boundary (mesh size). The phi scale thus consists of whole numbers that are either positive or negative and that can legitimately be evenly spaced on graph paper. In the following discussion the data w i l l be spaced on the graphs according to phi units, but the mesh size w i l l s t i l l be used to label class boundaries in order to provide continuity with the foregoing analyses, and i n order to make the grain sizes easy to visualize. The various gradations in grain size have been given descriptive labels, and they are presented below along with the appropriate class boundaries 54 of the Wentworth and phi scales. Although both scales extend farther at both ends than i s shown here, the data involved in this study are described by Table I. It w i l l be noted that a l l the granulometric constituents except pebble gravel and granule gravel were important in the scaling analyses. Interpretation of Strata Wind and^tide are the most lik e l y natural forces to have transported the granulometric constituents to the site and deposited them there. In the physical description of the site i t was suggested that the lowest strata on Lot 73, the P and T complex, represented stages in the t i d a l build up of the spit, whereas the overlying deposits were heavily influenced by man. The s o i l pH analysis also noted a d i v i s - ion between these two groups of strata. The clustering and scaling analyses did not detect this boundary but i t suggested three other divisions in the stratigraphy. It i s known that, at a minimum velocity of 15 cm/sec, wind w i l l begin to transport sand grains of .08mm diameter, and that the same minimum velocity of water w i l l transport sand grains of .2mm diameter (King 1971:194). Sand, i t w i l l be recalled, i s the most common natural constituent in almost a l l the sampled strata. Comparatively larger sand grains are transported by the same velocity of water flow because the difference between the density of sand and water i s less than between sand and air (King 1971:194). It has also been shown that 55 TABLE I Wentworth Scale, Phi Scale, and Descriptive Labels of Grain Sizes used in Granulometric Analysis. Wentworth phi label 8mm -3 and larger pebble gravel 4 -2 pebble gravel 2 -1 granule gravel 1 0 very coarse sand .500 1 coarse sand o250 2 medium sand «125 3 fine sand •063 4 very fine sand pan 5 and smaller s i l t s and clays a straight line relationship exists between particle size and c r i t i c a l sheer stress required to i n i t i a t e particle move- ment (King 1971:194). It can therefore be expected that water transported sands w i l l contain more particles in the medium and coarse sand ranges than w i l l wind transported sands, where particles in the fine sand range would be expected (Cornwall 1958:186). The greater velocity achieved by winds at Deep Bay, when compared to tides, is one factor that would tend to mask the expected difference exhibited by these two means of transport. This greater wind velocity would increase the amount of medium sand in the matrix and thereby minimize differences between water and wind transported sands. In fact, 2 phi (.250mm) sand grains are often under represented in samples of beach sands from six to twelve feet of water. 56 This condition i s thought to result from the easy transport of this size by both wind and watere The easy transportation of this grain size, compared to other sizes, means that i f particles of this size reach shore they can easily be blown away by wind (King 1971:290). The graphs in Figure 9 show typical frequency d i s t r i b - ution of natural constituents in both wind-laid and water- l a i d deposits on Lot 73. It can be seen that the P and T samples have the highest percentage of sand in the .500mm sieve, whereas the other strata have the highest percentage of sand in the .250mm sieve. This tends to confirm the f i e l d impression that the P and T complex of strata were probably l a i d down by ti d a l action as the spit built up. It seems that the different genesis of the material i s reflected not only in i t s grain sizes, but also in i t s chemistry, the lower matrix being less basic than the overlying deposits. The effect of wind on the deposition of the major sand category in the overlying strata i s enlightening for the fact that the spit may s t i l l be growing by this means. Indeed, the high positive correlation of fine sands with depth below surface on dimension 1 may support this position. It also suggests that sand lenses predominantly of .250mm grain size may indicate periods of site abandonment. In cluster 2b (natural strata »G", I, J, K, M, and N), a l l strata' but one exhibit extreme proportions of .250mm sieve contents. The exception to this pattern i s natural NATURAL STRATUM F EXCAVATION UNIT 4 2 2 8 -i 4 2 I H NATURAL STRATUM G/S EXCAVATION UNIT 2 UJ N co .300- X J°. .250-1 .125- .063- PAN I 20 WEIGHT (GM.) 40 .063- PAN- NATURAL STRATUM T EXCAVATION UNIT 2 NATURAL STRATUM P EXCAVATION UNIT 4 1 20 WEIGHT (GM ) I 40 —1 60 WEIGHT (GM.) Figure 9. Selected frequency distributions of granulometric constituents, Lot 73, DiSe 7. stratum K which contains ,500mm screen contents in the highest proportions, followed by 1mm contents, then by ,250mm contents. There exists the probability, therefore, that the genesis of natural stratum K i s more li k e l y to have been due to forces of marine deposition than to forces of wind deposition. Given that these strata are composed almost entirely of sand and that they l i e on the slope of the underlying strata that i s exposed to wind and waves, and given that they thin out and disappear at the crest of the underlying midden ridge, i t seems that they represent accumulations of material that have been l i t t l e altered by cultural activity. Whether this i s due to an absence of human activity at this part of the site or to site abandon- ment is d i f f i c u l t to determine. The presence of a stratum that appears to be water deposited must provoke conjecture, A temporary rise in sea level i s one hypothesis that comes to mind, but i t leaves too many questions unanswered. For example, why are there not similar sandy deposits on the west side of the old midden surface? And where is the evidence for this change from the rest of the coast? Possibly, t i d a l and weather patterns exceptionally favorable to the build up of a broad sloping beach would enable t i d a l effects to progress as far west as they have. The apparent absence of habitation debris from this part of the s i t e might also be accounted for by such an alteration in beach morphology. The production of a smoother, f l a t t e r beach, however, would suggest relatively calm marine conditions whereas the encroachment of waves practically to the crest of the present spit surface would require except- ionally high tides and violent wave conditions* As can be seen below, these strata were l a i d down i n a relatively short period of time* The absence of major sea level changes in the last 1000 years in the Gulf of Georgia (Heusser 1960:190; Mathews et a l G 1970:693-699), the absence of similar sandy strata from above the western slope of natural stratum G/0, the evidence for a relatively constant climate after about 3000 B,P8 (Heusser 1960,Table 6), and the apparently short period of time involved i n the deposition of these strata a l l suggest that they represent the upper limit of wave disturbance during a short period of relatively stormy weather0 During this inclement interval, the area of the site represented by these strata, and possibly the whole si t e , appears to have been infrequently used* The preceding discussion indicates that the i n i t i a l occupation of the spit occurred at a time when the spit was s t i l l subject to inundation* The virtual absence of bone from the basal water-laid deposits may be related to the relatively low alkalinity of these strata, or i t may be related to the a c t i v i t i e s conducted at the site* This un- certainty i s well worth the attention of future investigations* The granulometric analysis indicates that a division may exist within upper, shell bearing strata although the point 6o of division i s not clear. Cluster 1 seems to represent undisturbed aboriginal deposits, while clusters 2a and 2b seem to represent disturbed/historic strata and largely non- habitation deposits respectively. The location of cluster 2b between natural strata F and G/O may be important to the delineation of cultural components. The homogeneity of natural constituents in the wind-laid aboriginal deposits indicates that cultural constituents, rather than natural constituents, are what cause one natural stratum to appear different from the next. This suggests either that the site was occupied for a variety of different purposes, or that the purpose remained the same but the location of specific a c t i v i t i e s varied. It w i l l be seen in chapters VIII and IX that the latter alternative i s to be preferred. This finding i s consistent with the arguments on site use presented by Schiffer (1975:162), Chronology Six samples of wood charcoal were submitted to Gakushuin University for carbon-14 dating, a l l from Lot 73, Figure 10 shows the reported ages for each of the samples, and i t also shows the range of each date to one and two standard deviation units. The Libby half l i f e used for these age determinations was 5570^30 years, and present was defined as 1950, The stratigraphic position of each dated sample i s shown on the profiles (Figure 7), 61 900 1000 1300 2000 £ 2300 Q . ffl 3000 3900 4000 4900 5000(- GoK-6034 4601 90 8.P. i (5151205 BP.) f. GaK-6035 790*80 B.P. (725 + 190 B.P.) i f i x GaK-6036 900*90 BP. (860+205 B.P.) GaK-6037 1910 + 110 B.P. (1840+240 B.P.) GaK-6038 2630+IOOB.P. (2815*225 B.P.) T GaK-6039 j 4860 + 180 BP. (5645+380 B.P.)-L _1_ G/0 TRATUM H-l FLOOR Figure 10. Radiocarbon dates, DiSe 7. By natural stratum,, showing two standard deviation units; based on Libby half l i f e of 5570-30 years. Dates in parentheses are recalibrated according to Clark (1975) by J. Baldwin. 62 The sample from natural stratum C i n excavation unit 3 (GaK-6034) came from the bottom of this stratum and i t was collected from an area 33 x 60 x 4 cm. As with a l l samples, the f i e l d sample was cleaned with s t e r i l i z e d tweezers. The resulting sample consisted of small lumps of charcoal weigh- ing 36 gm. During the cleaning of the sample, fine rootlets were noticed and a human hair was found. However, because this sample was taken from a stratum that contained histor- i c a l material (see Historic Artifacts below), and because the date i s youngest of a l l sample dates (460-90 B.P.)—a finding consistent with i t s uppermost stratigraphic position — i t i s thought that contamination has not been severe. One problem l i e s i n the association of this date with obviously recent historic material. At two standard deviation units the youngest possible date for this sample i s 280 years B.P., but this date preceeds substantial European contact, not to mention cement, wire, nails, and ti n cans. It seems clear that substantial disturbance of the historic strata has occurred. It i s not clear whether the historic material has been intruded into aboriginal strata containing approp- riate dates, or whether the charcoal material and surrounding matrix has been recently transported from another part of the site. If the latter alternative were the case, then i t would appear that young material from another part of the site may have simply been relocated and, in the process, mixed with recent historic material. The physical appearance 63 of this stratum indicated that i t was not transported. Rather, i t seems to have had historic materials intruded into i t as the disturbances shown in the profiles suggest. The aboriginal artifacts associated with this date are thus l i k e l y to be more or less correctly dated by this sample, regardless of whether transportation of matrix or i n situ additions to the matrix has occurred. The sample GaK-6035 came from the bottom of natural stratum F in excavation unit 4, immediately behind the cranium of Burial 1. The date of 790-80 B.P. f a l l s well within the period of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a,Fig.17, Fig.18), and there i s no historic material from natural stratum F. The sample weight was 32.9 gm. It consisted of several large chunks of wood char- coal and was recovered from an area 50 x 50 x 4 cm, with no contamination apparent. The condition of the sample and the consistency between i t s date and i t s stratigraphic position, relative to other dates and sample locations, indicates that this date can be accepted with confidence. As w i l l be noted in the discussion of component separation and identification, this date and the cultural materials associated with i t are consistent with other findings in the Gulf of Georgia area. the third sample (GaK-6036) produced a date of 900^90 B.P. It came from an area 80 x 80 x 5 cm, near the bottom of natural stratum G/0 in excavation unit 5, and consisted of small pieces of wood charcoal. The cleaned sample weighed 64 26.5 gm. During cleaning a small, red, synthetic thread was found. The thread and the stratigraphic location of this date are problems. The thread suggests that the reported date may be younger than the real date by an un- known amount. On the other hand, i t i s not out of order with the other dates in the series, either stratigraphically or chronologically. If contamination has occurred, i t does not seem to have been substantial. Possible minor contam- ination: may account for the relatively large stratigraphic distance between samples GaK-6035 and GaK-6036, but this distance could also be accounted for by a period of relatively rapid matrix deposition. Such deposition could have been extremely rapid i n the case of natural strata "G" through N« It was noted at the end of the granulometric analysis that the group of sandy strata above stratum G/O may have built up quickly as a result of beach encroachment on the si t e . This would be a relatively fast process, but GaK-6036 came from near the bottom of stratum G/O. It seems unlikely that the remainder of stratum G/O, as well as the overlying group of sandy strata, were deposited in as short a period of time as the GaK-6036 date suggests. It w i l l also be recalled that the granulometric cluster analysis found the samples of G/O to d i f f e r substantially between excavation units 2 and 4. It i s possible, but unlikely, that what passed in the f i e l d for a single homogeneous stratum may actually be two apparently similar strata, one of which was deposited much more quickly than the other. This interpretation would admittedly put a great deal of strain on the data. The artifacts recovered from natural stratum G/O and underlying strata appear to be different from those above G/O. From natural stratum G with shell, which underlies G/O, a fixed barbed antler point was recovered. Such a r t i - facts are thought to be distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52). From natural stratum K a fixed barbed bone point was recovered, such tools being distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:48). Although natural stratum G/O i s one of two strata separating G with shell from K, and although the appearance of G/O suggests that i t i s more l i k e l y to share a cultural genesis with G with shell than K, the date from stratum G/O should not be rejected automatically even though this date appears to be too young to indicate a f f i l i a t i o n with the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a•65). Since both F and G/O belong to granulometric cluster 1, however, i t i s possible that they also belong together culturally despite the simil- arity i n appearance between G/O and G with s h e l l . As w i l l be suggested later, there may be a greater con- tinuity of artifact classes between these two culture types than i s common in some other sites in the Gulf of Georgia. This cultural continuity may be reflected in the granulo- metric consistency of strata as well. Consequently, the date may be i n line with other dates from components of the 66 Gulf of Georgia Culture Type. Analysis of artifacts must therefore be awaited before a f i n a l pronouncement of the validity of the date i s made* Even i f G/O i s found to belong to such a component, the date must s t i l l be suspect because of the amount of matrix accumulation separating i t from GaK- 6035. The fourth sample, GaK-6037, was collected from an area 4 x 28 x 5 cm in excavation unit 2* The dated sample weighed 31.6 gm and consisted of large chunks of wood charcoal that appeared to be from a single chunk of wood. The reported date was 1910-110 B.P. The f i e l d sample was collected from very near Burial 4, but the precise location of the sample and the apparent intrusion of Burial 4 into earlier strata suggests that this sample predates the burial. The burial comes from natural stratum G with shell, whereas the sample was collected from natural stratum H-l. A few fine rootlets were noticed in the f i e l d sample. Otherwise, no contamination of the sample i s indicated. Since Burial 4 had a number of grave inclusions distinctive to the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52), and the sample appears to be uncontam- inated, with a date f a l l i n g around the middle of the time period occupied by the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a: 65), this date can be regarded with confidence. The f i f t h sample i s composed of small and medium sized pieces of wood charcoal from an area 50 x 75 x 5 cm. The sample (GaK-6038) showed no evidence of contamination and 67 produced a date of 2630-100 B.P. It was collected from natural stratum T in excavation unit 3, one of the strata that was deposited by ti d a l action, to judge by the results of the granulometric analysis. Two problems are thus en- countered. F i r s t , i s the charcoal in situ , or was i t washed in from elsewhere? Certainly the sample was scattered, possibly by water, but i t i s impossible to t e l l whether the f i r e that produced the charcoal was a man made f i r e on the spit 2630 years ago or whether the charcoal was produced 2630 years ago at some other location and washed onto the site. Second, the effect on dated wood charcoal of what may be repeated and prolonged contact with sea water and i t s various contents i s l i t t l e known. In Hawaii i t i s known that movement of ground water can cause bicarbonate carbon-14 to be exchanged with carbon-14 i n samples, especially in the case of shell and bone. This factor w i l l produce spurious dates. Dating discrepancies are also known to occur in samples that are frequently or continuously inundated (Emory and Sinoto 1969:4). Also i n the Pacific, shell samples that have been in contact with ocean water since deposition should •to "If. be suspect because of the changes that occur i n the 0 /0 14 12 ratio and the consequent change in the C /C ratio (Shutler 1971:25). Since the exact means by which charcoal sample GaK-6038 was deposited in natural stratum T i s not known, the presence or absence of contamination through contact with sea water cannot be determined. In light of the findings in 68 Oceania, however, caution in the use of these dates seems to be the wisest course. From the tables of artifacts and faunal remains pre- sented below i t w i l l be seen that a single piece of unidenti- fiable land mammal bone i s the only item found in this stratum that could possibly be cultural, apart from the charcoal. There are a number of cultural remains i n the overlying natural stratum P, and there are a very few cultural remains in the underlying natural stratum P-l. Although i t i s evident that the site was occupied before and after the deposition of natural stratum T, the virtual absence of cultural remains must leave open the possibility that the charcoal of GaK-6038 does not have a cultural origin. Because GaK-6038 dates the wood but not necessarily natural stratum T, i t i s thought best to let the date stand as i t i s , quali- fying i t s acceptance with the acknowledgement that the actual date at which natural stratum T was l a i d down may diverge considerably from the one reported here. The sixth sample (GaK-6039) is from the clay floor feature in excavation unit 4 beneath which no cultural remains were recovered. The sample consisted of small pieces of wood charcoal embedded in the sand and clay feature. The dated sample weighed 38.4 gm and was collected over an area of 2m x 1.60m x 2cm. The date produced was 4860-180 B.P. No contamination was evident, but 7again no account can be made for the effect of contact with sea water. The problem of 6 9 cultural versus non-cultural origin of the charcoal and the problem of whether or not the charcoal has been transported again appear. The floor, composed of a 2 cm thick mixture of highly compacted clay, sand, and gravel, i s not unquest- ionably of cultural origin. On the other hand, i t i s d i f - f i c u l t to explain why such a feature exists i n the f i r s t place and why a l l cultural materials are found above i t . While i t may be a natural feature, and while the charcoal may be both non-cultural and transported from elsewhere, i t is the writer's opinion that the charcoal i s i n situ in a feature that i s probably cultural. For the reasons outlined for sample GaK-6038 the date i s accepted as i s with the appropriate qualifications. 70 CHAPTER IV DESCRIPTION OF ARTIFACTS Introduction This chapter presents descriptions of historic and aboriginal art i f a c t s . Because the historic artifacts, which are presented f i r s t , are peripheral to this study, they w i l l be described in much less detail than the abor- iginal a r t i f a c t s . The classes of aboriginal artifacts follow and are described in considerable d e t a i l . Variations in the distributions of various artifact classes are dis- cussed as a prelude to the delineation of cultural components in Chapter VII. Historic Artifacts A prodigious number of historic artifacts was recovered from the upper strata on Lots 73 and 81. At the outset of excavations on Lot 73 each historic artifact was written up as an a r t i f a c t , but i t quickly became apparent that to do so was much too time consuming. Subsequently, the procedure was adopted of placing a l l historic artifacts i n their own separate level bags. Below the top of natural stratum F a l l historic artifacts were again recorded for provenience. A l l historic artifacts on Lot 81 were placed i n level bags. Before recording of historic artifacts on Lot 73 was dis- 71 continued a total of 1399 artifacts were recovered i n approximately three weeks„ Table II summarizes the recorded historic artifacts from Lot 73, This table indicates that nails and miscellaneous metal fragments (mostly t i n can fragments) compose almost 70% of a l l historic a r t i f a c t s e Metal artifacts i n general compose 72% of the historic assemblageo Among these artifacts was a 1922 nickel. Glass artifacts comprise another 12,5% of the assemblage with 3% being bottle glass and 9,5% being pane glass. Fragments of cement add another 5% to the assemblage, A further 4,5% i s added by the miscellaneous category which consists of asphalt roofing t i l e fragments, linoleum fragments, and such other items as half of a pair of scissors. The impression received while the excavation of these materials was i n progress was that the remains of a small cabin and i t s associated debris were being excavated. This impression seems to be borne out by the preceding figures. If this impression i s correct, such a cabin could have been part of the community associated with the f i s h processing plant i n the 1920,s, On Lot 73 the vast majority of historic artifacts were found i n stratum A with lesser numbers found in lower strata. Strata B and B-l, D, and E a l l contained substantial numbers of historic artifacts and they have the appearance of being well disturbed, i f not imported recently from elsewhere. Natural stratum C, as noted i n the section on chronology, does not appear to have been well mixed like the overlying TABLE II Raw and Relative Frequencies of Recorded Historic Artifacts, Lot 73, DiSe 7. Artifacts Frequency Raw Relative Glass bottle glass pane glass Metal nails sheet metal bottle caps t i n f o i l t i n cans miscellaneous Cement Brick Ceramics Plastic Miscellaneous Wood boards clothes pegs 42 133 335 3 11 2G 1 638 70 12 21 21 63 7 22 3.0 9,5 24e0 0.2 0.8 1.4 0.1 45.6 5.0 0.9 1.5 1.5 4.5 0.5 1.6 N 1399 100.00% strata, but i t does contain 57 historic items. This number is not inconsequential, but compared to the hundreds of items recovered from stratum A i t represents a marked reduction in frequency of occurrence of these arti f a c t s . Almost a l l historic materials from this stratum were collected i n separate level bags, so i t i s impossible to note the exact provenience of each a r t i f a c t . The thinness of the stratum, i t s consistency, i t s undisturbed appearance, and the sub- stantially reduced number of historic artifacts i t contains a l l suggest that the presence of these artifacts may be accounted for better by intrusion of materials rather than by a late post-contact deposition of the whole stratum. Bight historic artifacts were recovered below the surface of natural stratum F. A clear glass fragment (artifact #944) was recorded from natural stratum F of excavation unit 4. The fragment was found in the extreme northeast corner where the profile indicates that natural stratum A has been disturbed into lower strata. A cement n a i l , reportedly from natural stratum F, was also found i n this corner of the p i t . It seems l i k e l y that they were mistakenly assigned to natural stratum F, when they are in fact from natural stratum A which intrudes into natural stratum F in this particular location. An unidentified rusty metal fragment was reported from natural stratum K in excavation unit 5. No provenience i s available for this a r t i f a c t , however examination of the north 218 m profile 7^ shows a post mold of natural stratum A. intruding down through natural stratum K. It is probable that such a disturbance could account for the recovery of a metal artifact in natural stratum K. A clear glass fragment was also reported from natural stratum "G" in excavation unit 4. Although complete provenience i s not available for this artifact, the depth below surface measurement indicates that i t could have come from the disturbance in the northeast corner where the two artifacts reportedly from natural stratum F were recovered. A rusty n a i l (artifact #1026) was also reportedly from natural stratum "G" in excavation unit 4. The depth below surface measurement indicates that i t also could be from the disturbance in the northeast corner of the excavation unit. Three more rusty nails (artifact #973, 974, and 1020) were reported from natural stratum "G" in excavation unit 5. The depth below surface proveniences available for these artifacts indicate that they are l i k e l y to have been found in the post mold visible in the .north wall prof i l e . Given that so few historic artifacts were recovered below the surface of natural stratum F, that they are, or are potent- i a l l y , associated with obvious intrusions of historic strata into prehistoric strata, and that these eight artifacts are reportedly from strata that are as old or older than 790^80 years B.P#, there i s l i t t l e reason not to consider them definitely to be intrusions. The top of stratum F therefore marks the historic horizon, s t r i c t l y speaking. But the definite possibility of historic material being intruded into stratum C, the " i n s i t u " appear- ance of this stratum, and the date obtained from the bottom of i t a l l suggest that this horizon and the extent of abor- iginal deposits do not coincide. Instead, aboriginal deposits and the historic horizon overlap, the former being at the top of stratum C and the latter being at the bottom. It seems most reasonable to emphasize aboriginal deposits rather than historic horizons, especially since the material may be intruded, and to define the top of stratum C or F, which- ever i s uppermost, as the boundary between aboriginal and historic occupation. Aboriginal Artifacts The following artifact descriptions are based largely on the nomenclature presented by Mitchell (1971a:89-216). The presence of artifact classes at Deep Bay that are not present at Montague Harbour, and the variation in members of a given artifact class between these two sites w i l l require that appropriate modifications be made to the des- criptive terminology and that appropriate references be cited. The format of the artifact classification w i l l also be the same as Mitchell (1971a:89-216). The actual format for artifact description w i l l emphasize the class rather than the particular artifacts (cf. Matson 1973:10-22} 1974: 110) because the central purpose of this study involves the 76 analysis of classes of tools, not individual tools© Because subsequent analyses w i l l require the grouping of artifacts in differing combinations of classes, the most detailed breakdown of these classes i s given i n the artif a c t des- criptions and Table III. It i s thought wiser to present the smallest possible analytic units f i r s t , then, when these units are combined for specific analyses, the exact contents of each new unit i s known. The range of dimensions and weights of artifact class members w i l l be given along with references or justi f i c a t i o n for distinguishing the particular class& Dimensions w i l l be presented in the following formats range of lengths x range of widths x range of thicknesses. Measurements were made to within .1 cm, therefore variations of less than this amount are recorded as a single measurement. Mitchell's (1971a) Archaeology of the Gulf of Georgia area, a natural region and i t s culture types w i l l be used as the primary reference because the present classification follows his and because his synthesis of references for each artifact class at Montague Harbour i s excellent, leading the reader to the range of literature dealing with many specific artifact classes. TABLE III Artifact Classes by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7.  TABLE IV Artifact Classes by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7. 80 STONE Chipped Stone A) Bifaces 1* Heavy duty bifaces (Figure l i g - i ) These artifacts are characterized by crude b i f a c i a l flaking and a broad lanceolate outline. Flake scars are large and few i n relation to surface area. No edge retouch i s evident, flakes having the appearance of being removed by percussion. The five class members from Deep Bay are a l l fragmentary, ranging i n weight from 16.6 to 28.6 gm and in dimensions from 4.7 to 8.1 x 2.3 to 3.6 x .9 to 1.3 cm (Mitchell 1971a,Fig.31m). 2. Light duty bifaces (Figure n j - k ) These are much smaller than heavy duty bifaces but exhibit the same outline, crudeness of flaking, and lack of edge retouch. There are two fragments in this class weighing 3.4 to 4.8 gm and measuring 2.5 to 2.9 x 1.1 to 2.3 x .7 to .9 cm. They appear similar to, but slightly smaller than, the point shown by Mitchell (1971a,Fig.31n). Application of the term "point", "biface", or "knife" to artifacts of this size and shape often depends on c r i t e r i a selected by the investigator. It i s maintained here that "point" and "knife" can imply an undemonstrated function to the class, and, since "knives" and "points" are special b i f a c i a l tools, the term "biface" i s preferable. Crudeness 81 Figure 11* Chipped stone, DiSe 7. a, heavy duty bifacially retouched flake; b„ heavy duty unifacially retouched flake; c-d. light duty unifacially retouched flake; e-f. light duty b i f a c i a l l y retouched flake; g - i . heavy duty biface; j-k. light duty biface. 82 of manufacture should also be a criterion on which to set apart "bifaces" and the potentially more refined "knives" and "points". B) Points As just suggested, the fin i s h of these items i s more sophisticated than i s the case for bifaces e There are more flake scars per surface area than i s the case for bifaces, and edge retouch i s common. The general shape of points may be similar to bifaces or more elaborate. 1. Base fragments with unilateral shoulder (Figure 1 2 1-m) These fragments have a rounded base with a small shoulder apparent on one edge. The two specimens from Deep Bay measure 2.0 x 1.8 x .7 cm and 2.2 x 1.9 x .8 cm and weigh 2.6 gm and 3.6 gm respectively. These specimens most closely resemble Figure 6a i n Mitchell (1971b). 2© Base fragments with bilateral shoulder (Figure I2n) The shoulders are very weakly developed but give the abrupt base a slightly pointed appearance. The specimen from Deep Bay i s 2.7 x 2.9 x .8 cm and i t weighs 6.2 gm. No satisfactory reference can be made to other similar items. 3. Base fragment, side notched (Figure 1 2 0 ) One item of this shape was found. It i s similar to the base of a point pictured by Borden (1970,Fig.32v). The Deep Bay specimen measures 2.5 x 2.5 x .7 cm and weighs 5.4 gm. m At I A A 4 4 . Figure 12, Chipped stone points, DiSe 7. a-d, leaf-shaped asymmetric; e, broad leaf-shaped symmetric; f-g. parallel edged; h - i , triangular stemmed; j-k, triangular unstemmed; 1-m, unilaterally shouldered base; n. bilaterally shouldered base; 6, side-notched; p-t, f l a t base; u-w, tips. 84 4. Base fragments, f l a t base with contracting sides (Figure 12p-t) There are five such items at Deep Bay, ranging in dimensions from 2.1 to 3.2 x 2 e4 to 2.9 x .7 to .9 cm and in weight from 4.3 to 9.5 gm. These fragments appear to belong to points with gently excurvate sides and leaf shaped outline. The base i s f l a t and thick, unlike a straight base which has been thinned. Calvert (1970,Fig.19a) pictures an art i f a c t , the base of which appears similar to those des- cribed here. 5. Tip fragments (Figure I2u-w) A l l items appear to be fragments of well made points of lenticular cross section. The sides of the points appear to have been gently excurvate. Five items from DiSe7 belong to this category. They measure 2.1 to 3.2 x 1.2 to 3.3 x .3 to .9 cm and they weigh 1.0 to 6.7 gm. Tips of the points pictured by Mitchell (1971a,Fig.32a-d,g,l) are similar to the Deep Bay specimens. 6. Points with parallel edges (Figure 12f-g) These points are narrow relative to their length. Their edges are parallel for a large portion of the length of the point. The bases are rounded. Two specimens, both with t i p missing, come from DiSe7. They could have been classed as light duty bifaces, except that there i s retouch on both surfaces and along the edges, in contrast to the 85 items classed as bifaces. Similar looking artifacts are shown by Mitchell (1971a,Fig.31o; 1971b,Fig.5o; 1971c,Fig.9e) The point in Figure 5e i s much cruder, however, than those described here. Dimensions are 4.0 to 4.7 x 2.0 to 2 01 x .9 cm, weight i s 7.7 to 8.7 gm. 7. Leaf shaped points, symmetric with excurvate edges (Figure 12e) This class of artifact i s very broad in relation to i t s length and the edges are smooth and evenly excurvate with the widest part of the ar t i f a c t at the midpoint of the long axis. The one speciman from Deep Bay i s 6.1 x 3.3 x .9 cm and weighs 18.4 gm. No highly similar point i s found in the literature, but i f the point shown by Calvert (1970, Fig.l9h) were as broad as that shown i n Figure 19k (Calvert 1970), a close approximation would be reached. 8. Leaf shaped points, asymmetric edges (Figure 12a-d) This class of point reaches i t s maximum width approx- imately one third of i t s length from the base. In this r- regard, the class i s similar to that described by Kidd (1969:44). The edges are curved at the proximal end and from the maximum width to the t i p they may be either straight or gently excurvate. Four members of this class were found at DiSe7. They measure 5.2 to 7.4 x 2.0 to 2.8 x .8 to 1.0 cm and weigh 9.2 to 20.4 gm. Examples of this class of point are given i n Mitchell (1971a,Fig.31g; 1971b,Fig.5h), and McMillan and Ste. Claire (1975,Fig.3a-c). TABLE V 86 Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Leaf Shaped Points with Asymmetric Edges, DiSe 7. Column D presents the distance along the long axis from the base to the point of maximum width. artifact number length width thickness weight D 9 6.4 2.0 0.8 11.6 2.2 1165 5.5 2 a5 0 09 9.8 2.2 1361 5.2 2.4 0.8 9.2 1.9 1388 7.4 2.8 1.0 20.4 3.3 9. Triangular points , stemmed (Figure 12h-i) These points are small and triangular in outline. The edges are straight but the base has a weakly developed pro- jection that can be called a stem although the term i s barely j u s t i f i e d . The stem may be emphasized by the removal of several small flakes from the junction of the stem and the base, otherwise the base tends to be straight across. The point shown in McMillan and Ste. Claire (Fig.3g) i s of the type described here. There were two such points in the Deep Bay collection. They measure 2.3 to 4.1 x 1.4 to 1.5 x 0.5 to 1.0 cm and weigh 1.4 to 4.3 gm. 10. Triangular points» unstemmed (Figure I2j-k) These points are well described by the ar t i f a c t class label. They are small, usually with straight edges but the edges can also be slightly excurvate© The base i s straight or slightly concave, and i t i s usually b i f a c i a l l y thinnedo Two such points come from DiSe7. They measure 2.8 to 2 e9 x 1*5 to 1*9 x ,5 cm and weigh 2,0 to 3.3 gm. This class of point i s pictured in Mitchell (1971a,Fig,76a-c; Fig,104 a-e), McMillan and Ste, Claire (1975,Fig,3h,i), and Carlson (1970,Fig,35c), C) Chopping tools These tools are usually c l a s s i f i e d as cobble tools, but since several of them are not made on cobbles, the present term was chosen, 1, Unifacial chopping tools (Figure 13a,c) Unifacial chopping tools are made on beach cobbles that retain a great deal of the original cortex and that are fashioned by the unifacial removal of a few large flakes to form a working edge. Five such artifacts are in the DiSe7 collection. They weigh 509,7 to 1866,1 gm and measure 9,0 to 14,4 x 9,4 to 15,3 x 3,8 to 6,7 cm. The largest specimen (artifact #2) has been heavily pecked on both sides and may also have been used as an anvil. Since i t was found on the beach where pecking could be historic, i t seems safer to classi f y this artifact as a chopper than as an anvil. Matson (1973:16) distinguishes this class of tool from other classes of cobble tool, but no pictures are available. Figure 13. Chopping tools, DiSe 7. a. unifacial chopper; b. bi f a c i a l chopper; c. unifacial chopper and anvil. 89 TABLE VI Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Unifacial Chopping Tools, DiSe7 0 Length = maximum dimension parallel to cutting edge Width = maximum dimension at right angles to length arti f a c t number length width thickness weight 1 10.8 9.4 5.3 712.8 2 14.4 15.3 6.7 1866.1 44 10.1 9.5 4.7 582.1 1063 9.0 12.2 3.8 638.0 1079 11.9 10.7 4.5 509.7 2. Bifac i a l chopping tools (Figure 13b) Bi f a c i a l chopping tools are also made on cobbles, although heavy flakes can also be members of this class. A few flakes are removed b i f a c i a l l y to produce a working edge. Again, most of the original cortex of the rock remains. Five such tools come from DiSe7. They measure 6.8 to 14.6 x 6.7 to 12.0 x 2.4 to 6.3 cm and weigh 117.2 to 1312.2 gm. Similar implements are described as cobble core implements (Mitchell 1971a:106). 90 TABLE VII Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Bifa c i a l Chopping Tools, DiSe7. Length and width defined as in Table VI. artifact number length width thickness weight 4 8.8 12.0 3.1 485.3 133 9.8 8.0 6.0 670.4 961 14.6 10.8 6.3 1312.1 1126 6.8 6.7 2.4 117.2 1421 8.2 8.4 3.7 320.0 D) Cores (Figure 17a,p) Cores exhibit scars where flakes have been removed. They also show one or more striking platforms that are either natural or prepared. They do not exhibit a working edge i n terms of cutting, scraping, or piercing. Fifteen cores that could be called pebble or cobble cores were found at Deep Bay. They range i n weight from 22.1 gm to greater than 5 kg and they measure 4.2 to 22.1 x 2.6 to 16.0 x 1.2 to 15.8 cm. Three cores, not included in the above des- cription, deserve special mention. The f i r s t i s an obsidian core showing the removal of long, uneven flakes using a bipolar technique. The striking platform i s at one end of the long axis, and the width and thickness are similar, but considerably less than, the length (2.2 x 1.5 x 1.2 cm, weight 3.5 gm). This core may represent an attempt to 91 prepare a microblade core, given i t s size, shape, and material, but the flake scars cannot be attributed to the removal of blades« The second core i s of quartz crystal measuring 3.2 x 2*0 x l e 6 cm and weighing 9.2 gm. The flake scars on this core are irregular• Probably the quartz crystal flakes described below were removed from cores such as this. The third core i s in two fragments that together measure 101 x 1 00 x .5 cm and weigh e6 gm. This core i s a microblade core with characteristic scars where two small blades have been removed by bipolar flaking 0 Such cores were also recovered from Argyle Lagoon and Cattle Point East Bluff (Carlson 1960:572, 574). E) Retouched flakes Retouched flakes exhibit a varying number of flake scars on their dorsal surface, but the ventral surface i s a single flake scar except where edge retouch has occurred. These flakes can be sorted on the basis of whether edge retouch has been unifacial or b i f a c i a l . This distinction i s made by Matson (1973:12-15), and i t i s also made, in part, by Fladmark (1970:24-28, 31) who chooses to group b i f a c i a l l y retouched flakes with bifaces. The former author treats retouched flakes on the basis of flake size and edge angle; the latter author places primary emphasis on the shape of the retouched edge. For the present purposes, the longest dimension of the flake has been used to group retouched flakes TABLE VIII Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Cores, DiSe7. Length = maximum dimension; width = right angle to length on the same plane* artifact number length width thickness weight 6 6*6 4.9 2.4 142.2 41 5*3 2.4 3.2 61.2 118 10.0 5.9 3.3 353.7 122 10*2 8.0 5.4 702.3 128 9*0 7.6 6.4 714.5 134 9.3 9.0 7.3 1078.3 955 20.8 13.2 7.0 1746.8 999 4.2 2.7 1.2 22.1 1139 8*3 4.5 3.5 190.6 1175 2.3 JL © 5 1.2 3.5 1197 4.3 4.0 2.6 49.1 1258 1.1 1.0 0o5 0.6 1318 8.2 2.6 1.9 95.2 1357 11.9 10.0 6.7 896.6 1376 3.2 2.0 1.6 9.2 1389 13.1 10.0 6.0 1128.6 1426 14.2 11.6 9.4 2426.3 1429 13.9 8.6 7.6 1442.1 1441 22.1 16.0 15.8 >5000.0 into heavy duty, medium duty, and light duty classes. The class boundaries are: heavy duty, greater than 5 cm; medium duty, less than 5 cm but greater than 2 cm; light duty, smaller than 2 cm. These boundaries quite closely reflect breaks in the frequency distribution of long axes of these flakes from Deep Bay. While thickness could also be a measure of how heavy or light duty a flake was, a case could also be made for developing some index to express more of the length, width, thickness, and weight of each flake. Unfortunately, such indices are d i f f i c u l t to relate to a three-dimensional object. Because the object of this paper i s to establish reasonable analytic units rather than establish the superiority of one method of classification, the use of the largest dimension of a flake to establish whether i t i s a member of one class or not seems j u s t i f i e d . Retouched slate flakes are included with basalt flakes even though slate may be less "heavy duty" than basalt for any given size. It seems more sensible to include the slate flakes than to set up a separate class for them only on the basis of material. 1. Unifacially retouched flakes Heavy duty (Figure l i b ) There are four members of this class from DiSe7. They measure 5.6 to 10.0 x 5.4 to 7.4 x 1.2 to 2.4 cm and weigh 76.8 to 203.3 gm. The working edges vary in form from concave to convex, but extreme curvature i s not present. 9^ Medium duty Sixteen members of this class come from Deep Bay and the shape of their cutting edge varies considerably. They measure 2.4 to 4 e6 x l e 3 to 3.7 x .2 to l e 2 cm and weigh e8 to 1905 gmc One of these flakes (artifact #1169) i s quartz crystals, The rest are basalts 2« B i f a c i a l l y retouched flakes Heavy duty (Figure 11a) One basalt flake measuring 11,9 x 8 Q1 x 1 Q4 cm#and*£ weighing 18102 gm and one slate flake measuring 6 05 x 3 01 x ,3 cm and weighing 7*1 gm belong to this class* On both implements the cutting edge i s straight. Medium duty Nine flakes belong to this class. Their edges vary from straight to convex, their measurements are 2.7 to 4.8 x 1.3 to 3.4 x .3 to .8 cm and their weight i s 1.1 to 11.0 gm. Four flakes are basalt, one is water worn obsidian, arid four are slate. Light duty (Figure l l e - f ) One flake (artifact #1242) belongs to this class. It is 1.8 x 1.2 x .4 cm, weighs .7 gm, and i s made of basalt. 95 TABLE IX Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Medium Duty Unifacially Retouched Flakes, DiSe7. Length = maximum dimension; width = right angle to maximum dimensions artifact number length width thickness weight 40 2.5 2.5 0.2 5.1 50 2 09 2.6 1.2 14.3 1118 4.1 3.5 1.1 16.5 1121 3.0 1.3 0.3 0.8 1169 2.6 1.5 0.3 0.9 1179 3.2 3.2 0.8 9.2 1182 3.2 1.9 0.5 3 o 3 1189 3.1 2.3 0.6 3.1 1293 2.4 2.2 0.9 5.6 1297 3.4 1.8 0.5 2.5 1323 4.2 3.7 1.2 19.5 1335 2.9 2.8 0.9 6.3 1394 4.6 3.0 0.9 19.1 1371 2.9 1.5 0.3 1.2 1401 3.7 2.5 0.6 5.3 1422 2.4 1.3 0.3 0.8 96 TABLE X Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Medium Duty B i f a c i a l l y Retouched Flakes, DiSe7. Length a maximum dimension. artifact number length width thickness weight 947 2.4 1.5 Oo5 1.7 1233 2.5 1*3 0.4 1.1 1256 2.5 2.3 0.5 8.6 1292 2.6 2.0 0.6 3.2 B06 4.1 1.6 0.8 7.1 F) Utilized flakes These flakes show evidence of use through the removal of very small flakes along an edge that i s naturally thin. The flakes removed from the presumed working edge do not exhibit the same pattern of removal as purposeful retouch. Instead, they appear more random in terms of their location and the side from which they are removed. The heavy duty, medium duty, and light duty criterion i s applied here as well. Heavy duty One such flake was found. Made of basalt, i t weighs 176.0 gm and measures 7.7 x 6.9 x 2.7 cm. It was found on z the beach in a waterworn condition. Of the six artifacts in this class, four are basalt and two are obsidian. They measure 2.1 to 4.3 x 1.1 to 3.3 97 x .4 to l o 0 cm and weigh 1.0 to 10.2 gm« Use i s evident only on one edge of these artifacts* Their edges tend to be straight or slig h t l y convex0 TABLE XI Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Medium Duty Utilized Flakes, DiSe7. Length = maximum dimension, artifact number length width thickness weight 39 3*9 2.5 0.1 4.3 1164 4.4 3.3 1.0 10.2 1291 3.2 3.1 0.5 5.1 1360 2.1 1.5 0.8 1.4 1372 2.4 1.1 0.4 1.0 1415 3.4 2.4 0.6 5.5 Light duty A l l nine artifacts in this class are obsidian. Their cutting edges tend to be straight or slightly convex. The thinness of these flakes makes i t possible for more than one ut i l i z e d edge to appear on a single flake. They measure .7 to 1.6 x .4 to 1.1 x .1 to .4 cm and they weigh .1 to .4 gm. 98 TABLE XII Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Light Duty Utilized Flakes, DiSe7 a Length = maximum dimension. artif a c t number length width thickness weight 1298 1.3 1.1 0.2 0.1 1332 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 1344 1.2 0.5 0.4 0.2 1345 1.6 0.8 0.3 0.2 1349 1.4 1.0 0.3 0.2 1350 0.8 0.7 0.2 0.1 1386 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.1 1396 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 1427 1.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 G) Microblades One medial fragment of what appears to be an obsidian microblade was found. It measures 1.0 x .6 x .2 cm and weighs .1 gm. It exhibits the customary trapezoidal cross section and parallel edges of microblades, but the ridges on the dorsal surface appear to converge gently toward what would be the d i s t a l end. Given i t s appearance and raw material, the classification of this a r t i f a c t as a microblade seems warranted. The distribution of microblades i s dis- cussed by Mitchell (1968b, 1971as97, 99). 99 H) Obsidian flakes Twenty irregular, small flakes showingano evidence of u t i l i z a t i o n belong to this class© They are designated as artifacts because the raw material i s not readily available at Deep Bay* This suggests importation from a more distant location* These flakes measure .5 to 2*7 x .2 to 1.7 x «1 to ,7 cm and weigh less than .1 to 2«2 gm. I) Quartz crystal flakes The description of this artifact i s the same as that for obsidian flakes and has been included for the same reason. There are twenty-nine of these flakes, measuring .9 to 2.8 x .4 to 2.2 x .1 to 1.3 cm and weighing less than .1 to 5.2 gm. Large quantities of obsidian and quartz crystal detritus are also reported at Shoemaker Bay (McMillan and Ste. Claire 1975:40) and from Cattle Point (Carlson 1960: 574). Ground Stone A) Abrasive stones Abrasive stones are characterized by an area, on at least one surface, that i s relatively smoother than the surrounding surface or that otherwise indicates use by abrasion. These artifacts are almost always of sandstone, the texture of which shows considerable variation. A 100 s t y l i s t i c classification of such artifacts i s presented by Mitchell (1971a,Table XVI), but, since the emphasis of this study i s directed more toward function than toward style, grain texture of the rock w i l l be used to class i f y abrasive stones. This approach has been implied in Matson (1973:20). Estimation of grain texture i s subjective and i s only in relation to other abrasive stones in the DiSe7 collection. Although intensity of use may affect the evaluation of grain texture, nevertheless, the finer the grain the smoother the working surface. The abrasive stones have been grouped into coarse, medium, and fine texture classes. (See Table XIII). 1. Coarse texture abrasive stones These artifacts have a grain texture that retains each piece of sand as a physically separate entity, the whole being cemented together by finer material that i s often abraded more quickly than the sand grains. This texture of abrasive stone would leave distinct, deep striations in an abraded implement. There are eight such items from Deep Bay, measuring 5.5 to 39.1 x 3.5 to 22.9 x 1.4 to 8.8 cm and weighing 39.4 gm to more than 5 kg. The form of these artifacts varies, most appearing to be fragmentary. The largest abrasive stone i s an egg shaped sandstone cobble with a ut i l i z e d dorsal surface. 101 TABLE XIII Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Apparently Complete Abrasive Stones, DiSe7. Length = maximum dimension. artifact number length width thickness weight coarse 956 1038 1114 1474 medium 132 943 1049 1423 1458 fine 46 998 1076 1515 12.4 13.0 18.1 39.5 14.4 10.4 13.8 9.1 12.0 22.0 15.1 4.9 13.7 5.8 8.6 5 07 23.0 7.3 9.2 9.5 6.9 11.4 16.5 7.9 4.4 8.1 2.7 1.8 3.2 8.5 5.4 2.1 1.9 7.9 2.0 2.3 2.4 0.6 2.1 237.6 345.4 607.7 5000.0 928.8 293.9 397.3 89.8 358.6 1149.8 472.1 19.3 363.0 2. Medium texture abrasive stones The texture of these artifacts i s finer than that of the f i r s t group. The grains are smaller and more closely spaced, although they s t i l l retain the appearance of being individual sand grains. The faster removal of cementing material i s not evident in this class. Objects abraded on this class of stone would exhibit fine, closely spaced striations. There are ten such artifacts at Deep Bay, measuring 4.0 to 17.5 x 2.5 to 13.0 x .7 to 7.8 cm and weighing 10.2 to 928.8 gm. Several of these artifacts show 102 b i f a c i a l abrasion, and several also exhibit slight edge weare 3. Fine texture abrasive stones (Figure 14b) The largest number of abrasive stones, seventeen, f a l l s into this class. The texture results from fine sand grains that are very compacted. The working surface i s extremely smooth, and an arti f a c t abraded on such a stone would show a flattened surface whose striations would be invisible to the naked eye. Within this class, f a l l the grooved and shaped abrasive stones. The Deep Bay artifacts in this class measure 2.4 to 15.8 x 1,4 to 16.0 x .6 to 6.0 cm and weigh 19.3 to 1600.2 gm. B) Abrasive stone/saw (Figure !4a) Three artifacts belong to this class. They show characteristic abrasive stone usage on one or both surfaces, but in addition they show bifa c i a l abrasion along a sharp, straight edge that contracts evenly from both sides. These artifacts measure 9.0 to 19.5 x 7,8 to 10.2 x 1.1 to 5.6 cm and weigh 104.8 to 1268.2 gm. The largest i s coarse textured. The other two are medium textured. This class of arti f a c t i s also known from Shoemaker Bay (McMillan and Ste. Claire 1975:44). C) Abrasive stone with edge retouch (Figure 14c-d) These artifacts axe classed as sandstone knives and grouped with chipped slate artifacts by Mitchell (1971a, Figure 14. Abrasive stones, DiSe 7. a. abrasive stone/saw; b. fine textured abrasive stone; e*d. edge retouched abrasive stone. 104 Table XVI). They are discussed separately here because i t i s clear that the Montague Harbour sandstone items are not abraded on either surface (Mitchell 1971a:102), and because the chipped and ground slate items from Deep Bay were clearly not used for the same purposes as the edge retouched abrasive stones. Two artifacts of this class were found, measuring 11.8 to 12.2 x 7.2 to 10.9 x 1.6 to 1.7 cm and weighing 185.7 to 320.7 gm. On one implement the retouch i s unifacial and is confined to one straight edge; the other implement i s bi f a c i a l l y retouched on three out of four edges. D) Chipped and ground stone These two fragments are d i f f i c u l t to classify on a functional basis. One (artifact #119) i s a basalt chunk abraded roughly on one surface and b i f a c i a l l y retouched on a convex edge. It i s unlike an abrasive stone with edge retouch because of the different material and because i t i s abraded rather than abrasive. It could be part of a heavy duty b i f a c i a l l y retouched flake that has been abraded on both sides. It weighs 69.2 gm and measures 5.2 x 4.4 x 1.9 cm. The other member of this class i s made of slate. It i s thin and i t has bif a c i a l retouch on four edges. Both sides are abraded, and one side also has a fine incision diagonally across i t as i f i t had been sawn. It weighs 3.6 gm and measures 4.1 x 2.3 x .3 cm. 105 E) Points In the Deep Bay collection ground stone points are a l l of slate* The classification of these points closely follows Mitchell (1971a), although fragments of such points w i l l be treated differently* It is customary simply to group frag- ments together in a "miscellaneous point fragments" class, but information on thickness, edge shape, and base form i s lost this way* The procedure followed i n this study i s to separate t i p , medial, and base fragments from points that are sufficiently whole so as to be treated as entire* 1* Tip fragments (Figure 15n-q,s) These class members consist of d i s t a l fragments of thin ground slate points* They exhibit the characteristic thin, f l a t cross section with b i f a c i a l l y bevelled edges* Because of the short edge presented on these fragments and because the base i s lacking, they cannot be assigned to a specific class of point* There are seven such fragments, measuring 2*1 to 4.5 x .8 to 2.4 x .1 to .3 cm and weighing .3 to 2.8 gm* 2* Medial fragments (Figure I5r) These fragments lack proximal or distal ends. A l l are of the thin ground slate point configuration with straight or slightly convex edges. There are three of these fragments, measuring 3.4 to 3.9 x 1.4 to 2.9 x .2 to .3 cm and weighing 1.8 to 4o5 gm. 106 Figure 15. Ground stone points, DiSe 7* a* thick; b-c. thick basal fragments; d. basal notched; e-h. corner notched; i-m. thin triangular; n-q,s0 tip fragments; r. medial fragment* 107 3, Basal fragments (Figure 15b-c) This class exhibits l i t t l e of the edge of the former artifact and nothing of the t i p . The base form of the two members of this class i s unfinished in one case and bifac- i a l l y bevelled in the other. Both fragments are from large points that were thicker than the previously described fragments and that appear to have been more parallel sided than the thinner fragments. The bases i n question measure 3.3 to 3.6 x 2.4 to 2.6 x .3 to .5 cm and weigh 3.7 to 5.9 gm. No satisfactory picture or description of these points can be found in the literature, although these basal frag- ments are approximated i n Mitchell (1971a,Fig.91) and Borden (1970,Fig.30ii) and are probably parts of thick ground slate points. 4. Triangular ground slate points (Figure 15i-m) These points are short and relatively broad with a thin, f l a t cross section and b i f a c i a l l y bevelled edges. Often the base i s thinned more or less abruptly. Bases and edges are usually straight. Five members of this class are found at Deep Bay. They measure 3.1 to 3.7 x 1.1 to 1.7 x .1 to .3 cm and weigh 1.1 to 2.7 gm. Such artifacts are described by Mitchell (1971a:189). 108 TABLE XIV Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Triangular Ground Slate Points, DiSe 7. ( ) = incomplete dimension. artifact number length width thickness weight 1054 3.7 1.1 0.2 1.0 1263 3.4 1.6 0.1 1.2 1267 (3.1) 1.1 0.2 1.1 1411 3.6 1.7 0.2 1.6 1468 3.7 (1«5) 0.3 2.7 5. Corner notched ground slate points (Figure 15e-h) This class i s characterized by an elongated triangular shape with straight to sli g h t l y convex edges, a thin, f l a t cross section, and a b i f a c i a l bevel on the edges. An acute angled notch has been abraded into the corners of these points, producing an acute angled shoulder and an expanding base. The narrowness of the base where i t joins the body of the point weakens the point, often resulting i n breakage. Many of these points are found without bases. Four of these artifacts were found at Deep Bay, measuring 3.1 to 4.6 x 1.4 to 1.9 x 0.2 to 0.3 cm and weighing 1.3 to 2.6 gm. Similar points are described by Mitchell (1971b,Fig.9j), McMillan and Ste. Claire (1975,Fig.5d), and Smith (1907,Fig.102b), and were recovered at Saltery Bay (Monks, in preparation). Points similar to these, but side notched instead of corner notched, are reported from Belcarra Park (Charlton 1972, 109 Fig«,50c), Buckley Bay (Mitchell 1973,Fig.21f), and Helen Point (Carlson 1970,Fig.36o). TABLE XV Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Corner Notched Ground Slate Points, DiSe 7. ( ) = incomplete dimension. artifact number length width thickness weight 1155 3.1 1.4 0.2 1.3 1163 (3.5) 1.4 0.3 107 1239 (4.4) 1.6 0.2 2.3 1404 (4.6) 2.0 0.2 2 06 6. Basally notched ground slate points (Figure 15d) There i s one such point with a missing t i p . The point i s broad and thin with f l a t surfaces and b i f a c i a l l y bevelled edges. The overall form appears to have been triangular. The semi-circular notches abraded into the base isolate a stem that i s roughly flush with the shoulders. The specimen measures 3.0 x 2.2 x 0.2 cm and weighs 2.2 gm. Illustrations or descriptions of similar points are not found in the local literature. i 7. Thick ground slate point fragments (Figure 15a) This class of point i s well known in the Gulf of Georgia (Borden 1970:98, Fig.30hh-jj; Mitchell 1971a:57). Edge and base form varies within the class (Mitchell 1971a:109, Fig.45d, n o e,g,k,l,m) but the thick hexagonal faceted cross section i s distinctive,. The artifact from Deep Bay i s very narrow, relative to i t s length, and is only slightly convex along the edgeso The base i s missing 0 It measures 7.3 x 1,6 x „4 cm and weighs 4 e6 gm0 F) Ground slate knives This class of artifact i s also well known in the Gulf of Georgia area. Members of the class have a working edge that i s straight to convex and that has been sharpened by abrasion 0 The converging sides can be either convex or bevelled in cross section. Variations in thickness of these knives may indicate temporal distinction, as may the amount of abrasion on both surfaces (Mitchell 1971a:48, 52, 57), lo Thick ground slate knives (Figure 16f) These two fragments are .6 to .7 cm thick and both are completely abraded on both surfaces. Their length and width vary from 3.9 to 8.9 x 2.3 to 6.8 cm and their weights are 6,7 to 42.6 gm. These two items are thicker and more com- pletely abraded than that described by Mitchell (1971a:113). 2. Thin ground slate knives (Figure 16d,g-h) This class i s the commoner one at Deep Bay. Its eleven members are .3 to .4 cm thick and they have parallel surfaces. A l l but one are abraded over their entire surface and nine are fragmentary. They measure 3.6 to 12.0 x 2.2 to 7.3 cm and g h Figure 16. Ground slate knives and celts, DiSe 7, a-b, celt; c, decorated slate; d,g~h, thin ground slate knife fragment; e, saw; f, medium thick ground slate knife. weigh 2.0 to 32.6 gm. Mitchell (1971a:191, Table XLII, Fig.108) describes this class, and Barnett (1975:62) indicates that members of this class were used as fish knives. The two complete members of this class, artifacts #8 and #1452, measure 11.3 x 5.4 x 0.4 cm and 12.0 x 4.9 x 0.4 cm and weigh 32.6 gm and 31.8 gm respectively. G) Ground slate fragments It i s customary to class a l l ground slate fragments together under "miscellaneous ground slate" i f they are not subsumed in a point fragment or knife fragment class, but here they are subdivided so as to use more of the information they can provide. In examining ground slate fragments that are not clearly members of any specific artifact class, four attributes always exist, separately or together, that can be used to subdivide them. 1. B i f a c i a l l y bevelled ground slate fragments These fragments are abruptly bevelled at an edge, they are thin, and they have parallel sides. The sides are usually completely worked, and the fragments are usually thin. These fragments could be from either thin knives or points, but their smallness makes their assignment to either class im- possible. There are five fragments of this class from Deep Bay. They measure 1.2 to 2.7 x 1.2 to 2.0 x 0.1 to 0.3 cm and weigh 0.2 to 2.4 gm. 113 2. Unifacially bevelled ground slate fragments These fragments are also thin with parallel surfaces but the bevel i s only u n i f a c i a l 0 Both surfaces are usually abraded. There are five of these artifacts at DiSe7, measuring 1.4 to 4,2 x .8 to 2,5 x ,1 to .3 cm and weighing .3 to 4,8 gm, 3, B i f a c i a l l y abraded ground slate,fragments This class of artifact shows no edge abrasion but i s ground on both surfaces. These surfaces are parallel and the fragments are thin e Two are from Deep Bay; they measure 3,8 to 3,9 x 2,2 to 2.4 x ,2 to ,3 cm. These fragments, like the b i f a c i a l l y bevelled fragments, are probably parts of thin ground slate points or knives but no diagnostic features allow them to be placed in either category. 4» Unifacially abraded ground slate fragments No edge abrasion i s evident on this class of artifact either and, in addition, only one surface has been abraded. Although there are only three artifacts in this class from Deep Bay, they appear to be slightly thinner than the thin ground slate artifacts and b i f a c i a l l y abraded fragments. This, coupled with the lack of s u r f i c i a l abrasion on the three members of this class, suggests that they may have been parts of the surface of other ground slate tools at one time. They measure 2.3 to 3.0 x 1.4 to 2.3 x .1 to .2 cm and weigh .4 to 2,0 gm. \ 114 H) Miscellaneous ground slate (Figure 16c) This fragment i s ground on both surfaces, and the surface along one edge has been worked to produce a long- itudinal incision from which shorter incisions produce an edge that gives the appearance of having broad serrations on i t . The fragment i s of silver slate. It measures 5.3 x 4.9 x .8 cm and i t weighs 30.0 gm. I) Celt (Figure 16a-b) This class of artifact i s characterized by having a p o l l that i s usually f l a t and rectangular to sub-rectangular in transverse cross section, a bit that i s usually straight and that may converge symmetrically or asymmetrically from each surface, and edges and surfaces that can be partly or completely polished. Members of this class are usually made of jade or nephrite, and one edge often shows where the artifact has been sawn from a larger piece of rock. The size, shape, and cross section of celts varies considerably, but since only three are represented from Deep Bay, no attempt w i l l be made to subdivide them. Of the three specimens one i s represented only by a fragment, but the other two are complete. The fragment i s of coarse grained nephrite with polish on part of a surface and an edge. It measures 4.7 x 2.8 x .9 cm and weighs 15.4 gm. One of the complete celts i s small, rectangular in cross section, and quite thick. It i s made of nephrite. The surfaces converge symmetrically to the b i t , which i s damaged. It measures 4.8 x 3.1 x 1.3 cm and weighs 39.7 gm. It i s similar in plan view and in dimensions to the one described by Mitchell (1971a:113, Fig.45a, Fig.46a) but i n longitudinal cross section the Deep Bay specimen has parallel surfaces and more even convergence at the b i t . It was found associated with Burial 5. The third celt i s also made of nephrite and i s quite large, measuring 10.6 x 5.7 x 1.3 cm and weighing 149.6 gm. It has a flattened, sub-rectangular transverse cross section, the edges diverge from the poll to the b i t , and the surfaces converge asymmetrically to the b i t . A similar celt i s pictured by Borden (1970,Fig.33dd). This celt was associated with Burial 4. Jc)> Saw (Figure I6e) This class of tool i s characterized by a straight edge that has a convex or b i f a c i a l l y bevelled cross section. The edge i s slightly dulled, and, along with the convex or bevelled area adjacent to the edge, i s formed by longitudinal abrasion. Usually the other surfaces of such artifacts are not abraded. They are often made of sandstone. Two fragments of this class were found at Deep Bay. In both instances the surfaces of the artifacts are roughly parallel and the artifacts are not unusually thick, considering that they are made of sandstone. They measure 8.2 to 9.9 x 4.3 to 5.1 x .7 116 to .9 cm and they?weigh 32*6 to 60.4 gm. Artifacts recog- nizable as being only saws are made on slabs that are recognizable as abrasive stones (Mitchell 1971a:196, Fig. 115b; McMillan and Ste. Claire 1975:44). K) Stone disc beads (Figure 17i-l) These beads axe small, f l a t , and circular with a perfor- ation that has been biconically d r i l l e d from each surface. They can be made using a variety of stone types, but the ones from DiSe7 appear to be of fine grained sandstone and schist. They are of similar size and shape as shell disc beads. There are eight specimens from Deep Bay. They measure .5 to .6 cm in diameter and .1 to .3 cm in thickness and they weigh .1 gm or less. L) Pendant (Figure 17b-c) This class of artifact i s any ground stone object that appears to have been suspended as decoration. Two such items were found. One i s highly polished and convex longitudinally as well as transversely, but the thickness i s relatively constant throughout. It i s roughly triangular with a rounded knob at the top. It was found with Burial 1 and i t appears to be made of black nephrite or steatite. It measures 3.6 x 1.7 x .4 cm and i t weighs 2.3 gm. A pendant similar only in outline was recovered from the Grant Anchorage Site (Simonsen 1973:42). The pendant described by McMillan and 117 Figure 17. Miscellaneous artifacts, DiSe 7. a. obsidian core; b-c. stone pendant; d-e. dentalia shells; f. shell ring fragment; g. stone pipe fragment; h 0 shell disc beads; i-1. stone disc beads; m. copper fragments; n. Mytilus californianus shell celt; o. pecten shell fragment; p. quartz crystal microblade core fragments. 118 Ste© Claire (1975:43) also sounds similar to the Deep Bay specimen. The other pendant i s rectangular in plan, elevation, and cross section. Two perforations at right angles to one another near the junction of one end and a side of the artifact were probably intended to meet and form the means by which this object could be suspended. The object i s crudely abraded and gives the appearance of being unfinished. It i s made of coal, measures 2.4 x 1.4 x .4 cm, and weighs 4.4 gm. Gulf Island Complex items of lignite are reported from Montague Harbour (Mitchell 1971a:115, 117) and coal artifacts are also reported from Buckley Bay (Mitchell 1973:91), and from Shoemaker Bay (McMillan and Ste. Claire 1975:43-44). M) Pipe (Figure I7g) This class of artifact i s an elongated conical piece of stone that i s perforated longitudinally and that has an expansion of the perforation at the base of the cone to accomodate the material being smoked. Two fragments of a pipe were found at DiSe7. It i s made of silver slate that i s coarsely abraded on the exterior surface. It measures 7.4 x 1.7 x<\.8Scm and weighs 8.5 gm. Few pipes are reported in the literature. An elbow pipe from the proto-historic period i s pictured by Borden (1970,Fig.33s); a decorated stone pipe bowl was surface collected at False Narrows from deposits l i k e l y to contain material of the Marpole Culture Type. One fragment is also reported from disturbed deposits at Glenrose (Percy 1971:174). Pecked Stone A) Hammerstone Hammerstones exhibit pecking and/or pitting of varying degrees of coarseness i n at least one place on an edge, an end, or a surface e They are usually of a size and weight such that they can be effectively used with one hande One such artifact i s from Deep Bay, but i t was found on the beach0 It exhibits a l l the above characteristics, fine pecking being evident on one corner a The shape of the artifact i s that of a long rectangle with a l l corners well rounded. Its regul- arity i s reminiscent of ballast weights for sailing ships or even sash weights, and the fact that i t was found on the beach leaves this possibility open. The pecking evident on one corner, to the exclusion of evidence of u t i l i z a t i o n any- where else, argues for i t s inclusion as an aboriginal a r t i f a c t . B) Stone bowl This object i s made of coarse, hard sandstone. It i s e l l i p t i c a l in plan with a shallow depression. The ventral surface i s smoothly curved in two dimensions, suggesting that i t i s the natural exterior of the parent rock. Pecking or grinding are not obvious in i t s manufacture. It may be naturally formed, as i t was found in the disturbed stratum on Lot 81. But, i t s form i s sufficiently bowl-like to include here. 120 Incised Stone Two artifacts f a l l into this class, both with incisions on one surface that are of cultural origin. The f i r s t a r t i - fact i s a chunk of siltstone that has random straight lines incised on one surface. Unfortunately, the person who excavated this ar t i f a c t added several thumbnail incisions to the same surface to test the hardness of the stone. It is not possible at present to distinguish the original lines from the recent ones. This artifact measures 16.7 x 11.0 x 3.4 cm and i t weighs 649.7 gm. The second ar t i f a c t i s a f l a t sandstone slab that has a series of geometric incisions on one surface. The incisions consist of two motifs that are closely spaced. There are two rows of short straight lines, one below the other, set side by side at one end of the incised surface. The remainder of the surface shows the other motif, a herring bone pattern, that i s presented in columns. The art i f a c t measures 9.4 x 4.1 x 1.0 cm and weighs 79.7 gm. Geometric motifs are thought to be more common in the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type than in the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:54). BONE A) Barbed bone point (Figure 18e*-f«) This class of point i s widely known and i s thought to be distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 121 i-k # heavy duty bone points; 1-n. bird bone bipoints; o-u. bone bipoints; v. bird bone awl; Wo polished bone awl; x-z. s p l i t bone awl; a'-d'. wedge base bone points; e*-f'. unilaterally barbed bone points. 122 1971a:48). The predominance of this artifact class in the southern Gulf of Georgia (Mitchell 1971a:198) may simply be a function of the number of sites excavated i n the southern Gulf, as opposed to the northern Gulf. Unilaterally barbed bone points are found at Rebecca Spit, Sandwick Midden and Courtenay River (Mitchell 1971a:198-9), Bliss Landing (Beattie 1971:28), and Comox (Smith 1907,Fig.104), as well as the two that have been found at Deep Bay. Thus, i t seems that such points are not uncommon in the northern Gulf relative to the number of reports available. The two specimens from Deep Bay are quite different from one another. The f i r s t i s a heavily made artif a c t of mammal bone. The barbs are crude and they are low and enclosed. The arti f a c t appears to have been broken transversely at half i t s former length, and an attempt to refashion the d i s t a l end has been made. The base i s sli g h t l y tapered but i s s t i l l thick. It measures 5.2 x 1.2 x .5 cm and weighs 3.7 gm. The second®specimen i s more finely made. It i s long and slender with a thinned base and low enclosed barbs. The edge of each barb has been serrated to form two or three smaller barbs in the same manner as that described by Smith (1907:310). It measures 12.6 x .8 x .5 cm and i t weighs 5.2 gm. B) Bipoints (Figure 181-u) These artifacts are characterized by sharp points at each end and a slender, elongated, diamond shaped pr o f i l e . 123 They are usually well finished over their entire surface, and they are more or less circular in transverse cross section 0 Their greatest width i s usually toward the mid-point of the long axis, although this varies somewhat. They are most often made of s p l i t mammal bone, but bird bone bipoints are also common. Thirty-five mammal bone bipoints and seven bird bone bipoints were found at Deep Bay, None of these artifacts showed the removal of medial flakes to form f i s h gorges (see Mitchell 1971a:202), There are two further artifacts c l a s s i - fied as bipoints for lack of a more appropriate grouping. They are both thick, made of mammal bone, and come to blunt points at either end. One of them (artifact #1113) may have been a pendant as there i s a slight constriction at one end where a break has occurred. The other (artifact #832) was surface collected from the inside beach. They measure 6,8 x 1,1 x ,8 cm and 6,8 x 1,0 x ,8 cm and weigh 5,1 gm and 4,1 gm respectively. The following two tables present the measure- ments for the bird bone and mammal bone bipoints. 124 TABLE XVI Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Bird Bone Bipoints, DiSe 7. ( ) = incomplete dimension, artifact number length width thickness weight 430 3,1 0.2 0.1 0.1 983 (1,6) 0.2 0.1 0.1 1090 2 Q8 0.2 0.2 0.1 1166 3,2 0.3 0.2 0.2 1187 3.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 1331 4.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 1484 3.0 0.4 0.1 0.3 The six complete specimens indicate a range in length from 2.8 to 4.1 cm, in width from 0.2 to 0.3 cm, and in thickness from 0.1 to 0.2 cm. Weights vary from 0.1 to 0.3 gm. TABLE XVII Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Mammal Bone Bipoints, DiSe 7. ( ) = incomplete dimension. ar t i f a c t number length width thickness weight 495 (3.3) 0.6 0.4 l o l 625 (2.5) 0.7 0.6 0.7 792 (2.1) 0.4 0.2 0.4 810 (6.6) 0.6 0.1 2.2 840 7.3 0.6 0.5 2.1 TABLE XVII (continued) 855 5.1 0.5 0.4 0.7 946 3.6 0.6 0.4 0.5 969 (4.8) 0.6 0.4 1.0 988-A (2.9) 0.5 0.2 0.7 997 (4.0) 0.4 0.2 0.5 1003 5.7 0.5 0.4 1.3 1004 4.4 0.7 0.4 0.7 1008 7.5 0.7 0.4 1.6 1012 5.6 0.7 0.5 1.2 1014 4.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 1030 (4.8) 0.7 0.4 1.8 1058 (2.8) 0.7 0.5 0.7 1074 3.7 0.6 0.4 0.6 1089 7.5 0.5 0.4 1.5 1096 (5.4) 0.6 0.4 1.4 1219 3.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 1267 (5.5) 0.6 0.6 1.6 1276 3.7 0.6 0.4 1.1 1280 5.4 0.5 0.4 1.2 1282 7.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 1290 (3.3) 0.5 0.5 0.7 1301 4.1 0.6 0.4 0.8 1307 4.3 0.6 0.4 0.9 1309 4.1 0.5 0.4 0.5 126 TABLE XVII (continued) 1310 (4*4) 0.6 0.4 1.6 1373 4.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 1374 (2.8) 0.7 0.4 0.6 1380 (4.0) 0.5 0.5 0.8 1398 4.0 0.6 0.4 0.4 1460 6.0 0.5 0.4 1.6 The twenty complete specimens indicate a range from 3.6 to 7.5 cm, in width from 0.5 to 0.8 cm, and in thickness from 0.4 to 0.6 cm. Weights of complete specimens range from 0,4 to 1.6 gm. C) Awl Awls are a class of hand held a r t i f a c t used for piercing. The working point i s slender and of roughly circular trans- verse cross section. The remainder of the implement may show varying degrees of finishing. Most awls are made of s p l i t mammal bone (usually deer metatarsal), although awls made of unsplit bird bone do occur. Awls are usually large compared to other pointed bone implements with slender points. 1. Mammal bone awl This class includes polished bone awls and s p l i t bone awls. There i s one polished bone awl and fourteen s p l i t bone awls. The polished bone awl (artifact #933) i s made of s p l i t deer metatarsal polished over the entire surface. From a f l a t 12? butt i t tapers gently to the point* This artifact measures 14*1 x 1*0 x *8 cm and weighs 6*6 gm (Figure 18w)Q The s p l i t bone awls are of much cruder manufacture, being ground to a slender point only at the tip* The remainder of the art i f a c t i s unworked* Measurements and weights for these fourteen artifacts are given i n Table XVIII (Figure 18 x-z) 0 2c Bird bone awl (Figure I8v) Two of these awls were recovered at Deep Bay* The complete one (artifact #1466) i s made on the radius of an unidentifiable bird* The point is made by abrading across the bone at an acute angle to the long axis* It measures 11*6 x 06 x 04 cm and weighs 1*1 gm© The second awl (artifact #1502) i s a d i s t a l fragment made on the ulna of an unidenti- fiable species* It measures 6*3 x .7 x ,5 cm and weighs 1*2 gm* Similar artifacts are reported i n Mitchell (1971a:133, 172, 202)* 128 TABLE XVIII Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Split Bone Awls, DiSe 7. ( ) = incomplete dimensions artifact number length width thickness weight 32 ;i3.9 1.7 0.4 5.3 884 ((5.0) 1.0 0.4 1.3 967 (4*2) 0.8 0.4 0.8 994 8.6 0.9 0.5 3.2 1037 8.8 1.3 0.1 5.2 1039 (6.0) 0.2 0.4 1.5 1065 (4«0) 0.7 0.4 1.4 1069 (4.5) 0.7 0.1 1.4 1084 11.0 1.1 0.7 6.3 1102 5.7 0.7 0.4 1.8 1141 (7.9) 0.6 0.4 2.1 1383 (3.9) 0.4 0.6 0.7 1437 (5.4) 1.0 0.5 1.7 1499 7.2 1.1 0.5 2.7 Many of the points of these artifacts show wear polish. The complete specimens show considerable variation in size and shape. Awls in this class are pictured in Mitchell (1971a, Fig.l8cc-hh)o 129 D) Wedge base bone points (Figure 18a*-d*) This class consists of well finished bone points that are pointed at one end and thinned at the other* The speci- mens from Deep Bay appear to be of two types* One i s abruptly pointed with the remainder of the body tapering gradually to a very thin, relatively broad base (class A)* The other type has a more gradual point, tapers over a lesser portion of the long axis, i s not as thin at the base as the previously described type, and i s often longer than the former type (class B). The same two types are found in the Montague Harbour III assemblage (Mitchell 1971a,Fig.117a-f, 1968,Fig* 7p,t)* It i s my impression, despite the small sample size, that the two forms of these points may be temporally distinct, the abrupt pointed ones being more recent* There are six wedge based points from Deep Bay* Their measurements are given in Table XIX, TABLE XIX Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Wedge Base Bone Points, DiSe 7, arti f a c t number length width thickness weight Class A 965 3.8 0.8 0.6 1.1 1285 3.9 0.9 0.4 1.5 Class B 1146 5.2 0.8 0.4 1.5 1158 6.7 1.0 0.5 3.1 1299 5.6 0.8 0.4 2.1 1465 6.2 0.6 0.3 1.8 130 E) Bone points This class of artifact includes fragments of bone that were obviously parts of points. Only one pointed end can be attributed to this class, unlike bone bipoints, and their size i s usually small, unlike awls. They are subdivided for descriptive purposes into heavy duty and light duty categories e Heavy duty points have abruptly converging edges and are made of thick pieces of mammal bone0 Light duty points are small, often circular i n transverse cross section, and gently tapered to the point. 1. Heavy duty points (Figure 18i-k) There are eleven of these points and fragments, a l l on thick pieces of bone. Abrasion i s not common away from the ti p . They dif f e r from awls in being abruptly pointed. They measure 2.8 to 9.1 x .2 to 1.5 x .1 to .9 cm and weigh .8 to 10.2 gm. 2. Light duty points This class of artifact can be further divided into mammal bone and bird bone points. Mammal bone (Figure 18a-f) There are forty-three artifacts i n this class. They a l l appear to be fragmentary, although i t i s d i f f i c u l t to judge their original sizes. They range in f i n i s h from roughly abraded to highly polished, and they are relatively slender 131 in proportion to their length. Mitchell (1971a:204, Fig.118 w-bb) cla s s i f i e s such artifacts as small, single-pointed bone objects. The Deep Bay specimens measure 1.0 to 4.7 x 0.3 to 0.6 x 0.1 to 0.6 cm and weigh 0.1 to 1.5 gm. i Bird bone (Figure 18g-h) Three bird bone point fragments were found. A l l are made on snail pieces of s p l i t long bone, and two appear to be fragmentary. Measurements for this class are given in Table XX. TABLE XX Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Bird Bone Points, DiSe 7. ( ) = incomplete dimension. artifact number length width thickness weight 1177 (1.9) 0;3 0.1 0.1 1268 2.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 1475 (1.9) 0.5 0.2 0.1 F) Ulna tool (Figure 19l-m) This class of artifact i s usually made on deer ulnae, although wapiti ulna tools are not uncommone The d i s t a l end is worked to a point or a wedge shape; sometimes the anterior d i s t a l edge i s b i f a c i a l l y ground to produce a knife edge. Distal ends are frequently broken off, leaving the proximal ends to be classifie d simply as "tools" rather than "awls" 132 i k I m Figure 19. Miscellaneous bone artifacts, DiSe 7. a* zoomorphic pendant; b. bird bone tube bead; c. beaver incisor tool; d e sea mammal tooth; e. girdled bone bead; f - i . bone chisel/wedge; j . sea mammal bone implement; k. sea mammal bone wedge; 1-m. deer ulna tool. ' 133 or "knife"o Three artifacts from this class were found at Deep Bayffl Two are proximal fragments and one i s a d i s t a l fragment* One proximal fragment i s abruptly pointed only a short distance from the condyles, the other i s missing the d i s t a l end but i t i s a much longer, more gently tapered artifact* The d i s t a l fragment has been abraded to a wedge shape* Similar artifacts are described by Mitchell (1971a, Fig*63g, Fig*93, Fig*118q,r), G) Bird bone whistle This class of artifact i s described by Mitchell (1971as 136)* Its members are made on the long bones of birds approximately the size of seagulls* One or more V-shaped notches are abraded transversely across the surface of the bone to form apertures from which a i r can escape* The specimen from Deep Bay i s broken at the center of the only visible notch* The exterior of the bone i s i n i t s natural state except for several coarse transverse incisions at the opposite end of the fragment* It measures 3*8 x *8 x *7 cm and i t weighs *7 gm. A similarly fashioned artifact i s pictured by Mitchell (1971a,Fig*64a)* H) Bone wedge/chisel (Figure 19f-i,k) j Tools of this class are made of mammal bone that i s usually s p l i t longitudinally and abraded to a broad, thin d i s t a l end that i s often rounded* Variation within the class 134 exists in terms of size, raw material, and degree of fi n i s h of the artifacts, but their general form suggests that they may have been used as chisels or wedges. There are seven whole and fragmentary members of this class from Deep Bay* One i s a large wedge of sea mammal bone with the b i t , and possibly the p o l l , missing. It measures 10.7 x 4.1 x .3 cm and i t weighs 38.2 gm. The remaining specimens are made of land mammal bone. Of these, two small ones are made on the ends of bone splinters. The bits are narrow and b i f a c i a l l y bevelled on both specimens. They weigh 1,2 to 1.7 gm and they measure 3.7 to 4.8 x 1.0 to 1.2 x .4 cm. The remaining four wedges are made of s p l i t long bone, presumably deer, and they come to narrow, rounded bits that are unifacially bevelled from the interior of the bone. Three are bit fragments, measuring 1.5 to 2.8 x 1.0 to 1.1 x .2 to .5 cm and weighing .3 to .6 gm. The fourth i s more complete, measuring 10.9 x 1.0 x .8 cm and weighing 7.1 gm. This class of artifact i s described by Mitchell (1971a:133). I) Beaver incisor tool (Figure 19c) Mitchell (1971a:137, 207) describes this a r t i f a c t class. The natural sharpening of the distal end of the tooth i s u t i l i z e d and often reground at a similar angle. These artifacts are reported to be used as incising tools for woodwork (Barnett 1975:109). One such artifact comes from DiSe7. i t i s abraded at an acute angle at the distal end 135 and broken at the proximal end. It measures 3.4 x 0,9 x 0,7 cm and weighs 1,3 gm, J) Modified sea mammal tooth (Figure 19d) Two such artifacts were found. One i s a male northern sea lion canine showing several small incisions at the proximal end for possible suspension as a pendant. It measures 8,8 x 2.9 x 2,7 cm and i t weighs 60,2 gme A similarly modified tooth was recovered from the Marpole s i t e . The second specimen i s a northern sea lion lower premolar. On this specimen the d i s t a l posterior section has been removed by abrasion to form a notch. No decorative or u t i l i t a r i a n purpose can be suggested for this a r t i f a c t . It measures 2,7 x 1,4 x 0,9 cm and weighs 2,3 gm. No comparable artifacts from other sites are presently known. K) Bone pendant (Figure 19a) Many forms of artifacts belong to this class. Their purpose i s presumably decorative, and they a l l indicate that they were meant to be suspended. The artifact from Deep Bay belonging to this category i s zoomorphic. It has the outline of a sea mammal, and i t was probably suspended from the constriction where the hind flippers or flukes meet the body. It has two lines incised at right angles to the long axis just behind the head, and a third incision runs diagonally across the same surface from the animal's throat to i t s back. The ar t i f a c t was associated with Burial 4* It weighs 8*4 gm and measures 9 G9 x 2.3 x 08 cm0 A green stain on i t s dorsal area has resulted from i t s proximity to the copper bead fragments described below* Stone f i s h effigies are l i s t e d as distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a: 52) 0 The pendant described here does not clearly represent a f i s h nor is i t made of stone, however, f i s h effigies could also be called zoomorphic effigies* L) Bone beads (Figure 19b-e) These three beads are of a tubular variety, the tubes being of varying lengths* Two beads are made of mammal bone and are about as long as they are wide* They are small, and one i s divided into two segments* With this latter specimen, i t i s not clear whether the segments were meant to be separ- ated or whether i t i s one bead with a deeply incised girdle* The girdled bead measures *8 x *5 x *4 cm, and the plain one *7 x 0 6 x *6 cm* They each weigh *2 gm* The third bead i s a short bird bone segment* It i s made from the long bone of a large bird, and i t i s unworked on the surface* It measures 2*1 x .9 x *9 cm and weighs 1*1 gm* A fragment of this kind of bird bone i s described in Mitchell (1971a:136, Fig*61b), and a shorter bead of this sort i s described in McMillan and Ste. Claire (1975:52)* 137 M) Sea mammal bone implement (Figure 19j) This artifact i s made from a large piece of sea mammal bone, possibly a r i b . The proximal end i s narrower than the body, and there i s a constriction from the dorsal surface 3 to 5 cm from the proximal end. This portion of the implement has been adzed to shape. The broad, f l a t body of the a r t i - fact thins and tapers to the distal end which i s gently convex. The d i s t a l end could have been used as an axe or wedge, and the proximal end may have been hafted l i k e an axe. No con- clusive use can be found for this implement, although i t has an appearance similar to "slave k i l l e r s " . It measures 25.5 x 7.2 x 2.0 cm and weighs 197.4 gm. N) Slender polished bone objects Three fragments f a l l into this class. They are char- acterized by an extremely polished surface, a circular transverse cross section, and an almost imperceptible taper. One specimen appears to be a proximal fragment that has been finished by a slight constriction and transverse polishing. These artifacts may have been awls or arrow points, but their f i n i s h and delicacy implies a less rigorous function. Use as blanket pins or needles seems more probable. These items measure 4.5 to 9.2 x .5 to .6 x .5 cm and weigh 1.2 to 3.4 gm. O) Miscellaneous worked bone fragment This class of artifact consists of pieces of bone that 138 show evidence of having been modified. Some may have been parts of larger, broken ar t i f a c t s . In their present condition these fragments can not reliably be assigned to any specific ar t i f a c t class. Generally small, there are seventy of these artifacts from Deep Bay. A l l are of mammal bone. Four have been incised randomly, one has been adzed or whittled, and the remaining sixty-five have been abraded and/or polished. Sixteen of these specimens are end fragments, and fifty-four are medial fragments. ANTLER A) Barbed antler point (Figure 20s) This class of point i s thought to be distinctive of the Marpole Component i n the Gulf of Georgia (Mitchell 1971a:52). The form i s similar to that of barbed bone points and overall size i s approximately the same. The specimen from Deep Bay has a roughly circular transverse cross section with low barbs that are well separated. The base i s conically tapered rather than thinned. It measures 15.2 x 1.0 x .7 cm and weighs 8.1 gm. This point i s unlike those pictured by Mitchell (1971a, Fig.95d,e); i t i s more similar in form to the bone point shown in McMillan and Ste. Claire (1975,Fig.8c). B) Antler point (Figure 201-m) These artifacts are similar in shape and size to bone 139 Figure 20e Antler artifacts, DiSe 7. a. foreshaft; b. tine flaker; c - i . composite toggling harpoon valves; J . ring; k. incised tine; 1-m. point; n-r. wedge; s. barbed point. 140 points, and i t is possible that they were used interchangeably. One of these artifacts i s heavy duty. It i s a d i s t a l fragment of a well finished point, measuring 5.2 x 101 x 0.6 cm and weighing 3.1 gm. The other two artifacts can be described as light duty; both are distal fragments. The tips in each case would be roughly conical, and the taper i s gentle. The whole specimen measures 5.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 cm and weighs 1.6 gm, while the fragment weighs 0.4 gm and measures 1.8 x 0.8 x 0.4 cm. C) Antler ring (Figure 20D) This kind of artifact i s rare, although bone rings are known from St. Mungo (Calvert 1970:61), Saltery Bay (Monks, n.d. a), and they are exhibited in Marpole and Stselax Phase displays in the U.B.C. archaeology laboratory. Shell rings are known from Deep Bay (described below), and one i s exhibited in the Marpole Phase collection in the U.B.C. archaeology laboratory. The antler ring artifacts from Deep Bay consist of a whole ring and two fragments of another ring. The whole specimen i s well finished, but i t i s slightly irregular in thickness. It measures 3.9 x 3.8 x 0.5 cm and i t weighs 3.2 gm. The two fragments appear to be in an earlier state of manufacture. They are roughly square in cross section, and they indicate that the center part of a disc has been removed by b i f a c i a l incising to produce a ring. They measure 1.9 x 0.8 x 0.9 cm and weigh 1.6 gm. Suttles (1951:106) describes 141 an antler ring as part of the composite toggling sea mammal harpoon apparatus. D) Antler wedge (Figure 20n-r) These artifacts are common in the Gulf of Georgia. Both beam wedges and tine wedges are found at Deep Bay; however, the small numbers of each and their fragmentary state preclude this subdivision. A l l but one of the artifacts i s a bit fragment. There are eight of these artifacts from Deep Bay. The one complete specimen measures 10.8 x 2.9 x 2.3 cm and weighs 32.5 gm. It i s made on a thick antler tine, probably wapiti. The bit i s square and unifacially bevelled. The seven remaining bit fragments, also showing unifacial bevel and slightly convex working edges, measure 2.7 to 5.8 x 1.6 to 3.1 x 0 03 to 2.3 cm and weigh 1.1 to 8.3 gm. Antler wedges are described by Mitchell (1971a:212). E) Antler foreshaft (Figure 20a) This artifact i s admittedly dubious for several reasons. F i r s t , i t was found just below the disturbed historic zone and, second, the base i s only roughly adzed or carved to shape despite the degree of fin i s h on the shaft of the a r t i - fact. Antler foreshafts are lis t e d as distinctive of the Locarno Beach Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:57). However, because the Deep Bay specimen was found in natural stratum F, and because of i t s indistinct form, i t may not be a fore- shaft. 142 F) Antler tine flaker (Figure 20b) These artifacts are the d i s t a l fragments of antlers. They show coarse wear at the t i p of the implement, suggesting that they may have been used to pressure flake l i t h i c material. It i s also conceivable that they were used as punches for indirect percussion. There are three of these artifacts at Deep Bay, measuring 5.8 to 6.9 x 1.2 to 1.6 x 0.9 to 1.2 cm and weighing 3.6 to 6.9 gm. G) Composite toggling harpoon valves These artifacts exist in a variety of forms i n the Gulf of Georgia. They can be plain or have lashing grooves on the exterior, and the d i s t a l interior end may be channelled or slotted to hold a piercing point. They a l l have flaring proximal ends with an interior channel to receive a fore* shaft. Mitchell (1971aj48, 57) l i s t s these valves among the distinctive archaeological features of both the Locarno Beach and Gulf of Georgia Culture Types. The fifteen valves and fragments from Deep Bay (Figure'*20 c-e) can be divided into three groups. Their dimensions and weights are presented in Table XXI. The largest group consists of eleven fragmentary valves. They have plain exterior surfaces and shallow channels on the d i s t a l interior surfaces. The channel at the d i s t a l end of these artifacts suggests that the arming point was most l i k e l y to have been a wedge base bone point. Similar artifacts are pictured by Mitchell (1971a, 143 Figol21a) and Capes (1964,Fig•20A-3). The second group (Figure 2Qh-±) consists of two notched valves that are much larger and more robust than the previous specimens. They are much longer and broader than members of the f i r s t group, although the exteriors are also plain and the arming channels are also shallow. If relative size i s any indicator, these valves were probably used i n the acquis- iti o n of larger animals than was the case for members of the preceding class. A similar pair of valves i s pictured by Borden (1970,Fig.33e). The third group consists of another matched pair of valves. They are as long as those in the second group, but are more slender than those in the f i r s t group. The dis t a l interior ends are deeply channelled to receive an arming point of circular transverse cross section. These two valves and three members of the f i r s t group were recovered from natural stratum G/0. This natural stratum also yielded a fixed barbed antler point; this class of artifact i s thought to be distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a: 52). No pictures or diagrams of this type of valve could be found (Figure'20f-g) . TABLE XXI Dimensions (cm) and Weights (gm) of Antler Composite Toggling Harpoon Valves, DiSe 7, ( ) = incomplete dimension. artifact number length width thickness weight group 1 590 (2.9) 1.0 0.4 0.8 1072 5.0 1.0 0.6 2.1 1115 (2.2) 0.9 0.6 0.7 1193 (l e6) 0,8 0.4 0.3 1278 (2.3) 1.1 0.5 0.6 1456 5.2 0.8 0.5 1.4 1461 (2 09) 0.8 0.5 0.8 1462 (3.5) 0.8 0.5 0.9 1479 (2.6) 1.0 0.6 1.0 1480 (2.0) 0.8 0.5 0.4 1503 (2,7) 1.0 0.5 0.4 group 2 505 6.8 1.2 0.7 2.5 513 (3.6) 1.2 0.4 0.7 group 3 1319a 6.2 0.7 0.6 1.5 1319b (4.8) 0,7 0.6 1.0 H) Incised antler tine (Figure 20k) This d i s t a l tine fragment has a longitudinal incision that bisects the tine. It i s possible that this artifact represents an i n i t i a l stage of manufacture of composite toggling harpoon valves. It measures 5.8 x 1.7 x 1.6 cm and weighs 9.2 gm. 145 I) Miscellaneous worked antler There are four abraded antler fragments,, They show relatively l i t t l e abrasion and no form that suggests member- ship in a specific artifact class* There are many fragments of adzed antler and one adzed antler tine* Over one hundred fragments were found in a concentration in excavation unit 4 on Lot 73 at the top of natural stratum M* Eight additional fragments are from excavation unit 5, natural stratum K on the same lot* One fragment was also found in natural stratum N i n unit 4. Two fragments were found on Lot 81, both in the disturbed zone* SHELL A) Shell disc beads (Figure 17h) These artifacts are small, f l a t , biconically perforated circl e s of clam shell* They are common in the Gulf of Georgia and are thought to be distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52)a There are 51 such beads from Deep Bay, 48 of which were associated with Burial 4. These artifacts are too light to weigh individually, although 22 of them and a label tag weigh 0*8 gm* They measure approximately 0*4 to 0*5 cm in diameter and 0*1 to 0*2 cm in thickness* 146 B) Dentalia (Figure 17d-e) Whole and fragmentary dentalia are often found in Gulf of Georgia sites. Similar items were recovered from Montague Harbour III (Mitchell 1971a:213, 215). They are l i s t e d as inclusions in midden burials distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52). They were probably imported from the west coast of the island. There are 18 from Deep Bay, 12 of which were associated with Burial 4. Most of these artifacts are too light to weigh accurately to the nearest tenth of one gram. The longest specimen recovered was 3 cm, and most shells are 0.4 cm or less in diameter. ' C) Shell ring fragment (Figure 17f) This artifact i s f l a t and represents only half of the original a r t i f a c t . As mentioned above, a similar but larger shell ring i s exhibited in the Marpole Phase collection in the UoBoCo archaeology laboratory. The DiSe 7 specimen i s 2.0 x 1.3 x 0.3 cm and weighs 0.5 gm. This artifact may be part of a nose ring such as the one pictured in Kew and Goddard (1974:48, 87). D) Sea mussel tool (Figure 17n) This artifact i s made of Mytilus californianus. The surface of the shell has been ground smooth, and the cutting edge is unifacially bevelled. The fragment weighs 4.1 gm and measures 3.3 x 2.4 x 0.3 cm. Artifact #319 from Montague 14.7 Harbour III (Mitchell 1971a:178) i s also unifacially bevelled and abraded on part of the exterior. The Deep Bay artifact may have been used for scraping, gouging, or cutting, E) Pecten shell (Figure 170) One fragment of unmodified pecten shell was found. Rattles made of pecten shell were used by the Coast Salish (Barnett 1975:177), Pecten shell has been recovered from the Stselax Phase, according to the arti f a c t exhibit in the U.BoC, archaeology laboratory, and a pecten shell was also found in San Juan Phase deposits at Helen Point (Carlson 1970,Fig,36e), MINERAL A) Ochre Ochre i s usually found in small particles and i s most often rusty red in colour, although different colours are known. It smears easily on skin, distinguishing i t from stones with iron oxide in them. Fifty-seven pieces were found at Deep Bay, of which two were orange, one was white, and the remainder were red. The uses of red ochre are noted in Mitchell (1971a:198) and Barnett (1975:74, 89, 91, 105), B) Mica One mica flake was found. It i s clear at i t s thinnest 148 portions and slightly irridescent at i t s thicker portions, No use can be attributed to the art i f a c t , but i t may have served as decoration (cf, Mitchell 1971a:198). It measures 2,3 x 1,6 x 0,1 cm and weighs 0,1 gm, METAL A) Native copper (Figure 17m) The remains of two slender tubes of copper were found in association with Burial 4, The fragments were too fragile to measure or weigh. Similar beads, but larger with solid wooden centers, were found at Prince Rupert Harbour (G, MacDonald 1976,pers, comm). The stain from these fragments i s found on the zoomorphic bone pendant. WOOD Two samples of wood were recovered. One came from stratum F in excavation unit 1 of Lot 73, It consists of highly decomposed cedar fragments. The age of natural stratum F i s such that wood preservation from a point some 800 years B,P, i s unlikely. Since the s o i l pH i s the same i n this stratum as in most others, and since no similar fragments of wood were recovered from other strata, except as noted below, i t seems li k e l y that this artifact was intruded into natural stratum F. The second sample consists of bark that was found wrapped around some shell disc beads, dentalia beads, and the copper bead fragments associated with Burial 4. The copper salts probably helped preserve the bark (Matson 1975,pers. comm). This artifact i s extremely fragile and i s now stored in carbowax. Variations in the Artifact Inventory Table IV presents the artifacts from Lot 81 by excav- ation unit and natural stratum and Table III presents the same material for Lot 73. The portion of a natural stratum in an excavation unit i s hereafter referred to as an analy- t i c a l unite Analytical units from which no artifacts and no faunal remains were recovered were discarded from sub- sequent discussion. The data are presented in their most detailed form in order that subsequent recombinations of artifact classes w i l l be explicit in terms of their contents. A) Lot 81 Table IV indicates that 98 artifacts were recovered from Lot 81 and that 66 of them, or 2/3, were found in the disturbed historic stratum. Of the remaining 32 artifacts, none was found below natural stratum F, and most were found in natural strata B and C. The most numerous artifacts, 16 in total, are made of bone. This figure represents half of the undisturbed artifact assemblage. There are five abraded 150 bone fragments, four light duty bone points, and three bone bipoints. There i s also one s p l i t bone awl, beaver incisor tool, worked mammal tooth, and bone bead. Ground stone i s the next most common category with 12 artifacts present. Five of these are abrasive stones, four are thin ground slate points and fragments, and thin ground slate knife, pipe, and pendant are each represented once. The total number of chipped stone artifacts was two, one quartz crystal flake and one obsidian flake. Likewise, two antler artifacts were found, an antler tine flaker and a composite toggling harpoon valve. No shell or mineral artifacts were found in undisturbed deposits. The cultural a f f i l i a t i o n of the undisturbed assemblage is d i f f i c u l t to judge because of the small sample size and the lack of radiocarbon dates. Bearing in mind the small sample size, i t i s s t i l l interesting to note that chipped stone accounts for approximately 6% of the assemblage, ground stone for about 37.5%, bone for about 50%, and antler for another 6%. The preponderance of bone and ground stone artifacts, especially the relative abundance of bone bipoints, light duty bone points, and thin ground slate artifacts, suggests that the undisturbed assemblage could belong to the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type. The presence of an antler composite toggling harpoon valve and the relative scarcity of chipped stone support this suggestion. The percentages of chipped stone and bone also suggest this (Mitchell 1971a: 151 47). The type of chipped stone, namely quartz crystal and obsidian, suggests on the other hand that an earlier culture type may be represented. Without dates the issue cannot be resolved, but the weight of evidence appears to f a l l on the side of the f i r s t of these two interpretations. The undisturbed assemblage i s almost equally divided into stone and non-stone artifacts, there being 14 of the former artifacts and 18 of the latter. However, there i s a massive disparity between ground and chipped artifacts, there being 29 of the former and two of the latt e r . Of the ground artifacts, 5 are abrasive stones and 24 are abraded. The antler tine flaker may have been used to assist in the manufacture of chipped stone artifacts such as the obsidian and quartz crystal flakers. B) Lot 73 There were 518 artifacts recovered from excavations on Lot 73. Of these, 91 were from the disturbed historic deposits (including natural stratum C). Only one artifact is found below natural stratum P. It i s a quartz crystal found i n natural stratum P-l. No artifacts were found in natural stratum T. As mentioned in the section on chronology, the oldest radiocarbon date was produced by a sample collected from the clay and sand floor underlying natural stratum P-l in most places. Of the 427 artifacts from definitely aboriginal deposits, 152 135 are chipped stone, 62 are ground stone, 110 are bone, 25 are antler, 65 are shell, 27 are mineral, 2 are wood, and 1 i s metal« The distribution of these broad categories, and of some specific artifact classes, suggests that assemblages repre- senting three components can be recognized,, Chipped stone artifacts are found throughout the deposits, although they are considerably more common in strata G/O, G with shell, and P e Among the chipped stone artifacts are several classes thought to be distinctive of specific culture types in the Gulf of Georgia area. Microblades, and by inference micro- blade cores, are reportedly distinctive of the Marpole and Locarno Beach Culture Types (Mitchell 1971as52, 57) 0 The microblade found at Deep Bay came from natural stratum P, while the microblade core came from natural stratum G-2© Leaf shaped chipped stone points are thought to be distinctive of the Locarno Beach Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:57)e A variety of these artifacts, including leaf shaped points and numbering 14, were found at Deep Bay. One was found i n natural stratum A, one was found in natural stratum G-2, one in G/O, and the remaining 11 in natural stratum P 0 Cobble tools are also distinctive of the Locarno Beach Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:57). The unifacial and b i f a c i a l chopping tools from DiSe 7 correspond to this artifact class« Four of these artifacts were found in strata I, M, G/O, and G with shell. Small, triangular chipped basalt points are 153 l i s t e d as being distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a.48). Three such artifacts were found at Deep Bay, a l l symmetrical. Two are stemmed and one i s unstemmed. The two stemmed specimens were found i n natural stratum G with shell, and the unstemmed specimen was found in natural stratum G-2. i t should be noted that the stem on each of these points i s very weakly developed. For analytical purposes they could be grouped with the unstemmed specimen. There were 72 ground stone artifacts recovered from excavations on Lot 73. Of these, 10 were found above the surface of natural stratum F, leaving 62 in definitely aboriginal deposits. With the exception of two abrasive stones and a stone disc bead found i n natural stratum P, ground stone artifacts are not found below natural stratum H-l. Although this category of artif a c t i s present in natural strata dark G, H, and H-l, only four artifacts are found in these strata. Combined with the three artifacts from natural stratum P, the total number of artifacts in aboriginal deposits below natural stratum G with shell i s only seven (11%). Natural strata F, G/O, and G with shell contain 15, 12, and 19 artifacts respectively, for a total of 46 artifacts representing 74% of a l l artifacts from aboriginal deposits. These deposits contain 20 abrasive stones, 17 ground slate points, of which two bases and one point are relatively 15k thick and the rest are thin, 4 ground slate knives, 9 abraded slate fragments, 2 celts, 2 saws, 5 disc beads, 2 incised fragments, and 1 pendant. Thin triangular ground slate points are reported to be distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:48)e Three specimens were recovered from Lot 73, one from natural stratum G/O, one from G with shell, and one from dark G. Other thin ground slate points and fragments were also found, and their distributions are of interest here. Three corner notched thin ground slate points were found, one from natural stratum N, one from G/O, and one from G with s h e l l . The basal notched thin ground slate point frag- ment was recovered from natural stratum F. Tip fragments and medial fragments of thin ground slate points came from natural strata F, G/O, G with shell, and H. Of the 14 thin ground slate points and fragments, four are from natural stratum F, one i s from N, three are from G/O, four are from G with shell, one i s from dark G, and one i s from H. Thick ground slate points are li s t e d as distinctive of the Marpole and Locarno Beach Culture Types (Mitchell 1971a: 52, 57). Only one of these items was recovered from Lot 73, and i t came from natural stratum G with shel l . Two point bases that appear to be from thick points of this class were also recovered, one from natural stratum G with shell and the other from natural stratum H. 155 Thin ground slate knives are found in both the Gulf of Georgia and Marpole Culture Types (Mitchell 1971a:48, 52). On Lot 73 this class of artifact was found in natural strata A, F, "G", and G with shell in quantities of two, one, one, and one respectively. One medium thick ground slate knife fragment was recovered from natural stratum I. Celts of various forms are distinctive of each culture type. Gulf of Georgia Culture Type celts are f a i r l y large, thin, and well made (Mitchell 1971a:48). Marpole Culture Type celts are of various sizes, but usually large. They are roughly made with a flattened oval cross section and sides that often taper to a rounded, rough p o l l (Mitchell 1971a:52)e The Locarno Beach Culture Type celts are small and well made with rectangular plan and cross section (Mitchell 1971a:57)« Two celts were recovered from Lot 73, one from natural stratum "G", and the other from natural stratum G with s h e l l . The former celt was small and rect- angular in plan and cross section and was well made. The latter was quite large and well made, with edges converging toward the well finished p o l l . Unfortunately, neither of these forms corresponds stratigraphically with the associations expected of them in terms of other arti f a c t s . These two artifacts do not seem to conform to the distribution expected of them on the basis of Mitchell's proposed distinctive features, but since only two celts are involved, reliance should not be placed on them as indications of cultural a f f i l i a t i o n . 156 Stone disc beads are reportedly distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52), Four were recovered from the Lot 73 excavations, one from natural stratum N, one from G/O, and two from G with shell. There were 156 bone artifacts recovered from Lot 73, forty-six of them from the disturbed historic strata*, Of the remaining 110 artifacts in aboriginal deposits, only six are found below natural stratum dark G, and none were found below natural stratum S. As with ground stone, natural strata F, G/O, and G with shell contain the majority of the bone artifacts from aboriginal deposits s There are 31 in F, 28 in G/O, and 29 in G with shell for a total of 88 (81%). The largest single artifact class i s worked bone fragments, of which there are 38 in aboriginal deposits. Light duty bone points are next most numerous with twenty, ten of which are from natural stratum F alone. Fifteen bone bipoints were recovered. Seven of these were from natural stratum F, while the other eight were found in strata G/O, G with shell, and H. The ten s p l i t bone awls from aboriginal deposits were scattered evenly from natural stratum F down to natural stratum G with s h e l l . This class of artifact i s reportedly distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia and Marpole Culture Types (Mitchell 1971as48, 52). Heavy duty bone points accounted for 8 artifacts, 5 of which were found in natural stratum G/O of below0 Five bone wedges/chisels were 157 found, and i t i s worth noting that they a l l came from natural strata N, G/O, and G with shells A l l four wedge base bone points were found in aboriginal deposits* One was found in natural stratum F, two in G/O, and one i n dark G. One distinctive archaeological feature of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type i s "numerous single-and double-pointed bone objects of various sizes * • • " (Mitchell 1971a:48)* Aboriginal deposits on Lot 73 contained 47 of these artifacts, or 43%, of the bone artifacts in aboriginal deposits* Natural stratum F contained 19, or 40%, of these artifacts* Ten of them are light duty bone points, 7 are bipoints, 1 i s a heavy duty bone point, and 1 i s a wedge base bone point* Natural stratum G/O contains 8 of these points, 4 of which are light duty, 2 are wedge base, 1 i s heavy duty, and 1 i s bipoint* Natural stratum G with shell contains 14 of these artifacts, only 3 of which are light duty while S are heavy duty* Six bipoints were recovered, but wedge base points were absent* The lowest bone point was found in natural stratum Q* Two patterns seem to emerge from this scrutiny of bone points* F i r s t , bipoints, when they are found in numbers, seem to comprise approximately the same proportion of bone points for each natural stratum* Second, there may be an inverse relationship i n the proportions of heavy duty and light duty bone points through time* Heavy duty points seem to be more common in earlier strata on Lot 73 and light duty points are more common in later strata* If more than one 158 component is represented i n the aboriginal strata, as w i l l presently be shown to be the case, then the distinctiveness of the previously quoted archaeological feature should be reconsidered. Unilaterally barbed bone points are another class of artif a c t thought to be distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a;48). Two were found on Lot 73, one in natural stratum K, and the other in natural stratum H. The latter specimen had been broken transversely at about one-third to one-half i t s original length, and the break had been abraded to form a new broad, wedge shaped t i p . The workmanship on this point was inferior to that of the former example. A f i e l d assessment of component divisions places one of these points in a Gulf of Georgia component and another in a Marpole component, thereby raising the issue again of the r e l i a b i l i t y of distinctive archaeological features for a l l cases. The remaining bone tools are found in small numbers. It i s of interest to note that a bead and a pendant were found in natural stratum G with shell, and that a bird bone whistle fragment was recovered from H-l. A l l three of these items could be thought of as decorative or ceremonial, and a l l are from deep in the midden deposits. The bead and the whistle are both of bird bone. Two similar artifacts were recovered from Montague Harbour I (Mitchell 1971a:136). The unidentified sea mammal bone artif a c t was recovered 159 from natural stratum J. With the sea mammal bone wedge from stratum N, there i s a suggestion that sea mammal ut i l i z a t i o n may have become important during the period when the later strata were being deposited e Only 33 antler artifacts were recovered, and 25 of these came from aboriginal deposits. The majority of these a r t i - facts, ten, were from natural stratum G/O, followed by natural stratum P with six, and G with shell with four. The most frequent artifact class i s antler composite toggling harpoon valves, which are reportedly distinctive of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:48). The seven specimens recovered from aboriginal deposits were evenly distributed in natural strata F, G/O, and G with shell. Since a component division may f a l l in between these strata, the universal applicability of this feature must again be questioned. The two specimens from natural stratum G with shell are much more slender and elongated in form, and they appear to be channelled to receive a piercing point of circular cross section. The other valves, i t w i l l be recalled, have a shallow channel more suited to wedge base bone points. Antler wedges are l i s t e d as distinctive archaeological features of the Gulf of Georgia and Marpole Culture Types (Mitchell 1971a:48, 52). The five recovered from aboriginal deposits on Lot 73 are evenly distributed between natural strata p and G with s h e l l . Three antler points, analogous to the bone points 160 discussed above, were recovered from natural stratum G/O. This may be another indication of a shift through time from antler to bone as a raw material for tools. These points would be classed as light duty rather than heavy duty, however. A single barbed antler point was recovered from natural stratum G with shel l . This class of artifact i s l i s t e d as an archaeological feature distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a;52). Although a single example of this artifact class cannot be conclusive, i t s location i s suggestive when viewed relative to other artifact classes that are indicative of the Marpole and Gulf of Georgia Culture Types. As mentioned earlier, antler artifacts are found more often in the lower strata of their range. This range i s also of interest since no antler artifacts are found below the bottom of natural stratum G with s h e l l . This distribution seems unusual considering that substantial shell midden deposits of similar pH continue underneath G with shel l . Like the paucity of bone below this point, the lack of antler artifacts may indicate cultural variation through time in the choice of raw material for artifact manufacture. On the other hand, both bone and antler distribution may reflect changes in a c t i v i t i e s carried on at the s i t e . There are 67 shell artifacts, of which 65 are from aboriginal deposits. Of these undisturbed artifacts, 49 are shell disc beads. Thirteen whole or fragmentary dentalia shells came from natural stratum G with shell. These artifacts, 161 l i k e the bone pendant and the copper beads, were associated with Burial 4, The vertical distribution of shell artifacts i s identical to that of antler artifacts, none being found below natural stratum G with shell* A total of 49 shell disc beads were recovered, one from G/O and the other 48 from natural stratum G with shells There were 14 dentalia a r t i - facts, the additional specimen coming from natural stratum Fe Half a shell ring segment was found in natural stratum K, and a Mytilus californianus chisel or gouge fragment was recovered from natural stratum F 0 Disc beads and dentalia shells are often included with burials in the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52), Twenty-seven mineral artifacts were recovered from aboriginal deposits on Lot 73. One was mica, and the remaining 26 were ochre 0 The vertical distribution of mineral artifacts i s almost identical to that of shell and antler artifacts, only two pieces of ochre being recovered from natural stratum H 9 Natural strata F, G/O, and G with shell contained the largest numbers of ochre artifacts, eight, five, and four respectively» The mica flake was found in natural stratum G with shel l s Two wood artifacts were recovered, both from aboriginal depositse The cedar bark wrapping found in natural stratum G with shell was associated with Burial 4 and contained copper, shell disc beads, and dentalia shells» The wood fragments from natural stratum H do not have any identifiable 162 appearance and may represent the remains of a stake that was driven into this stratum recently. Several fragments of native copper were treated as one artifact because they were found with the cedar bark wrapping. Their fragmentary condition precluded the possi- b i l i t y of establishing how many beads there were i n i t i a l l y . Native copper i s l i s t e d as an inclusion with burials of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52). These specimens, associated with Burial 4, were found in natural stratum G with s h e l l . Table XXII summarizes the locations of Mitchell's distinctive archaeological features i n the natural strata of Lot 73 at Deep Bay. 163 TABLE XXII Comparison of Distinctive Archaeological Features of Three Culture Types from the Gulf of Georgia Area (after Mitchell 1971a:48, 52, 57) with Artifact Class Distribution, Lot 73, DiSe 7 e artifact class culture type stratigraphic association, DiSe 7. small, triangular chipped basalt points Gulf of Georgia I, G-2 various chipped stone point Marpole forms; stemmed and unstemmed; common asymmetric triangular forms contracting stem chipped basalt points microblades and cores chipped slate/sandstone knives or scrapers cobble, s p l i t cobble, and boulder spall tools large faceted ground slate and bone points large ground slate points, faceted on lenticular cross section thin, triangular ground slate points thin ground slate knives thick ground slate knives, partial abrasion large, well made celts various sized, roughly finished celts Locarno Beach Marpole Locarno Beach Locarno Beach Locarno Beach Locarno Beach Marpole Gulf of Georgia Georgia Beach Georgia Gulf of Marpole Locarno G with shell P, G/O, G-2 P, G-2 H I, K, G/O, G with shell, P G with shell G/O, G with shell, G-2, F, N A, F, "G", G with shell Gulf of Marpole G with shell TABLE XXII (continued) 164 artifact class culture type stratigraphic association, DiSe 7. small, well made celts labrets and earspools Gulf Islands Complex items flat-topped hand mauls decorated-top hand mauls numerous, irregular abrasive stones handstones and grinding slabs disc beads of shale or clam shell perforated stones, large and small grooved or notched sinkers stone sculpture unilaterally barbed bone points unilaterally barbed antler points b i l a t e r a l l y barbed antler points numerous single and double pointed bone objects Locarno Beach Marpole Locarno Beach Locarno Beach Gulf of Georgia Marpole Gulf of Georgia Locarno Beach Marpole Marpole Marpole Locarno Beach Marpole Gulf of Georgia Marpole Locarno Beach Gulf of Georgia »«G" A, D, C, F, K, N, G/O, G with shell, P N, G/O, G with s h e l l , P K, H G with shell s p l i t or sectioned bone awls Gulf of Georgia Marpole A, B, D, E, C, F, G/O, G with shell, H, J, G-2, dark G B, F, "G", I, K G/O, G with shell TABLE XXII (continued) 165 artifact class culture type stratigraphic association, DiSe 7 0 large needles (bone) heavy bone wedges antler wedges barbed antler harpoons with line attachment antler sculpture antler composite toggling harpoons valves antler one piece toggling harpoon heads Marpole Locarno Beach Gulf of Georgia Marpole A, F, K, G/O, G with shell Marpole Gulf of Locarno Locarno antler foreshafts for above Locarno harpoons triangular ground sea mussel Gulf of points sea mussel shell celts frequent use of native copper ornaments Locarno Marpole Georgia Beach Beach Beach Georgia Beach loosely flexed midden burial Gulf of above ground deposition; few lasting inclusions midden burial, loose to Marpole tight flex; often inclusions, sometdimes cairns Georgia skull deformation Gulf of Marpole large post moulds and house Gulf of outlines Marpole clay lined depressions and Locarno vertical rock slab alignments Georgia Georgia Beach A, D, F, G/O, G with shell G with shell F, K, G/O, G with shell, P inland location occasionally Locarno Beach 166 CHAPTER V FEATURES Introduction Seven features are described in this section. They range i n size from small basin-shaped depressions of less than one meter i n diameter to rock alignments of 275 meters in length. These features are intended to show pertinent aspects of the cultural development at this s i t e . Two features are included because their relationship to the cultural sequence i s unknown. Features Figure 21 shows in plan the rock wall f i s h trap to the southeast of the sit e . It i s believed that this trap was used to harvest the abundant herring run that occurs along this beach i n early spring each year. A similar f i s h trap has been recorded approximately five miles south of the Big Qualicum River. In each case, advantage has been taken of natural inter»tidal beach formations. The trap i s constructed in a large depression with a relatively sandy bottom. To the water side of the trap i s a ridge of cobble covered beach, the elevation of which i s higher than the top of the rock walls forming the trap. This beach ridge protects the rock walls Figure 21. Rock wall f i s h trap, DiSe 7 168 of the trap from wave destruction. Even in a large storm the walls are covered by about one meter of water before large waves pass over them. The floor of the depression in which the trap i s constructed slopes down to the north. Water therefore enters and leaves the trap from the north end. Following the current out of the trap, f i s h would come to a relatively narrow aperture in the stone walls where they would be taken in set nets, dip nets, or basketry traps. Present use of the Deep Bay f i s h trap as a low tide boat launching basin may have altered this portion of the trap, but on the trap below Big Qualicum River the feature i s quite evident• At the high end of the trap the rock wall flares into two wings that meet i n an abrupt V-shaped protrusion that points into the f i s h trap. This irregularity in the wall i s at approximately the deepest part of the depression in which the trap i s b u i l t . On an ebb tide the water inside the trap drains at a faster rate than water comes into i t from the reservoir beyond this wall, and the water coming into the trap passes mostly through the V formation in the wall with considerable speed. The purpose of this config- uration i s unclear. Possibly i t represents an i n i t i a l trap for f i s h following the ebb tide out of the reservoir beyond the trap; possibly i t regulates draining i n the trap so that f i s h i n the trap w i l l seek an exit from the trap over a longer period of time than i f a school were to exit a l l at 169 once. In either case, the result would be a more efficient procedure for the acquisition of f i s h within the trap,, No age can be assigned to the trap, but i t s ingenious con- struction would preserve i t for as long as the cobble ridge remained stable. An historic feature i s shown in Figure 22. A cement block i s clearly visible i n the upper right corner of the picture, and the edge of another one can be seen between two boulders just above and to the l e f t (west) of the stake i n the foreground. To the l e f t of this feature, i n excavation unit 1, are a series of disturbed strata that were probably dumped there recently as f i l l for the outside of the rock alignment. To the right (east) of the feature, in excavation unit 2, the surface of natural stratum C i s v i s i b l e . Although historic materials are not uncommon in C, they may be present as a result of having been intruded into an aboriginal stratum that i s relatively thin. It can be seen that the cobbles and at least one cement block rest on, rather than i n , natural stratum C. A concentration of adzed antler fragments, labelled art i f a c t #1147, i s shown in Figure 23b. These fragments, numbering well over one hundred, were found lying on the surface of natural stratum M i n an area about 70 x 55 cm. A crescent of crushed mussel shell flanks the antler concen- tration to the west. Most of the fragments were small and in poor condition when collected. Subsequent preservation Figure 22. Historic feature showing cement blocks, Lot 73, DiSe 7. a LOT 73 R ROCK RT ROOT 0 L _1_ 1.0 _J METRES Figure 23 Features and burials, Lot 73, DiSe 7. a. plan of natural stratum G-2; b. concentration of adzed antler fragments in the laboratory managed to save most of them, but some simply disintegrated. The few larger fragments indicate that an antler beam—probably of an elk, judging from the reconstructed diameter of the beam—had been adzed along the surface and diagonally at one end. Many fragments appear to have been s p l i t from the beam after i t was adzed. The con- centration of the debris and the manner in which i t has been worked suggests that i t i s the detritus of i n i t i a l antler manufacturing. This process may have involved freeing the antler from the skull, producing useful pieces of antler, or roughing raw antler into shape for abrasion. The variety in fragment size and the very small size of most fragments suggests that this material constitutes primary refuse. As such, i t may indicate a brief, seasonal site occupation (Schiffer 1972:162). Figure 23a shows the areal extent of natural stratum G-2 and some of i t s stratigraphic associations. An appraisal of the shape of this feature, as shown by the profiles and the figure, suggests that i t i s a shallow, roughly circular pi t excavated into natural stratum H. As the plan shows, there are numerous rocks in this feature, some of which are firecracked. The feature also contains large quantities of whole and fragmented clam sh e l l . Butter clam, l i t t l e neck clam, barnacle, and edible mussel are the predominant species. The matrix i s loose brown sandy s o i l . This feature i s remin- iscent of two features of similar size, shape, and content at 173 Saltery Bay (Monks ii.d. a). Clams were reported to have been steamed open over hot rocks i n earth ovens. This process i s a prelude to clam storage preservation techniques (Gunther 1927:206; Barnett 1975:61), but i t i s not inconceivable that clams were cooked in this manner on an everyday basis as well. The denial of aboriginal stone boiling by four well informed sources (Barnett 1975:68) implies that cooking over hot rocks in an earth oven may have been very common in aboriginal times. Of the mollusc species found to be abundant i n natural stratum G-2, basket cockle is the only one that was even occasionally sought for storage (Stern 1934:47). Thus, material stratum G-2 may represent an earth oven or steaming pit used to prepare several species of mollusc for everyday consumption. Figure 24 shows disarticulated dog remains i n the upper cairn of Burial 5. The remains pictured here were found between layers of cobbles covering the human remains. The photograph was taken facing east. A f u l l discussion of these remains i s included with the discussion of Burial 5 (see Appendix I I ) . Cairn burials, often with inclusions, are lis t e d by Mitchell (1971a:52) as distinctive archaeological features of the Marpole Culture Type. Although dog remains are not l i s t e d among the usual inclusions, dog burials are ethnographically recorded (Barnett 1975:97). and i t i s con- ceivable that a dog might be buried with i t s owner. The clay floor as i t was exposed in excavation units 3 174 and 4 i s shown in Figure 25. As the figure shows, the floor was only several centimeters thick, and i t sloped down from i t s f i r s t appearance at about west 54.20 m. It was very thin in excavation unit 2 and consequently removed before i t was noticed. No cultural remains were found below this floor. Carbon sample GaK-6039 was obtained from this feature i n excavation unit 4. The genesis of this floor i s unknown, but i t s uniqueness among the water deposited strata, i t s impregnation with many small pieces of charcoal, the presence of cultural material above i t , and the absence of such material below i t , a l l suggest that i t may not be of natural origin. Instead, i t may represent a compacted l i v i n g area at a period of relatively low tides. Figure 26 shows a depression in the surface of natural stratum D on Lot 81. This depression has a square outline with rounded edges and corners and i s approximately one meter square. It i s set i n a clay stratum that i s discontinuous throughout the excavation unit. Beside the feature i s a large slab of disintegrated sandstone and a large hole through the clay stratum that may be a post hole or a cache p i t . In this depression were found an abrasive stone, an antler com- posite toggling harpoon valve, whole butter clam and edible mussel shell valves, and a cherry p i t (Prunus sp.). The feature i t s e l f i s 5 cm to 10 cm deep with sides that slope at approximately a 45 ° angle to a f l a t bottom. The perimeter of the depression i s orange, as i f the clay had Figure 25. Compacted sand, gravel, and clay floor, Lot 73, DiSe 7.  178 been fi r e d , but the bottom of the depression and the clay away from the perimeter of the depression are yellowish- brown. Combined with the total absence of charcoal and firecracked rock, these findings seem to indicate that the depression was not used as a hearth or f i r e p i t . What the feature may have been used for i s not clear, but i t was probably inside a shelter of some sort. Otherwise, i t s sur- face would probably be eroded. 179 CHAPTER VI FAUNAL REMAINS Introduction This chapter presents a description of the faunal remains recovered from the excavations on Lots 73 and 81. A l l the mammal and bird remains were weighed individually and identi- f i e d . Identifications were based on comparative skeletal collections i n the Department of Zoology Vertebrate Museum and the Archaeology Laboratory at the University of British Columbia and in the British Columbia Provincial Museum's Birds and Mammals Division. Primary written references were Olsen (1968), Howard (1929), Gilbert (1973), and Schmid (1972). The minimum numbers of individuals for each class of remains was calculated within each analytical unit by how many of any given skeletal elements were present and whether the elements were adult or juvenile. Estimating minimum numbers of individuals on the basis of both natural stratum and excav- ation unit boundaries produces a relatively inflated estimate compared to within-site or within-stratum estimates (Grayson 1973:432-439). Consequently, the estimates presented in this chapter should be used only to compare variations in abun- dance of a class from one analytical unit to another. These estimates hold no real value i n terms of inter-site comparisons. 180 Estimates were also made of the grams of usable meat represented by each class of remains within each analytical unit* Multiplying the minimum numbers of individuals i n a given class by the l i v e weight of one individual produces a total l i v e weight. This weight i s then multiplied by a fraction, representing the usable portion of an individual animal of the class, to produce an estimate of usable meat represented by the remains i n question* This procedure, the estimates of l i v e weight, and the estimated fraction of usable meat for each faunal class follow White (1953:346-348). As with minimum numbers of individuals, these estimates are intended to be used only as a measure of relative a v a i l - a b i l i t y within this particular site* Because these estimates are based on figures for minimum numbers of individuals, distortions contained i n these estimates are inherent i n subsequent estimates of grams of usable meat* The f i s h and mollusc remains were not subjected to such rigorous treatment* The prodigious amounts of these remains made 100% identification impractical* It was decided to sample these faunal remains i n conjunction with the s o i l samples reported in Chapter III and Appendix I* Consequently, there were thirty samples of these remains from analytical units on Lot 73 and ten from analytical units on Lot 81* A 500 cc sample of matrix was mechanically s p l i t from the dried 2 l i t e r f i e l d samples. This was passed through a stack of Canadian Standard Sieves containing 8mm, 4mm, and 2mm mesh 181 sizes. Rocks were removed, and the remaining organic debris, mostly f i s h and mollusc remains, were identified and separated according to faunal class. The remains in each class were then weighed. No estimates of minimum numbers of individuals or grams of usable meat were made. Faunal Remains Lot 81 Table XXIV presents the weights and minimum numbers of individuals of faunal remains from Lot 81. Table XXV shows the estimated grams of usable meat of each mammal and bird species in each analytical unit. Except in the case of elk, White's estimates for mammals seem to be conservative. Therefore, the weights of individuals used for these e s t i - mations are: elk, 500 lb (Cowan and Guiget 1968:361); mule deer, 200 lb (White 1953:397); sea lion, 1500 lb (average adult male and female, Cowan and Guiget 1968:347); and seal, 185 lb (average adult male and female, Cowan and Guiget 1968: 353). Estimates of l i v e weights of bird species are taken from White (1953:398) and from inferences derived from Guiget (1958, 1967). For both birds and mammals the estimated per- centages of usable meat for each species (White 1953:397-398) were used. Dogs are omitted because they are not ethno- graphically known to be a subsistence resource. Mammal and bird remains not present at least twice w i l l be deleted from subsequent analyses and are presented in Table XXVI. Fish and mollusc remains not present in at least two TABLE XXIII Li s t of Generic and Common Names of Species Found in Tables. XXIV through XXX, Lots 73 and 81, DiSe 7, Generic Name Bos sp. Canis sp. Castor canadensis (Kuhl) Cervus elaphus (Linnaeus) Belphxnxdae Eumetopias jubata (Schreber) Microtus sp. Odocoileus hemionus columbianus Common Name cow domestic dog beaver wapiti dolphins and porpoises northern sea li o n mouse mule deer or coast black t a i l deer harbor seal or hair seal raccoon surface feeding ducks greater scaup duck ruffed grouse murrelet goose raven blue grouse coot loon bald eagle seagull american widgeon scoter swan cormorant grebe shoveller murre pacific herring red i r i s h lord salmon ling cod flounders and halibuts dogfish (Rafinesque) Phoca vituiina richardii (Linnaeus) Procyon lotor (Linnaeus) Anas sp. Aythya marila (Linnaeus) Bonasa umbellus (Linnaeus) Brachyramphus sp. Branta sp. Corvus corax (Linnaeus) Dendragapus obscursus (Say) Fulica sp. Gavia sp. Haliaeetus leucocephalus '{ tLinnaeus) Larus sp. Mareca americana Melanitta sp. Olor sp. Phalacrocoracidae Podiceps/Colymbus Spatula clypeata (Linnaeus) Uria sp. Clupea harengus p a l l a s i i (Valenciennes) Hemilepedotus sp. Oncorhynchus sp. Ophiodon elongatus (Girard) Pleuronectiformes Squalus suckleyi (Girard) 183 TABLE XXIII (continued) Generic Name Common Name Acmaea sp. Balanus sp, Bittium sp, Clinocardium n u t t a l l i (Conrad) Echinarachinius exentricus (Eschscholtz) Iselica obtusa laxa (Pall) Macoma nasuta (Conrad) Mytilus californianus (Conrad) Mytilus edulis (Linnaeus) Nassarius mendicus (Gould) Ostrea lurida (Carpenter) Polinices l e w i s i i (Gould) Protothaca staminea (Conrad) Saxidomus giganteus (Deshayes) Strongylocentrotus drobachiensis (Muller) Thais sp. Tresus sp, Cancer sp, limpet barnacle bittium basket cockle sand dollar blunt or obtuse i s e l i c a bent nose clam sea mussel edible or bay mussel lean dog whelk native oyster moon snail l i t t l e neck clam butter clam green sea urchin purple whelk horse clam crab 184 TABLE XXIV Weight (gm) of Faunal Remains by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7. MNI = minimum numbers of individuals F A U N A M A M M A L S B I R D S 4 0 00 6 6 0 8 1.30 2 4 . 2 0 ' 5 .50 147.20 5 1 7 0 ' 5 0 . 9 0 143.20 5 .00 6 .60 4 1.10 6.00 I 16.60 7 .60 189.90 ' 9 .70 14.30 4 0 1 . 10 '28 .00 I 10. 10 17.20 10 .30 10 40 5.70 4 50 2.30 .60 .10 4.80 77TO 30 3 0 0 26. I I 7 .90 35 .60 .80 7 .60 9 .50 9 0 8 .50 2 .30 26.60 14.80 5.1 0 4 3 . 9 0 I 26 0 0 20 I 80 .30 I 60 I .40 12 .00 1.00 10 1 .30 5 . 0 0 I I .50 8.60^ 14.90 3 0 . 2 0 .50 .10 . 10 .90 ' .60 6 .00 C I I.10 1.20 C2 1.70 10 I . 40 4 .90 . 8.50 9 .60 4.40 5. 10 70 .80 .50 2 . 5 0 .27 .54 .30 .70 F I F A U N A M N 1 F I S H M O L L U S C A M A M M A L B I R D .55 .07 .06 .37 21.42 2.35 3.28 8 . 4 5 . 0 5 1.44 4 . 7 9 . 3 8 . 5 8 .01 .36 .08 .03 .21 .78 , .27 , .10 .01 .01 .03 .06 . 16 .36, 5.35 .07 ' .24 I .49 27 .45 , 59 .55 6. 70 . 1 8 .30 .90 4.22 . 10 2 2 2 ~ II I I I I I .82 I .66 ' ' .10 ' .04 .52 .09 .01 .10 . 13 .04 .08, . 5 0 . 0 5 .95, 24 "80* " CI C2 D E F F I G TABLE XXV Estimated Weight of Usable Meat (gm) for each Identifiable Mammal and Bird Species by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7. 0) H 0 W Natural Excavation Stratum Unit CO I Q) til 10 a> H •H o o o 8 S! •A 3 >| O (4 H •H M Si 04 W to 3, M CM <i +» •p •H .3 H 0 s w M O (0 04? o •H •d 8: H X ) •H <H •H +•» S •H O S3 Total A 1 11364 mm 13636 5910 79 - 95 95 - 48 237 31464 2 - 95454 13636 - 63 95 95 477 48 79 109947 3 - 47727 9090 5910 - - 95 - '- 158 62980 4 11364 - 9090 - - - 95 - 158 20707 B 2 - 4545 mm - 63 - - • - 48 79 4735 3 - - 4545 - - - 95 - 477 48 79 5244 C 2 - - 9090 - - - - - - - 79 9169 3 11364 9090 mm - - 95 - - 48 79 20676 C-l 3 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 C-2 3 - - - - - - - - • 0 D 3 mm - mm - 79 - - - - 79 E 3 - - 9090 - - - - - - 79 9169 F 3 - - 4545 - 79 63 - - - 79 4766 F - l 3 mm 4545 4545 G 3 - — - - - - - - — - 0 Total 34092 143181 90902 11820 237 189 475 285 954 240 1106 283481 186 TABLE XXVI Weight (gm) of Mammal and Bird Remains Not Present in at Least Two Excavation Units by Natural Stratum and Arbitrary Level, Lot 81, DiSe 7. Species Natural stratum A B F - l Excavation unit 1 2 3 4 2 3 Mammals Bos Castor canadensis Microtus Procyon lotor 227.8 - - 0.6 - - - 0.2 - - 0.1 - - - 2.8 - Birds Dendragapus obscursus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Mareca americana Phalacrocoracidae - 1.5 - - 0.1 - - 1.4 - 0.3 Spatula clypeata - 0.1 - 18? samples axe presented i n Table XXVII. Thus, bixds and mammals not present i n at least 6.7% of a l l analytical units and f i s h and mollusc remains not present i n at least 10% of a l l samples are found in this table. It can be seen that land mammal remains are more common than sea mammal remains and that only 2.4 gm of a total of 141.6 gm of sea mammal remains were recovered from undisturbed deposits. Land mammal remains, primarily deer, dog, and unidentified land mammal, predominate i n the undisturbed deposits. Of the identified remains, deer i s the more common. Among birds, unidentifiable duck and unidentifiable bird are most common. A l l the identi- f i e d species are water birds, and a l l but Larus sp. (seagull) are migratory. The greatest weight of bird remains comes from the disturbed stratum. The f i s h remains indicate that a very narrow range of species was commonly exploited. No species i s limited to the disturbed stratum, but dogfish and salmon are uncommon i n the aboriginal deposits. The frequent occurrence of herring remains suggest i t s importance as a subsistence resource. The absence of f i s h species from natural stratum A in excavation units 1, 2, and 4, and from strata B and C in excavation unit 2 i s a result of sampling procedure. The same i s true for mollusc remains. A l l species are present i n both aboriginal and historic deposits, with the exception of Iselica obtusa. This species i s found only in aboriginal deposits. Edible mussel i s the most frequently represented species, followed closely by barnacle. Unidenti- 188 TABLE XXVII Weight (gm) of Fish and Mollusc Remains Not Present in at Least Two Samples by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7. Species Natural stratum H B F Excavation unit 3 2 3 Fish Ophiodon elongatus - - 0.47 Mollusc Clinocardium n u t t a l l i 6.19 Ostrea lurida - 0.23 Polinices lewisii , 4.21 189 fiable clam, not surprisingly, i s p l e n t i f u l . Natural stratum B contains more mollusc species than any other stratum, although natural stratum C-l approaches the same species content. The minimum numbers of individuals were calculated only on identified mammal and bird species. Among the mammals, i t can be seen again that sea mammal remains are found only i n the disturbed stratum. The calculation of minimum numbers of individuals i s a good equalization mechanism of comparing relative abundance of species whose remains are of markedly different weights (Imamoto 1974:31). This can be seen in examining dog and deer remains. Whereas their total weights on Lot 81 are 153.1 gm and 464.8 gm respectively, they both represent the remains of twenty individuals. The range of individuals i n a given stratum and excavation unit i s not as great for birds as i t i s for mammals. Except for the presence of unidentifiable duck remains in several instances, a l l other species remains represent single individuals. Natural strata C-l, C-2, F - l , and G contain no bird individuals, and Melanitta sp. remains, as noted before, are confined to the disturbed stratum. Table XXV indicates that sea lion accounts for the largest quantities of usable meat. Half of the usable meat represented by the Lot 81 mammal and bird remains comes from this source. Deer i s next most important as a meat source, representing approximately one-third of the total usable meat 190 on Lot 81. Elk ranks third at 12% of the total, and seal i s the lowest ranking mammal at 4%. Thus, mammals represent about 98% of the usable meat from birds and mammals on Lot 81. This suggests that the taking of mammals was much more li k e l y to have been a major activity than fowling, i n terms of meat acquisition. It i s clear from the totals for each analytical unit that the greatest weights of remains occur in the disturbed/ historic stratum. Without chronological control, however, i t i s impossible to say whether this situation represents dif f e r e n t i a l deposition of faunal remains over space, or through time, or both. If the disturbed/historic strata are omitted from consideration, then deer becomes the most im- portant source of meat, followed by elk. No sea mammals were recovered from the aboriginal deposits. However, mammals continue to account for by far the largest amount of usable meat. Although land mammals predominate in the s t r i c t l y aboriginal context (i.e. they are found in the undisturbed natural strata), i t seems clear that sea mammals were exploited at some time in the past and that sea lions especially could have accounted for large proportions of the total usable meat. Table XXVI and XXVII contain species that do not occur frequently enough to be included in Table XXIV. These species are found only i n natural stratum A. Mouse i s included i n this table rather than i n Table XXIV because these rodents are not reportedly used as food resources. Their remains 191 are often found articulated, suggesting that they may have died in burrows intruded into earlier strata. It i s somewhat surprising that raccoon, a common species, occurs infrequently. On the other hand, the absence of beaver, which i s locally uncommon, i s not too surprising. Of the five bird species represented, eagle and grouse are not migratory. The single f i s h species represented, ling cod, i s surprisingly infre- quent considering i t s general a v a i l a b i l i t y throughout the Gulf of Georgia. Equally surprising i s the infrequent occurrence of basket cockle when i t i s so readily available i n the intertidal zone on either side of the s i t e . Native oyster and moon snail are not as commonly used for food as clams, according to ethnographic sources, so i t i s reasonable that they should occur infrequently in archaeological deposits. Lot 73 The faunal remains from Lot 73 have been edited as well. Bird and mammal species not present at least five times ( i . e . those not having a chance of occurring at least once in each excavation unit) were omitted from Table XXVTII. Thus, i n 63 possible occurrences, those occurring 6.3% of the time or less are deleted. The deleted species are presented i n Table XXIX. Also, f i s h and mollusc remains not present in at least three out of thirty samples (10%) are deleted and found in Table XXIX as well. This table indicates that bird, f i s h , and mollusc remains are absent, except for one minute exception, from natural stratum P and earlier strata, i t i s also apparent TABLE XXVIII 192 Weight (gm) of Faunal Remains by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7. MNI = minimum numbers of individuals F A U N A M A M M A L S B I R D S F I S H NATURAL STRATUM 3 . 5 0 . 2 . 1 0 2 3 0 0 . 4 0 2 . 9 0 3 8 . 7 0 3 7 9 0 1 2 . 0 0 ' ' 1 4. 1 0 ' I I 5 . 2 0 ' 3 8 7 0 5 1 . 7 0 2 2 2 . 3 0 7 8 9 0 1 4 6 0 ' 2 6 . 5 0 ' 1 5 1 1 0 " 2 0 ' 3 0 3 3 0 4 0 6 0 1 6 0 1 . 3 0 . 5 0 3 . 5 0 3 . 5 0 1 1 0 . 3 0 4 . 3 0 5 5 0 4 0 2 8 0 2 3 0 . 5 3 , 0 3 . . 0 4 \ 0 9 . 2 7 ; ; 0 1 .' 1 2 3 4 5 A 1 2 . 5 0 . 3 7 0 . 71 7 0 9 0 1 3 0 1 3 9 0 1 ' 2 6 1 2 8 2 6 60 9 0 2 4 4 7 5 8 0 2 4 0 ' ' 7 7 0 ' 6 0 10 7 0 4 3 0 3 0 • ! 9 . , 2 3 1 2 D 4 0 0 0 7 0 8 1 2 E 5 0 3 0 9 . 9 0 4 9 . 3 0 9 9 0 ' ' 5 0 ' ' 4 4 . 9 0 ' 1 . 9 0 ' ' 4 . 7 0 ' 2 0 . 9 0 ' 1 0 2 9 0 1 . 2 0 ' 1 . 0 0 2 . 1 0 1 0 4 1 0 5 4 ' ' 0 3 ' 0 4 2 3 4 C 9 9 9 0 17 8 0 61 0 0 1 4 1 0 14 5 . 9 0 3 3 4 0 ' 9 6 I 0 ' 2 3 7 0 ' 1 . 1 0 ' 5 4 . 7 0 ' 6 0 ' 1 7 7 0 1 7 1 0 1 7 7 4 0 19 9 0 4 3 0 ' ' 1 0 7 5 0 ' 7 . 9 0 1 5 0 0 ' ' 3 4 6 0 ' ' 1 2 4 7 0 . 7 0 1 5 0 6 4 0 1 0 0 ' 3 0 2 0 2 9 0 4 0 5 0 0 2 0 4 8 0 ' 4 1 0 ' 7 0 2 5 0 I 2 1 ' \ 1 9 0 9 ^ . 0 2 1 2 3 4 5 F 8 7 0 1 5 0 9 8 1 0 5 7 0 2 1 0 ' 18 2 0 ' ' 3 4 3 3 2 0 2 2 0 3 0 0 6 0 3 . 0 6 4 5 G X 1 7 . 5 0 2 3 . 6 0 4 6 10 1 0 ' 3 5 0 ' 4 0 0 1 0 3 0 ' ' ' 2 8 7 0 ' 4 3 0 ; ' ' ' io \ 1 0 3 4 5 1 7 6 0 ' 1 0 6 0 ' . 0 3 4 5 J 1 1 10 1 2 . 4 0 2 0 5 0 1 4 0 ' ' 3 4 0 ' ' 3 2 4 0 ' 5 6 0 2 5 0 2 0 7 0 ' ' 8 . 5 0 ' ' 3 3 8 0 1 0 6 0 4 0 0 1 4 0 ' 1 . 6 0 5 0 ' 8 0 0 6 ' . [ 0 1 3 4 5 K 4 0 0 1 2 0 3 1 0 1 3 8 0 ' 3 0 6 4 0 6 2 0 5 3 6 0 ' 6 1 0 ' 1 0 0 ' ' 2 40] 2 0 7 6 ; ; 0 3 3 4 5 M 1 9 0 2 1 6 0 9 4 0 4 7 2 0 1 2 5 0 0 4 0 0 2 7 . 4 0 4 9 8 0 1 4 9 6 0 ' 5 9 3 0 ' 2 6 . 7 0 ' 3 6 . 4 0 ' 4 3 . 7 0 ' 1 3 . 6 0 ' 2 0 1 0 8 0 4 0 6 0 " • • • 2 Q 0 3 ; ; ; 0 2 3 4 5 N 1 8 0 2 1 0 1 7 0 1 3 . 2 0 ' ' 1 5 . 9 0 ' ' 51 . 3 0 ' 4 . 0 0 2 0 . 6 0 5 5 2 0 8 5 . 0 0 8 . 1 0 5 2 . 2 0 ' ' 3 5 . 1 0 ' 1 7 . 1 0 ' 1 0 9.90 21 . 0 0 2 . 0 0 7 9 , 0 0 8 6 0 5 1 0 8 4 . 0 0 3 1 . 0 0 . 9 0 ' 9 . 0 0 . 4 0 . 1 0 6 . 7 0 4 0 . 1 0 2 . 2 0 3 . 4 0 , 5 0 ' 1 . 2 0 1 . 7 0 1 2 0 ; ; 3 0 ; 2 3 ! : 6 . O P . : . U ' 0 4 1 2 3 4 5 GO 5 . 8 0 1 5 3 . 6 0 3 4 4 0 4 . 3 0 1 0 3 . 0 0 6 9 . 3 0 65.00'6 8 . 3 0 ' 2 0 4 . 8 0 ' 5 . 5 0 2 0 5 . 0 0 2 0 9 6 0 5 1 . 6 0 ' 8 3 2 0 2 3 4 0 . 7 0 5 . 0 0 1 . 3 0 1 . 5 0 1 . 2 0 3 . 8 0 1 1 . 0 0 1 4 . 0 0 1 0 8 5 0 . 6 0 ' 5 0 0 ' 5 . 1 0 1 . 0 4 . 0 8 . 3 3 1 2 3 GS 1 0 0 0 18 0 0 4 0 1 . 1 4 0 3 1 G 2 . 1 0 0 7 3 G D 6 0 2 4 . 5 0 2 8 0 0 6 6 . 3 0 2 6 3 0 ' 6 7 5 0 ' 2 3 0 7 5 0 3 0 2 4 0 8 0 2 3 0 1 1 3 ' ' 0 2 ' II 1 2 H 6 0 1 3 . 4 0 1 0 ' 2 . 5 0 ' 1 3 0 1 0 1 0 ' 3 0 0 4 5 8 1 2 H 1 3 . 6 0 4 0 1 0 2 0 . 1 0 ' i i o ' 1 0 1 2 R . 0 5 2 S 4 7 0 7 2 0 7 . 1 0 ' 6 0 ' 3 6 0 ' 1 0 ' ' 9 . 4 0 ' 1 1 . 9 0 ' 3 5 0 9 0 ' 1 0 0 1 0 0 ' 4 0 1 2 3 4 P 1 . 5 0 2 4 T 3 0 0 9 7 0 . 1 4 P 1 1 . 2 0 2 6 0 2 T 1 3 0 2 P 2 193 TABLE XXVIII (continued) 4 2 7 1 3 2 7 4 . 2 4 3 5 6 0 9 . 9 2 3 7 5 4 7 7 0 4 5 . 9 3 1 . 1 3 7 . 1 9 8 . 4 4 3 0 0 2 7 8 6 1 6 0 2 7 2 1 ' 2 ' 3 3 ' i ' 2 ' ' 1 ' ' 2 ' ' 1 1 i i i i • ' i ' ' ' i 1 1 2 ' 1 ' 2 1 2 3 4 5 A 3 9 . 5 7 2 . 8 9 1 1 3 . 5 5 8 . 2 5 2 3 . 2 1 3 . 5 1 1 5 . 5 3 . 3 1 0 4 . 4 8 1 . 3 1 " 8 4 . 3 6 2 1 . 9 7 ' L 6 9 1 0 3 2 5 2 2 1 2 B 3 . 1 5 4 3 5 5 2 3 6 1 4 6 5 4 7 7 7 6 . 5 3 . 2 6 12 3 2 0 0 9 ' 5 7 . 7 2 ' 2 . 2 5 2 1 ' 1 ' 1 1 2 D 4 . 8 3 3 . 4 0 12 5 9 6 2 0 . 4 9 1 1 . 7 8 . 7 2 1 9 . 0 7 . 0 8 ' . 7 0 3 . 4 2 ' 2 9 . 7 0 4 1 ' . 9 7 1 2 E 4 . 6 7 1 6 . 5 4 1 1 9 7 5 1 1 9 6 7 1 5 . 6 0 . 4 5 0 7 7 . 9 7 7 0 9 8 2 5 8 8 7 5 1 . 1 1 ' 1 1 6 0 ' 1 8 7 4 3 . 3 6 ; 2 4 2 1 2 ' 1 ' ' 1 1 2 3 4 C 1 7 8 1 . 4 2 4 4 . 7 7 2 3 . 6 0 1 . 4 7^ \9 1 3 2 1 5 . 7 2 7 . 2 8 8 4 9 6 2 4 4 . 9 4 01 . 0 3 ' 0 3 13 . 0 1 4 2 1 9 . 1 1 ; 6 . 3 4 2 0 . 2 4 . 6 1 5 8 3 2 2, 1 ' 2 1 2 1 > ; 2 1 1 1 i . ; i ; j . i , i i 1 2 3 4 5 F 2 . 8 0 6 0 . 9 6 . 4 9 3 . 1 1 1 1 1 ' 2 ' . . . . i . 4 5 G X 1 . 4 0 . 8 0 . 3 0 . 2 0 3 2 2 • l 0 . 0 3 . 18 2 . 7 8 . 1 0 1 0 . 2 3 . 7 3 . 1 5 . 0 3 1 1 i ' ' i ' i ' 3 4 5 1 . 4 2 76.12 2 . 3 5 3 . 6 0 i 4 5 J 2 . 3 1 6 2 5 . 0 3 1 . 3 2 . 4 0 4 . 2 0 . 0 2 4 9 . 1 5 1 i f i 2 " 1' i i i i 3 4 5 K 2 . 5 0 7 3 8 6 . 3 8 . 2 7 . 0 8 4 . 6 9 . 0 5 1 1 1' 1 1 i ; ; ; i ; ; 3 4 5 M 1 . 0 6 . 5 0 4 5 9 . 2 0 . 0 7 . 1 5 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 i ' i i 3 4 5 N 3 4 1 3 1 1 8 6 1 1 5 5 3 9 1 . 4 4 2 16 7 . 4 3 7 . 3 6 4 7 7 0 1 . 0 3 6 6 6 ; . 2 5 1 . 1 5 . 0 5 1 1 2 ' 1 1 ' 1 ' Z 2 ' l 2 2 2 2 i ' i ' ' r i ' 1 ' l ' 2 1' 2 1 2 3 4 5 G 0 . 9 5 1 2 0 9 1 . 3 8 16 7 6 6 5 7 9 7 3 0 . 6 7 1 1 0 7 1 0 4 6 1 4 5 3 . 2 8 1 3 . 9 8 . 2 0 0 6 3 . 5 7 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 ' 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 r ' ' i ' ' 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 G S 2 . 2 7 2 8 4 2 1 6 . 3 5 1 2 4 . 7 5 2 5 0 12 1 1 1 1 G 2 . 5 0 . 7 2 5 3 3 8 8 3 G D 5 . 0 9 1 . 1 4 . 6 1 15 5 5 5 7 . 2 1 0 2 . 9 4 1 5 8 4 . 1 9 . 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 H 5 . 4 6 . 6 6 1 . 1 0 3 4 . 9 1 3 9 4 8 2 . 9 0 1 9 . 3 8 2 4 2 . 8 8 3 4 . 2 9 9 . 4 8 3 5 . 2 4 . 8 4 . 0 3 . 2 2 2 4 9 1 5 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 H 1 . 1 7 . 7 7 . 3 6 1 1 1 2 0 . 9 2 8 . 3 4 3 . 6 8 8 . 8 0 1 8 . 4 4 3 . 3 0 . 1 7 . 0 4 1 . 4 0 . . 8 1 1 . 4 6 1 . 2 4 . 0 3 1 1 2 R 1 2 . 6 1 3 7 . 1 8 1 . 0 9 2 . 9 7 2 S 1 1 T i i ' 1 2 3 4 P , 1 1 ' 2 4 T i 1 4 P 1 2 T 1 2 P 2 TABLE XXIX Weight (gm) of Mammal, Bird, Fish, and Mollusc Remains Deleted from Table XXVIII, Lot 73, DiSe 7. Species Natural stratum A A A A B B D E C Excavation unit 1 3 4 5 1 2 1 1 2 Bos sp. - - - - - - 16.1 Castor canadensis 1.7 - - - - - - - - Cervus elaphus - - - - 6 . 4 - 5 s o Delphinidae - 17.1 Microtus sp. 0 . 1 Procyon lotor - - - - - - - . - unidentifiable mammal 0 . 4 - - - - - - 4 . 0 1 . 2 Cancer sp. - 0 . 9 - - - - - - - Anas sp. - - - 0 . 2 - - - - - Bonasa umbellus - - 0 . 2 - - - - - - Brachyramphus sp. - - - - - - - - - Corvus corax - - - - - - - - - Fulica sp. 2 . 0 - - - - - - - Gavxa sp. - - - - - - - - - Melanitta sp. - - - - - - - - - Uria sp. - - - 3.1 - - - - - Mytilus californianus - - - - - - 0.87 § Ostrea lurida - - - - - - - - - Nassarius mendicus - - - - - - - - - Hemilepidotus sp. - - - - - - - - - Ophxodon elongatus - - - - - 0 . 5 9 - - - Pleuronectiformes - - - - - - - - - TABLE XXIX (continued) Species Natural stratum C C F F F F "G" J K G/O Excavation unit 3 4 2 3 4 5 4 5 4 2 Bos sp. v Castor canadensis Cervus elaphus Delphinidae Microtus sp. Procyon lotor unidentifiable mammal Cancer sp. Anas sp. Bonasa umbellus Brachyramphus sp. Coryus corax Fulica sp. Gavia sp. Melanxtta sp. Urxa sp. Mytilus californianus Ostrea lurida Nassarius mendicus Hemilepidotus sp. Ophiodon elongatus PIeuronectiformes - - - - - 32.4 - - - - 1.4 — - - 5.7 - - - 0.5 - 0.1 0.1 - - - - 0.4 0.3 - - - - - - - - 2.6 - - - - - - - - 2.5 - - 0.1 - - - - - - - - - 0.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.90 - 0.01 - - - - - - - - TABLE XXIX (continued) Species Natural stratum G/O G/O G shell G shell H H H-l H-l T-l Excavation unit 4 5 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 Bos sp. Castor canadensis Cervus elaphus Delphinidae "* Microtus sp. Procyon lotor unident ifi a b l e mammal Cancer sp. Anas sp. Bonasa umbellus Brachyramphus "sp. Corvus corax Fulica sp. Gavia sp. Melanitta sp. Una sp. Mytilus californianus Ostrea lurida Nassarius mendicus Hemilepidotus sp. Ophiodon elongatus Pieuronecti formes - 17.8 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.4 0.50 0.30 0.4 2.1 1*4 2.3 0.2 0.1 2.5 0.52 - 4.99 - 1.35 - 197 that bird and mammal remains are less common in these strata compared with later strata. Among the mammals, the identified sea mammals are not found in strata that have, to this point, been treated as disturbed and/or historic strata. This dis- tribution supports the previous treatment of the strata i n question. Like Lot 81, dog, deer, and unidentified land mammal remains occur most frequently. It i s worth noting also that seal remains are found i n natural stratum P along with dog, deer, and unidentifiable land mammal. The persis- tence of land mammal remains into natural stratum P-2 suggests that, despite the absence of artifacts below natural stratum P-l, cultural deposits are being dealt with. Within the aboriginal strata, the frequency of mammal remains increases above and below natural stratum J, which contains relatively few remains. Bird remains also tend not to be found in natural stratum J and to increase in frequency of occurrence on either side of this stratum. A very limited range of species i s found in natural stratum P and below, only unidentifiable remains being found. Like the remains from Lot 81, the unidentifiable bird remains are most common on Lot 73, but among the identi- f i e d species, seagull occurs most frequently. Seagull, bald eagle, and Canada Goose are non-migratory species. Like the bird species represented on Lot 81, the migratory birds rep- resented on Lot 73 spend the winter on the coast. They nest in the interior of the province and i n northern Canada. 198 Of the identified f i s h species, two out of three are also migratory, Salmon remains are found occasionally throughout the record, but herring remains are almost ubiquitous, being absent only from natural stratum I, Dog- f i s h , like salmon, i s occasionally present. As noted prev- iously, no f i s h remains are found below natural stratum S. Mollusc remains are also virtually absent below natural stratum S, The ,01 gm of unidentifiable clam shell in natural stratum T hardly represents major cultural deposition. Bivalve species occur more frequently i n the record than do gastropod species. Among the bivalves, edible mussel remains occur most frequently and are present in greater quantity than any other species. L i t t l e neck clam i s the next most frequent in occurrence. It i s interesting to note that bent nose clam, which has a high tolerance to polluted water con- ditions, i s found only in the disturbed and historic strata. Those familar with the identification of mollusc remains from archaeological context w i l l appreciate the d i f f i c u l t y in distinguishing fragmentary horse clam and fragmentary butter clam remains. One option i s to create a single category for both remains (e.g, Connover 1972:276). The distinctive hinge and siphon aperture of horse clams, however, often makes i t possible to assign some fragments to each of these species. Since the location of the hinge, relative to the long axis of the shell, i s a major physical distinguishing character- i s t i c , the existence of two species of horse clam in the Gulf of Georgia area i s seldom recognizable among horse clam fragments. The fragmentary condition of most shells from Deep Bay therefore precluded this division. Fragments of horse clam or butter clam shell that were not clearly horse clam were assigned to the butter clam category. This pro- cedure may result in over representation of butter clam and under representation of horse clam. On the other hand, large fragments that appeared more l i k e l y to be horse clam shell than butter clam shell were added to the former category, thereby reducing the potential disparity in weight and frequency of occurrence between these two species. The procedure outlined above may also account for the infrequency of horse clam occurrences on Lot 81. Gastropods, i t has been noted, are less frequent than bivalves on Lot 73. The exception to this rule i s barnacle, which i s present i n as many samples as edible mussel, and which i s often present in considerable quantity as well. Several species are not l i k e l y to be food resource species, for example Acmaea, Bittium, i s e l i c a obtusa, and Echarachinius exentricus, but they are included here because they occur sufficiently in the deposits to warrant their inclusion. Iselica obtusa, unlike the other species just noted, i s found on the rocky cobble beach to the northeast of the site in vast quantities at the present time. The other species are presently limited to the intertidal zone on either side of the spit. 200 The data on minimum numbers of individuals for birds and mammals show that only mammal individuals are found in natural stratum P and below. The same pattern that was observed on Lot 81 can be seen with these data as well. Specifically, dog and deer are the most frequently occurring mammal species, and most bird species are represented by only one individual in any given natural stratum and excav- ation unit. Sea lion and grebe are not found i n the disturbed and historic strata, and seal i s represented by one individual in these strata. Several strata do not contain remains of individuals of identifiable species. Natural strata £, dark G, R, S, and T f a l l into this category where mammals are concerned. No identifiable bird individuals were found i n natural strata E, I, J, dark G, S, P, T, P-l, T - l , and P-2. Among the birds, seagull i s again the most frequently repre- sented species. The situation regarding estimates of usable meat, as shown i n Table XXX, i s somewhat different than the situation on Lot 81. The disturbed/historic strata on Lot 73 do not contain extraordinarily large estimated amounts of usable meat compared to the aboriginal natural strata. In fact, the greatest estimates of usable meat are found i n natural strata F, G/O, and G with shel l . These three natural strata account for 67% of the estimated usable meat on Lot 73. It is noteworthy that sea mammals are found most often in these natural strata. These three natural strata represent the TABLE XXX Estimated Weight (gm) of Usable Meat for each Identifiable Mammal and Bird Species by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7* Total A 1 - - 4595 - - mm - - 79 4624 2 - - 9090 254 63 - • 95 - - 9502 3 - - 4545 - - 254 - 79 4878 4 - - 9090 - - 254 95 - 158 9597 5 - - 5910 4545 - - - •- 95 - 158 10708 B 1 o - - 9090 - - mm - - 158 9248 D m* 1 mm 4545 _ _ _ mm 79 u 4624 2 - - 4545 - - - - 4545 E 1 o - - - - - - - - - 0 C 2 4545 mm _ mm 79 U 4624 3 - - 4545 - - - - mm 158 4703 4 - - 4545 - - - — - - 4545 F 1 47727 5910 9090 - - - 95 - 79 62901 2 47727 5910 9090 254 - - - - 62981 3 - - 13635 254 - - 95 - 79 14063 4 Mi - - - - • M» 95 - - 95 5 - - 9090 - - 254 - - 79 9423 •»G" 4 - 5910 4545 mm - mm - 48 - 10503 5 - mm 9090 mm - - - - 9090 TABLE XXX (continued) Natural Excavation Stratum Unit (0 rtJ •H a 0 +» © «J Xi 3 •n fi (0 •H H H •H H 3 (0 • H CO (If +* A •H 0) CO (0 +» a > H 3 0J •rl C 4 0 0 0 •H > <« o o o •H G •H o 0 0 a (U H 3 X! • r t M > <d 0) 0, O J5 CO < a H CO ?M3 OJ o •H (A 0 H J3 <« •H «H •H •H (3 0J •O •H O Total I 3 4545 4545 4 - - 4545 - - mm; - - • - 4545 5 - - - - mm -• - /' - 0 J 3 - - - - - .• - - - 0 4 - - - - - - - - - 0 5 - - 4545 - - - - - 4545 K 3 - - 4545 - - - - 48 - 4593 4 - - 4545 254 - - - - 79 4878 5 - - 4545 - - mm - - 79 4624 M 3 - mm 4545 - - - - - 79 4624 4 - - 4545 - - - 95 - - 4640 5 — - mm - — mm - - — 0 N 3 47727 - mm - - - - 79 47806 4 47727 - 4545 - mm - - - 79 52351 5 mm - - - 63 - - - - 63 G/O 1 - - 4545 - - - - - - 4545 2 - - 4545 - - - - - 79 4624 3 - - 4545 - - 254 - 48 79 4926 4 - 5910 9090 - - - 95 48 158 15301 5 95454 11820 9090 - 63 - •-. - 158 116585 withi shell 1 47727 5910 9090 - 63 - 285 79 63154 2 95454 - • 9090 254 - - 95 - 237 105130 3 95454 11820 4545 - - 254 95 48 158 112374 G-2 1 - - 4545 - - - 95 - 79 4719 H O r+ H -0 I V I to J> vO vO Ov 00 U) o to J> vO vO Ĵi Ol H Ol to to Ol to H H 00 4> to Ol to o to 00 00 Ol vO 00 Ov Ol X I H H a J>l-J4>tOJ>WtOI-'tO tO+J to tO M tO M UJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ol Ol Oi I l l l l l t v O l l l l l l v O v O I M M H O O O H I Ol I I I O I O I O I I I I I I I I a I J> J> J> J> CO Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol to I I I I I I I I I Ol I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I to to I I I I I I I I I I I I Oi I I Oi I vO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ol I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I VO VO t I vO I H H J> J> J> O Ov VO Oi Ol Oi 4> tO U) O 00 J> J> J> Oi Ol to O ^ l O OiOOOOiOiOiOJ>OvOU>OOiOOO CO S! H r+ 0> d g H o 3 £ r t r+ H» O » Eumetopias jubata Phoca vitulina Odocoileus hemionus Branta sp. Aythya marila Haliaeetus leucocephalus Larus sp. Podiceps/ Colymbus" unidentifiable duck 8 «+ H E o § 1+ 3 C (D P, 204 major aboriginal strata on Lot 73. The likelihood seems great, then, that sea mammal hunting was an important aspect of the food quest for a large portion of the time repre- sented by the Lot 73 deposits. Indeed, sea mammals are represented in natural strata N and P as well, implying a temporally extensive and continuous exploitation of this type of food resource. Of the estimated weight of usable meat represented in the aboriginal deposits, 76% i s sea mammal, most of i t sea li o n . Deer, the only land mammal represented on Lot 73, represents 29% of the total estimated usable meat from a l l natural strata and 24% of the estimated usable meat from the aboriginal deposits. Since sea mammals account for 70% of a l l meat, a l l birds represent less than 1% of the total usable meat represented on Lot 73. As far as the frequency with which the various species occur in the table, deer seem to be the most frequently represented species. Seal and sea lion , although they comprise a large portion of the total usable meat estimation, occur much less frequently. As already noted, they tend to occur only i n the major natural strata. The frequency of occurrence of mammal species i n the Lot 73 deposits may represent their relative abundance in the environment, however cultural patterns in the acquis- i t i o n of these species may be indicated as well* Because sea mammals represent such large quantities of usable meat per individual, the opportunity to acquire them i s unlikely 205 to have been missed, despite their relative scarcity when compared to deer. On the other hand, i t should be kept in mind that calculating minimum numbers of individuals from infrequently occurring species, such as sea mammal, w i l l result in an inflated estimate. Extrapolating from these estimates to estimates of usable meat, especially when the usable percentage of li v e weight i s high (White 1953:398), results i n figures that may be unduly inflated. For these reasons, the apparent abundance of sea mammal meat should be regarded with caution. The acquisition of deer, a more ubiquitous but less meaty species, seems l i k e l y to have occurred on a more routine basis. Birds clearly represent a peripheral dietary item and were probably taken as adjuncts to the main items of the food quest. These generalizations apply to the midden deposits but not to the P and T strata. In this water-laid group of strata birds are not represented, either through lack of acquisition or lack of preservation. Table XXIX presents species not incorporated in Table XXVIII. The most notable feature of Table XXIX i s the occurrence of cow remains i n natural stratum F. Given the degree of disturbance of this stratum toward the eastern end of the trench, i t i s l i k e l y that these remains, like the eight historic artifacts, have been intruded into abor- iginal deposits. Again, beaver, raccoon, and mouse occur infrequently, but they are joined by crab, elk, unidentifiable mammal, and a sea mammal of the dolphin family. Both the 206 Delphinidae and crab remains are found only i n the disturbed and historic strata. Half the bird species represented are migratory, the other half being available a l l year. Only two of the bird species (crow and grouse) are land birds and neither i s migratory. Even though crows are land birds they are very common along the shore. Infrequently occurring f i s h species include ling cod, a species of sculpin, and a f l a t f i s h of unidentifiable species. Since sculpin species are not ethno- graphical ly repotted to be major food resources, and since f l a t f i s h species are rare around Deep Bay, relative to other f i s h species, i t i s reasonable that these two kinds of f i s h should not occur frequently in the archaeological record. The infrequent occurrence of ling cod i s as surprising on Lot 73 as i t was on Lot 81. Native oyster occurs infrequently on Lot 73 as i t does on Lot 81. It i s joined, however, by Mytilus californianus, which grows only on the open coast and dog whelk, which inhabits the lower intertidal and sub- ti d a l zones of rocky beaches along the coast. The presence of Mytilus californianus probably does not indicate i t s use as a subsistence resource. Instead, i t was probably brought from the outer coast to Deep Bay through an exchange network, and was probably intended for use in artifact manufacture. 207 CHAPTER VII DELINEATION OF COMPONENTS Introduction In this chapter the cultural components thought to be represented by the material from Lot 73 are defined and identified. Lines of evidence contained in Chapters III through VI and Appendices I through IV are brought together for this purpose. It i s thought that this diversified approach to component delineation w i l l help to avoid the tendency to define components primarily on the basis of artifact dis- tributions. Subsequent to the delineation of components, an attempt i s made to establish cultural a f f i l i a t i o n s between the Deep Bay components and other components in the Gulf of Georgia area. Component I Although natural strata H through S contain only 17 artifacts, the nature of these artifacts and the composition of the matrices in which they were found suggest a f f i n i t i e s with later, rather than earlier, deposits. Unlike the over- lying strata, natural strata,P, T, P-l, T - l , and P-2 contain an artifact assemblage that i s entirely l i t h i c except for one worked mammal bone fragment. Among the l i t h i c artifacts, a l l but three are made by chipping. The faunal remains also 208 exhibit a marked change in frequency at the upper surface of natural stratum P. Below this boundary only a few land mammal and bird remains and no f i s h or mollusc remains are found. A l l these classes of remains are found in abundance above natural stratum P. Frequency distributions of grain sizes in s o i l samples (Figure 9) indicate that the surface of natural stratum P marks the top of the deposits contain- ing what are thought to be water borne natural constituents. Natural constituents of subsequent natural strata are thought to be primarily wind transported. Analysis of s o i l pH also indicated that a change in degree of alkalinity of matrices occurs at or near the surface of natural stratum P. Two dates were recovered below the top of natural stratum P. A date of 2630^100 B.P. (GaK-6038) was recovered from natural stratum T and a second date of 4860^180 B.P. (GaK-6039) was recovered from the clay floor feature. The younger of these two dates i s thought to be a maximum age for natural stratum P, which contains almost a l l of the l i t h i c assemblage. The true age i s probably somewhat younger than this date. The next carbon sample above GaK-6038 i s from natural stratum H and i s dated at 1910±110 B.P. (GaK-6037), or A.D. 40. The oldest reliable date for the Marpole Culture Type i s 2310^105 B.P. (GaK-4646), or 360 B.C., (Matson 1976,Table 1-2), and the youngest reliable date for the Locarno Beach Culture Type i s 2200^120 B.P. (M-1515), or 250 B.C., (Mitchell 1971a:61, Table XI). Consequently, i t would seem that a cultural dis- 209 tinction ought to exist between GaK-6037 and GaK-6038. The preceding factors indicate quite clearly that the upper sur- face of natural stratum P should be considered as the upper boundary of what w i l l be labelled here as Component I. Components II and III The cluster analysis of s o i l samples based on granulo- metric constituents, reported in Appendix I, suggests that the group of natural strata consisting of "G", I, J, K, M, and N (cluster 2b) may form an important interruption i n the deposition of aboriginal habitation deposits. This suggestion may be a l l the more important i f natural stratum G/O, which contains almost no shell and which l i e s under the natural strata of cluster 2b, i s interpreted as a buried s o i l surface (Abbott,pers. comm). I cannot demonstrate, however, that natural stratum G/O i s , i n fact, an old midden surface. There i s a marked decrease in the amount of shell in natural stratum G/O from earlier strata. The natural strata of cluster 2b show a high v a r i a b i l i t y of shell content, then natural stratum F and the natural strata of cluster 2a contain relatively large amounts of shell again. These data suggest that a division of strata near the surface of natural stratum G/O might legitimately be made. In addition, the analysis of clam shell seasonality (Appendix IV) shows a possible change in seasonal exploitation patterns between natural strata G-2 and G/O on one hand, and natural strata F and I on the other 210 (Table XLIV)• This further suggests a boundary at the top of natural stratum G/O. Major variations i n the types of f i s h , mammal, and bird remains are not apparent i n the aboriginal portion of the shell midden deposits. Neither i s there any apparently major variation through time in the relative amount of any one bird, f i s h , or mammal species i n the aboriginal deposits. Burials show relatively l i t t l e variation in form through time. Except for the abundant inclusions with Burial 4 and the several minor inclusions with Burials 1 and 5, cairn burial in a tightly flexed position without grave goods appears to have been the predominant form of interment. Occasional cairn burial and occasional elaborate grave goods are thought to be distinctive of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a: 52). Therefore, burials from natural stratum F down through natural stratum P could conceivably belong to this culture type. The skull deformation on Burial 1, however, does not allow the possible presence of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type to be excluded. That Burial 4 also contained elaborate grave goods of the type described by Mitchell strengthens the possibility that the Marpole Culture may be represented by at least a portion of the Deep Bay deposits. The A.D. 40 date (GaK-6037) was recovered from the top of natural stratum H. This date f a l l s i n the middle of the time period ascribed to the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:65). The charcoal sample that produced this date was recovered from the surface of natural stratum H, immediately under Burial 4, which lay at the bottom of natural stratum G with shel l . This date and the nature of Burial 4 both sug- gest that a second component may be present at this site. This component seems to be well established, at least by the time that natural stratum G with shell was deposited. Probably the component was established earlier, according to the GaK-6037 date. Since the evidence of this second component i s recovered almost exclusively from shell midden deposits, the assignment of a component boundary to the top of natural stratum P receives further support. The a r t i f a c t inventory from the aboriginal deposits exhibits considerable continuity through time. There are, nevertheless, several variations in this inventory that are informative. The relative abundance of chipped stone and bone in the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type has been discussed by Mitchell. This culture type tends to contain 4 to 8% chipped stone and 50% to 70% bone (Mitchell 1971a:47). An examination of Table II reveals that the aboriginal natural strata above the surface of natural stratum G/O contain 104 artifacts, of which 8.6% are chipped stone and 41.3% are bone. Moving the boundary downwards to include natural stratum G/O decreases the percentage of bone artifacts only slightly (38.9%), but i t doubles the chipped stone percentage (17.5%). Moving the boundary upwards from the upper surface of natural stratum G/O has almost no effect on relative frequencies of 212 bone and chipped stone in the upper group of aboriginal strata. On this b a s i s , j i t can be argued that the upper surface of natural stratum G/O marks an important change in the relative amounts of chipped stone and bone artifacts i n the deposits. Individual artifact classes also indicate that a division occurs i n the cultural inventory. Table XXII shows the dis- tribution in the Lot 73 deposits of art i f a c t classes thought to be distinctive of culture types in the Gulf of Georgia (Mitchell 1971a:47, 52, 57). Because the lower shell midden deposits appear to contain some material of the same age as the Marpole Culture Type, Table XXII can be examined in terms of which artifact classes serve to distinguish this culture type from succeeding ones. Materials distinctive only of the Marpole Culture Type include various chipped stone point forms, large ground slate points with faceted or lenticular cross section, disc beads of shale or clam shell, unilater- a l l y barbed antler points, native copper ornaments, and midden burial in flexed position, sometimes with inclusions, some- times under cairns. Except for disc beads and cairn burials, the other artifacts are found only in natural stratum G with shell on Lot 73. One stone disc bead i s found i n natural stratum H, one i s natural stratum G/O, and one in natural stratum P. One shell disc bead i s found in natural stratum G/O. Of 54 disc beads, one i s found above the surface of natural stratum G/O andoone i s below the surface of natural stratum P. The evidence of burials has already been discussed. It i s worth noting that only Burial 1 showed evidence of skull deformation. This burial comes from natural stratum F and i s dated at 790^80 B.P. (GaK-6035). This date f a l l s within the time range of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:65). Artifact classes distinctive only of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type are small, triangular chipped basalt points (rare), thin triangular ground slate points, large well made celts, numerous irregular abrasive stones, unilaterally barbed bone points, and numerous single and double pointed bone objects. None of these artifact classes i s confined to natural strata above the surface of natural stratum G/O. The only art i f a c t class to approach this restricted distribution is unilaterally barbed bone points. One i s found i n natural stratum K, and the other in natural stratum H. This latter specimen was recovered from near the surface of the natural stratum very close to the west 64m wall of the excavation unit. Inspection of the profile (Figure 7) shows that natural stratum F l i e s on top of H at this point. It i s possible that the artifact was originally from natural stratum F and that i t has been intruded into the surface of the underlying natural stratum. The Gulf of Georgia and Marpole Culture Types share a number of distinctive archaeological features. Thin ground slate knives, s p l i t or sectioned bone awls, antler wedges, 2 and skull deformation are features from this l i s t that are present on Lot 73. Possibly some or a l l of the Gulf of Georgia features that are present at Deep Bay should be added to this l i s t since they do not appear to be restricted to a small group of natural strata. Distinctive archaeolog- i c a l features of the Marpole Culture Type, on the other hand do seem to suggest component boundaries similar to those detected by other artifactual and non-artifactual c r i t e r i a . Art styles are thought to differ between the Gulf of Georgia and Marpole Culture Types, In the former culture type geometric design motifs seem to be emphasized, while in the latter culture type the emphasis seems to be on representational forms (Mitchell 1971a:49, 54), It i s note- worthy that of the two decorated artifacts recovered from Lot 73, one i s geometric and the other i s zoomorphic. The geometric artifact comes from natural stratum G/O, the zoo- morphic one from natural stratum G with shell. If the upper surface of natural stratum G/O i s accepted as the top of a component, then this component contains decorated objects with both geometric and representational motifs. Antler composite toggling harpoon valves are rare from components of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52, 56, 72), i f the upper surface of natural stratum G/O i s accepted as the upper boundary of a component, then both components contained in the shell midden deposits contain antler composite toggling harpoon valves. Of the ten such valves found on Lot 73, five are from natural strata G/O or G with shell, two are from natural stratum F, and three are from the disturbed/historic zone. In the northern Gulf of Georgia, at least, this artifact class appears to have a long and continuous history. The evidence examined so far suggests that a component boundary might be drawn at the upper surface of natural stratum G/O. The component below this boundary, but above Component I, can be labelled Component II. The component in the aboriginal deposits above the surface of G/O can be labelled Component III. The preceding discussion makes i t clear that Component II i s thought to belong to the Marpole Culture Type and Component III to the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type. The Gulf of Georgia Culture Type i s thought to have evolved from the Marpole Culture Type, and no major cultural changes are thought to exist between these two types (Mitchell 1971a:72). The evidence from Montague Harbour supports this position, and the d i f f i c u l t y in establishing an obvious boundary between Components II and III at Deep Bay lends i t further support. The distinctive archaeological features that successfully distinguished Component II from Component III are primarily those l i s t e d for the Marpole Culture Type and are usually found i n small numbers. Disc beads, for instance, number 54, but of theses>48 were found i n association with Burial 4. Therefore, these artifacts should probably be thought of as one artifact (possibly a necklace), bringing to seven the number of disc bead artif a c t s . Also, although ten burials were recovered, only Burial 4 conforms to the Marpole Culture Type pattern of having numerous grave goods, including shell disc beads, dentalia shells, native copper ornaments, and a zoomorphic bone pendant. There i s one unilaterally barbed antler point, one thick faceted ground slate point, a few small fragments of native copper that are thought to be from one or two tube beads, and five fragments of various chipped stone points. This situation indicates f a i r l y clearly that variations in the frequencies of relative ly abundant artifact classes are probably not being recog- nized. Consequently, components are being defined on the basis of relatively infrequent artifact classes. The lack of success met with i n trying to separate com- ponents on the basis of distinctive archaeological features of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type i s puzzling. This s i t - uation suggests that the distinction between Components II and III may result from the termination of certain cultural patterns at the end of Component II, This interpretation i s supported by the fact that only a few distinctive arch- aeological features of the Marpole Culture Type serve to distinguish the two components. These features, as already mentioned, occur infrequently at the best of times. The interpretation i s further supported by the i n a b i l i t y of any distinctive archaeological features of the Gulf of Georgia 217 Culture Type to distinguish between these two components. These archaeological features seem not to be too distinctive at Deep Bay, as they seem to have a more general distribution through time. This situation may not be true at other sites i n the Gulf of Georgia area. This lack of distinctiveness between Components II and III suggests that there may have been a great deal of cultural continuity within the past 2000- 2300 years. These findings are i n accord with those offered for the Gulf of Georgia area as a whole (Mitchell 1971a:72). While some individual sites may exhibit discontinuities between artifact assemblages of the two most recent components, these apparent differences tend to diminish as the range of Gulf of Georgia sites i s examined. Up to this point, components have been distinguished from one another by subjective means. One wonders whether this subjective delineation of components can be objectively verified. To evaluate this problem a Kruskal-Wallis test was applied using analytical units as the sample unit. For each artifact class a l l sample units were ranked on the basis of artifact class raw frequency. The Kruskal-Wallis test was then applied to the three subjectively delineated components. A detailed description of the method used to apply the Kruskal- Wallis test i s given in the analysis of s o i l pH (Appendix I ) . The fine distinctions between artifact classes l i s t e d in Table III were avoided by grouping some finely divided cate- gories into the following transformed artifact classes: 218 u t i l i z e d flakes, unifacially retouched flakes, b i f a c i a l l y retouched flakes, bifaces, triangular chipped stone points, other chipped stone points and fragments, choppers, abrasive stones, thin ground slate points and fragments, thick ground slate points and fragments, ground slate knives, ground slate fragments, unbarbed bone points and fragments, and antler fragments* This reorganization produced a new artifact l i s t containing 54 transformed arti f a c t classes (see Appendix V). Because of the experimental nature of this test, and because i t deals with only one of many Gulf of Georgia area sites, i t was thought prudent to run a moderate risk of Type II error (accepting the null hypothesis when i t i s false). Subsequent work in the area may refine the results produced here, therefore i t i s better to err by including as many distinctive artifact classes as possible rather than by excluding too many. The chosen level of significance was therefore set at«<#.05. The significant a r t i f a c t classes and their probabilities are presented in Table XXXI. Bifaces, thick ground slate points and fragments, and wood include such small artifact frequencies that they should be excluded from further discussion. It i s interesting to note, however, that five of the seven bifaces occur in Component I and that a l l three thick ground slate points and fragments occur i n Component II. Seven artifact classes remain that can distinguish between components. Six of these arti f a c t classes involve TABLE XXXI Artifact Classes Significant at »<gr#05 Kruskal-Wallis Test of Cultural Components by Artifact Classes, Lot 73, DiSe 7. Artifact Class N u t i l i z e d flake :0.0039 17 obsidian flake 0.0009 19 quartz crystal flake 0.0006 27 unifacially retouched flake 0.0008 18 biface 0.0154 7 leaf shaped chipped point & fragment 0.0256 20 thin ground slate point & fragment 0.0422 14 thick ground slate point & fragment 0.0208 3 unbarbed bone point 0.0389 44 wood 0.0247 2 220 stone as the material of manufacture and in five of the six instances the stone i s chipped. Because the Kruskal-Wallis test program ranks the values of each variable from smallest to largest, and because the one-tailed substantive hypothesis states that the distribution function of one case w i l l be greater than either of the other two, the artifact classes appearing in Table XXXI have a larger rank sum i n one com- ponent than i n either of the other two. The associated probability levels indicate the likelihood of occurrence of the distribution of these rank sums. From prior knowledge of the artifact distributions, one would expect that the chipped stone artifact classes serve to separate Component I from the other two components. Indeed, between 58% and 82% of a l l chipped stone artifact classes i n Table III are found in Component I. The thin ground slate points and fragments are found in Components I and II only. Five, or 36%, are from the former component and nine, or 64%, are from the latt e r . Thus, thin ground slate points serve to distinguish Component II from the other two components at the °cs.05 probability level. This finding conflicts with the distinctive archaeological features of the Marpole Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:52) because this class of artifact i s customarily thought to indicate the Gulf of Georgia culture Type. As the following analysis of Deep Bay component a f f i l i a t i o n s w i l l show, and as the fore- going discussions of the relationships between components 221 have indicated, the distinction between the two culture types may not be as great as i s implied by their separate labels. As already mentioned, the relations between these two culture types are thought to be very close (Mitchell 1971a:72). The occurrence of thin ground slate points in both culture types, and the predominance of them in Component II at Deep Bay, may not be altogether surprising in this light (see Table XXXII). A similar Kruskal-Wallis test on the weights of each faunal species in each analytical unit f a i l e d to produce any new means of distinguishing between components. The only species that could distinguish between components at «<^.05 were several mollusc species. It i s obvious, even without this test, that Component I can be distinguished by the absence of mollusc remains in the matrix. These findings do indicate, on the other hand, that the relative amounts of each bird, mammal, and f i s h species do not tend to increase or decrease in a pattern between components. This situation suggests that the subsistence patterns practiced at Deep Bay may have been well developed when the site was i n i t i a l l y occupied. It also suggests that subsistence patterns at Deep Bay may not have altered substantially throughout the occupation of the s i t e . This tendency away from substantial variation between components of bird, mammal, and f i s h remains may be related to the great similarity i n artifact assemblages between Components II and III. Assuming that there i s a functional TABLE XXXII Artifact Class Frequencies by Component, Lot 73, DiSe 7. Component Artifact Class I II III disturbed/ Total historic Chipped Stone u t i l i z e d flake, heavy duty 1 1 - 1 3 medium duty 4 1 - mm 5 light duty 8 1 - 9 microblade 1 - - mm 1 obsidian flake 11 8 - - 19 quartz crystal flake 20 6 1 1 27 unifacially retouched flake, heavy duty 3 1 - - 4 medium duty 8 6 mm - 14 bi f a c i a l l y retouched flake, medium duty 1 2 1 1 5 light duty - 1 mm mm 1 retouched slate flake - 3 2 1 5 biface, light duty 2 - - - 2 heavy duty 3 1 - 1 5 core, cobble/flake 5 3 2 1 11 microblade - 1 - mm 1 point base, unilaterally shouldered 1 - - 1 2 bil a t e r a l l y shouldered mm 1 mm mm 1 side notched 1 - mm - 1 f l a t base, contracting edges point t i p 5 - - - 5 4 1 - mm 5 broad leaf shaped symmetric point 1 - mm mm 1 parallel edged leaf shaped point 2 mm - - 2 asymmetric leaf shaped point 2 1 mm - 3 triangular stemmed point - 2 - - 2 triangular unstemmed point - 1 1 - 2 chopping tool, unifacial - - 2 - 2 bif a c i a l 1 2 *" 3 Ground Stone abrasive stone, fine 5 4 3 12 medium 1 1 2 mm 4 coarse 1 2 - 3 6 223 TABLE XXXII (continued) Component Artifact Class I II I l l disturbed/ historic TOtc abrasive stone/saw 1 2 3 abrasive stone, edge retouched - 1 - - 1 point, t i p fragment (thin) - 3 2 - 5 medial fragment (thin) - 1 1 - 2 basal fragment (thick) - 2 - - 2 thin ground slate point, triangular - 3 - - 3 corner notched mm 2 1 3 basal notched - - 1 1 thick point - 1 - mm 1 ground slate knife, medium thick mm - 1 1 thin - 1 2 2 5 ground slate fragment - 5 4 2 11 celt mm 1 1 - 2 saw mm 1 1 - 2 pendant - - 1 - 1 disc bead 1 3 1 mm 5 incised stone object — 2 •» mm 2 Bone polished bone rod 3 awl, s p l i t bone - 5 5 1 11 bone point, heavy duty - 7 1 2 10 light duty - 8 10 13 31 wedge base - 3 1 - 4 barbed mm 1 1 2 bone bipoint - 8 7 15 30 ulna tool - - 2 — 2 bird bone whistle — 1 . 1 worked tooth - - 1 1 pendant - 1 - - 1 bead - 1 - 1 chisel/wedge mm 4 1 2 7 unidentifiable sea mammal bone implement - mm 1 - 1 worked fragment 1 25 12 13 51 Antler point, unbarbed - 3 3 barbed mm 1 - 1 ring - - 1 1 2 wedge - 3 2 2 7 foreshaft - - 1 - 1 224 TABLE XXXII (continued) Component Artifact Class I II III disturbed/ Total historic composite toggling harpoon valve 5 2 3 10 tine flaker 1 1 incised fine 1 1 fragment, adzed - - 3 1 4 abraded 1 2 1 3 Shell disc bead - 49 - 49 pecten 1 1 dentalium - 13 1 1 15 ring - - 1 1 Mytilus californianus chisel/ gouge 1 1 Miscellaneous ochre i H 15 19 45 mica 1 1 wood 1 1 2 copper 1 1 Total 88 234 105 91 518 225 relationship between the artifacts and faunal remains found at a site, the tendency away from significant variations in either the artifact or faunal assemblages at Deep Bay further supports the interpretation that the subsistence patterns at the site are long standing and largely unaltered. Similar situations may subsequently be discovered at other sites, and this would not be surprising given the purposeful nature of the ethnographically described annual subsistence round. The situation at Deep Bay may be contrasted with sites where major environmental changes took place over the course of time, thereby altering site use patterns substantially. Two sites of this kind that come to mind are the St. Mungo Cannery Site (Calvert 1970) and the Glenrose Cannery Site (Matson 1976)• The tendency, in both the art i f a c t assemblage and the faunal assemblage from Deep Bay, not to exhibit substantial variation through time seems to support Mitchell's (1971a:72) hypothesis of a close cultural link between the Marpole and Gulf of Georgia Culture Types. The emphasis un t i l now has been on the delineation of components. A case has been made for the existence of three components at Deep Bay, and i t would now be desirable to establish what cultural a f f i l i a t i o n they have with other components in the Gulf of Georgia area. In a sense, the delineation of components at Deep Bay has been a determination of component a f f i l i a t i o n . It i s thus strongly suspected that Component III i s a Gulf of Georgia Component and that Component II i s a Marpole Component. Recent work (Matson 1974) has indicated that clustering and multidimensional scaling of presence-absence data can substantiate the subjectively recognized relationships between components in the Gulf of Georgia. The following discussion i s an attempt to build on the foundation provided by Matson. To the 29 components l i s t e d in Table II (Matson 1974: 103) can be added Component II (DBY2, N=31) and Component III (DBY3, N=29)» Component I i s excluded because i t contains only eight of the variables in Table II (Matson 1974:103). The cultural a f f i l i a t i o n s of Component I are discussed below. Confidence can be placed in the correspondences between a r t i - fact classes l i s t e d in Matson's Table II and artifact classes described i n this study because his Table II i s derived from Mitchell's (1968) doctoral dissertation. The classification used in this study follows closely the classification in Mitchell (1971a), which i s his dissertation revised for pub- lica t i o n . One conclusion of Matson's presence/absence study was that variables 6 through 17 were inconsistently reported in the literature and that their removal helped to produce clusters that closely approximated the subjectively estab- lished relationships between sites (Matson 1974:107). It was decided to exclude these variables from the present analysis of 31 components to produce results that were as closely comparable as possible to those of the original study. To this end, the same clustering and scaling techniques were 227 applied to the data using the same computer programs (Matson 1974:102, 104-105)• The intricacies of the techniques have already been discussed in Appendix I under the section on granulometric analysis. The dendrogram produced by cluster- ing 1- dice coefficient values using the Furthest Neighbor method i s shown i n Figure 27. Like Matson1s revised dendrogram (Matson 1974,Figure 4) a l l the Gulf of Georgia Components are incorporated in a single large cluster. The two new components are found here. That Component II from Deep Bay should be a member of this cluster i s not as surprising as i t may f i r s t appear. Inspect- ion of Table III and a review of the subjective division of Components II and III indicates how closely a l l i e d they are in terms of shared artifact classes and faunal remains. The association of Helen Point 2 and 3 i n this cluster i s another instance of close similarity between components. While coding consistency within a single site may be a factor producing these apparent anomalies, this i s thought to be less l i k e l y than genuine cultural similarity. In the case of Deep Bay, the artifact classification was based on the same c l a s s i f i - cation used i n Matson*s Table II. One would not expect this problem to appear at sites where site use has altered sub- stantially over time, such as St. Mungo or Glenrose, The second cluster appears to be predominantly Marpole Culture Type assemblages, but from here on noticeable d i - vergences from Matson's Figure 4 begin to appear. This i s 228 A o 1.0 .9 .8 .? I I I I GULF OF GEORGIA CULTURE TYPE MARPOLE CULTURE TYPE LOCARNO BEACH CULTURE TYPE UNKNOWN CULTURE TYPE .6 .5 .4 .0 - HP3 * - HP2 • - CP4 * - PNCE * • STS * - SDWK * - TRON * - MH3 - SNJN * - DBY2 • - DBY3 * - FXCE * - CP3 • - MHI . A - MH2 • - CP2 • - CP! O - PTGY • - MARP • - L0C2 . A - HPI O - FOBY A/© - BG O - WF2 O - STMG O - RICH • - WFI A - LOCI A - CPTB • - GARR • - ARL2 e Figure 27. Dendrogram of Gulf of Georgia Components and Components II and III, Lot 73, DiSe 7. undoubtedly the result of a) adding two assemblages to the study, and b) simply deleting the 12 "reportage" variables rather than recalculating the input matrix using metric vectors. Although these minor differences create a modi- fied dendrogram, a number of specific clusters remain intact. The most noticeable changes are the association of Argyie Lagoon, Garrison, and Cattle Point Island with three early assemblages as part of an outlying fourth cluster. Also, the inclusion of the Richardson assemblage in this cluster i s a surprise. The third cluster consists of assemblages whose cultural a f f i l i a t i o n s are unclear. According to the present analysis, they are more closely a l l i e d to the Marpole and Gulf of Georgia Culture Types than they are to earlier assemblages. The inclusion of Locarno Beach assemblages (LOG 2 and MH 1) i n the largely Marpole Culture Type cluster, and the opposite situation in the fourth cluster, suggests that the differences between these two culture types may not be as abrupt as i s often thought. Indeed, Locarno Beach 2 i s recognized as a separate assemblage from Locarno Beach 1, and the former i s stratigraphically above the latter (Borden 1950:15). It i s quite possible that Montague Harbour I represents a transitional artifact inventory as well. The identity of Argyie Lagoon and Cattle Point East Bluff are unclear as well. The former bears only limited similarities to the Marpole Component (Carlson 1960:573), and of the 15 variables in the original l i s t , the number is reduced to 11 by removing the "reportage" variables. Cattle Point East Bluff i s also of dubious cultural a f f i l i a t i o n (Carlson 1960: 571). The Garrison assemblage (N=22) i s not affected by the cut in "reportage" variables, and i t contains material strongly similar to other assemblages of the Marpole Culture Type, Richardson, on the other hand, consists of a very small assemblage (N=14) from a disturbed s i t e . In fact, the investigator suspects the excavated assemblage represents more than one component, one of which i s probably Marpole (Carlson 1960:571), Therefore, the apparent incongruities of Figure 27 can, to a certain extent, be satisfactorily resolved. As a consequence, f a i r l y good general agreement between subjective and objective analyses can be attained and the relations of anomalous assemblages can be examined. The present analysis, however, was unable to separate Compon- ents II and III from Deep Bay into the culture types to which they were expected to belong. Similar situations from other sites, and reasons for their occurrence, have been noted. The i n a b i l i t y of these objective techniques to distinguish between the two components from Deep Bay does not mean that differences between them do not exist. The nature of this particular test simply does not exploit these differences. For instance, the l i s t of artifact classes does not include scrapers or antler composite toggling harpoon valves. Both of these occur often in components of Gulf of Georgia sites. Also, presence/absence analysis weights each artifact class equally, so one abrasive stone in component X equals f i f t y from component Y. The dates obtained from Component III f a l l f a i r l y well within the range of dates for the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type. The earlier date from Component II i s consistent with the age range for the Marpole Culture Type, but the later date seems at f i r s t glance, to be too young for this culture type. From the section on chronology i t w i l l be recalled that GaK-6036 was dated at 900-90 B.P., or 1050 A.D. Also, there was some question of the validity of the date because a red synthetic thread was found in the f i e l d sample. If the date from this sample i s not to be dismissed offhand as too recent, a consideration of components in this time period and artifact continuity at the site i s warranted. The three earliest Gulf of Georgia Components have been dated at 370^ 100 A.D. for Pedder Bay (although there i s some question as to whether this assemblage i s really a member of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type), 436-40 A.D. for Fossil Bay Late Component, and 550^90 A.D. for Dionisio Point l i b (Mitchell 1971a,Table XI). The next most recent Gulf of Georgia Com- ponent i s Montague Harbour III, dated at 1160^130 A.D. (Mitchell 1971a,Table XI). Thus, there i s a gap of at least 390 years at one standard deviation unit between these two dates. No Gulf of Georgia Components are presently known from this time period. On the other hand, the most recent Marpole Culture Type component i s Beach Grove, dated at 560- 232 25 A.D. Prior to this date an uninterrupted series of dates exists for the Marpole Culture Type, Because there i s no sharp distinction between the two culture types, and because one culture type i s directly ancestral to the other, i t i s only reasonable to expect that considerable temporal overlap should exist between assemblages having Gulf of Georgia and Marpole characteristics. Also, cultural adaptation, as reflected by remains of material culture, i s l i k e l y to be more or less gradual, affecting different aspects of culture at different rates. Activities common during the period of greatest Marpole Culture Type influence that retained their relevance, despite changes in other aspects of culture, would thus persist into the Gulf of Georgia time period. On the other hand, act i v i t i e s common during the time period of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type are unlikely to have developed overnight, so i t i s not sur- prising that some assemblages with a f f i n i t i e s to this culture type are found at a relatively early date. This argument i s consistent with the concept of culture types which are s t r i c t l y formal units. The present evidence suggests that recognizable changes in the Marpole Culture Type adaptation began after 1600 B.P, and continued u n t i l at least 1400 B,P, The GaK-6036 date of 900-90 B.P, suggests that this period of change may have lasted longer than 200 years, possibly for as long as 700 years. The difference i n age between GaK-6036 and the 233 youngest presently accepted Marpole Culture Type date (Beach Grove, 1390-25 B.P.) i s only 490 years, whereas the d i f f e r - ence in age between the two oldest presently accepted Gulf of Georgia Culture Type dates (Dionisio Point l i b and Montague Harbour III) i s 610 years. Since the larger time gap i s accepted within a single culture type, i t does not seem unreasonable to accept the smaller time gap within another culture type. If GaK-6036 i s younger than the true age of the sample due to contamination, the argument for accepting this date i s strengthened because i t would reduce the time gap between late Marpole Components. However, the point remains that a period of change from the Marpole Culture Type seems to have begun about 1600 B.P. and ended between 1400 B.P. and 900 B.P. Assemblages from this transitional period exhibit characteristics of both culture types, and i t i s conceivable that this change did not occur at the same time or at the same rate throughout the Gulf of Georgia area. Although a late Marpole date of 900 B.P. seems unduly young now, subsequent research may find that this culture type persisted longer in the northern Gulf. It may also be deter- mined that the transition period between these culture types was quite slow throughout the entire Gulf of Georgia. The considerable similarity in the artifact assemblages between Components II and III suggests that a discussion of the "real" culture type a f f i l i a t i o n of GaK-6036 may simply be academic. 234 The cultural a f f i l i a t i o n of Component I i s more d i f f i c u l t to assess than was the case for Components II and III, The l i t h i c character of the Component I assemblage suggests a possible a f f i l i a t i o n with the L i t h i c Culture Type (Mitchell 1971a:59), This culture type i s composed of assemblages containing abundant stone artifacts, primarily medium to large f a i r l y well made chipped stone points that are usually leaf-shaped, various cobble implements, and sometimes chipped "crescents". Ground stone artifacts are often lacking (Mitchell 1971a:59-60), Dionisio Point I contains a barbed antler point fragment but i t i s classed in the Lit h i c Culture Type, It would seem, then, that non-chipped stone artifacts, i.e. ground stone and non-stone, can be part of assemblages legitimately belonging to the Lithic Culture Type, On these grounds, there seems to be l i t t l e reason not to classify Component I at Deep Bay as a member of the Lithic Culture Type, The only dated components of this culture type are from the Fraser Canyon Sequence, They indicate a time range of 5400 to 7000 B.C. (Mitchell 1971a,Table XI after Borden 1961:6), Within this time range, components of the Mazama and Milliken Phase are found. The l i t h i c character of Component I at Deep Bay i s also broadly similar to the Old Cordilleran Component at the Glenrose Cannery Site, This component i s dated between 8500 and 5500 B.P, (Matson 1976:17), The other components from the Gulf of Georgia that are assigned to the Lithic Culture Type are undated (Mitchell 1971a,Table X), The date 235 subsequent to which v i r t u a l l y a l l the artifacts i n Component I were found, however, i s only 2630^100 B.P, (GaK-6038). This date suggests that a dominant adaptation from the earliest portions of Gulf of Georgia prehistory continued as a useful part of subsequent, more technologically diversified adaptations. While the Lit h i c Culture Type may have been dominant between 8500 B.P, to 5500 B.P,, certain aspects of i t may have continued to be useful for an additional 3000 years. The l i t h i c assemblage at Deep Bay appears to f a l l within the time range of the late Locarno Beach and early Marpole Culture Types, The former culture type occupies the time period approximately between 3200 to 2200 B.P; the latter culture type occupies the time period 2300 B.P, (Matson 1976; Table 1-2) to 1400 B.P, (Mitchell 1971a,Table XI). Since Component I i s bracketed by dates of 2360-100 B.P. and 1910- 110 B.P., and the component seems l i k e l y to have been depos- ited earlier, rather than later, during this time period, i t seems safe to say that this assemblage was i n use during the time when the transition from the Locarno Beach Culture Type to the Marpole Culture Type was being made in some areas of the Gulf of Georgia. If the Component I assemblage i s seen as a continuation of the formerly dominant Lit h i c Culture Type, then the kinds of a c t i v i t i e s represented by the assem- blage may have been more or less appropriate at least unt i l the late Locarno Beach and early Marpole Culture Type time periods• 236 There i s considerable continuity in the stone artifacts between Components I and II. Except for chipped stone points, a l l stone artifact classes are found in both com- ponents. The remaining chipped stone artifact classes occur in greater numbers i n Component I. The materials from which stone artifacts are made are also continuous between these two components, although the quality of the basalt tends to improve through time. The limited evidence from the faunal assemblage indicates that similar species were being exploited in both components as well. These data suggest that there i s substantial continuity, of material culture at least, between these two components. As there i s good reason to argue, Component II contains material thought to belong to the Mar- pole Culture Type. The apparent continuity between Components I and II, and the estimated age range of Component I, suggest that this component may belong to the Locarno Beach Culture Type time period. Given this background, i t i s argued that Component I at Deep Bay contains a specialized assemblage from the Locarno Beach time period. Thus, while assemblages of the Locarno Beach Culture Type are geographically limited within the Gulf of Georgia area (Mitchell 1971a:59), there now i s evid- ence that varying adaptations from this time period are more widely distributed. The Component I assemblage appears to be specialized, but the sample size i s small and the physical context of the assemblage must be remembered. The spit has 237 been building for at least the past 5000 years, probably longer. At present, we are unaware of the spit morphology at the time of occupation represented by Component I. It would seem unlikely, however, that the whole spit at that time was exactly the same as the deposits uncovered on Lot 73. The older portion of the site, closer to the base of the spit, was probably permanently above water. If this were the case, i t i s reasonable to think that the kinds of act i v i t i e s conducted on the portion of the site permanently above water would not be the same as those conducted on the periodically inundated part. The variations in matrix con- tent between the Glenrose Cannery Old Cordilleran Component deposits in excavation units 3, 4, and 6 on one hand and 1, 1/5, and 5 on the other (Matson 1976:11) are a good example of differing use of site areas early in Gulf of Georgia pre- history. Since the assemblage from Component I was recovered from the latter context, i t would seem to be a specialized portion of the whole site assemblage at that time. This site assemblage may also have been specialized in terms of an annual seasonal round. The relatively un-waterworn appearance of the artifacts from Component I suggests that they may have been f a i r l y high up on the beach and therefore infrequently subjected to wave action. The large cobbles on the inside beach of Deep Bay that showed evidence of flake removal may therefore represent the remains of a later but similar manner and location of 238 chipped stone arti f a c t manufacture. Many of the artif a c t classes from the Component I assemblage appear intuitively to be associated with land hunting, e.g. chipped stone points, bifaces, retouched flakes, and ut i l i z e d flakes. The predominant faunal remains from this component were unidentifiable land mammal and deer. The Coast Salish are reported to have driven deer into nets or ambushes in restricted areas (Barnett 1975:97, 103). This analogue suggests that the spit at Deep Bay could have been used for a similar purpose. Duck nets were also erected on flyways (Barnett 1975:103). Remains of unidentifiable duck and unidentifiable bird comprise the remainder of the Component I faunal assemblages. If land mammal and bird species were being sought at Deep Bay during this time period, this exploitative pattern would appear to be consistent with the interpretation of seasonal exploitation patterns for other Locarno Beach Components. The status of other l i t h i c assemblages i n the Gulf of Georgia needs to be discussed. Lit h i c assemblages from the Fraser Canyon sequence f a l l within the 9000 to 7350 B.P. time range (Borden 1961:6), and the assemblage from the Old Cord- i l l e r a n Component at Glenrose f a l l s i n the 8500 to 5500 B.P. time range. At the other end of the time range within which l i t h i c assemblages are found i s Component I dated at 2630 B.P. Undated l i t h i c assemblages in the Gulf of Georgia consist of Dionisio Point I, Olcott Site, James Site, and the Deception 239 Pass Phase (Mitchell 1971a,Table X). It would seem, on the basis of the present evidence, that this kind of assemblage can exist almost anywhere within the 8500 B.P. to 2500 B.P. time range. This argument i s supported to some extent by evidence for the existence of specialized artifact assemblages as far back as 4100 to 4200 B.P. (Grabert and Larsen 1975:240, 245). To my knowledge, none of the l i t h i c assemblages l i s t e d in Mitchell (1971a,Table X) i s followed by a Locarno Beach Component. In fact, Dionisio Point I i s followed by Dionisio Point Ila which i s suspected of being a Marpole Culture Type Component (Mitchell 1971c:167). This situation follows the same pattern that i s observed at Deep Bay. It i s quite possible, then, for Dionisio Point I also to be a specialized assemblage belonging to the Locarno Beach Culture Type time period. These data suggest that l i t h i c assemblages do not always represent the cultural remains of early, unspecialized, land-oriented hunters as suggested by Bryan (1957:7; 1963:89) and King (1950:79). Until recently, Locarno Beach Components were known only from the Fraser Delta, southern Gulf Islands, and southern Vancouver Island (Mitchell 1971a,Table IX); Evidence for components of this culture type, and technological special- ization among these components, i s now coming to light from other areas. The Cherry Point A component has a middle date of 2630-420 (RL-272) and a minimum date of 2300 B.P. The assemblage consists of pebble tools, chipped slate knives, 240 d r i l l e d sinker stones, elongated hammerstones, large perfor- ated cobbles, two heavy faceted ground slate points, several flake tools, and some Gulf Islands Complex items. This com- ponent i s thought to represent a fishing station. It f a l l s into the time period of the Locarno Beach Culture Type, l i e s under deposits of the Marpole Culture Type, and contains artifact classes thought to be distinctive of the Locarno Beach Culture Type. The abundance of the chipped stone tools also suggests a f f i l i a t i o n s with the Lit h i c Culture Type. Grabert and Larsen conclude that Cherry Point A represents a specialized activity site of the Locarno Beach Culture Type (Grabert and Larsen 1975:241-248). That specialization of assemblages occurred at an even earlier time i s evidenced by the 4100^500 B.P. date from basal midden deposits at Semiamoo Point (45-WH-17) and by the 4180^120 B.P. date from early, shell free strata containing flake tools, pebble tools, pro- j e c t i l e points, and Marpole style harpoons at site 45-WH-34 on the Nooksack River (Grabert and Larsen 1975:240, 245). Thus, Mitchell's argument that variation i n Locarno Beach assemblages may be related to seasonal pursuits appears to be supported (Mitchell 1971a:57). Also, these data suggest that large quantities of chipped stone artifacts are found in specialized ac t i v i t y assemblages that are as old as, or older than, the Locarno Beach Culture Type. The l i t h i c assemblage at Deep Bay i s also pre-dated by the assemblages from stratigraphic unit 1 at the St. Mungo 241 Cannery Site (Boehm 1970) and the St. Mungo Component at the Glenrose Cannery Site (Matson 1976). It seems safe to con- clude that not a l l l i t h i c assemblages are early. It also appears that well developed specialized activity patterns precede at least one l i t h i c assemblage. It may be true that the eafliest l i t h i c assemblages were products of relatively unspecialized land-oriented hunters (Bryan 1957:7j 1963:89; King 1950:79), but subsequent l i t h i c assemblages seem to have been specialized constituents of increasingly more complex cultural adaptations. .The L i t h i c Culture Type appears to have been the dominant adaptation for approximately 3000 years in the i n i t i a l portion of Gulf of Georgia prehistory. Continued interaction between man and his surroundings produced progressively more refined and complex tool k i t s . Part of these subsequent adaptations continued to be pertinent aspects of the earliest adaptation. Thus, between 5500 B.P. and 2500 B;P. l i t h i c assemblages, which can be interpreted as later modifications of the orig- i n a l L i t h i c Culture Type, continue to be found as integral parts of later adaptations in the Gulf of Georgia area. The L i t h i c Culture Type was i n i t i a l l y defined in terms of the emphasis on chipped stone and the minor importance of ground stone. The substantive data on l i t h i c assemblages suggests that in the 5500-2500 B;P. period more ground stone, pecked stone, antler, and probably bone came into use, although the bulk of each assemblage s t i l l consists of chipped stone a r t i - facts. 242 The evidence now seems to indicate that l i t h i c assem- blages may persist for a long time in the Gulf of Georgia area. The act i v i t i e s that these assemblages represent may have been more or less important adjuncts to a series of phases or culture types, including the Locarno Beach Culture Type. Thus, l i t h i c assemblages could legitimately be consid- ered as site-specific, seasonal assemblages of various time periods>or culture types. In this sense, a l l l i t h i c assem- blages need not be assumed to have great antiquity or to represent an unspecialized, land-oriented type of culture early in the human history of the Gulf of Georgia (Bryan 1957: 7, 1963:89; King 1950:74). Efforts in this chapter have been directed toward de- lineating components at Deep Bay and establishing their cultural a f f i l i a t i o n . Three components were distinguished, although there i s very considerable continuity between the artifact assemblages of the two most recent components. Component I i s thought to be a late manifestation of the Lithic Culture Type from the time period when the late portion of the Locarno Beach Culture Type predominated. Component II appears most similar to the Marpole Culture Type, and Compon- ent III seems most closely related to the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type. A variety of information and techniques have been used in the delineation of components. Traditionally, character- i s t i c artifacts and features have been used to distinguish components, An attempt has been made here to add further information such as s o i l characteristics and faunal variables (after Chang 1967:28), A subjective method of component delineation has been followed in which the distributions of artifact classes, faunal species, s o i l pH, granulometric constituents, clam shell seasonality, and carbon-14 dates are analyzed and compared to stratigraphic discontinuities. The cultural a f f i l i a t i o n s of these components were then assessed using both monothetic and polythetic methods. The monothetic method consisted of comparing the distinctive archaeological characteristics of each culture type in the Gulf of Georgia with the three components from Deep Bay, The polythetic method consisted of comparing a series of artif a c t assemblages from the Gulf of Georgia, including Components II and III from Deep Bay, by means of a furthest neighbor cluster analysis. Component I from Deep Bay could not be included i n this analysis because of i t s small sample size. The polythetic set of variables used to determine degree of component similarity i s that presented in Matson (1974,Table I I ) . It was concluded that each time period can be seen as a collection of assemblages, each of which represents a group of a c t i v i t i e s . Such groups of a c t i v i t i e s , or even individual a c t i v i t i e s , may persist as a culture type for varying periods of time, may be related to seasonal activity, and may vary in cultural importance from one time period to another. This emphasis on cultural continuity i s consistent with Mitchell's model of cultural development in the Gulf of Georgia area (Mitchell 1971a:67-72). The cultural continuity suggested by ling u i s t i c evidence, particularly Jorgensen (1969:21, 52), also seems to be supported. Because of the potential contin- uities of cultural phenomena from one time period to another, i t seems doubly important to examine the widest possible spectrum of c r i t e r i a when attempting to establish boundaries within the archaeological record. The more c r i t e r i a that are examined, however, the less l i k e l y are such boundaries to be clear cut. This lack of a r t i f i c i a l c l a r i t y i s in keeping with the idea that there i s considerable continuity of a c t i - v i t i e s from one segment of the cultural continuum to another. Therefore, the transition from the predominance of one culture type to another can be seen as a period of accelerated change. Based on the preceding discussion, the persistence of some characteristics of a given phase or culture type beyond their most common period of occurrence, such as the seemingly too recent material i n natural stratum G/O, can be taken to represent the continuance of .useful ac t i v i t i e s through a period of cultural change. 245 CHAPTER VIII ASSOCIATIONS OF ARTIFACT AND FAUNAL DATA Introduction This chapter is concerned with relationships between artifact classes and faunal species• As stated in Chapter I, the aim of this analysis i s to determine whether ethno- graphically recorded relationships between artifacts and fauna can be detected in the archaeological record. This chapter i s therefore divided into two parts, the results of the quantitative analyses, and a discussion of these results. Since the greatest amount of data i s available for Lot 73, the following discussion w i l l deal only with that part of the s i t e . The preceding chapters have indicated that three compon- ents may be represented in the deposits on Lot 73. These components are thought to belong in the Locarno Beach, Marpole, and Gulf of Georgia Culture Type time periods. Because these three culture types are thought to be mani- festations of the same cultural continuum, and because there is considerable continuity of artifact classes and faunal remains across component boundaries, the following analyses disregard component boundaries. This procedure may obscure whatever variations occur through time in the association of 246 artifact and faunal variables, but since the culture types involved are thought to be closely linked in a cultural sense, i t seems unlikely that this procedure w i l l create serious distortions in the results. Also, since this i s an explor- atory study, i t seems more appropriate to present generaliz- ations about a l l the data as a f i r s t step, leaving more refined analyses of individual components to a later date. Quantitative Analysis: Method For the examination of the Lot 73 mammal and bird remains 63 analytical units were included because 100% of these remains were identified and weighed. Because the f i s h and mollusc remains were sampled before identification and weigh- ing, only thirty analytical units were eligible for analysis. In the following analyses, the data have been treated at two levels of measurement: presence/absence within analytical units and rank order of relative frequency within analytical units. For each faunal variable relative frequencies were calculated for weight of remains, minimum numbers of indiv- iduals, and estimated grams of usable meat. The artifact classes presented in Table III were regrouped so that the variable "utilized flake" consisted of heavy duty, medium duty, and light duty u t i l i z e d flakes. These transformed artifact classes are l i s t e d in Appendix V and are hence- forth the only referent for the term "artifact class". The following analyses therefore consist of a presence/absence analysis of artifact classes by faunal species, a rank order analysis of artifact classes by faunal species weight, a similar analysis substituting faunal species minimum numbers of individuals, and another similar analysis substituting faunal species estimated weight of usable meat. The data were analyzed by means of two computer programs, both of which were contained i n the S t a t i s t i c a l Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) (Nie, Bent, and Hull 1970). The program used to treat the presence/absence data was the chi- square test. This test produces a s t a t i s t i c that i s compared to a chi-square distribution for the appropriate degrees of freedom. The location of the test s t a t i s t i c on the ordinate of the distribution provides a probability for the difference between the observed and the, expected distributions of the variables, given fixed marginals, i f the population d i s t r i r butions were actually independent (Nie, Bent, and Hull 1970: 275). Where the number of cases i s larger than 21 the test s t a t i s t i c i s calculated using Yates* correction for continuity (Nie, Bent, and Hull 1970:125) according to the following formula: where X i s the test s t a t i s t i c , N i s the number of cases, and A, B, C, D are the contingency table c e l l frequencies (Siegel 1956:107). This correction improves the approximation of 2 (A+D)(A+C)(B+C)(B+D) 248 2 the computed value of X to the chi-squared distribution (Siegel 1956:107). The advice of Cochran, cited i n Siegel (1956:110), has been followed in this study. That i s , where N>20<40 the Fisher Exact Test (two-tail) has been applied when one or more expected c e l l frequencies i n a 2 x 2 table are less than 5. Chi-square, when used as a test of independence between variables, assumes that the variables have been sampled random- ly and independently from a universe that i s either i n f i n i t e l y large or that i s sampled with replacement (Mueller, Schuessler, and Costner 1970:437; Pierce 1970:189, 194, 196). The Deep Bay data were not acquired in a manner that was consistent with these assumptions. F i r s t , excavation units were chosen on the basis of where i t was convenient to dig on the lots where permission to excavate was granted. Artifact classes and faunal species were therefore not sampled independently since both these categories of variables were contained in the chosen excavation units. Since the universe of each artifact class and faunal species was not known, and excav- ation units were not sampled randomly, i t i s impossible to claim that each variable was sampled randomly. These prob- lems are unavoidable in archaeology. The results of analyz- ing such data by means of such techniques, which are s t i l l the most appropriate ones despite their shortcomings, must be interpreted with these considerations in mind. Indeed, the nature of the analytical units, analytic techniques, and 2^9 data must a l l be considered together i n terms of t h e i r e f f e c t s on the results of any analysis. The chi-square test i s one of independence between di s t r i b u t i o n s of paired variables. Its associated probabil- i t y allows for acceptance or re j e c t i o n , at a chosen s i g n i f i - cance l e v e l , of the n u l l hypothesis that the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the variables are independent. Besides t h i s information, c a l c u l a t i n g a c o e f f i c i e n t of association w i l l show the strength and dir e c t i o n of association between variables. The Spearman rank order c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t , des- cribed below, varies from -1 to +1. Since a c o e f f i c i e n t of association to accompany chi-square should also vary between these two values, Yule's Q and phi >(0) were considered. The former c o e f f i c i e n t i s a spe c i a l case of gamma, a test of the p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of rank order for variable pa i r s . This measure i s based on data that are assumed not to have disproportionately large marginal t o t a l s for a few categories of the variables (Mueller, Schuessler, and Costner 1970:287). Since the Deep Bay data seldom meet t h i s assumption, Yule's Q was rejected as an appropriate c o e f f i c i e n t . The second c o e f f i c i e n t , phi, i s preferable to Q because of i t s a f f i l i a t i o n with the chi-square s t a t i s t i c according to: 9 = where 0 = phi, X = chi-square, N = t o t a l number of observations. However, phi calculated according to t h i s 250 formula by SPSS does not always provide the same c o e f f i c i e n t compared to the resu l t of: 0 = AD - BC (A+C)(A+B)(B+D)(C+D) i where 0 = phi, and A, B, C, and D = 2 x 2 c e l l frequencies (Monks n.d. b). Phi i s influenced by sample size when calculated from chi-square with Yates' correction. Cal- culated independently, however, phi i s not subject to sample s i z e . Further, consistency of phi values can be maintained in cases where the Fisher exact p r o b a b i l i t y has been calculated. Substantial discrepencies have been noted between phi values calculated by the two preceding formulae (Monks n.d. b). In the following analyses, phi has been calculated independently of chi-square. Note that the phi c o e f f i c i e n t includes D c e l l frequencies; that i s , i t includes negative matches of variables. The inclusion of D c e l l frequencies i n the calculation of a c o e f f i c i e n t of association rests on the argument that these c e l l frequen- cies should be included when a l l variables in the data under study vary within the data (Sneath and Sokal 1973:130-131). Large numbers of negative matches w i l l i n f l a t e the values of phi and chi-square. Consequently, the s t a t i s t i c a l s i g nificance and the strength of association of any variable pair in the presence/ absence analysis should not be accepted u n c r i t i c a l l y . One means of reducing the number of p o t e n t i a l l y spurious 251 associations i s to eliminate variable pairs involving infre- quent occurrence of one or both variables. This criterion i s set out belowo Another means of evaluating the r e l i a b i l i t y of any coefficient of association i s to examine i t s data base* The data were also analyzed in rank order form by the SPSS version of the Spearman rank order correlation coeffic- ient and i t s associated level of probability. The coefficient i s calculated by ranking analytical units from lowest to highest on the basis of the relative frequencies of one a r t i - fact class and one faunal variable at a time, subtracting the ranks for each analytical unit, squaring the difference and applying the following formula: 6 £ D 2 3 N - N 2 where r g = Spearman's rank order correlation coefficient, D = the sum .of the squared differences i n rank, and N = the number of analytical units involved. For computational simplicity and to allow for correlation of within-case tied ranks, the following formula is substituted: € 2 D ~ y - r s = — • 2(T xT y) 1 / z 2 where D = the sum of squared differences in rank, T^ and T y = the correction values for tied ranks on either of the va r i - ables under analysis. T v or T„ may be computed by: 252 N (N 2-l) - £R(R 2-1) where R = the number of ties at a given rank for X or Y. The probability of r can be determined by comparing the value derived by the following formula with a student's t distribution with N-2 degrees of freedom: (Nie, Bent, and Hull 1970:154). Spearman's rank order correlation coefficient tests whether two observations are independent in each of n ran- domly drawn units. The measure assumes that there i s indep- endence between both variates in the bivariate sampled pop- ulation, that samples are drawn randomly, that variables are continuous, and that measurement is precise (Bradley 1968:91, 92). The last two assumptions, taken together, mean that tied ranks among the observations for either variable are assumed not to occur. The data from Deep Bay again do not entirely meet these c r i t e r i a . The absence of a variable from a number of analytical units causes tied ranks for zero values to occur e These are corrected for, according to the formulae presented above. Therefore, the use of the measure is j u s t i f i e d on these grounds. The problem of randomness, as noted in the discussion of chi-square, i s almost never 253 overcome in studies such as this one. With respect to i n - dependence between the variables under consideration, the arguments concerning the deposition of primary refuse, out- lined in Chapter I, are sufficient to show that this con- dition is also not met in these data. Although a correction fortties i s made in the calculation of r , i t i s s t i l l possible to obtain high values of the s coefficient where one or both variables exhibit large numbers of zero values. This procedure has been outlined under the discussion of chi-square. Omitting from consideration those variable pairs where one or both variables have large numbers of zero values, and examining the data base of each variable pair are two means of overcoming this problem. A moderately low level of probability was chosen in order to include as many potentially meaningful relationships as possible. It was thought that the exploratory nature of this study j u s t i f i e d running a moderate risk of Type II error. For this reason, the «< =5.05 probability level i s again applied in this analysis. The four analyses of the data were performed, and the results were synthesized. Those relation- ships between artifact classes and faunal species that occur- red in two or more analyses, excluding relationships based on more than 90% tied values for one or both variables, are presented in Table XXXIII. A l l the associations are direct except those marked by a dash (-), which are inverse. The relationships in this table are not only significant at less V TABLE XXXIII Variable Pairs Significant at°t^:.05 in Two or More Analyses, Artifact Class by Faunal Species. Lot 73, DiSe 7 (-) = inverse relationship Analysis +/- wt% MNI meat wt Variable Pair 0 r g c< r g o< r g ©<- uti l i z e d flake x basket cockle (-) ut i l i z e d flake x mussel (-) uti l i z e d flake x butter clam (-) quartz crystal flake x mussel (-) unifacially retouched flake x mussel (-) unifacially retouched flake x unidentifiable clam (-) unifacially retouched flake x barnacle (-) abrasive stone x dog abrasive stone x unidentifiable duck abrasive stone x sea lion thin ground slate point x sea lion thin ground slate point x unidentifiable sea mammal thin ground slate point x seagull thin ground slate point x unidentifiable duck ground slate knife x seagull ground slate fragment x unidentifiable mammal 0.509 0.0336 0.4092 0.025 - 0.523 0.0489 0.3704 0.044 - - - - 0.523 0.0489 0.4525 0.012 - - 0.523 0.0489 0.3977 0.030 - - - - 0.523 0.0489 0.3657 0.047 - 0.523 0.0489 0.4170 0.022 - 0.523 0.0489 0.4299 0.018 - - - - 0.635 0.0052 - .- 0.2938 0.019 0.667 0.0329 0.3043 0.015 - 0.762 0.0196 - - 0.3130 0.013 0.825 0.0106 0.3873 0.002 0.3517 0.005 0.2965 0.018 0.746 0.0110 0.3636 0.003 - - 0.809 0.0031 0.4069 0.001 - 0.667 0.0295 0.2632 0.037 - - 0.809 0.0253 0.3055 0.015 - 0.762 0.0048 0.3938 0.001 0.4374 0.001 0.5014 0.001 ( \ 3 TABLE XXXIII (continued) Variable Pair +/- Analysis wt% MNI meat wt ground slate fragment x grebe ground slate fragment x sea lion ground slate fragment x goose bone point x seagull bone point x unidentifiable duck bone bipoint x seagull bone bipoint x unidentifiable duck bone bipoint x unidentifiable bird worked bone fragment x sea lion worked bone fragment x unidentifiable sea mammal worked bone fragment x unidentifiable duck antler wedge x eagle antler wedge xr seagull antler wedge x grebe antler wedge x goose antler composite toggling harpoon valve x unidentifiable sea mammal antler composite toggling harpoon valve x grebe ochre x dog ochre x unidentifiable sea mammal ochre x unidentifiable duck 0.905 0.0280 0.3507 0.005 - 0.2735 0.030 0.2929 0.020 - 0.2733 0.030 0.2575 0.042 0.794 0.0002 0.4048 0.001 - - - - 0.682 0.0151 0.2762 0.028 - 0.841 0.0000 0.4997 0.001 0*667 0.0331 0.3053 0.051 - - - - 0.540 0.0260 0.2729 0.030 - 0.746 0.0075 0.2956 0.019 0.2854 0.023 0.3605 0.004 0.762 0.0008 0.3644 0.003 - 0.683 0.0151 0.3468 0.005 - - 0.905 0.0048 0.4465 0.001 0.2519 0.046 - 0.810 0.0253 0.3062 0.015 - - - 0.889 0.0123 0.3848 0.002 - 0.3025 0.016 0.4699 0.001 0.778 0.0009 0.433 0.001 0.021 0.0001 0.5411 0.001 - - 0.682 0.0023 0.2861 0.023 - - - 0.730 0.0021 0.3531 0.005 - 0.682 0.0128 0.3465 0.005 - 256 than °tsr«>05 in their respective analyses, but they are also reliable in the sense that they have been observed in more than one analysis. In addition, the relationships based on excessively high tied values have been removed. Therefore, i t can be argued that these relationships reflect actual patterns in the data. These relationships can not be consid- ered as artifacts of the techniques used in the analyses. The data were analyzed using two different kinds of tests and, in the case of the faunal remains, four different forms. That consistent results were produced under these conditions i n - dicates that patterning in the data, not patterning imposed by the analytic techniques, has been detected. Quantitative Analysis: Results In the presence/absence analysis and weight of remains analyses, 52 artifact classes were matched against 33 faunal variables. Thus, 1716 combinations of variables were consid- ered, and a chi-square probability calculated for each one. If the chosen significance level i s .05, then one would expect, at this level, to have 5%, or 86, relationships occur by chance alone. In fact, the presence/absence analysis produced 58 paired variables and the weight of remains analysis produced 150. The minimum numbers of individuals analysis involved 518 paired variables, of which 5%, or 26 pairs, could occur by chance. A total of 68 pairs significant at CK.^.05 were produced in this analysis. The estimated weight of" usable meat analysis involved 486 possible pairs of variables, of which 23 could occur by chance at the chosen significance level. This analysis produced 72 pairs. Thus, only the presence/absence analysis produced fewer significant pairs of variables than could be expected by chance at the chosen level of significance. The fact that the data do not entirely meet the assumpt- ions of the analytic techniques, and the fact that variation in sample unit size can affect the likelihood of association judged by chi-square, both suggest that any problem perceived as a result of this shortfall i s s t r i c t l y academic. Indeed, even when more than 5% of the possible variable pairs are found to be significant, one i s s t i l l never sure which are the significant pairs. When i t i s considered that a number of the variable pairs significant i n the presence/absence analysis are also found in the other analyses, the possib- i l i t y seems small that the significant presence/absence va r i - able pairs are s t i l l due to chance alone. In the analysis that provided the relationships presented in Table XXXIII, three potential reasons for the pairing of variables can be distinguished. Variables can be associated or correlated because they were involved in the same activity, e.g. thin ground slate knives and salmon remains. In this instance the association could be called "coterminous". This term i s used in the following analysis to indicate a relat- ionship with an ethnographic analogue indicating that both 258 variables were used in the same activity. Variables can also be associated because they were involved in unrelated activ i t i e s that occurred at the same time, e.g. herring remains and chipped stone points. This association could be called "concomitant" because there i s an ethnographic analo- gue indicating that herring fishing and deer hunting were practiced by different members of a single group at the same time of year (Barnett 1975:29). Thirdly, a variable pair can associate, even below the chosen level of significance, on the basis of chance alone. In this case, one would not expect to find ethnographic analogues for the relationship, and i t could be labelled "coincident". Such a relationship would not exhibit an ethnographic or logical basis. While a number of coincident relationships are obvious in the individual analyses, they seem to be virtually eliminated in the syn- thesized results (Table XXXIII). Thus, the largest portion of the relationships in this table appear to be due to either coterminous or concomitant activity. The above table presents pairs of artifact classes and faunal species that occur at 3^.05 in at least two of the four analyses. Fish and mollusc remains were not included in the MNI or estimated weight of usable meat analyses, there- fore these paired variables occur in two out of two analyses. The f i r s t seven pairs of variables are inversely related in both analyses, and their occurrence in both these analyses suggests that they are reliable relationships; Except for 259 the relationship of u t i l i z e d flake to basket cockle, however, a l l the coefficients of association and a l l the probabilities for these pairs are the same. This situation results from the similar distribution among analytical units of the mollusc species in question, the similar distribution of the l i t h i c artifact classes among analytical units, the almost total exclusivity of artifact and faunal distributions, and the disproportionately large number of shell bearing analytic units compared to those with the l i t h i c artifact classes in question. The frequencies of the A, B, C, and D c e l l s are 1, 2, 25, and 2 respectively for these six pairs. Intuitive- l y , one would expect a high negative coefficient of assoc- iation, given the relationship of the B and C c e l l frequencies to those of the A and D c e l l s . Indeed, the phi coefficient i s higher for each variable pair than the Spearman rank order correlation coefficient. The proper s t a t i s t i c a l interpretations of these relation- ships states that where one variable i s found or where i t increases in rank, the other variable tends to do the opposite. This finding confirms the subjective impression that most chipped stone artifact classes are found in Compon- ent I deposits, whereas most mollusc remains are found in Component II and III deposits. In terms of a c t i v i t i e s , these data imply that the acti v i t i e s conducted at this p a r t i - cular part of the site changed through time. I n i t i a l l y , a c t i v i t i e s involving chipped stone artifacts took place on 260 the beach, but after beach build up ended and midden build up started, this location was used for different purposes. The continuity of simple chipped stone tools continues into Component II, but not nearly i n the same numbers as are present in Component I. A shift in activity l o c i , or a gradual decline in the importance of such tools are seen as factors affecting the observed relationships. These findings support the suggestion made at the end of Chapter III that activity areas within the site may have changed as the spit continued to build up. It should be noted that salmon remains and coarse grained basalt debitage are negatively associated in the St. Mungo Component at Glenrose Cannery. This r e l - ationship suggests that there i s variation in the areas of site use within the component (Matson 1976:189). The neg- ative relationships of certain chipped stone categories and faunal species at Deep Bay and Glenrose seem to indicate that ac t i v i t i e s involving chipped stone and marine resources tend not to co-occur. Abrasive stones pair with dog, sea lion, and unidenti- fiable duck. The f i r s t two of these pairs occurs in the presence/absence and MNI analyses, and the last pair occurs in the presence/absence and percentage weight of remains analyses. No ethnographic accounts relate this artifact class with these faunal species, and concomitant activity i s the only non-coincidental basis on which any of these rela;- tLonships could reasonably occur. Abrasive stones, being common a r t i f a c t s , would have been used while dogs inhabited the s i t e . They could have been i n use while the other species were being taken, and they may have been used to make a r t i - f a c t s that were used to take the l a t t e r two species. This i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s tenuous and should not be given much con- fidence. The v i r t u a l absence of any of these variables from Component I suggests that these relationships pertain mostly to Components II and I I I . The degree of d i f f i c u l t y i n i n t e r - preting these relationships i s not re l a t e d to the r e l i a b i l i t y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s . I t i s maintained that, although the meanings to be i n f e r r e d from these relationships are obscure, the relationships themselves are r e l i a b l e and p o t e n t i a l l y meaningful. Thin ground sla t e points are rela t e d to sea l i o n , unid- e n t i f i a b l e sea mammal, seagull, and un i d e n t i f i a b l e duck. While the l a t t e r three relationships occur i n the presence/ absence analyses, the f i r s t r e l a t i o n s h i p is-found, i n a l l four analyses. Of a l l these variables, only seagull occurs i n a n a l y t i c a l units from Component I, I t occurs once. The relationships between these variables, therefore, apply l a r g e l y to the two most recent components. The th i n ground s l a t e points involved i n these pa i r s consist of triangular, corner notched, and basal notched forms as well as fragments. These classes of points are often thought of as arming points f o r either arrows or composite toggling harpoons. Blade type arming points f o r composite toggling harpoons, used i n the 262 quest for seals and sea lions, are reported (Barnett 1975: 98-99), but i t should be pointed out that the composite toggling harpoon valves from Deep Bay do not have slots to receive such arming points. Arrow points of slate are reported ethnographically (Barnett 1975:101), and hunting birds with arrows i s also reported (Barnett 1975:102), How- ever, the bird arrows described do not specifically include ones with thin ground slate points. These points could have armed arrows used to take seagulls and ducks, since both were taken for food (Barnett 1975:63), but the inference i s tenuous at best. It seems most l i k e l y that these bird and mammal species were being taken by other means at the same time as other species were being hunted with arrows. Thus, these variable pairs suggest concomitant activity. Since thin ground slate points occur primarily in Component II, these relationships should apply primarily to that archaeological unit. There are none of these variables to speak of in Component I, and few members of the artifact class i n Component III, The relationship of ground slate knife to seagull i s puzzling. Occurring in two analyses, the distributions of these two variables suggests that the relationship i s most pronounced in Component III. The minimal presence of ground slate knives in analytical units indicates that heavy r e l i - ance should not be placed on interpretations of this v a r i * able pair. Nonetheless, the intuitive association of both 263 variables with f i s h catching and butchering a c t i v i t y implies that concomitant a c t i v i t y may serve as the basis for t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p . No ethnographic substantiation can be found for t h i s idea. Ground s l a t e fragments are associated with sea l i o n , u n i d e n t i f i a b l e sea mammal, grebe, and goose. A l l these variables are absent from Component I. The two b i r d v a r i - ables are minimally present i n Components II and I I I . There- fore, the most r e l i a b l e relationships occur between ground s l a t e fragments and sea mammal variables i n Components II and I I I . The inter p r e t a t i o n to be placed on these r e l a t i o n - ships i s f a r from c l e a r . Because ground sla t e fragments are non-functional a r t i f a c t s , and because, not sur p r i s i n g l y , no ethnographic analogues exist f o r these r e l a t i o n s h i p s , the most reasonable i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these variable p a i r s i s that they occur by coincidence. Bone points are re l a t e d to seagull and un i d e n t i f i a b l e duck. This a r t i f a c t class consists of both heavy duty and l i g h t duty points; however, the l a t t e r outnumber t h e former by 34 to 10. Of the three variables involved, only unidenti- f i a b l e duck i s found i n Component I, and here only i n one a n a l y t i c a l u n i t . The d i s t r i b u t i o n s of these variables appear to be f a i r l y homogeneous throughout Components II and III Therefore interpretations based on these pairs should re f e r only to the two recent components at Deep Bay. Within these two components, the p r o b a b i l i t y of chance occurrence of these 26k pairs i s quite low, and the strength of association i s mod- erate to high. These two relationships may reflect coter- minous activity, with light duty bone points arming arrows with which birds were hunted. This interpretation seems less l i k e l y than concomitant activity because bone points of a variety of sizes could have been used for a number of other a c t i v i t i e s . For instance, ducks may have been taken at the same time as herring were being raked. Bone bipoints share relationships with seagull, unid- entifiable duck, and unidentifiable bird. Bipoints are not found in Component I, and are evenly distributed i n Compon- ents II and III. The bird remains are also evenly distributed in the two most recent components, but unidentifiable duck and unidentifiable birdijremains are also found in Component I. The relationships, therefore, apply only in Components II and III. Bone bipoints are often thought of as f i s h gorges or herring rake teeth (Barnett 1975,Fig. 27, 86). The bipoints from Deep Bay show no medial girdle, as i f they had been fi s h gorges (Mitchell 1971a:202). But girdling may not have been required for such a use. They could be herring rake teeth. They do not seem to be directly involved in acti v i t i e s concerned with acquiring, processing, or consuming the bird species involved here. An interpretation based on concomitant activity appears to be most reasonable. At the same time as fishing was conducted using bone bipoints, the 265 birds represented by these faunal variables may have been taken. Worked bone fragments are paired with sea l i o n , unid- e n t i f i a b l e sea mammal, and un i d e n t i f i a b l e duck. Like pairs involving ground s l a t e fragments, l i t t l e i n the way of mean- i n g f u l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n can be derived from these r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The absence of a l l four variables from Component I, with one t r i v i a l exception, suggests that Components II and III account for a l l of these r e l a t i o n s h i p s . I t may, however, be more than coincidence that sea l i o n and un i d e n t i f i a b l e sea mammal co- occur with both miscellaneous ground s l a t e and bone variables. Antler wedges share relationships with four b i r d v a r i - ables, eagle, grebe, goose, and un i d e n t i f i a b l e duck. Antler wedges, are not abundant at Deep Bay. They are absent from Component I and evenly d i s t r i b u t e d i n Components II and I I I . Eagle, goose, and grebe are also absent from Component I and uncommon but evenly d i s t r i b u t e d i n the other two components. Uniden t i f i a b l e duck i s almost absent from Component I but evenly d i s t r i b u t e d i n the other two components. Thus, the two l a t e components contain a l l the variable p a i r s i n question. Antler wedges are manufacturing tools used i n woodwork (Barnett 1975:108). They are un l i k e l y , therefore, to have been used i n the a c q u i s i t i o n of the b i r d variables involved here. The bases of these relationships may be coincidence, owing to the minimal occurrences of antler wedges. At the lea s t , the high c o e f f i c i e n t s of association and c o r r e l a t i o n 266 should be accepted with caution since so many common absences are involved in these data. However, the possibility should not be discounted that woodworking and fowling may have been concomitant a c t i v i t i e s . Woodworking specialists are known to have exchanged their products for other resources that they needed (Barnett 1975:107). Also, woodworking was often undertaken at slack periods of the year (Barnett 1975:107), such as winter, when migratory species such as grebe were available (Munro and Cowan 1947:44-48). Antler composite toggling harpoon valves tend to co- occur with unidentifiable sea mammal and grebe. None of these variables i s found in Component I. Unidentifiable sea mammal remains occur in a number of analytic units in Components II and III, but antler composite toggling harpoon valves and grebe occur only in the minimum number of such units. The inflated coefficient values for these two pairs should there- fore not be blindly accepted. Instead, i t would be reasonable to say that some reliable patterns of co-occurrence exist between the artifact and faunal variables, but the number of tied zero values causes inflated coefficient values and pro- babilities to be produced. Composite toggling harpoon valves are reportedly used to hunt salmon, seals, and sea lions (Barnett 1975:83, 98-99). Four Coast Salish composite toggling harpoons used for salmon range in length from 4.8 to 6.6 cm with an average of 5.7 cm (Hoover 1974,Table V). For the northwest coast in general, 267 eight salmon harpoon head valve lengths range from 4.# to 11.1 cm with an average of 6.9 cm (Hoover 1974,Table IV). Salmon composite toggling harpoon heads a l l belong to Type I (Hoover 1974:39). The most common subtype of this type is la which has two valves of equal length, both of which are spurred. They are mounted on a fixed foreshaft and have a separate, shanked, unbarbed arming element (Hoover 1974:3#). They also lack lashing grooves, and the arming channel is lat e r a l l y bound (i.e. i t is closed along the edges where the valves meet); i (Hoover 1974:97). The four complete valves from Deep Bay range in length from 5.0 to 6.3 cm with an average of 5.3 cm. Their form i s that of Hoover's Subtype l a . The evidence therefore suggests that the Deep Bay valves were most l i k e l y to have been parts of salmon harpoons. If this is the case, the relationship between antler composite toggling harpoon valves and sea mammals appears to be based on concomitant activity. Salmon remains are not common at the sit e . But, like seals and? sea lions, salmon are known to prey on herring. It is reasonable to expect salmon acquisition tools to associate with sea mammals under these circumstances. Indeed salmon are also prey to seals and sea lions, so the common presence of herring, salmon, and sea mammals is to be expected. It should be pointed out that the sample sizes involved in the,calculations of ranges and averages for valve lengths are small in both Hoover's case and my own. Also, very few 268 of Hoover's valves are definitely made of antler. For these two reasons his results should be applied with caution to the Deep Bay data. Secondly, sea mammals were tired and hindered by means of floats tied to harpoon lines (Barnett 1975:99). When tired, the animal could be brought alongside and dispatched. I contend that excessively robust harpoon valves are not needed for this purpose. If this i s true, then salmon harpoons could have doubled as expedient means for acquiring sea mammals. In this case, the relationship between sea mammal and antler composite toggling harpoon valve may be based on coterminous activity. The relationship of the valves to grebe i s tenuous. Aside from s t a t i s t i c a l considerations and the possibility that the relationship i s coincident, there may be another basis for the pairing of these two variables. Grebes prey on small f i s h as an integral part of their diet (Carl 1963: 47), and in this respect they are similar in habit to seals and sea lions. Since herring are known to spawn near the site at a time when grebes are s t i l l on the coast, and since seals, sea lions, and salmon could also be expected to be present as predators at this time, i t i s possible that the relationship between the antler composite toggling harpoon valves and grebe remains i s based on concomitant activity. Ochre shares relationships with dog, unidentifiable sea mammal, and unidentifiable duck. A l l of these variables are common throughout Components II and III. This abundance 269 suggests that the coefficients and the probabilities are reliable for the three variable pairs. Unidentifiable sea mammal and ochre are absent from Component I, and dog and unidentifiable duck each occur in only one analytical unit of Component I. Ochre was used as a cosmetic and as body ornamentation (Barnett 1975:74; Gunther 1927:224). It was also used in f i r s t f r u i t ceremonies (Barnett 1975:90-91, 105), and in pre- paring houses and init i a t e s for s p i r i t dance ceremonies. It is interesting to note that duck down i s spread on the floor at such ceremonies (Kew 1970:163-164). Given the abundance of the variables i n question and the extreme unlikelihood that ochre was used to acquire or process the faunal variables in question, the relationships observed here seem most l i k e l y to be based on concomitant activity. In the case of unidenti- fiable sea mammal and unidentifiable duck, f i r s t f r u i t cere- monies may have involved the use of ochre (coterminous ac t i v i t y ) . This seems unlikely, however, since f i r s t f r u i t ceremonies seem to have been restricted to salmon on Vancouver Island (Barnett 1975:107), and since f i r s t k i l l ceremonies (Barnett 1975:107) are unlikely to have accounted for the abundance of ochre at Deep Bay. Ochre may have been used for body care or ornamentation while subsistence acti v i t i e s were in progress, or, given the suspected late winter occupancy of the site, the association of ochre and duck may imply some form of ceremonial activity. 270 A number of^subsequent analyses not reported here were conducted on these data. Artifact classes were re-grouped according to function and material, and faunal variables were re-grouped according to taxonomic andvecological similarities. These re-grouped data were analyzed by the same means as the data reported above, and consistent results were again obtained among the analyses. Further, the re-grouped data tended to support the specific relationships reported here. Theoretical Framework The preceding analyses have pointed to a number of associations between specific artifact classes and faunal species. These relationships are thought to result from ac t i v i t i e s that are coterminous, concomitant, or coincident. Because a l l the faunal species, except dog, that are consid- ered here are ethnographically recorded food resource species, the topic of subsistence comes immediately to mind. The following discussion attempts to place the results of the preceding analyses in a more general, subsistence oriented context. A recent study by Flannery (1972) defines a procurement system as part of the complex adaptive system which is culture. Each procurement system requires a technology involving imple- ments and f a c i l i t i e s , and the focal point of each system i s the plant or animal food resources being acquired (Flannery 1972:222-234). Note here that the term "procurement system" 2?1 refers only to food resource procurement. The food resource i s held to be the focus of the procurement system (Flannery 1972:223), and seasonality and scheduling are said to be regulating mechanisms of such subsistence systems. These mechanisms may counteract or amplify c u l t u r a l deviation (Flannery 1972:228, 231; a f t e r Maruyama 1963). This model, although valuable as a foundation and as a stimulus, has a number of features that are debatable. F i r s t , the term "system", as defined below, denotes a useful but overworked concept i n archaeology. Most of t h i s overwork a r i s e s as a r e s u l t of assuming, rather than demon- s t r a t i n g , that a system e x i s t s . In many cases there i s no a l t e r n a t i v e but to make such an assumption i n order to account for an observed phenomenon, and i n t h i s case the use of a verbal system model (von Bertalanffy 1968:24) i s acceptable. But, i n many cases i t i s possible to demonstrate that there exists " . . . a complex of elements d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y r elated i n a causal network, such that at l e a s t some of the components are r e l a t e d to some others i n a more or less stable way at any one time. The i n t e r r e l a t i o n s may be mutual or u n i d i r e c t i o n a l , l i n e a r , non-linear or intermittent, and varying i n degrees of causal effectiveness or p r i o r i t y . The p a r t i c u l a r kinds of more or l e s s stable i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s of components that become established at any time constitute the p a r t i c u l a r structure of the system at that time" (Buckley 1968:493). 272 The archaeological record does not contain many elements, of what Flannery calls procurement systems, because they are either non-observable or unpreserved. For this reason, i t seems unwise to consider archaeological manifestations of what once may have been a system as the system i t s e l f , as he appears to do (Flannery 1972:227). Instead, i t i s thought more appropriate to consider the archaeological evidence as a potential indicator of a system. Also, Flannery does not demonstrate that causal relationships exist between variables in what he calls a system, even though techniques for detect- ing the association, and possible causation, of system vari- ables are at hand and have been employed in the present study. It seems doubly inappropriate, therefore, to consider the phenomena discussed by Flannery as procurement systems. Instead, the archaeological indicators of what may be pro- curement systems w i l l be called procurement complexes. It is argued here that by demonstrating the possible existence of procurement complexes i n the archaeological record, and by inferring from them the non-observable and unpreserved aspects of food resource acquisition and processing, a more reasonable basis can be l a i d for evaluating whether or not relationships between variables imply the existence of pro- curement systems. Second, the designation of the food resource as the focus of a procurement complex is subject to debate. It i s reason- able to argue that, without appropriate technology, food 273 resources could not be( procured. In this sense, technological variables are as important in a procurement complex as food resources. The particular food resource may serve as a con- venient label for a procurement complex, but i t does not follow that technological variables are less important. The procurement system concept assumes that a relation- ship exists between a culture and the food remains that i t deposits archaeologically. While this i s undoubtedly true, the possibility of establishing specific culture-food resource relationships must be kept in mind. The method used in the f i r s t part of this chapter avoids this generalized assumption by demonstrating specifically which material cultural v a r i * ables and which food resource variables are associated.- Having avoided this assumption, inferences about non-observable and unpreserved variables involved i n food resource procurement rest on a firmer foundation than those of Flannery, which rest on the assumed relationship of faunal remains and the rest of culture. Furthermore, without the axiom that technological variables are as important as environmental variables in procurement complexes, the demonstration of specific relation- ships between material culture and food resources i s made more d i f f i c u l t , and the inferences drawn from the data about non- observable and unpreserved cultural variables are consequent- ly weaker. Third, seasonality i s a given non-cultural mechanism around which procurement systems develop and scheduling 274 decisions are made (Flannery 1972:227). Although scheduling can result in either deviation amplifying or deviation counteracting situations, the phenomenon called "scheduling" by Flannery (1972:227) appears in fact to be two different but related things. Part of Flannery»s concept of scheduling appears to be the cultural decisions that are made concerning where to be at what time of year in accordance with the seas- onality of various food resources. This concept can be called "annual round". The second concept, also affected by seasonality, relates to the decisions as to who w i l l be at which place at which time of year to exploit resources. This concept can be labelled "organization of labor". The adopt- ion of these two terms would not only specify the cultural mechanisms that regulate the use of procurement complexes and their relationships, but i t would also provide a means by which the sources of variation in food resource a v a i l - a b i l i t y noted by Suttles (1960:302) can be incorporated into archaeological usage. Synthesis of Results In the light of this discussion, many mf the associations detected in the f i r s t part of this chapter may be seen as implying procurement complexes. Associations that are thought to represent both coterminous and concomitant food resource acquisition and processings a c t i v i t i e s f a l l into this category. However, not a l l coterminous and concomitant r e l - 275 ationships are necessarily involved in subsistence a c t i v i t i e s . Relationships involving non-subsistence species, such as dog, would not be involved in procurement complexes, although dogs could be considered as a technological item in terms of hunt- ing. Nor would non-subsistence oriented artifact classes be involved in procurement complexes. Into this category f a l l antler wedges, abrasive stones, ground slate fragments, worked bone fragments, and ochre. Also, inverse relationships, such as those between simple flake tools and various mollusc species, cannot be considered as procurement complex indicators because they imply temporal variation in a c t i v i t i e s conducted at the same part of the si t e . The remaining associations that may imply procurement complexes are: thin ground slate point and sea l i o n , thin ground slate point andsunidentifiable sea mammal, thin ground slate point and seagull, thin ground slate point and unidentifiable duck, ground slate knife and seagull, bone point and seagull, bone point anduunidentifiable duck, bone bipoint and seagull, bone bipoint and unidenti- fiable duck, bone bipoint and unidentifiable bird, antler composite toggling harpoon valves and unidentifiable sea mammal, and antler composite toggling harpoon valves and grebe. Clearly, the range of species involved i n these assoc- iations i s limited* Therefore, the relationship between variable associations and procurement complexes i s not one to one. That i s , a number of such associations may imply a 276 single procurement complex. The species involved i n these associations, along with the a r t i f a c t classes associated with them, are: s e a l l i o n - t h i n ground s l a t e point; unidenti- f i a b l e sea mammal-thin ground s l a t e point, antler composite toggling harpoon valve; seagull-thin ground s l a t e point, ground sla t e k n i f e , bone point, bone bipoint; grebe-antler composite toggling harpoon valve; u n i d e n t i f i a b l e duck-thin ground s l a t e point, bone point, bone bipoint; u n i d e n t i f i a b l e bird-bone b i p o i n t . The u n i d e n t i f i a b l e sea mammal variable i s l i k e l y to consist almost exclusively of sea l i o n and seal because these species comprise a l l the i d e n t i f i a b l e sea mammal remains. Therefore i t i s not unreasonable to combine t h i s variable and sea l i o n and l a b e l the r e s u l t sea mammal; Thus, the a r t i f a c t class associations of t h i s variable are antler composite toggling harpoon valves and thi n ground sla t e points. These associations may represent a procurement complex. However, the si z e of most of the valves and the absence of an arming s l o t on them leaves open the question of whether t h i s procurement complex i s a r e s u l t of coterminous or con- comitant a c t i v i t y ^ I f i t i s a r e s u l t of coterminous a c t i v i t y , the s i z e and form of a number of antler composite toggling harpoon valves and th i n ground s l a t e points seem inappropriate. I f i t i s a r e s u l t of concomitant a c t i v i t y , what resources were being taken with the a r t i f a c t classes i n question, and by what means were the sea mammal species taken? Small antler com- / 277 posite toggling harpoon valves may imply that salmon were being taken. These f i s h prey on herring, as do seals and sea l i o n s , therefore they are l i k e l y to be avail a b l e at Deep Bay at the same time as these species. I f a r e l a t i o n - ship between antler composite toggling harpoon valves and sea mammals was based on concomitant a c t i v i t i e s of sea mammal and salmon a c q u i s i t i o n , one would expect substantial quan- t i t i e s of salmon remains to have been recovered from the Deep Bay excavations. In f a c t , salmon remains are not common compared to other f i s h remains. It i s not clear whether t h i s s i t u a t i o n r e s u l t s from salmon not being taken at Deep Bay or from salmon being processed and removed from the s i t e . Thin ground s l a t e points, l a r g e l y triangular and corner notched, may have armed hunting arrows (Duff 1952:59). Their small s i z e and l i g h t weight v i r t u a l l y precludes t h e i r use i n a p r o j e c t i l e more robust than an arrow. Such arrows would have been e f f e c t i v e i n hunting deer, the remains of which are p l e n t i f u l i n the Deep Bay deposits. Bucks were preferred i n the spring when they were we l l fed (Suttles 1951:82-83). The Slaiamman are reported to have acquired deer and herring during March (Barnett 1975:29). Herring are known to spawn at Deep Bay i n March also. Therefore, i t i s possible that seals and sea l i o n s , preying on the herring as they spawned, were taken at the same time as deer were being hunted by means of bows and arrows. Although the p a i r i n g of t h i n ground s l a t e points and 278 antler composite toggling harpoon valves with seal and sea l i o n variables seems d e f i n i t e l y to imply a procurement complex, the exact nature of the procurement system or systems represented by thi s complex i s not c l e a r . The ethnographic and ecological analogues provide for a variety of interpretations. The b i r d remains, except for u n i d e n t i f i a b l e b i r d , also co-occur with the same a r t i f a c t classes as the sea mammal remains. In addition, however, the b i r d species share re- lationships with bone points and bone bipoints. Relation- ships of the b i r d species with these l a t t e r two a r t i f a c t classes may suggest a coterminous b i r d procurement complex, but there i s l i t t l e ethnographic support f o r t h i s i n t e r p r e t - a t ion. Instead, the re l a t i o n s h i p s , i n some instances, of bi r d and sea mammal species with the same a r t i f a c t classes implies that there may be some i n d i r e c t connection between the a c q u i s i t i o n of these faunal species. Seals and sea l i o n s are known to prey on herring (Cowan and Guiget 1968:348, 353; Barnett 1975:15), and the birds presently under discussion commonly feed on herring and the i r roe (Carl 1966:47; Guiget 1967:8). Among the Lummi and other southeastern Coast S a l i s h groups, nets were suspended underwater on herring spawning beaches i n order to trap and drown birds feeding underwater on herring and th e i r eggs (Stern 1934:41; Suttles 1951:73-74). Herring are known to inhabit Baynes Sound (Tester 1947) and to spawn on the beach to the southeast of the s i t e i n early 279 spring (March in 1976). The migratory bird species presently under discussion leave the coast between March and May (Munro and Cowan 1947). It seems highly l i k e l y , therefore, that both the bird species and the sea mammal species i n question were present at the site as predators on the herring. Man, too, was present as a predator on a l l these species, as the faunal remains indicate. Herring were reportedly taken by means of rakes made of a wooden shaft set with pointed bone "teeth" (Stern 1934:50; Barnett 1975:86; Gunther 1927:202; Suttles 1951:126), and i t i s almost certain that herring were also taken by means of the f i s h trap to the southeast of the s i t e . Herring remains are p r o l i f i c i n the shell midden deposits of the site, attesting to their heavy exploitation by man. Also present in the midden de- posits are large numbers of single and double pointed bone objects that could easily have served as herring rake teeth. Herring remains do not share relationships with bone points or bone b i p o i n t s — i . e . f i s h procuring artifact classes — a s might "ini t i a l l y be expected, because of their omni- presence. The massive amounts of these fish that could be caught in the f i s h trap, compared to the amounts that could be caught with herring rakes, probably made their remains so abundant that they do not covary with any artifact class. Also, the likelihood that herring were preserved whole by smoking and drying (Stern 1934:50; Gunther 1927:208; Suttles 1951:127) would account in large part for the lack of re- lationships between herring remains and fi s h processing 280 artifact classes. Therefore, because these f i s h could be taken in large numbers, possibly without related artifact classes being l e f t i n the archaeological deposits, i t i s not surprising that herring remains share no relationships with artifact classes. The relationships of seagull, grebe, unidentifiable duck, and unidentifiable bird with bone points and bone bipoints seem to suggest, on the basis of the preceding discussion, that a procurement complex exists and that this complex i s based on concomitant activity. While herring were being taken, birds preying on herring and herring eggs were pro- bably also taken as a subsidiary resource. The same argument can be applied to the acquisition of seals and sea lions. Although these species may have been less peripheral than waterfowl to the subsistence base of the site inhabitants, and although the sea mammal procure- ment complex appears most li k e l y to reflect concomitant activity (sea mammal and salmon acquisition), i t can be strongly argued that sea mammals were probably exploited, like waterfowl, as they followed the spawning herring. It was suggested in the discussion of the sea mammal procurement complex that thin ground slate points might imply hunting activity, since none of the antler composite toggling harpoon valves had slots to receive this kind of armament. If arrows are implied by these points, then a consideration of land hunting evidence i s in order. Tables XXVIII and XXX 281 indicate that deer i s the major land mammal species repre- sented i n the Deep Bay deposits and that t h i s resource was heavily exploited. In spite of t h i s heavy ex p l o i t a t i o n , deer remains do not "share s i g n i f i c a n t relationships with the same a r t i f a c t classes i n more than one a n a l y s i s . Possible reasons for t h i s are: 1) because the durable a r t i f a c t s used to acquire deer were valuable beyond the period of time that people stayed at Deep Bay they were probably curated, and 2) because non-durable a r t i f a c t s , such as snares, traps, and nets (Barnett 1975:96-98, 99-103), could be used to take substantial numbers of deer without being evident i n the . archaeological record. This s i t u a t i o n i s the same as that outlined for the absence of variable pairs involving herring. Deer limb bones, as pointed out i n Chapter VI, are found i n disproportionately large numbers compared to trunk bones i n the Deep Bay deposits. This suggests that a number of the a r t i f a c t classes used to hunt and p r e l i m i n a r i l y butcher deer are u n l i k e l y to be found at the s i t e . Furthermore, the s e l e c t i v e importation of deer bones to the s i t e would mean that not a l l remains of these animals have the same chance to associate with a r t i f a c t classes compared to species that were whole when brought to the s i t e . The abundance of deer remains i n the s i t e , combined with the p o s s i b i l i t y that land hunting may have taken place at the same time as seals and sea l i o n s were being taken, suggests that deer hunting may have been an important procurement complex at Deep Bay. The abundance of dog remains, a species that could be interpreted as an artifact in the sense that dogs were often used as aids in deer hunting (Barnett 1975:96-97), further supports the inference that considerable deer hunting may have been undertaken at Deep Bay. In fact, deer and dog remains co-occur at ^ = +0.398, °̂  = 0.001 in the presence/ absence data and at r = +0.321, ©< = 0.010 in the weight of s remains data. It has already been pointed out that this activity may have occurred i n the spring when herring were available and when bucks are at their prime (Barnett 1975: 29; Suttles 1951:82-83). It appears, therefore, that a deer procurement system may be implied by the sea mammal and water- fowl procurement complexes. Verification of Results If the preceding discussion i s an accurate interpretation of past cultural and environmental relationships at Deep Bay, one could reasonably expect that relationships would occur among the artifact classes and among the faunal remains in question. Using the same techniques as were used to detect relationships between artifact classes and faunal species, the four forms of the data were examined. No relationships were found in the minimum numbers of individuals and e s t i - mated weight of usable meat data. The presence/absence and weight of remains data, however, produced the relationships shown in Tables XXXIV and XXXV. Table XXXIV indicates that a l l the artifact classes pair with at least one other artifact 283 TABLE XXXIV Pairs of Selected Artifact Classes, Lot 73, DiSe 7 <\. ̂  a05 Variable Pair Analysis +/- wt% thin ground slate point x bone point thin ground slate point x bone bipoint ground slate knife x bone bipoint bone point x bone bipoint bone point x toggling harpoon valve bone bipoint x toggling harpoon valve +0,478 0.002 +0.3048 0.015 +0.367 0.011 +0.2745 0.029 +0.308 0.051 +0.2824 0.025 +0.516 0.000 +0.3949 0.001 +0.379 0.023 +0.2501 0.048 +0.432 0.003 +0.3793 0.002 TABLE XXXV Pairs of Selected Faunal Species, Lot 73, DiSe 7 <=\̂  .05 Variable Pair Analysis +/- wt% 0 «*< r «* sea lion x unidentifiable, sea mammal sea lion x. seagull sea lion x unidentifiable duck unidentifiable sea mammal x seagull unidentifiable sea mammal x grebe l unidentifiable sea mammal x unidentifiable duck unidentifiable sea mammal x unidentifiable bird seagull x unidentifiable duck unidentifiable duck x unidentifiable bird +0.404 0.005 +0.4114 0.001 +0.2478 0.050 +0.2745 0.029 +0.292 0.047 +0.2877 0.022 +0.410 0.005 +0.3871 0.002 +0.374 0.007 +0.4031 0.001 +0.391 +0.309 0.025 0.032 +0i2740 0.030 +0.384 0.006 +0.3438 0.006 284 class in both analyses of the data e These relationships may be diagrammed as follows: ground slate knife I thin ground' - bone bipoint - composite toggling slate point I harpoon valve -bone point Figure 28. Relationships among selected artifact classes, Lot 73, DiSe 7. These relationships tend to support the view that these artifact classes are mutually interrelated because of their involvement in related subsistence a c t i v i t i e s . If one accepts only those paired faunal species that occur i n both analyses, a l l faunal species are nevertheless found to pair with at least one other species (Table XXXV). The relationships among these variables can be shown as follows: unidentifiable bird - unidentifiable duck - seagull / \ unidentifiable sea mammal sea lion I grebe Figure 29. Relationships among selected faunal species, Lot 73, DiSe 7. The remains of these species tend to co-occur in the arch- aeological record because, like the selected artifact classes, they were part of a related set of subsistence a c t i v i t i e s . 285 It remains to show that deer and herring remains are related to these selected faunal species and to each other. Table XXXVI shows those variable pairs involving deer that occur at ^ i j r ,05 in the presence/absence and weight of remains data, TABLE XXXVI Variable Pairs Involving Deer and Selected Faunal Species, Lot 73, DiSe 7 .05 Analysis • +/- wt% Variable Pair ft r g ^ deer x unidentifiable sea mammal +0,285 0,0479 deer x unidentifiable duck +0,365 0.0085 deer x unidentifiable bird +0.359 0.0104 +0.3247 0.009 If one accepts only those variable pairs that are found in both analyses, then deer s t i l l i s related to the selected faunal species through i t s co-occurrence with unidentifiable bird. If a l l three variable pairs in Table XXXVI are accepted, then deer is seen as tightly interrelated with selected faunal species. Herring remains pair only with seagull remains. The relationship should not be considered as a strong one because of the minimal occurrence of seagull remains. However, there does seem to be a relationship between these variables that i s significant at *K = .006 with a correlation coefficient of 286 r g = +0.345 in the weight of remains data. This relation- ship is also found in the presence/absence data to have a significance of °^ = .022 and a coefficient of association of <ji - +0.329. These data indicate that the seagull pro- curement complex, and by extension the waterfowl procurement complex, may indeed be linked to the acquisition of herring. Consequently, these data are thought to support the preceding concomitant activity interpretation that was derived for variable pairs involving waterfowl. A significant direct relationship between herring and deer could not be detected in either the presence/absence or weight of remains data. The lack of a variable pair involving these two species does not necessarily indicate that they were unrelated to one another in terms of subsistence acti v i t i e s at the s i t e . In fact, quite the opposite interpretation can be made. If the ethnographic analogy with the Slaiamman holds for the former inhabitants of Deep Bay, i t i s possible that different groups within the site inhabitants were i n - volved in the independent a c t i v i t i e s of herring fishing and deer hunting. The number of participants in each type of activity could vary randomly through such mechanisms as i n - herited rights to specific resource locations, access to a number of resource locations through bilateral kinship ties, and specialist pursuits of both types of activity. Also, predictable and non-predictable fluctuations in the abundance of each resource may obscure whatever potential relationships 287 exist between the remains of these two species. Because these two resources were l i k e l y to have been pursued indep- endently, they can be seen as a l l the more important in terms of subsistence. Even i f the harvest was poor from one of these resources, the abundance of the other resource would not be affected. Conclusion It seems reasonable to infer that the procurement com- plexes discussed above represent the tangible evidence of several food resource procurement systems. Several of these systems are clearly more important than the others; These systems can be defined and intuitively ranked as follows: l a . The herring procurement system. Artifact class data, faunal data, ethnographic analogues and ecological analogues a l l suggest that herring were a primary food resource and that a well developed set of tools and behavior was associated with their acquisition. lb. The deer procurement system. Ethnographic and eco- logical analogues and faunal data indicate that deer, as well as herring, were acquired independently as basic components of the subsistence strategy at Deep Bay. 2. The sea mammal procurement system. Both seal and sea lion belong within this system. Faunal data, possibly the artifact class data, ethnographic and ecological analogues a l l support the view that this procurement system was closely 288 tied to the herring procurement system. Although more usable meat on Lot 73 i s represented by sea mammals compared to deer, the dependent relationship of sea mammals and herring suggests that the sea mammal procurement system should be assigned less importance than the deer procurement system; 3. The waterfowl procurement system. A l l four types of data indicate the existence of such a procurement system. An examination of the weights of remains of these species, their frequency of occurrence, and the amount of usable meat they contribute to the food resource inventory clearly shows that these species form a minor part of the subsistence base. 4. The mollusc procurement system. This system i s added here, not because i t seems to be the least important food resource procurement system at Deep Bay, but rather to indicate that mollusc gathering activity was undoubtedly an important day to day activity (Gunther 1927:206; Stern 1934:47). This system i s also included as a reminder that i t i s possible for a coastal site to have been occupied without evidence of shell- f i s h having been gathered, e.g. Component I. These procurement systems are thought to constitute the subsistence base at Deep Bay. The absence from Component I of practically a l l the variables involved means that the relationships discussed here apply to Components II and III. The distributions of sea lion remains and thin ground slate points indicate that at least part of the sea mammal procure- ment system, andrpossibly the deer procurement system, may have been more prevalent in component II than in Component III, Bone bipoints appear in greater numbers in Component III than in Component II, This suggests that the waterfowl procurement system may have developed through time in con- junction with the herring procurement system. On the other hand, light duty bone points are evenly distributed through Components II and III; Therefore, changes may have been minor in the procurement systems in which they were involved. The i n a b i l i t y of the Kruskal-Wallis test to differentiate between components on the basis of many artifact classes or faunal remains seems to indicate that only minor shifts are lik e l y to have occurred in the procurement systems throughout Components II and III, 290 CHAPTER IX SEASONAL ASPECTS OF SITE USE Introduction The purpose of this chapter i s to bring together the various lines of evidence pertaining to the seasonal occupat- ion of Deep Bay, The data on which this discussion i s based consist of the various attributes of the faunal assemblage recovered from the midden deposits on Lot 73. The virtual absence of faunal remains from the Component I deposits means that the findings presented here are applicable p r i - marily to Components II and III, Physical characteristics and the ecology of selected birds, f i s h , and mammal species are examined and the conclusion i s reached that, at least during the time when Components II and III were deposited, the Deep Bay site was occupied during the late winter and early spring. During the period of Component III, however, the site may have been occupied less intensively at various other times of year as well. An attempt i s also made, i n light of seasonal implications drawn from the faunal assem- blage, to place the Deep Bay site into an annual subsistence round context. This context w i l l be general in the sense that insufficient information i s available for meaningful distinctions to be made between the roles played by Components 291 II and III in the annual round. Faunal Evidence The clam shell seasonality analysis suggested that at least 50%, and as much as 80%, of a l l clams recovered from the midden were taken in the f i r s t growth quarter. That i s , they were gathered during the period during which the winter check ring was being formed or during the i n i t i a l stages of post-winter growth. This evidence would imply that clams were being most heavily exploited during mid-to-late winter and early spring. The heavy exploitation of clams at this time of year may indicate that late winter and early spring was the period of most intensive occupation of the si t e , or i t may indicate that other more desirable subsistence resources were not available at this time of year. The decrease in the emphasis on the spring quarter, and the increase i n the emphasis on later quarters, of clam exploitation from the Gulf of Georgia Component might be accounted for by local environmental change affecting the a v a i l a b i l i t y <5f the range of subsistence resources. Or, i t may be accounted for by a cultural change. One possibility i s that increased population pressure and increased inter-group^conflict prompted the construction of defensive structures such as earthworks. One such earthwork, reportedly very large, formerly existed on the spit at Deep Bay. With a need for greater security, the earlier annual round may have been slightly modified to include longer occupation, by some or a l l local group members, of sites such as Deep Bay that could be defended relatively easily. Thus, although there may be a slight change through time in the seasonal occupation of the s i t e , i t appears mainly to have been used during the late winter and early spring. From Lot 73 the remains of fourteen bird species or genera were identified. In keeping with previous usage, the term "variables" w i l l be used to refer to genus and species remains. Eight variables were found in three or less analytical units, thus suggesting their lack of importance in terms of subsistence. Five variables are sedentary while the remaining three are migratory. Six variables found in five or more analytical units are included in Table XXVIII, and i t i s inferred from their increased frequency of occur- rence that they were relatively important in terms of sub- sistence. Three of the six variables are migratory and three are sedentary. Because of their importance for sub- sistence purposes, as well as seasonal dating purposes, the migratory variables from this table w i l l be examined closely here. The three variables in question are Aythya marila, Podiceps/Colymbus, and unidentifiable duck. Aythya marila, or greater scaup duck, i s a winter v i s i t o r to the coast of British Columbia (Godfrey 1966:69). It appears on the coast between September and November and departs between March and May (Munro and Cowan 1947:67; Guiget 1958:55). The greater scaup duck i s a salt water bird when on the coast. Its diet i s almost entirely animal matter such as shellfish, insects, and crustaceans (Godfrey 1966:56). This preference for animal foods i s l i k e l y to include herring and their roe. Podiceps/Colymbus, or grebe, consists of some six species in the province. A l l are migratory, however, spending the period from September to November through March to May on the coast (Munro and Cowan 1947:44-48). The red-necked grebe and p i e d - b i l l grebe, however, are known to nest on the coast as well (Godfrey 1966:16, 19). When on salt water, grebes feed on small fishes that they chase and capture underwater (Carl 1963:47), as well as on crustaceans (Godfrey 1966:17, 18). Unidentifiable duck i s a variable covering Anseriformes not belonging to the swan or goose category. These ducks a l l have a tendency to winter on the coast of British Columbia and to migrate north for nesting purposes in the summer. Nevertheless, some members of the various species involved, usually immature individuals, stay on the coast during the summer as well (Munro and Cowan 1947:59-72). Ducks i n this category feed on a variety of plants, crustaceans, and sh e l l - f i s h . The migratory birds that are found i n abundance on Lot 73 therefore appear to frequent the coast between October and April and to subsist there, to a considerable extent, on animal foods. The frequently exploited sedentary species are Branta sp. Larus sp., and Haliaeetus leucocephalus. The f i r s t of these 294 variables i s most li k e l y to be the greater Canada goose, although subspecies of this genus are imperfectly under- stood (Godfrey 1966:49). The second is most l i k e l y to be the glaucous-winged g u l l , and the last i s the bald eagle. While the Canada goose feeds on vegetable matter (Guiget 1958:16), both the bald eagle and glaucous-winged gull feed i to a greater or lesser extent on animal food, especially f i s h (Guiget 1967:8; Godfrey 1966:98; Carl 1963:68). Another notable feature of these sedentary birds i s their large size. They are larger than almost any other locally avail- able sedentary birds except herons and possibly cormorants. Thus, whereas the preferred migratory birds appear i n large numbers, the preferred sedentary birds appear to be of large size. Among the infrequently occurring bird variables, Brachyramphus sp. (murrelet), Gavia sp. (loon), Melanitta sp. (scoter), and Uria sp. (murre) are of particular interest. Murrelet i s a sedentary bird, of interest because i t s diet consists of crustaceans and small f i s h such as herring (Carl 1966:83). The common loon, the arctic loon, and the red- throated loon are common winter residents on the British Columbia coast. The arctic loon i s known but uncommon on the coast in summer. The yellow-billed loon winters on the coast, albeit i n small numbers. The point of interest about loons i s their capacity to swim underwater in pursuit of f i s h , which form a major portion of their diet. The white- 295 winged scoter, known as M. fusca (Munro and Cowan 1947:72) and M. deglandi (Godfrey 1966:79), is a winter resident of the coast. Both white-winged and surf scoters are common winter coastal visitors (Godfrey 1966:79-80; Carl 1966:64- 66). The white-winged scoter inhabits the coast between September-October and March-April. Its diet consists of animal foods such as shellfish and crustaceans. The surf scoter i s present on the coast at the same time of year, but i t s diet i s extended to include insects and small f i s h (Guiget 1958:73). Lastly, murres—most li k e l y the common murre (uria aagle)—inhabit different parts of the coast during different seasons. During the summer breeding season they are usually found in colonies along the open ocean and are usually absent from more protected waters. In the early f a l l , however, they move to protected inside waters where they remain for the winter. Murres are classif i e d as f i s h eating birds (Carl 1966:82). As noted i n Chapter II, a l l these bird species are recorded in Audubon Society Christmas bird counts (eg. Arbib 1973:179-180). Turning to migratory f i s h , herring i s the only species available in great numbers at the s i t e . Herring remains were very abundant in the deposits, sometimes appearing almost carpet-like. The fis h trap on the beach to the southeast of the site i s a possible means by which they were acquired. Evidence has already been cited to the effect that, although herring were present in Baynes Sound adjacent to the site , 296 during the late f a l l and winter, the spawning of these schools, and therefore their greatest accessibility, did not occur u n t i l early spring. In 1976 the height of the spawn occurred about March 21st (J, Reid,pers, comm). Herring spawn on the seaweed and sand deposits surrounding and in the f i s h trap, and their abundance during this time can pro- bably be judged by the a b i l i t y of present day people to dip herring from the trap with trout nets and bare hands. It has been noted that seals and sea lions prey on f i s h , including herring, during the spawning periods (Cowan and Guiget 1956:348, 353). Since the Deep Bay situation i s unlikely to be different from any other herring spawning area, i t can be inferred that the seal and sea l i o n remains in the deposits represent individuals taken while following the schools of spawning herring. Since the herring spawn occurs about March, i t seems reasonable to conclude that seals and sea lions are most readily available at the site at this time of year. Not only seals and sea lions preyed on spawning herring. Stern (1934:41) notes that the Hurnrni set nets underwater to trap birds feeding on herring and their roe. These birds consume animal foods, including f i s h , that are obtained in underwater pursuit. Thus, the migratory birds may easily have been taken while they fed on the herring or their eggs. Seagulls and eagles, both scavengers and consumers of f i s h , can be assumed to have been present in substantial numbers 297 while herzing spawned because of the relatively abundant and concentrated food supply. Barnett reports for the Slaiaman that, while herring were caught at the mouth of Powell River during March to mid-May, deer were hunted on Powell Lake. The products of both pursuits were later exchanged (Barnett 1975:29). In the Deep Bay faunal assemblage, deer remains were among the most frequently and abundantly represented remains of any species. As has been pointed out by Suttles, bucks were preferred in the spring because of their well nourished condition, i n contrast to does that had just given birth. Does, which were fat in the f a l l , were hunted in December for immediate consumption (Suttles 1951:82-83). Although there i s no information on the sex of deer in the Deep Bay faunal assemblage, the two ethnographic reports of deer hunting in the spring, particularly in conjunction with herring acquisition, and the abundance of both deer and herring remains i n the faunal assemblage, suggest that the seasonal acquisition pattern may also have been followed at Deep Bay. Age composition of selected species i s another means by which seasonal inferences can be made from the faunal assemblage, in the Deep Bay faunal assemblage, i t i s possible to examine the dog and deer remains and, to some extent, sea mammal remains in this l i g h t . Juvenile individuals, identi- f i e d on the basis of bone size and fusion of epiphises, are present for dog and deer and to a lesser extent for sea lion, seal, and beaver. Given the rather generalized seasonal range outlined by these c r i t e r i a i t i s desirable to accumu- late more specific evidence (cf. Ham and Irvine 1975:371). In one instance, however, i t was possible to assign one canine individual to the one to five month age bracket on the basis of tooth eruption. Also, the remains of a f e t a l deer were identified. Mule deer, or coast black t a i l deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) give birth in the spring (Banfield 1974:389). While this i s only an isolated instance suggesting a season of site occupation, i t does support the other lines of evidence that suggest a late winter and early spring occupation. The isolated instance of a fetal deer may support Suttles' report that male deer were preferred in the spring. The migratory birds imply a late f a l l to early spring time period. Within that time period the clam shells and the herring remains imply a late winter to early spring time period. The presence in the faunal assemblage of two sea mammal species and two sedentary bird species known to prey on small f i s h , including herring,supports the position that the species in question were most l i k e l y to have been taken at the s i t e . The conclusion can be made, therefore, that the site was primarily occupied during the late winter and early spring for the purpose of taking advantage of the concentration of food resource species centered around spawning herring. 299 The faunal and ethnographic evidence also suggests that deer hunting may have occurred in conjunction with herring fishing. If Deep Bay represents a site occupied during late winter to early spring, i t s place in an annual subsistence round should be examined. Not only i s i t of interest to reconstruct an annual round on the basis of what i s known from Deep Bay, but i t i s also important to give some cultural context to the artifact assemblage. This context w i l l enable hypotheses to be developed that help account for variation among assem- blages • There are certain fixed points of reference that can be dealt with in reconstructing an annual round in the Deep Bay area. F i r s t , there i s the cessation of vigorous subsistence related activity during the height of winter, approximately December through February. There are no indications of where a winter village site might be located, but i t would have to be relatively large in area and f a i r l y protected from northern and southwestern winds. The entire local group could be expected to spend the main winter months there. In the early spring the i n i t i a l subsistence ac t i v i t i e s would take place. There are several other herring spawning areas near Deep Bay, notably Comox Harbour and Nanoose Bay. Depending on size and composition, the local group could move en masse to one or more such locations to exploit the concentration of resources centered around herring. Possibly deer would also 300 be exploited from the same sites at the same time. From approximately May to November the largest portion of stored provisions, aside from salmon, had to be acquired. Principal among these would be clams, which are plentiful in the area and could be gathered and processed by small div- isions of the local group, possibly one or two nuclear fam- i l i e s . The Buckley Bay site (Mitchell 1973) may have been used for such activity given i t s proximity to extensive ti d a l f l a t s i n Fanny Bay, The gathering of berries and other veg- etable foods, t r o l l i n g for salmon, and deer hunting occupied much of the summer as well. The major salmon species spawning in the area i s dog salmon (Qncorhynchus keta) , which ascends local rivers and streams in November, The main rivers in this regard are the Puntledge, Big Qualicum, and L i t t l e Qualicum. in addition, this species was known to frequent a l l the smaller streams in abundance (A, Recalma,pers. comm). Hunting of does may have consumed a f a i r amount of time i n the early f a l l . This act i v i t y could have been carried out almost anywhere by relatively small segments of the local * The name "Qualicum" i s derived from an Indian word that refers to the place where dog salmon spawn (G, Reid,pers, comm). Within the Halkomelem lingu i s t i c group the Cowichan and Musqueam dialects share the same word for dog salmon (K^^ax***) and the Chilliwack have only a slightly different word Î X*** ) (Elmendorf and Suttles 1960:24). 301 group. A concentration of people could be expected again in the late f a l l at the major dog salmon fishing locations already noted. Excavated sites such as Sandwick Midden (Capes 1964), Tsable River Bridge (Whitlam ms.), and L i t t l e Qualicum River (Bernicfc- ms.) may represent the l o c i of such a c t i v i t i e s , prom these sites, the local group probably moved more or less directly back to the winter village sites where repair and manufacture of artifacts and social-ceremonial ac t i v i t i e s may have been focused. In this chapter I have examined the faunal assemblage from Lot 73 at Deep Bay and have concluded that the site was probably occupied in late winter and early spring during the past 2000 to 2500 years. There is also some evidence that, during the past 1000 years, seasonal occppation of the site may have been prolonged to include portions of the summer and f a l l . Evidence for the seasonal use of Deep Bay enables i t to be placed in a hypothetical reconstructed annual subsis- tence round based on ethnographic, environmental, and archae- ological data. The chapter has also demonstrated a range of sources for data pertaining to seasonal aspects of site use. The synthesis of these data i s seen as an appropriate method for inferring seasonality of site use. 302 CHAPTER X CONCLUSION The aim of this dissertation was to see whether ethno- graphically reported relationships between artifact classes and food resource remains could be observed in the archaeol- ogical record. On the basis of the procurement systems that were detected in Chapter VIII, i t is concluded that this aim has met with moderate success. The archaeological data reveal relationships between artifact classes and food resource remains that are interpretable by means of ethnographic and ecological analogues. It i s concluded that procurement systems involving herring, deer, sea mammals, and waterfowl, in addition to predictable clam gathering a c t i v i t i e s , are represented at the Deep Bay s i t e . The artifact classes involved in these procurement systems are antler composite toggling harpoon valves, thin ground slate points, bone points, bone bipoints, and possibly thin ground slate knives. An analysis of the seasonal indicators in the faunal assemblage points to a late winter and early spring occupation of the si t e . A possible extension of seasonal site occupation may have occurred within the last 1000 years. The f i s h trap to the southeast of the site was probably of major importance in terms of subsistence at the s i t e . If the abundance of herring remains is a valid indicator, i t would seem that the f i s h trap, or a f i s h trap, may have existed at the site for 20GG years or more. The elaborate trench embankments that formerly existed at the site suggest a need for defense, possibly in the face of population expansion. This embankment may be related to the evidence from clam .shell seasonality that, during the time period of the Gulf of Georgia Culture Type, the period of site occupation was less confined to the late spring and early summer. The need for protection and the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a defensible location may have prompted populations to inhabit a formerly seasonal camp for s l i g h t l y extended periods of time. This situation would not necessarily have meant a major change in subsistence patterns. The absence of most faunal remains from Component I, and the different character of i t s artifact assemblage, suggest that the findings presented here are not applicable to this component. However, since the material from Component I may be atypical because i t was recovered from what has been interpreted as a beach, i t ds possible that the procurement systems found in Components II and III might also be found in midden deposits associated with Component I. There is some minor evidence to suggest that the sea mammal procure- ment system may have been favored in Component II and that the herring and waterfowl procurement systems may have been 304 favored in component III. However, the in a b i l i t y of any major artifact class or faunal species to distinguish bet- ween these two components suggests that any shifts in pre- ference among procurement systems probably was minor. Lot 73 supplied the data on which the seasonal and procurement system interpretations are based. The findings of this dissertation, therefore, apply s t r i c t l y to the Lot 73 material. Although a similar range of artifact classes and faunal species are found on Lot 81, i t i s not safe to apply the Lot 73 findings to the whole site. The type of analyses undertaken here are not yet duplicated elsewhere in the Gulf of Georgia area. For this reason i t would be unwise to imply that similar relationships between artifact classes and faunal remains are l i k e l y to be found at other sites. It i s note- worthy, in this regard, that an inverse relationship between basalt debris and salmon remains was found in the St. Mungo Component at Glenrose Cannery (Matson 1976:189). This com- ponent, in units 1, 1/5, and 5 i s also interpreted as beach deposit. Future work in the Gulf of Georgia may subsequently show that evidence of procurement systems can be detected at other sites as well. The methods used to detect relationships between artifact classes and food resource remains are judged to have been both appropriate and effective. The use of the chi-square test of independence between samples and the Spearman rank order correlation coefficient with an associated probability 305 has proven effective in finding variables that are associated at high levels of probability. The use of these techniques to examine the artifact and faunal data in their presence/ absence, minimum numbers of individuals, weight of remains, and estimated weight of usable meat forms has shown that a nucleus of consistent results can be produced from four different forms of the same data. The existence of this nucleus*of results indicates that the method and techniques employed in this study can detect associations between a r t i - fact and faunal variables that are l i k e l y to be significant and reliable. The use of quantitative techniques, such as those employed here, to examine the artifact and faunal data has proven to be a successful procedure for effecting the aims set forth at the beginning of this dissertation. This conclusion i s reinforced by the existence of a nucleus of consistent results from a l l four analyses. The quantitative measures used to analyze the data are appropriate, although the data contained some features that tended to weaken the effect of the s t a t i s t i c a l measures. Relatively large numbers of common absences tend to inflate the values of phi and chi-square. Therefore, the strength of association of some variable pairs may be due in part to few common presences and many common absences. The probability f or\ the chi-square s t a t i s t i c in such instances indicates too low a probability for chance occurrence of two variables. This problem i s common, especially in archaeology, where there are often many variables that are found relatively infrequently 306 among excavation units. The procedure applied in this disser- tation, that i s , screening out variables that occur very infrequently and examining variable pairs to assess relative r e l i a b i l i t y , i s the most effective procedure to control for these distortions. Although Spearmanfs rank order correlation coefficient i s also sensitive to t i e d values, the formula corrected for ties adequately compensates for the tied zero values in the data. Consequently, the probability associated with r g appears to be accurate. In looking back on the quantitative techniques employed and the results produced, the potential u t i l i t y of s t i l l more sophisticated analytical techniques is apparent. Combining artif a c t and faunal variables into a single assemblage of variables, and applying R-mode clustering and scaling tech- niques subsequent to the procedures employed in this study, would help detect meaningful groupings of artifact classes and faunal species. The information thus derived would potentially illuminate the complex network of interrelation- ships that exist between the artifact and faunal variables in the archaeological record. A consistent nucleus of results produced by this method could be expected to conform even more closely than the present results to subsistence related ethno- graphic reports. Different re-organization of the data for analysis would also be useful. The examination ofOeach component separately would refine the preliminary results produced in this dis- sertation. A check on the r e l i a b i l i t y of variable pairs 307 could be accomplished by redefining the analytical units. One obvious transformation i s the natural stratum. These analytical units could be examined both within components and over a l l components. The implications of this study for future work in the Gulf of Georgia are promising, A. series of similar studies would help c l a r i f y relationships between artifact assemblages by indicating to which aspects of the annual subsistence round the artifact assemblages were related. In addition, valuable information would be gained on the nature of specific annual subsistence rounds throughout the region. This infor- mation, in turn, would form a solid foundation for more detailed studies of adaptation within the region at various times in the past. It would also open the way for more compre- hensive examinations of seasonal site use and settlement patterns. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbott, D.N. 1972 1977 Allen, J.R.L. 1968 Anderson, J.R. 1937 Arbib, R.S.Jr. 1973 Ascher, R. 1968 Banfield, A.W.F. 1974 Barnett, H.G. 1975 Beattie, O. 1971 "The u t i l i t y of the concept of phase in the archaeology of the southern Northwest Coast", Syesis 5:267-278. Victoria. personal communication Current ripples: their relation to patterns of water and sediment motion. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam. Trees and shrubs: food, medicinal, and poisonous plants of British Columbia. Department of Education, Province of British Columbia, Victoria. American Birds (ed.) National Audobon Society 27(2):135-558. New York. "Time's arrow and the archaeology of a contemporary community", in Chang, K.C. (ed.) Settlement Archaeology. National Press, Palo Alto. The mammals of Canada. National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museum of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, The Coast Salish of Brit i s h Columbia. Greenwood Press, Westport. "Salvage archaeology at Bliss Landing", in Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Salvage '71. Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, publication no.l, Vancouver. 309 Bernick, K. 1976 von Bertalanffy, L. 1968 "Preliminary report of 1976 salvage excavations at the L i t t l e Qualicum River s i t e : DiSe 1", ms. on f i l e , Archaeological Sites Advisory Board of B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a . General systems theory. New York. George B r a z i l l e r , Binford, L.R. 1973 "Interassemblage v a r i a b i l i t y - the Mousterian and the 'functional' argument", in Renfrew, C. (ed.) The Explanation of Cultural Change. Duckworth, London. Boehm (Calvert) S.G. 1970 "The St. Mungo Cannery s i t e : a preliminary report", i n Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Archaeology in B r i t i s h Columbia: new discoveries. B.C. Studies s p e c i a l issue 6-7:54-76. Vancouver. Borden, C.E. 1950 "Preliminary report on archaeological investigations i n the Fraser Delta region", Anthropology in B r i t i s h Columbia, 1:13-27. 1961 1970 Fraser River archaeological project. Anthropological Papers7 no. 1, National Museum of Canada, Ottawa. "Culture history of the Fraser-Delta region: an outline", i n Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia: new discoveries. B.C. Studies s p e c i a l issue 6-7:95-112. Vancouver. 1977 Bradley, J.V. 1968 personal communication Di s t r i b u t i o n - f r e e s t a t i s t i c a l tests. Prentice-Hall, Englewood C l i f f s . Bryan, A.L. 1957 "Results and interpretations of recent archaeological research i n western Washington with circum-boreal implica- tions", Davidson Journal of Anthropology 3:1-16. Seattle. 310 Buckley, W. 1968 "Society as a complex adaptive system", i n Buckley, W. (ed,) Modern Systems Research for the Behavioral S c i e n t i s t . Aldine, Chicago, pp. 490-513. Buxton, J . 1969 Earthworks of southwestern B r i t i s h Columbia"! M.A. Thesis, University of V i c t o r i a , V i c t o r i a , Calvert, S.G, 1970 "The St, Mungo cannery s i t e : a preliminary report", i n Carlson, R.L, (ed,) Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia: new discoveries. B,C, Studies s p e c i a l issue 6-7:54-76. Vancouver. Capes, K.H. 1964 "Contributions to the prehistory of Vancouver Island", Occasional Papers of the Idaho State University Museum, Pocatello. C a r l , G.C. 1966 Guide to marine l i f e of B r i t i s h Columbia. B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Museum, Department of Recreation and Conservation, Handbook no. 21, V i c t o r i a . Carlson, R.L. 1960 1970 "Chronology and culture change i n the San Juan Islands, Washington", American Antiquity 25:562-586. S a l t Lake C i t y . "Excavations at Helen Point on Mayne Island", i n Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Archaeclogy i n B r i t i s h Columbia: new discoveries. B.C. Studies special issue 6-7:113-125. Vancouver. Chang, K.C. 1967 Rethinking Archaeology. New York. Random House, Charlton, A.S, 1972 "Noons Creek and Belcarra; a preliminary report on excavations near Port Moody", i n Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Salvage f71. Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Publication Number 1, Vancouver. 3.11 Church, Me 1976 personal communication Clark, R.M. 1975 "A c a l i b r a t i o n curve f o r radiocarbon dates", Antiquity XLIX 0 London. Connover, K.J. 1972 Archaeological sampling at Namu, a problem i n settlement reconstruction. Ph.D. D i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Colorado, Denver. Conover, W.J. 1971 P r a c t i c a l nonparametric s t a t i s t i c s . John Wiley and Sons, New York. Cook, S.F. and R.F. Heizer 1965 Studies on the chemical analysis of archaeological s i t e s . University of C a l i f o r n i a Publications i n Anthropology vol.2, Los Angeles. Cornwall, I.W. 1958 S o i l s f o r the archaeologist. Phoenix House, London. Cowan, I. McT. and C. Guiget 1956 The mammals of B r i t i s h Columbia. B.C. Pr o v i n c i a l Museum, V i c t o r i a . Craig, G.Y. and A. Hallam 1963 "Size-frequency and growth-ring analyses of Mytilus edulis and Cardium edule, and palaeoecological s i g n i f i c a n c e " , ; Palaeontology vol.6, pt.4:731-750. Day, J.H., L. Farstad, and D.G. L a i r d 1959 S o i l survey of southeast Vancouver Island and Gulf Islands, B r i t i s h Columbia. B r i t i s h Columbia S o i l Survey, Report no.6, V i c t o r i a . Donald, L. and D.H. M i t c h e l l 1975 "Some correlates of l o c a l group rank among the southern Kwakiutl", Ethnology vol.XIV, no.4:325-346. V i c t o r i a . Duff, W. 1952 The Upper Stalo Indians. Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia, memoir n o . l , V i c t o r i a . 312 Eades, D.C. 1965 Elmendorf, W.W. 1960 "The inappropriateness of the co r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t as a measure of taxonomic resemblance", Systemic Zoology 14(2): 98-100. and W.P. Suttles "Pattern and change i n Halkomelem S a l i s h d i a l e c t s " , Anthropo1oglea1 L i n g u i s t i c s 2(7):l-32. Emory, K.P. and Y.H. Sinoto 1969 "Age of the s i t e s i n the South Point area, Ka'u, Hawaii". P a c i f i c Anthropo- l o g i c a l Records, no. 8~ Bernice i?. Bishop Museum, Department of Anthropology. Honolulu. Fladmark, K.R. 1970 1974 Flannery, K.V, 1972 Fraser, C. McL. 1928 Freeman, L.G. 1973 G i l b e r t , B.M. 1973 "Preliminary report on the archaeology of the Queen Charlotte Islands", i n Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Archaeology in B r i t i s h Columbia: new discoveries, B.C. Studies special issue 6-7:18-47. Vancouver. A paleoecological model for northwest coast prehistory. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary. "Archaeological systems theory and early mesoamerica", i n Leone, M.P. (ed.) Contemporary Archaeology. Southern I l l i n o i s University Press, Carbondale and Edwardsville. and G.M. Smith "Notes on the ecology of the butter clam", Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada section 4, 22:271-286. "The analysis of some occupation f l o o r d i s t r i b u t i o n s from e a r l i e r and middle p a l e o l i t h i c s i t e s in Spain", IXth International Congress Of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences. Chicago. Mammalian Osteo-Archaeology: North AmericaI Missouri Archaeological Society, University of Missouri, Columbia. 313 Godfrey, W.E, 1966 Grabert, G.F. 1975 The birds of Canada. National Museum of Canada, b u l l e t i n no. 203, B i o l o g i c a l Series no. 73, Ottawa. and C.E. Larsen "Maritime transgression and c u l t u r a l adaptation: preliminary tests of an environmental model", i n Fitzhugh, W. (ed.) P r e h i s t o r i c Maritime Adaptations of the Circumpolar Zone. Mouton, The Hague. Gregory, W.K. 1933 Guiget, C.J. 1958 1967 Gunther, E. 1927 "Fish Skulls: a study of the evoluation of natural mechanisms", Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 33(2). The birds of B r i t i s h Columbia (6) Waterfowl. B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Museum, Department of Education, Handbook no. 15, V i c t o r i a . The birds of B r i t i s h Columbia (5) Gulls, Terns, Jaegers, and Skua. B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Museum, Department of Recreation and Conservation, Handbook no. 13, V i c t o r i a . Klallam ethnography. University of Washington Publications in Anthropology, Seattle. Ham, L.C. 1976 Ham, L.C. 1976 "Analysis of s h e l l samples from Glenrose", in R.G. Matson (ed.) Glenrose Cannery Si t e . National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, paper no. 52:42-78. Ottawa. and CM. Irvine "Techniques for determining seasonality of s h e l l middens from marine mollusc remains", Syesis 8:363-373. V i c t o r i a . Hayden, B. 1975 "Curation: old and new", i n Raymond, J.S. e t . a l . (eds.) P r i m i t i v e Art and Technology, University of Calgary Student Press, Calgary. 314 Heusser, C.J. 1960 H i l l , J.N. 1970 Hoover, A.L. 1974 Howard, H. 1929 Imamoto, S.S. 1976 "Late pleistocene environments of north p a c i f i c America", American Geographical Society Special Publication 35. New York. Broken K pueblo: p r e h i s t o r i c s o c i a l organization i n the American southwest. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona, no. 18. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Socketed harpoon heads from the northwest coast. M.A. Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver. "The avifauna of Emeryville shellmound", University of C a l i f o r n i a Publications in Zoology 32(2):301-394. "An analysis of the Glenrose faunal remains", in Matson, R.G. (ed.) The Glenrose Cannery S i t e . National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, Paper no. 52:21-41. Ottawa. Johnson, S.C. 1967 Jorgensen, J.G. 1969 Keen, S.D. 1976 "Hierarchical clustering schemes", Psychometrika 32:241-254. S a l i s h language and culture. Language Science Monographs, Indiana University Publications. Mouton and Company, The Hague. The growth rings of clam s h e l l s from two Pentlatch middens as indicators of seasonal gathering. M.A. Thesis, University of V i c t o r i a , V i c t o r i a . Kew, D. and P.E. Goddard 1974 Indian art,-, and culture of the North- west Coast. Hancock House, Saanichton. Kew, J.E.M. 1970 Coast S a l i s h ceremonial l i f e : status and i d e n t i t y in a modern v i l l a g e . Ph.D. ~ Dissertation, University of Washington. 315 Kidd, R.S. 1969 '•The archaeology of the F o s s i l Bay s i t e , Sucia Island, northwestern Washington State, i n r e l a t i o n to the Fraser d e l t a sequence", Paper no.2, Contributions to Anthropology VIII: archaeology, National Museum of Canada, B u l l e t i n 232, Ottawa. King, A. 1950 King, C.A.M. 1971 "Cattle Point, a s t r a t i f i e d s i t e i n the southern northwest coast region", Memoirs of the Society f o r American Archaeology, 7>. Menasha. Techniques i n geomorphology. Edward Arnold, London. Koyama, S. 1974 Kruskal, J.B. 1964 "Correlation of faunal remains and selected a r t i f a c t s at Hogup Cave, Utah", Readings i n Archaeological Method and Technique. Center f o r Archaeological Research at Davis, publication no.4. "Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goddness-of-fit to a non-metric hypothesis", Psychometrika 29:1-27. Kruskal, W.H. and W.A. Wallis 1952 ,fUse of ranks i n one-criterion variance analysis", Journal of the American S t a t i s t i c a l Association 47:583-621. Lance, G.N. and W.T. Williams 1967 Leone, M.P. 1972 "A general theory of c l a s s i f i c a t o r y sorting s t r a t e g i e s . I: H i e r a r c h i c a l Systems", Computer Journal 9:373. "Issues i n anthropological archaeology", i n Leone, M.P. (ed.) Contemporary Archaeology. Southern I l l i n o i s University Press, Carbondale and Edwardsville. Longacre, W. 1970 Archaeology as anthropology: a case study. University of Arizona Anthro- po l o g i c a l Papers, 17. 316 MacDonald, G.F. 1976 personal communication Mann, H.B. and D.R. Whitney 1946 "On a test of whether one of two random variables i s s t o c h a s t i c a l l y larger than the other", The Annals of Mathematical S t a t i s t i c s 18:50-60 (5.3). Maruyama, M. 1963 "The second cybernetics: deviation- amplifying mutual causal processes", American S c i e n t i s t 51:164:1790 Mathews, W.H. , J.G. Fyles, and H.W. Nasmiith 1970 "P o s t - g l a c i a l c r u s t a l movements i n south- western B r i t i s h Columbia and adjacent Washington State", Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 7(2):690-702„ Matson, R.G. 1973 "Progress report on the Glenrose cannery s i t e (DgRr 6)", Ms. 1974 "Clustering and scaling of Gulf of Georgia s i t e s " , Syesis 7:101-114. V i c t o r i a . 1975 ^ personal communication 1976 The Glenrose Cannery S i t e . National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, paper no. 52, Ottawa. McMillan, A.D. and D.E. Ste. C l a i r e 1975 "Archaeological investigations i n the Alber n i Valley", B.C. Studies no.25:32- 77. Vancouver. M i t c h e l l , D.H. 1968a "Excavations at two trench embankments i n the Gulf of Georgia region", Syesis 3:29-46. V i c t o r i a . 1968b "Microblades: a long-standing Gulf of Georgia t r a d i t i o n " , American Antiquity 33(1):11-15. Salt Lake C i t y . 1971a "Archaeology of the Gulf of Georgia area, a natural region and i t s culture types", Syesis 4(supp.l):l-228. V i c t o r i a . 1971b " A r t i f a c t s from archaeological surveys i n the Johnstone S t r a i t region", Syesis 5:21-42. V i c t o r i a . 1971c 1973 Monks, G.G. 1971 1973 n.d. n.d. b "The Di o n i s i o Point s i t e and Gulf Island culture history", Syesis 4:145-165. V i c t o r i a . "Salvage excavations at s i t e DjSf 13 Buckley Bay, B r i t i s h Columbia", i n W.J. Byrne (ed.) Archaeological Salvage Projects 1973. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada paper no.26, Ottawa. "Excavations at Saltery Bay P r o v i n c i a l Campsite, DkSh 2", ms. on f i l e , Archaeological S i t e s Advisory Board of B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a . Interrelationships of a r t i f a c t classes from the Gulf of Georgia. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Unive r s i t y of V i c t o r i a , V i c t o r i a . "Saltery Bay: a mainland s i t e i n the northern Gulf of Georgia", ms. i n preparation. "Associations of a r t i f a c t classes and faunal species from two s i t e s i n the Gulf of Georgia", ms. i n preparation. Munro, J.A. and I. McT. Cowan 1947 A review of the b i r d fauna of B r i t i s h Columbia. B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Newcombe, W.A. 1932 Newcombe, W.A, 1913 Museum, V i c t o r i a . "A large S a l i s h earthwork", B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History Report for the year 1931. V i c t o r i a . / and C.F. Newcombe "Sea l i o n s on the coast of B r i t i s h . k Columbia", Report of the B r i t i s h Columbia Commissioner of Fisheries:131-145. V i c t o r i a . Nie, N.H., D.H. Bent, and C.H. Hull 1970 S t a t i s t i c a l package f o r the s o c i a l s c i 318 01sen, S.J, 1968 Osgood, C. 1940 Fish, amphibian, and reptile remains from archaeological sites: part I, southeastern and southwestern United States* Appendix: the osteology of the wild turkey. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, vol.LVI, no.2. Ingalik Material Culture. Yale University Publications in Anthropology no.22, New Haven. Patenaude, V, 1976 Percy, R.C.W. 1972 Quayle, D.B. 1970 Recalma, A. 1975 Recalma, B. 1975 Reid, J . 1975 Rickets, E.F, 1968 Roll, T.E. 1974 ••Deep Bay (DiSe 7) faunal analysis plus element l i s t , excavation units 2, 3, 4, and 5", paper submitted to Dr. R.G. Matson for Anthropology 433, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. "Miscellaneous archaeological work: 1971", in Carlson, R.L. (ed.) Salvage '71. Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, publication no.l, Vancouver. The intertidal bivalves of British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial Museum, handbook no.17, Victoria. personal communication personal communication personal communication and J. Calvin Between pacific tides. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Original edition 1948. The archaeology of Minard: a case study of a late prehistoric Northwest Coast procurement system. Ph.D. Dissertation, Washington State University, University Microfilms. 319 Schmid, E. 1972 S c h i f f e r , M.B. 1972 1976 Shawcross, W. 1967 Shutler, R. Jr. 1971 Siegel, S. 1956 Simonsen, B.O. 1973 Smith, H.I. 1907 Atlas of Animal Bones for P'rehisforians. Archaeologists, and Quaternary Geologists, E l s e v i e r Publishing Company, Amsterdam. "Archaeological context and systemic context", American Antiquity 37(2): 156-165. Menasha. Behavioral Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. "An investigation of p r e h i s t o r i c diet and economy on a coastal s i t e at Galatea Bay, New Zealand", Proceedings of the Pr e h i s t o r i c Society 33(2);107-131. " P a c i f i c i s l a n d radio-carbon dates: an overview", in Green, R.C. and M. Kelly (eds.) Studies in Oceanic culture history, v o l . 2. P a c i f i c Anthropological Records, no. 12, Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Department of Anthropology. Honolulu. Noh-parametrie s t a t i St 1 c s. McGraw-Hill Series i n Psychology, McGraw-Hill, New York. Archaeological investigations in the Hecate Strait-Milbanke Sound area of B r i t i s h Columbia"! National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada, paper no. 13, Ottawa, "The archaeology of the Gulf of Georgia and Puget Sound", American Museum of Natural History, memoirs 4(6)~ New York. Sneath, P.H.A. and R.R. Sokal 1973 P r i n c i p l e s of numerical taxonomy. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco. Stern, B.J. 1934 The Lummi Indians of northwest Washington, Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology, 17, New York. 320 Suttles, W.P, 1951 1960 1962 Tester, A.L. 1947 Torgerson, W.S. 1958 Weide, M.L. 1969 The economic l i f e of the Coast S a l i s h of Haro and Rosario S t r a i t s . Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington. " A f f i n a l t i e s , subsistence, and prestige among the Coast S a l i s h " , American Anthropdlogist 62:296-305"! Menasha. "Variation in habitat and culture on the northwest coast", Akten des 34 Inter- national Amerikanistenkongresses. Wien. "Herring schools i n Baynes Sound", Fisheries Research Board of Canada, c i r c u l a r no. 10. Theory and methods of scaling . Wiley and Sons, New York. John "Seasonality of Pismo clam c o l l e c t i n g at ORA-82", Archaeological Survey Annual Report. Department of Anthropology, University of C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles 127-141. Wentworth, C.K. 1922 Whitlam, R. 1974 "A scale of grade and class terms for e l a s t i c sediments'', Journal of Geology 30(5):377-392. 1974 salvage excavations at the Buckley Bay s i t e (DjSf 13) and the Tsable River Bridge s i t e (DjSf 14): a preliminary report", ms. on f i l e , Archaeological Sites Advisory Board of B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a . Zenkovich, V.P. 1967 Processes of coastal development. Steers, J.A. and C.A.M. King (eds.), D.G. Fry (trans), Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh and London. 321 APPENDIX I SOIL ANALYSIS Introduction This appendix presents in detail the procedures used in, and the results obtained from, the pH and granulometric analyses conducted on s o i l samples. The results produced by these analyses are used to interpret aspects of the stratigraphy discussed in Chapter III, L i t t l e attention i s paid to the natural constituents of archaeological soils on the northwest coast, yet i t i s well known from other investi- gations (Cornwall 1958:204-216; Cook and Heizer 1965) that careful study of these data produces results that are often crucial to a proper understanding of the archaeological record. Because such an examination would be among the f i r s t on the northwest coast, and because information on environ- mental factors pertaining to the accumulation of midden deposits i s an expected result, the natural constituents of s o i l samples from Deep Bay were examined. The term "natural constituents" refers here to both physical and chemical properties of the s o i l . The term i s used advisedly, however, since chemical properties of soils can result from cultural processes as well as natural processes. Since the distinction between the two processes i s d i f f i c u l t 322 to make, and since only an elementary chemical test i s proposed, the term "natural constituents" i s j u s t i f i e d . The physical properties of the s o i l w i l l be examined by means of a granulometric analysis, and the chemical property w i l l be examined by means of a pH analysis. So i l samples were collected from each natural stratum of each excavation unit after profiles were drawn. This produced 85 s o i l samples from Lot 73 and 15 from Lot 81 for a total of 100 samples excluding discretionary samples taken during the course of the excavation. Each s o i l sample was 2 l i t e r s . The large number of samples and the complexity of the procedure for acquiring the granulometric data required that a sample of the s o i l samples be selected. On Lot 81 the selection was easy; a l l ten s o i l samples from excavation unit 3 were used because this excavation unit was the only one on the lot that penetrated any substantial distance into aboriginal deposits. On Lot 73, the problem of choosing samples was more d i f f i c u l t . Although randomized designs could be formulated to guarantee the inclusion of each stratum, the maximum number of samples from each stratum was only five. Given this small a range of choice for any stratum, and given the unnecessary complexity of the sampling procedure, a simpler arbitrary design was selected. A l l s o i l samples from the second and fourth excavation units were selected, as were one sample each from strata that appeared in neither of these two excavation units. This selection procedure meant that 323 the maximum distance that any natural stratum could extend between samples would be only two meters. The location of excavation units 2 and 4 relative to each other and relative to the remaining three excavation units aided i n assessing the amount of granulometric and pH variation within each natural stratum over a known distance. Thirty s o i l samples from Lot 73 were selected using this procedure, bringing the total sample number of s o i l samples from both lots to forty. pH Analysis The s o i l pH tests were done in the U.B.C. Forestry Laboratory with the permission of Dr. C. Rowles and the assistance of Mr. B. von Spindler. Ten grams of each s o i l sample was placed in a paper cup and 20 ml of d i s t i l l e d water was added. The solution was stirred with a plastic stirrer that was washed with d i s t i l l e d water after s t i r r i n g each sample. The solutions were l e f t to equilibrate for one hour then stirred again. After the solution had settled for 10 to 15 minutes the pH was read using an electronic pH meter. The results are presented in Tables XXXVII and XXXVIII. Inspection of these tables suggests that relatively minor changes in s o i l acidity occur from top to bottom of the stratigraphic column on Lot 81. The figures for Lot 73, on the other hand, suggest that the lowest four samples are generally lower in pH than the majority of the upper samples, and that these two groups of samples are separated from one another by a natural stratum of unusually high alkalinity. TABLE XXXVII Soi l pH, Lot 73, DiSe 7. sample excavation natural pH number unit stratum 58 2 A 7.6 35 4 A 7.5 62 2 B, B-1 7.7 59 2 C 7.8 36 4 C 7.9 79 1 D 7.6 80 1 E 7.7 60 2 F 7.7 37 4 F 7.7 38 4 I I Q I I 7.6 61 2 G/0 7.6 42 4 G/0 7.6 64 2 G with shell 7.6 34 3 dark G 7.3 84 1 G-2 7.8 63 2 H 7.5 67 2 H 7.5 88 1 H-l 7.9 39 4 I 7.5 30 5 J 7.9 72 4 K 7.7 40 4 M 7.7 41 4 N 7.5 71 2 Q 7.3 69 2 R 7.8 70 2 S 8.1 66 2 T 7.3 44 4 T 7.0 65 2 P 7.2 43 4 P 7.0 325 TABLE XXXVIII So i l pH, Lot 81, DiSe 7. sample number excavation unit natural stratum PH 5 6 7 8 9 11 10 12 U 13 14 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 A B C C-l C-2 D E F F - l G 7.6 7.7 7.4 7.6 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.7 7.8 In order to test whether the apparent differences in s o i l pH of the two stratigraphic groups on Lot 73 were due to chance, and in order to examine the Lot 81 data in the same manner, quantitative techniques were employed. To select among quantitative techniques the nature of the data and the aim of such an analysis must be considered. There i s no reason to assume a p r i o r i that variables in the sampled population are normally distributed, therefore non-parametric statistics are to be favored over parametric s t a t i s t i c s . Further, since the former type of s t a t i s t i c relies on observed rather than assumed distributions of variables, and since the asymptotic relative efficiency (A.R.E.) of non-parametric tests approaches that of parametric tests when the conditons for the non-parametric tests have been met, especially where small sample sizes such as the present ones are involved 326 (Bradley 1968:18), the non-parametric type of s t a t i s t i c was chosene The aim of the analysis i s to examine s o i l pH (the variable) of a number of sections of strata (the samples) contained in each excavation unit when these strata can tentatively be grouped subjectively on the basis of their appearance or on the basis of their cultural contents. The class of test most appropriate for these aims i s the one-way analysis of variance tests The non-parametric versions of this test are the Mann-Whitney test for samples grouped into two cases and the Kruskal-Wallis test for samples grouped into three or more cases. Both these tests (Mann and Whitney 1947:50-60; Kruskal and Wallis 1952:583-621) examine a single variable from each sample and rank the attributes of that variable from smallest to largest without respect to case. The samples are then segregated by case and the ranks are summed. These summed ranks provide a test s t a t i s t i c that can be compared with c r i t i c a l values of the chi-square dis- tribution for the Kruskal-Wallis test and with quantiles of the normal distribution in the case of the Mann-Whitney test in order to determine whether the difference between the distribution functions of each case i s due to chance. By comparing the appropriate c r i t i c a l value with the test s t a t i s t i c , where the degrees of freedom are equal to the number of cases minus one, i t can be determined whether the probability of achieving the observed distribution function i s less than or equal to the level ;of probability thought to be appropriate by the investigator. Both these tests deal with difference of location of cases on a relative scale. The rank sum of each case i s a location parameter, but since i t i s d i f f i c u l t to visualize, the median i s often used to indicate the distribution of variable attributes within a case. The Kruskal-Wallis test i s the non-parametric equivalent of the F-test, The asymptotic relative efficiency of the Kruskal-Wallis test in terms of the F-test, assuming normal distribution (i.e. assuming that conditions have been met under which the F-test could legitimately be applied), is between 0,864 and 0,955 (Siegel 1956:193; Conover 1971:262; Bradley 1968:132); when the distribution of variables i s not normal, the lowest asymptotic relative efficiency i s 0,864 and the highest i s i n f i n i t y . For this reason as well as those cited earlier, non-parametric tests were chosen. On the basis of the population distribution of each case the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests can estimate the probability that the cases i n question are from the same or identical populations. The substantive hypothesis for each test states that there i s a difference in location of population distributions for each case, and the null hypo- thesis states that there i s no such difference i n location of distribution functions. Both the above tests were performed by computer using 328 the U.B.C. BMD:P3S biomedical package of non-parametric s t a t i s t i c s . This package was written by Steven Chasen of the UCLA Health Sciences Computing F a c i l i t y and was updated for the U.B.C. computing center by Jason Halm (Halm 1975). The one-way analysis of variance option calculates a s t a t i s t i c for the Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests and provides a probability for a distribution that i s assumed to be normal for the former test and that i s assumed to have a chi-square distribution for the latter. The probability given by the former test i s one-tailed; for testing a two-tailed hypo- thesis, the probability can simply be doubled because the distribution of test s t a t i s t i c s i s assumed to be normal. The probability given for the Kruskal-Wallis test i s one- tailed; hypotheses being evaluated by the Kruskal-Wallis test are framed directionally (Conover 1971:258) to account for the fact that the chi-squared distribution never goes below zero, unlike a normal distribution. The pH values of Lot 81 samples do not giveaany indi - cation of a major break between stratigraphic groups, nor i s there any such indication from an inspection of the s t r a t i - graphy, i t was decided to divide the ten samples into upper and lower groups of five strata each and test for differences of location using the Mann-Whitney test. The two-tailed test was required, and the level of significance was set at 0.05. This choice was made in order to provide a larger opportunity to avoid Type 1 error (rejecting the n u l l hypothesis when i t 329 i s true). The two-tailed probability obtained from this test was 0.9152, and since this value i s larger than the chosen level of significance the null hypothesis i s not rejected. These results confirm the subjective impression that the upper and lower groups of strata are similar in terms of the pH (Figure 30). On Lot 73 there i s some indication that a difference in location between groups of strata may exist on the basis of pH values. Also there may be a cultural boundary that i s coincident with the break in pH values. Table XXXVII and Figure 30 depict the s o i l pH data for Lot 73. Inspection suggests that the P and T samples, and possibly the Q sample, have lower pH values than the samples from the overlying strata. Therefore a one-tailed test with direction predicted by the substantive hypothesis i s appropriate. To be consis- tent with the level of significance set in the test of Lot 81 s o i l pH, the 0.05 level w i l l again be used here. Experimen- tation produced the lowest probability when the pH of natural stratum Q was included with the pH values for strata P and T. This probability was 0.0003, which leads to the rejection of the null hypothesis. The substantive hypothesis, which states that the distribution function of the s o i l pH values from the upper strata i s larger than the distribution function of the same values from the lower strata, i s therefore sup- ported. Even i f the level of significance had been set at 0.001, the smallest probability usually selected by researchers, 330 Figure 30. S o i l pH, Lot 73, DiSe 7 331 the substantive hypothesis would s t i l l have been supported. This test suggests that a s o i l pH boundary exists dividing natural strata Q, P, and T from the overlying strata. Simi- lar tests within the overlying strata did not produce signi- ficantly different stratigraphic groups. Even i f such groups had been detected, the extent of their differences would have been unclear because these subsequent tests constitute a simultaneous testing procedure. The probabilities obtained from such tests cannot be used i n their absolute form and are useful only for ranking differences between cases (Conover 1971:259). Granulometric Analysis This analysis was carried out in the University of British Columbia Department of Geography sediment laboratory with assistance and advice offered by Dr. M. Church and Mr. H. Schreier. It was done in conjunction with the faunal sample analysis that i s presented below. A complicated procedure was required to obtain the granulometric data. The forty s o i l samples, each 2 l i t e r s in volume, were dried at 100°C for 24 hours and then s p l i t to a volume of 500 cc. Sample volume was preferred over sample weight because volume i s less sensitive than weight to variation in matrix composition. The choice of 500 cc as the sample volume was based on both practical and intuitive grounds. The faunal material to be collected from the 500 cc volume seemed, on the basis of preliminary tests done on 332 smaller volumes, to provide an accurate reflection of the range of species and their relative weights in the 2 l i t e r f i e l d sample. Also, the hand separation of faunal material from inorganic material, as described below, and the subse- quent separation and identification of faunal species, was exceedingly time consuming. Thus i t was f e l t that a maximum volume of 500 cc could be satisfactorily treated. The 500 cc sample was then placed i n a Tyler Canadian Standard sieve stack consisting of 8mm, 4mm, and 2mm mesh sizes plus pan and shaken by hand for about 30 seconds so as to reduce damage to fragile faunal elements as much as possible. The organic and inorganic constituents of a l l three screens were separated and the organic materials retain- ed for subsequent analysis. The inorganic constituents of these sieves were added to the pan which contained sub-2mm organics and inorganics. The remaining sample was s p l i t again to a weight between 100 gm and 150 gm but as close to the latter as possible. This weight was chosen because the sieve stack through which the sample ultimately had to pass was designed to operate most ef f i c i e n t l y with a sample of 100 to 150 gm. This size of sample i s also the one commonly used by sedimentologists in conducting granulometric analyses (Church 1976,pers. coram). To remove the sub-2mm organics a two part process was required. F i r s t , the sample was combusted at 800°C for two hours in order to reduce the charcoal content to ash (Cornwall 333 1958:154). Second, the cooled sample was placed in a beaker with 10% hydrochloric acid to remove the remaining organics, by this time only shell. When the shell was completely dissolved, the sample was washed through a ,063mm net sieve, wash water containing the sediments was saved, and the sands and gravels retained by the sieve were put into a crucible and dried for 8 to 12 hours. The water and sediments were f i l t e r e d through number 1 qualitative f i l t e r paper, the retained sediments and f i l t e r paper were combusted at 800°C for two hours, then the sediments were weighed. The dried sands and gravels were placed in a Tyler Canadian Standard sieve stack consisting of 8mm, 4mm, 2mm, 1mm, .500mm, .250mm, •125mm, .063mm mesh sieves and pan and were shaken for twenty minutes an a Fischer Wheeler sieve shaker. The contents of each sieve were weighed and recorded, and the contents of the pan and the contents of the f i l t e r paper were added to produce the total weight of sediment. Tables XXXIX and XL show the weights for each sample. An inspection of these tables indicates that there are certain general regularities in the data. The ,500mm or ,250mm sieves almost always contain the greatest weight of material. Also, the ,063mm sieve and pan usually contain the least weight of material. Inspection alone, however, does not f u l l y realize the present aim, which i s to determine whether boundaries between groups of strata can be distinguished on the basis of grain TABLE XXXIX Weight (gm) of Granulometric Constituents by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7. »sh Size Excavation Unit 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 (mm) Natural Stratum F E B C A C-2 C-l G F-l D 8 15.6 31.1 9.4 16.9 11.4 14.5 11.6 30.9 14.5 4.4 4 14.6 9.9 12.7 20.4 7.8 12.7 12.1 12.2 2.3 8.0 2 7.4 6.4 5.2 8.5 3.5 5.4 9.5 4.6 1.2 7.3 1 3.2 3.3 2.2 4.7 2.2 4.3 4.5 4.5 1.3 6.8 .500 12.7 8.8 6.4 11.4 7.3 12.4 12.0 14.4 7.8 9.6 .250 20.8 19.7 19.1 28.5 22.1 30.2 30.6 20.5 16.8 16.9 .125 10.8 9.3 9.1 12.3 11.3 15.2 14.2 13.1 11.4 13.9 .063 3.0 2.1 2.0 2.6 2.5 3.1 3.1 3.6 4.6 9.2 pan 4.6 4.9 3.6 4.8 2.9 5.1 4.7 6.0 3.3 49.6 Total 92.7 95.5 69.7 110.1 71.0 102.9 92.3 109.8 62.2 125.7 TABLE XL Weight (gm) of Granulometric Constituents by Natural Stratum, Soil Sample Data, Lot 73, DiSe 7. Mesh Size Excavation Unit 2 2 2 2 4 1 3 1 2 2 (mm) Natural Stratum H S H Q 0 H-l dark G G-2 F G 8 16,2 14.4 11.0 14;8 8.1 8.1 16.8 4.6 9.4 4.0 4 9.3 7.8 6.1 4.6 8.1 4.5 3.3 3.8 4.7 3.0 2 4.0 2.1 3.0 1,3 3,5 2,4 1,9 1,9 1.6 5,8 1 4.9 4.1 5.3 3.0 7.7 4,7 3.8 3.9 2.0 7.4 .500 26.4 38.7 38.9 41.2 35.2 24.2 21.6 17.6 10.0 26.4 .250 29.5 47.1 38.0 42.1 48.8 21.8 36,8 42.4 57.4 59.0 «il25 5.6 5.0 5,6 1.8 7.2 4.5 5.1 6.2 8.8 7.4 .063 1.5 1.3 1.8 0.4 1.9 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.1 pan 3.5 1.8 2,8 0.9 2,6 1.9 3.0 3.0 1.8 1.8 Total 100.9 122,7 112.5 110.6 123.3 73.7 93.8 85.1 98.0 116.0 TABLE XL (continued) Mesh Size Excavation Unit 4 4 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 (mm) Natural Stratum N F R P P T K T B , B-l C 8 3.8 4.2 32.1 54.4 19.4 0.0 0.0 6.7 4.6 7.2 4 0.9 8.7 9.6 23.5 32.4 6.0 3.2 3.5 3.1 5.6 2 1.0 3.6 2.2 2.5 6.3 5.6 11.4 3.8 1.1 1.0 1 1.5 5.7 3.7 3.8 4.8 17.0 38.9 17.6 0.6 0.7 .500 10.8 18.9 35.1 30.5 30.1 70.7 41.5 56.3 2.8 2.9 1,250 72.0 60.3 28.5 16.8 14.8 15.4 37.6 12.3 17.7 18.3 .125 7.6 7.3 1.7 1.5 2.0 0.9 2.5 1.5 14.5 11.9 .063 0.6 1.1 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.7 0.1 1.2 4.0 3.4 pan 0.9 1.5 1.1 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.2 1.3 2.1 1.8 Total 99.9 111.3 115.2 132.8 112.8 117.7 136.5 103.7 50.9 53.2 ON TABLE XL (continued) Mesh Size Excavation Unit 1 1 4 2 4 4 5 2 4 4 (mm) Natural Stratum E D C A A I J G s h e l l "G" M 8 9.2 5.5 21.5 11.4 10.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 4 4.6 3.7 10.6 7.8 5.3 0.0 0.5 3.3 0.8 0.6 2 0.7 0.9 2.8 3.5 2.2 0.1 0.7 2.5 0.7 0.2 1 1.0 0.9 0.9 2.2 1.5 1.0 1.1 3.5 1.1 1.5 .500 3.5 4.6 3.6 7.3 7.9 8.6 9.4 21.9 10.8 11.4 .250 25.4 22.7 29.0 22.1 39.6 83.7 88.0 41.7 80.2 74.8 .125 11.6 11.0 11.3 11.3 6.9 5.2 7.4 7.1 8.7 14.3 .063 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 1.8 0.1 0.7 1.5 1.8 2.5 pan 1.7 4.3 1.5 2.9 2.7 0.3 0.9 2.7 2.4 1.4 Total 60.7 56.8 84.6 68.9 79.3 100.0 108.9 87.4 107.4 107.3 338 size data. The present data require a multivariate analytic tool, as opposed to the univariate analysis of s o i l pH. A combination of two techniques was decided upon. Cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling were chosen because they provide results that are easy to visualize even though the procedures are sophisticated, and they provide clues from which the influence of important variables can be inferred. Cluster analysis, as the name implies, examines a matrix of coefficients and, in a series of cycles, creates groups of coefficients and adds to them un t i l a l l coefficients have been joined together. In each cycle the matrix i s searched for the coefficient or group of coefficients whose values are most similar to groups defined by previous cycles. The most similar groups or coefficients are then joined and a new cycle begun. A number of these hierarchical grouping methods are available. The method chosen for the present study was Furthest Neighbor cluster analysis. This type of analysis takes i t s name from the work of Lance and Williams (1969:393), and i t i s the same as the Maximum Method of clustering (Johnson 1967:241-254) arid Complete Linkage clustering (Sneath and Sokal 1973:222). During each cycle of Furthest Neighbor cluster analysis a new entity i s admitted to a cluster at a level of similarity equal to that at which the new entity and cluster member with which i t i s most dissimilar can com- bine (Sneath and Sokal 1973:222). The result of this technique i s the tendency for tight hyperspherical clusters to be created that join other clusters only at high coefficient values (Sneath and Sokal 1973:222). The production of relatively concise clusters, the relative simplicity of the technique (Matson 1974:102), and the insensitivity of the technique to matrix transformation providing the rank order of coefficient values remains unchanged (Johnson 1967: 49 cited i n Matson 1974:102) recommend this technique for the present purposes. The cluster analysis was performed on a matrix of city block distance coefficients. City block distance was chosen over Euclidian distance because the former satisfied the condition of triangle inequality, whereas the latter does not. This makes ci t y block distance a genuine distance function even though both coefficients are variations of Minkowski r-metric distance. When r=l Minkowski r-metric distance i s the same as cit y block distance; when r=2 Minkowski r-metric distance i s the same as Euclidian distance (Kruskal 1964a:117). Aside from the advantage of being a genuine distance function, c i t y block distance i s also pre- ferable because i t s calculation depends only on the pair of cases being examined and because proportional differences, rather than absolute differences, between paired cases are produced (Sneath and Sokal 1973:126). Calculation of c i t y block distance coefficients was based ai the rank of sieve content weights for each sample. Rank, instead of raw weight or relative frequency of weight, was used for calculating distance coefficients because a) the ranks can be treated as values of variables in the same way as weight or percent, and b) the rank order of weights ade- quately represents the different relative weight of each grain size without introducing spurious accuracy such as might be involved with the use of relative frequencies. The use of finely calibrated data such as relative frequencies mayooften mask clustering rather than f a c i l i t a t e i t . The clustering program used in this analysis needs to know whether or not the input data are to be standardized. The ranks are unstandardized in the- present test because each mesh size was considered to be as important as the next and because most variables occur in most of the cases. The ci t y block distance coefficient matrix was also used as input for multidimensional scaling analysis. Both non- metric and metric analyses were available, but the metric analysis provided the most readily interpretable results. Metric multidimensional scaling i s similar to the metric analysis in that coefficients are ranked by magnitude and then an attempt i s made to produce a configuration of points in n-dimensional hyperspace that has a monotonic relationship to the rank order of the distance coefficient magnitudes (Kruskal 1964b:1). In the metric version, however, the metric quality of the coefficients i s permitted to affect the f i n a l configuration of points. The Torgerson B* matrix consists of figures representing distances from a point of origin (centroid) of a configuration of points. Factoring this matrix produces principal axes that account for the observed configuration of points. The f i r s t axis produced has the greatest effect on the configuration of points, the second axis has the second greatest effect, and so on; The per- centage of trace i s a measure of stress or goodness of f i t of the configuration of points to the axes produced. The closer to 100% the percentage of trace approaches, the more satisfactorily the configuration of points can be accomodated by the axes produced (Torgerson 1958:245-276). The advantage of scaling l i e s i n two areas. F i r s t , i t i s another visual means of analyzing data that enables relationships between cases to be explored in more dimensions than those presented by a cluster analysis; second, the principal axis analysis with i t s associated percentages of trace for each axis enables the investigator to return to the original data with specific ideas as to which variables or groups of variables are having the greatest effect on the relationships between cases. The following analysis w i l l deal with the granulometric data from each lot separately. The clustering and scaling of these data w i l l be presented f i r s t for Lot 81 and second for Lot 73. The cluster analysis of Lot 81 samples i s shown in Figure 31. The cluster analysis indicates that six of the ten samples form a cohesive cluster with the remaining four o o o o o o oo o o o <0 o o o o o o PJ o o o o D • F - l © G © C - l • C - 2 • A A F • 0ISTURBED/HISTORIC STRATUM ABORIGINAL STRATA Figure 31. Furthest Neighbor Cluster Analysis Granulometric Data, Lot 81, DiSe 7 samples joining the cluster one at a time. Natural strata B and C are granulometrically identical and may have been judged different in the f i e l d due to s o i l color resulting from different moisture content. Natural strata F and F - l , however, are relatively different granulometrically as are C, C-l, and C-2 to lesser degrees. The extreme difference of natural stratum D i s due to the high proportion of sedi- ments and the low proportion of gravels 8mm and larger. This stratum i s , in fact, very high in clay and i s readily dis- tinguishable from the other strata on the basis of color and texture. The impression given by this cluster analysis i s one of relative homogeneity of granulometric constituents among strata with several strata showing minor variation and one stratum exhibiting marked variation. It i s notable that natural stratum A, although heavily disturbed by bulldozing and spreading from another part of the s i t e , l i s nonetheless granulometrically similar to the majority of the undisturbed strata. ; The metric multidimensional scaling extracted 99.12% of trace by three roots. The f i r s t dimension accounted for 71.11% of trace; the second, for 17.80%; and the third, 10.20%. Since 10% trace i s relatively low and since no meaningful interpretation could be produced for the third dimension, i t has not been included in the following discussion. The configuration of points representing sample relationships for each pair of dimensions i s presented in Figure 32. The T+.06 + •.04 F - l + •.02 F CM o -H to o + -i to o r o CM q i • °B,C C-2 • c - i -.02 + - .04 + A DISTURBED/HISTORIC STRATUM • ABORIGINAL STRATA - .06 J- Figure 32 Metric Multidimensional Scaling based on Torgerson's B* Matrix. Granulometric Data, Lot 8 1 , DiSe 7. samples show the greatest d i s p e r s a l along dimension 1, which also accounts f o r the greatest percentage of trace. To i d e n t i f y t h i s dimension, Table XXXIX was re-examined, and i t was found that the samples are d i s t r i b u t e d along dimension 1 i n approximately the same order as the magnitude of the com- bined weight of ,063mm and pan constituents. Correlation of the combined weight of these constituents with the value f o r each sample along dimension 1 produces a Spearman's rank order c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t of +0.71. The samples with the greatest weight of pan constituents are on the negative side of the dimension, and those with least are on the p o s i - t i v e side. Correlation of rank on dimension 1 with v e r t i c a l location produced a Spearman's rho of only +0.46. By the same procedure i t was determined that dimension 2 r e f l e c t e d the weight of 2mm sieve contents (Spearman's rho of +0.73), the samples with the le a s t material 2mm or larger being at the p o s i t i v e side of the scale and those with most of t h i s material being at the negative end of the scale. This seeming paradox i s a r e s u l t of giving the largest weight or r e l a t i v e frequency a rank value that i s interpreted by the program as lowest. The reduced percentage of trace for dim- ension 2 probably accounts for the r e l a t i v e l y low rank order c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t between the weight of 8mm sieve contents and the p o s i t i o n on dimension 2. The Lot 73 data were clustered, and the dendrogram i s presented i n Figure 33. Two major d i v i s i o n s appear i n the o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 00 h- (0 m CM o o o o o o o o o o o CLUSTER CLUSTER CLUSTER k e * • DISTURBED/HISTORIC STRATA GULF OF GEORGIA COMPONENT MARPOLE COMPONENT LITHIC COMPONENT M G G/S J 1 1 A A C 0 • E C B.B-I T K T P P R * F • N • G * F • G-2 * D/G H-l 0 X 0 H K S K H * Figure 33. Furthest Neighbor Cluster Analysis. Granulometric Data, Lot 73, DiSe 7. 347 data, with the smaller d i v i s i o n having two subdivisions. For d e s c r i p t i v e purposes the larger major cluster w i l l be c a l l e d cluster 1, and the smaller major one c l u s t e r 2. The subdivisions of cluster 2 w i l l be c a l l e d a and b, with 2a containing seven strata and 2b containing f i v e . Examination of the p r o f i l e s indicates that the s t r a t a i n cluster 2a are a l l adjacent and that four of f i v e s t r a t a i n cluster 2b belong to the group of thin s t r a t a separating natural stratum F from natural stratum G/0 at the east end of the trench. Natural stratum F i s s t r a t i g r a p h i c a l l y between the s t r a t a contained i n clusters 2a and 2b. With the exception of natural strata F and G with s h e l l , the s t r a t a i n c l u s t e r 2 are uppermost i n the s i t e and, as w i l l become apparent i n subsequent analyses, they contain the largest concentrations of s h e l l of a l l the s t r a t a . In c l u s t e r 1, a l l s t r a t a are adjacent except for natural/stratum F, which i s p a r t l y adjacent to natural stratum G/0, and natural stratum K, which i s adjacent to s t r a t a i n cluster 2b. F i e l d assessment of matrix color and texture suggested that natural strata P and T were sub s t a n t i a l l y unlike the other s t r a t a , and analysis of s o i l pH data also suggested t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n . The granulometric data, however, do not suggest such a d i v i s i o n . Instead, natural stratum T appears to be s i m i l a r i n granulometric content to natural stratum K with which i t has no physical, c u l t u r a l , or chrono- l o g i c a l connection, and natural stratum p seems to be most l i k e the adjacent natural stratum R. The physical properties Cluster Stratum 348 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 1 2b 2b 2b 1 2b 1 1 1 2b 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A B & B-1 D E C F •»G" I J K M N G/0 G-2 G with s h e l l dark G H H-l Q R S P T Figure 34. Cluster membership by natural stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7. 349 of natural stratum N i n i t i a l l y suggest that i t i s a member of the s t r a t a i n group 2b, but i t s granulometric consistency, combined with i t s proximity to natural stratum G/O suggest otherwise, as shown i n the dendrogram. The membership of natural stratum F i n c l u s t e r 1, e s p e c i a l l y i n close assoc- i a t i o n with members of the G s t r a t i g r a p h i c complex, i s a surprise because a f i e l d assessment of t h i s stratum's a f f i l i a t i o n found i t most l i k e the s t r a t a i n c l u s t e r 2a. The lack of close r e l a t i o n s h i p between samples G and O i s also surprising because they are i n f a c t samples from what appeared i n the f i e l d to be the same stratum. As a re s u l t of f i e l d procedure, i t was l a b e l l e d d i f f e r e n t l y i n excavation units 2 and 4. The two samples of natural stratum F are not as uniform as expected, and to a lesser extent neither are the two C samples. The l a s t of these can be explained by the f a c t that natural stratum C i s i n f a c t a series of heavy s h e l l lenses that are contiguous and d i f f i c u l t to separate u n t i l seen i n p r o f i l e , therefore differences i n granulometric constituents are to be expected to some degree. No similar explanation can be offered f o r samples from G/O and F since no s t r a t i g r a p h i c d i s t i n c t i o n s were observed within them. The grouping of sample O with strata underlying i t , and the grouping of G with s t r a t a overlying i t d e f i n i t e l y suggests a d i s t i n c t i o n , but none was observed during either excavation or p r o f i l i n g . Why the two F samples are not more cl o s e l y related and why they cl u s t e r with s t r a t a of the G 350 complex instead of with each other cannot be e a s i l y explained. The relationships of the F samples suggests that some natural s t r a t a have more in t e r n a l v a r i a b i l i t y than others, and that sometimes t h i s v a r i a b i l i t y i s considerable. This reasoning may also account for the G and O samples, the v a r i a t i o n be- tween them being greater than that between each one and the other s t r a t a with which they group. A f i e l d assessment of the c u l t u r a l relationships between these s t r a t a indicated that s t r a t a above the surface of natural stratum G belong to a Gulf of Georgia component or l a t e r , that the P and T s t r a t a , with the possible i n c l u s i o n of any or a l l of natural s t r a t a Q, R, and S, belonged to a L i t h i c component, and that the s t r a t a between these two boundaries belonged to a Marpole component. With t h i s break- down i n mind, the eighteen samples i n cl u s t e r 1 are seen to be members of the Marpole and L i t h i c components except f o r the two F samples, K, and possibly N. Cluster 2 contains only one natural stratum that was not thought to belong to the Gulf of Georgia component, .namely G with s h e l l . The scaling analysis of these data produced the re s u l t s shown by paired dimensions i n Figure 35. Again, three roots were extracted that accounted for 97.32% of trace. Dimension 1 accounted for 50.36% of trace, dimension 2 f o r 39.59%, and dimension 3 f o r 7.37%. This l a s t dimension w i l l be excluded from further discussion for reasons previously noted. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of samples i n dimension 1 appeared to correspond 351 + +.04 B.B-I F D/G* ++.02 H,S X H Q * —+ C-2* +.06 H-l o O +" iO o (0 o o CM O f M # e 6 •02 f G/S I -.04+ 1 DISTURBED/HISTORIC STRATA • GULF OF GEORGIA COMPONENT K MARPOLE COMPONENT • LITHIC COMPONENT - .06 - . 7 3 Figure 3£* Metric Multidimensional Scaling based on Torgerson's B* Matrix. Granulometric Data, Lot 73, DiSe 7, 352 to the weight of .125mm sieve contents i n each sample. This r e l a t i o n s h i p produced a Spearman's rho of +0.83, and the summed weights of the .125mm and .063mm sieves produced a rho of +0.82. I t i s clear that the amount of f i n e sand i n each sample, r e l a t i v e to each other sample, has the greatest e f f e c t on the relationships between samples. I t i s i n t e r - esting to note, too, that v e r t i c a l s t r a t i g r a p h i c order and order along dimension 1 are also correlated at +0.82. This phenomenon suggests that the higher the midden p i l e becomes, the larger the proportion of the f i n e r grades of sand among the natural s o i l constituents. This point w i l l be developed l a t e r . Dimension 2 appears to r e l a t e to the coarser sand grades. It was determined that the order of samples on dimension 2 had the highest Spearman's rho (+0.74) with the combined weights of the .250mm, .500mm, and 1mm sieve contents. No sa t i s f a c t o r y correlations could be found f o r the order of samples on dimension 3. This may be the resul t of thi s dim- ension having a low percentage of trace, i . e . the dimension may represent a variable or group of variables that have r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e e f f e c t on the relationships between samples. These analyses both indicate that the f i n e s t grades of s o i l constituents are most important i n determining r e l a t i o n - ships between s t r a t a . On Lot 81 the f i n e s t grain sizes used for t h i s analysis were important probably because natural stratum D, a s o l i d clay stratum, contained large amounts of 353 the f i n e s t material examined here and was so obviously d i f - ferent from the surrounding matrices. On Lot 73 there were no lenses or st r a t a of clay, but the f i n e s t grades of sand were nonetheless most important. On both l o t s the ,063mm sieve contents had a substantial e f f e c t on sample r e l a t i o n - ships. Whereas dimension 2 on Lot 81 seemed to represent 8mm sieve contents, i t apparently represents a combination of s l i g h t l y l i g h t e r materials on Lot 73, Since i t doubtful that natural stratum D, the clay stratum on Lot 81, i s the re s u l t of natural deposition, i t i s not surprising that the sorting of materials i n that stratum and adjacent s t r a t a i s poor. Consequently, natural s t r a t a C - l , C-2, and D appear at the end of dimension 2 representing most 8mm sieve contents while non-adjacent s t r a t a are at the other end of the dimension. The sorting of materials i n these other s t r a t a presumably was more complete. On Lot 73 the ,250mm, ,500mm, and 1mm sieve contents are represented by dimension 2, These con- stituents are derived from s t r a t a that contain much more thoroughly sorted granulometric constituents. It i s probably f a i r to say that some or a l l of these constituents would be important i n analyzing relationships between s o i l samples when no unsorted s t r a t a are involved. 35^ APPENDIX II BURIALS Introduction The human s k e l e t a l material was analyzed by Valerie C. Patenaude (now Sivertz) i n conjunction with,r.a. directed studies course i n human paleopathology under the d i r e c t i o n of Dir. Braxton A l f r e d of the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Table XLI presents a summary of her f i n d i n g s . Ten b u r i a l s were recovered from DiSe 7, a l l of them from Lot 73. B u r i a l 6 lay h a l f i n the trench and h a l f out so i t was pedestalled and l e f t i n s i t u . Consequently, the information on t h i s b u r i a l was gathered i n the f i e l d , not i n the laboratory. B u r i a l 2 consists of scattered human remains from natural stratum K, excavation unit 5. These remains indicate the presence of only one i n d i v i d u a l and i t has been assumed here that they represent the same i n d i v i d u a l . Burials Table XLI shows that B u r i a l 1 (Figure 36) and B u r i a l 2 were found i n s t r a t a thought to comprise Component I I I . Burial 7 (Figure 37b) i s the only b u r i a l found i n natural stratum P. B u r i a l 9 (Figure 38) was recovered from an obvious intrusion into natural stratum P; the person i s 355 TABLE XLI DiSe 7 Burials b u r i a l number 1 2 3 figur e number 36 40 excavation unit 73-5 73-5 73-5 a r b i t r a r y l e v e l 65 63 59-60 natural stratum F K O lowest elevation 6.39m - 5.70m lowest depth below surface 0.60m - 1.25m coordinates to center -north 217i50m - 217.60m -west 56.41m - 52.70m age old adult young adult sex female b u r i a l condition -scattered no yes no -complete yes ho yes - a r t i c u l a t e d yes no yes -flexed yes no yes bone condition -excellent - -good yes - f a i r - yes -poor - - yes spina l orientation NE-SW - E-W ly i n g on r i g h t side - - yes ly i n g on l e f t side yes eyes facing SE - N s k u l l deformation yes no no pathology yes no no ca i r n yes no yes inclusions - a r t i f a c t u a l no no no -other no no no TABLE XLI (continued) 356 b u r i a l number 4 figure number 39 excavation unit 73-2 ar b i t r a r y l e v e l 59 natural stratum G lowest elevation 5.80m lowest depth below surface 1.20m coordinates to center -north 216.16m -west 58.30m age sex b u r i a l condition -scattered -complete - a r t i c u l a t e d -flexed bone condition -excellent -good - f a i r -poor spin a l orientation l y i n g on right side l y i n g on l e f t side eyes facing s k u l l deformation pathology c a i r n inclusions - a r t i f a c t u a l -other juvenile 18mo-2yr male? no yes yes yes yes E-W yes N no no yes yes no 5 37 73-3 58 G 5.80m 1.12m 217.65m 56.55m adult male no yes yes yes yes NNE-SSW yes w no yes yes 6* 73-4 59-58 GX/P 5.75m 1.05m 216.14m 55.45m adult no yes yes yes yes N-S yes W ? ? ? yes yes * not excavated 357 TABLE XLI (continued) b u r i a l number figure number excavation u i i t a r b i t r a r y l e v e l natural stratum lowest elevation 7 37 73-4 58-57 P 5.63m lowest depth below surface 1.40m coordinates to center -north -west age sex b u r i a l condition -scattered -complete - a r t i c u l a t e d -flexed bone condition -excellent -good - f a i r -poor spinal orientation l y i n g on ri g h t side lying on l e f t side eyes facing s k u l l deformation pathology cairn inclusions - a r t i f a c t u a l -other 216.46m 55.49m old adult male no yes yes yes yes E-W yes no yes yes no no 8 37 73-4 58-57 0/P 5.63m 1.45m 216.30m 54.30m adult male no yes yes yes yes E-W yes N no no yes no no 9 38 73-3 56 P 5.51m 1.43m 217.35m 56.78m juvenile 18mo-2yr female? no yes yes yes yes E-W yes N no no no no yes TABLE XLI (continued) b u r i a l number 10 figure number excavation unit 73-4 ar b i t r a r y l e v e l 59 natural stratum 0/P lowest elevation 5.86m lowest depth below surface l.i21m coordinates to center -north 218.00m -west 54.35m age fetus sex ? b u r i a l condition -scattered no -complete no** - a r t i c u l a t e d yes -flexed yes bone condition -excellent yes -good - f a i r -poor spinal orientation E-W lyi n g on ri g h t side l y i n g on l e f t side yes eyes facing S s k u l l deformation no pathology no cairn no inclusions - a r t i f a c t u a l no -other no ** s k u l l missing 359 Figure 36. Bu r i a l 1, Lot 73, DiSe 7 36o Figure 37. Burials, Lot a. Burial 5 b. Burial 7 c. Burial 8 73, DiSe 7. Figure 38. B u r i a l 9, Lot 73, DiSe 7 362 thus thought to have l i v e d subsequent to the deposition of t h i s matrix. Burials 6, 8 (Figure 37c), and 10 were a l l found at the junction of natural strata G/0 and P i n ex- cavation unit 4, therefore these in d i v i d u a l s probably l i v e d at about the same time as the person from Bu r i a l 9. Of the nine b u r i a l s whose age could be approximated, B u r i a l 10 appears to be a fetus or a newborn c h i l d . B u rials 4 (Figure 39) and 9 are infants i n the eighteen month to two year age range, and the remainder are adults. There i s some suggestion that B u r i a l 2 was a young adult, but the scattered condition of the remains makes th i s judgement tentative. Burials 1 and 7 are thought to be o l d adults on the basis of tooth wear and the condition of bone j o i n t s . The sex of s i x individuals could be established, but there i s some question about the certainty of t h i s assignment for Burials 4 and 9. Three of the remaining four b u r i a l s are males. I f a l l s i x b u r i a l s are included, four are male and two are female. Among the nine complete and a r t i c u l a t e d b u r i a l s , six had an east to west spin a l o r i e n t a t i o n and a l l were i n the t i g h t l y flexed p o s i t i o n (Figure 40). The b u r i a l s are equally divided between l y i n g on the l e f t and r i g h t sides. Surprisingly, s k u l l deformation of the Cowichan type (Boas 1891:95) was noted only f o r B u r i a l 1. This was also the most recent b u r i a l . Cairns were a common feature of b u r i a l s at Deep Bay. Six b u r i a l s were covered by cairns, but i t i s possible that  Figure 40. B u r i a l 3, Lot 73, DiSe 7 365 Burials 4 and 5 (Figure 37a) shared the same c a i r n . P r o f i l e s indicate that B u r i a l 1 was placed i n a shallow p i t and then covered with a c a i r n . There i s also a suggestion of t h i s procedure i n the p r o f i l e beside B u r i a l 4, and B u r i a l 5 appears to have been placed i n a shallow depression p a r t i - a l l y excavated in t o natural stratum P. No other instances of t h i s procedure were noted, possibly because of the d i f - f i c u l t y of distinguishing small scale disturbance of t h i s nature i n a coarse and r e l a t i v e l y homogeneous matrix such as a coastal s h e l l midden. B u r i a l 9, however, was placed i n a grave excavated into natural stratum P, but no c a i r n was placed on top of i t . Instead, the remains were surrounded by moderate sized cobbles as i f the grave perimeter had been li n e d with them. A r t i f a c t inclusions with b u r i a l s are rare. B u r i a l 1 had a well made pendant ( a r t i f a c t #1110) i n the throat region. B u r i a l 4, as has already been indicated i n the a r t i f a c t des- c r i p t i o n s , had a zoomorphic bone pendant, a large well made c e l t , a number of s h e l l d i s c beads, and dentalia associated with i t . In addition, some fragments of native copper, possibly tube beads, were found with the i n d i v i d u a l . Cedar bark wrapping that enclosed the copper fragments also en- closed some of the s h e l l d i s c beads and dentalia s h e l l s . A recent specimen from DhQk'....l (Castlegar), now stored i n the Museum of Anthropology at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, consists of copper tube beads separated by dentalia s h e l l s " 366 and clam s h e l l d i s c beads on a braided f i b e r s t r i n g . This suggests a p o t e n t i a l l y wide range i n both space and time for t h i s form of adornment. A small c e l t ( a r t i f a c t #1326) and two antler composite toggling harpoon valves were associated with B u r i a l 5 but more unusual was the presence of a double cairn above t h i s b u r i a l . The uppermost c a i r n contained the s k u l l , f i v e verte- brae, right mandible, r i g h t humerus, right femur, l e f t and r i g h t innominates, and seven u n i d e n t i f i a b l e bone fragments of a small adult dog. The remains were not a r t i c u l a t e d and the s k u l l was inverted. The use of dogs by the Coast S a l i s h f o r producing fl e e c e and f o r assistance i n the hunt i s ethno- graphically documented (Barnett 1975:96, 97, 119, 256). Although wool dogs are reported (Stern 1934:89), Barnett (1975:96) expresses uncertainty as to the di s t i n c t n e s s of a hunting breed from a wool bearing breed. Suttles (1951: 103) reports that a single dog species was used f o r both wool production and hunting. Indeed, the maintenance of two d i s t i n c t breeds of dogs would imply an advanced l e v e l of animal husbandry. It i s in t e r e s t i n g to speculate that, despite i t s small s i z e , the canid with B u r i a l 5 may have been a hunting dog that was dismembered i n action, possibly by a bear. The s k u l l of the adult male l a b e l l e d B u r i a l 5 i s crushed; i n i t i a l l y s o i l pressure was thought to have caused t h i s condition, but an unfortunate encounter with a bear may have produced si m i l a r r e s u l t s . On the other hand, 367 the i n c l u s i o n of a c e l t and composite toggling harpoon valves with the i n d i v i d u a l would not necessarily imply hunting prowess. Burials 4 and 5 were found at approximately the same elevation i n the same natural stratum, and they were only 75 cm apart. The:, area covered by the Bu r i a l 5 c a i r n reached toward B u r i a l 4 and several cobbles were found above thi s b u r i a l . Thus an extension of the Bur i a l 5 c a i r n or a p a r t i a l separate c a i r n may have covered B u r i a l 4. Without add i t i o n a l evidence to c l a r i f y t h i s s i t u a t i o n the large c a i r n should be regarded as covering B u r i a l 5 only, and Burial,4 should be regarded as having been covered by what may have been intended as a c a i r n . B u r i a l 4 was only generally a r t i c u l a t e d . The person lay face up with the cranium s p l i t up the back and flattened, with the face i n the middle. The mandible l a y upside down on top of the face, and the sternum lay on top of the mandible. The r i b s were spread out as i f opened at the sternum, and the spine was contorted. Although the arms and legs were i n the positions t y p i c a l of a flexed b u r i a l - - t h a t i s , elbows bent with hands to the face or throat and knees to the chest and feet close to the p e l v i s — o n e innominate was completely disoriented. This d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of s k e l e t a l elements i s not found i n other b u r i a l s at the s i t e , but i t i s reminiscent of the condition of the dog i n the nearby c a i r n . The possib- i l i t y of a rel a t i o n s h i p between the two bu r i a l s i s raised again but, on the other hand, the great difference i n a r t i - f a c t inclusions with each person might suggest that each b u r i a l event was separate. Three b u r i a l s exhibit pathological bone conditions. B u r i a l 1 had a cphgenitally dislocated hip and a right leg that was noticeably shorter and f r a i l e r than the l e f t . As a r e s u l t of these conditions the p e l v i s was deformed, espec- i a l l y around the r i g h t acetabulum. The vertebral column was also deformed, probably as a r e s u l t of e f f o r t s to keep the torso v e r t i c a l while walking with one short l e g . B u r i a l 5 also had a l a t e r a l l y deformed vertebral column ( s c o l i o s i s ) . B u r i a l 7, the e a r l i e s t b u r i a l at the s i t e , showed pronounced ef f e c t s of a r t h r i t i s on the proximal and d i s t a l condyles of the r a d i i and ulnae. The condition was more noticeable on the r i g h t side. 369 APPENDIX III LITHIC DEBRIS Introduction This b r i e f description of l i t h i c debris presents only weight of flakes by natural stratum and excavation unit for Lot 81 and Lot 73. This abbreviated analysis i s j u s t i f i e d on the grounds that almost a l l of the l i t h i c debris i s un- d i f f e r e n t i a t e d shatter (D. Pokotylo,pers. comm) and that d e t a i l e d analysis of l i t h i c debris i s beyond the scope of t h i s study* Thus, l i t t l e relevant information can be gained by a d e t a i l e d analysis of these data. Lot 81 Table XLII presents the weights of l i t h i c remains on Lot 81. In treating the l i t h i c debris i t was decided to simply count and weigh the flakes from each a n a l y t i c a l u n i t . There are no l i t h i c remains i n natural stratum A of excav- ation unit 4 and only one flake i n the same stratum i n excavation unit 1. Almost h a l f the l i t h i c remains i n excav- ation unit 3 come from the disturbed and h i s t o r i c stratum, but t h i s f i n d i n g i s not supported from excavation unit 2, where only 22% of the l i t h i c remains are i n the upper stratum. The percentages of l i t h i c debris from each excavation unit found i n natural stratum B i n units 2 and 3 are also noticeably TABLE XLII Weight of L i t h i c Debris (gm) by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 81, DiSe 7.* Natural Stratum Excavation Unit 1 2 3 4 A 38.4 12.7 251.8 0.0 B - 39.8 133.8 - C - 5.0 25.2 - C-l - - 0.1 - C-2 - - 0.0 - D - - 8.5 - E - - 3.9 - F - - 0*0 - F-1 - 81.8 - G _ 0.0 * blanks indicate natural stratum not present i n the excavation u n i t . 371 d i f f e r e n t . This may r e f l e c t the small amount of debris from excavation unit 2. Natural stratum F-1 of excavation unit 3 contains the only appreciable remaining amount of l i t h i c d e t r i t u s . Lot 73 Table XLIII presents the weights of l i t h i c debris found i n each natural stratum of each excavation unit on Lot 73, One pattern i s immediately evident. In excavation units 1 through 4 natural stratum P contains the largest percentage of l i t h i c debris. The l i t h i c debris from s t r a t a of the l i t h i c component comprise 92.95% of a l l l i t h i c debris i n excavation unit 1, 96.40% i n unit 2, 91.91% i n unit 3, and 80.46% i n unit 4. The lack of l i t h i c debris i n t h i s stratum i n unit 5 i s a r e s u l t of i t s being s t r a t i g r a p h i c a l l y beyond the clay f l o o r feature. Also, the sandy group of s t r a t a between F and G/O generally contain very low r e l a t i v e frequencies of l i t h i c debris compared to other s h e l l midden s t r a t a . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of flakes i n excavation unit 5 i s a t y p i c a l , possibly because so few items of debris were recovered here (99,8gin, f l a k e s ) . The great abundance of chipping debris from deposits that represent a s e r i e s of beach surfaces c a l l s to mind the large number of cobbles with numerous flakes removed i n regular patterns that l i e on the beach west of the s i t e . Many of these cobbles are basalt, but a number are also of coarser grained igneous rock. The l i t h i c debris from the P 372 TABLE XLIII Weight of L i t h i c Debris (gm) by Excavation Unit and Natural Stratum, Lot 73, DiSe 7.* Natural Stratum Excavation Unit 1 2 3 4 5 A 0.8 26.4 45.4 5.0 1.2 B, B-1 3.7 0.0 - mm - D 0.0 0.0 - • - - E 0.0 - - - - C - 8.1 50.1 5.1 - F 57.1 0.0 45.8 7.3 42.8 I I Q I I - - 0.0 11.0 0.0 I - 0.0 27.7 0.9 0.0 J - 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 K - 0.0 0.0 252.7 5.5 M - - 10.7 0.2 0.0 N - 0.0 10.4 1.9 24.7 G/0 66.1 8.0 21.0 160.8 24.5 G-2 6.1 - - - — G & s h e l l 19.2 47.2 167.0 _ _ dark G - - 0.0 — — H 65.6 46.6 - - — H-l 19.1 13.6 0.0 — — Q - 28.7 - - — R 18.3 2.4 - — — S 0.0 0.0 - — - P 2634.3 4680.7 3903.4 1573.3 0.0 T 0.0 95.9 112.9 0.0 0.0 P-l 746.9 36.2 278.0 258.6 0.0 T-1 0.0 0.0 0.0 — — P-2 0.0 35.1 20.0 m. T-2 0.0 17.8 - mm _ P-3 0.0 - - — _ * blanks indicate natural stratum not present i n the excav- ation u n i t . 373 and T s t r a t a at the s i t e i s mostly from coarse grained igneous rocks, although some basalt i s present, and the cores found i n these strata are equally divided between basalt and coarse igneous rock. The main difference bet- ween the beach and the P and T strata l i e s i n the absence of flakes on the beach and t h e i r abundance i n the excavations. Given the present evidence, i t i s impossible to t e l l whether either of these locations represents a possible raw material source or work area. 3U APPENDIX IV CLAM SHELL SEASONALITY Introduction The object of t h i s analysis was to obtain information on the approximate season of death of clams whose remains were found i n the midden* This information enables one to i n f e r the time of year during which the s i t e was most l i k e l y to have been occupied. The use of mollusc remains for t h i s purpose has been pioneered i n New Zealand (Shawcross 1967; Coutts 1970:874; Saxon and Higham 1969:303-311) and C a l i f o r n i a (Weide 1969) and the technique has been applied l o c a l l y with some success (Ham 1974; Ham and Irvine 1975; Keen 1976). The following analysis applies aspects of the seasonal dating technique that are appropriate to the Deep Bay data. Analysis Prodigious quantities of s h e l l were c o l l e c t e d i n the f i e l d ; much of i t was not appropriate f o r seasonal dating but the remaining s h e l l was s t i l l of such a quantity as to make unfeasible a 100% sample. To overcome t h i s problem the following steps were taken: 1) only butter clam remains were analyzed, 2) a 10% random sample was drawn of a n a l y t i c a l units containing butter clam remains, and 3) where the quantity 375 of s h e l l i n one of these a n a l y t i c a l units was s t i l l cumbersome a random sample of the entire quantity was drawn from the u n i t . Limiting the analysis to a single clam species, i n t h i s case butter clam (Saxidomus giganteus), has both advantages and disadvantages. Personal experience and the work of Keen (1976:74) indicates that t h i s species i s easiest to interpret i n terms of winter and summer growth ring d i s t i n c t i o n s . Also, butter clams tend to have a robust s h e l l , e s p e c i a l l y toward the l i p , that enables the valves to withstand deposition, recovery, preparation, and analysis. Basket cockle i s also robust but i t i s less easy to interpret i n cross section than butter clam (see Ham and Irvine 1975,Fig.3c, Fig.5c). A further advantage to the use of butter clam i s i t s frequency, t h i s species being found i n a l l 26 a n a l y t i c a l units above natural stratum P. Although i t i s possible that some f r a g - ments of horse clam (Tresus sp.) have been included with the butter clam remains, the separation of these two species i n the faunal sample analysis i s thought to be quite r e l i a b l e . Even i f a l l the s h e l l i d e n t i f i e d as butter clam i n several a n a l y t i c a l units were i n f a c t a l l horse clam thereby making the number of sampled a n a l y t i c a l units i n which butter clam was present equal to the number of such units i n which l i t t l e neck clam or basket cockle was present (23 and 21 re s p e c t i v e l y ) , the robustness and i n t e r p r e t a b i l i t y of butter clam s h e l l s s t i l l favors t h e i r examination. Ham (1974:36-37) and Ham and Irvine (1975:371-372) note that clam species with d i f f e r e n t 376 e c o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s display d i f f e r e n t seasons of death at the Glenrose s i t e . Clams l i v i n g r e l a t i v e l y deep within sand and gravel beaches seemed to have been c o l l e c t e d i n summer whereas those l i v i n g up to s i x inches deep i n muddy beaches seemed to have been c o l l e c t e d i n winter (Ham 1974: 36-37; Ham and Irvine 1975:371-372). It was suggested that higher low tides during the day i n winter i n h i b i t e d the c o l l e c t i o n of some species, p r i m a r i l y butter clam and horse clam (Ham 1974:36-37; Ham and Irvine 1975:371-373). One important aspect of t h i s argument i s omitted, however, and that i s the p o s i t i o n within the i n t e r t i d a l zone preferred by the clam species i n question. L i t t l e neck clams are found mainly around the h a l f - t i d e mark but they occur to the sub- t i d a l mark (Quayle 1970:59). Butter clams, which are c l o s e l y associated e c o l o g i c a l l y with l i t t l e neck clams (Fraser and Smith 1928:272), are most abundant i n the lower t h i r d of the i n t e r t i d a l zone (Quayle 1970:63); and basket cockles are exposed only at low tides ( t h i s i s a rather ambiguous des- c r i p t i v e term but i t i s probably safe to assume that i t means below the h a l f - t i d e mark) (Ricketts and Calvin 1948:180). Personal observation also associates at least Tresus capax with butter clam and l i t t l e neck clam. Therefore i t would seem that i f one species were available during winter daytime low t i d e s a l l species would be available at the same time. The difference between digging s i x inches or twelve inches to obtain clams seems minor. Given the ethnographic reports of clams being c o l l e c t e d on a year round basis with intensive c o l l e c t i o n of some species for storage during summer (cf. Gunther 1927:206; Suttles 1951:67-69; Stern 1934:47), and given at least some archaeological support f o r t h i s p o s i t i o n (Keen 1976:56), i t does not seem unreasonable to examine only butter clam s h e l l s to determine seasonality. Their a v a i l - a b i l i t y may have fluctuated throughout any given year but the a v a i l a b i l i t y of the other important clam species f l u c t u - ated i n d i r e c t proportion; fewer clams may have been gathered i n winter than i n summer but the proportion of one clam species r e l a t i v e to the next would remain the same regardless of season i f summer clam storage patterns were disregarded. Disadvantages of se l e c t i n g butter clam or any other single species for seasonality analysis seem r e l a t i v e l y few. The responses of butter clam to environmental phenomena such as temperature and disturbance may not be the same as the responses of other species therefore the complete spectrum of molluscan growth response to these phenomena cannot be observed with a single species. There may also be c u l t u r a l preferences f o r one species over another that change through time thereby l i m i t i n g the usefulness of a single species. I f t h i s s i t u a t i o n e x i s t s we.jare presently unaware of i t . Also, the beach matrix at a s i t e may change through time, as i n the Glenrose case, thereby p o t e n t i a l l y a f f e c t i n g the species of clam that can and cannot l i v e under the changed conditions. The changing beach matrix may also be a symptom of t e r r e s t r i a l changes as well (e.g. the Glenrose and St. Mungo s i t e s ) where d e l t a i c b u i l d up may a l t e r the natural environment of the s i t e s u f f i c i e n t l y to necessitate changes i n the nature of the a c t i v i t i e s and the seasonal occupation of a s i t e (Boehm 1970:75). Thus, reliance on a single species could provide data that were incomplete at best. The abundance and f r e - quency of occurrence of butter clam remains at Deep Bay suggests that changes i n environment and c u l t u r a l preference! have not played an important part i n the a v a i l a b i l i t y of butter clam or any other clam species. As for d i f f e r e n t i a l environmental e f f e c t on d i f f e r e n t clam species, the degree to which clam species vary i n t h i s regard i s not presently known. It i s thought that the disadvantage of not examining the range of clam species i n order to account f o r various growth phenomena i s outweighed by the sample homogeneity to be achieved by the examination of a singl e species. The faunal sample analysis of 26 a n a l y t i c a l units i n - dicated that butter clam was found i n a l l 26 of these u n i t s . Since these a n a l y t i c a l units are samples of natural s t r a t a i t can be i n f e r r e d with considerable safety that i f the sampled a n a l y t i c a l unit contains butter clam remains the natural stratum from which i t was sampled also contains butter clam remains. This means that 53 of a possible 63 a n a l y t i c a l units on Lot 73 probably contain butter clam s h e l l s and that eight a n a l y t i c a l units on Lot 81 also probably contain butter clam s h e l l s . On Lot 73 i t was decided to take a 10% sample of a n a l y t i c a l units containing butter clam s h e l l s for seasonality analysis. The a n a l y t i c a l units were divided into the disturbed and h i s t o r i c group, the Gulf of Georgia group, and the Marpole group, each containing 14, 21, and 18 a n a l y t i c a l units respectively. These figures represent 26,4%, 39.6%, and 34.0% respectively of a l l a n a l y t i c a l units con- taining the desired species. Five samples, or 9.4% of a l l a n a l y t i c units, were drawn using a table of random numbers. The percentage of units i n each group was m u l t i p l i e d by the number of units sampled and the r e s u l t was rounded to a whole number. This procedure provided f o r one a n a l y t i c a l unit from the disturbed and h i s t o r i c group and two each from the Gulf of Georgia and Marpole groups. The a n a l y t i c a l units chosen were natural stratum A i n excavation unit 5, natural stratum F i n excavation unit 3, natural stratum I i n excavation unit 4, natural stratum G-2 i n excavation unit 1, and natural stratum G/0 i n excavation unit 5. A similar procedure on Lot 81 produced natural stratum B i n excavation uni t 2 and natural stratum A i n excavation unit 3 for analysis. In s p i t e of t h i s sampling procedure the quantity of s h e l l remains i n natural stratum F, excavation unit 3, s t i l l consisted of nineteen bags (14 l b . heavy type) twelve of which were f u l l and seven of which were approximately half f u l l . Most of the s h e l l s i n these bags were butter clam. It was decided to take a 20% sample or four bags from t h i s t o t a l , 36.8% of the p a r t i a l l y f u l l bags and 63.2% from the 380 f u l l bags. Rounded to a whole number t h i s procedure gave three f u l l bags and one p a r t i a l l y f u l l bag for analysis. A l l butter clam valves and valve fragments with part or a l l of the l i p i n t a c t were removed from the sampled a n a l y t i c a l u n i t s . The s h e l l s were then washed i n warm water to remove the d i r t and d r i e d . They were then cut with a hack- saw at right angles to the long axis of the valve at approx- imately the mid-point of the long axis. This technique produces a cross section that i s at right angles to the growth rings at the l i p . Where two cross sections from a s i n g l e valve were produced only one was retained for analysis since two seasonal estimates from the same valve would bias the r e s u l t s . The cross sections were then f i l e d smooth, the valves dipped for f i v e seconds i n 10% hydrochloric acid, rinsed i n water, and d r i e d . They were then examined under a X10-X30 power Nikon binocular microscope and the width of the growth increments were measured using Mitutoyo vernier c a l i p e r s . The point of reference from which measurements were made was the dense concentration of growth rings that i s usually r e l - a t i v e l y narrow and that usually stands out from the thicker summer growth rings. Where no precise winter check ring was evident but where winter growth rings were obvious measurement was taken from the center of the aggregation of winter growth rin g s . A preliminary examination of the s h e l l s indicated that the growth increments, i n butter clams at l e a s t , are often 381 e r r a t i c thereby making tables of average valve breadth growth of only t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t (e.g. Craig and Hallam 1963:738). Also, t h i s e r r a t i c growth pattern makes estimates based on growth only i n the previous year unreliable (e.g. Ham and Irvine 1975:365; Tables I-V). In an e f f o r t to develop some c r i t e r i o n on which the most recent growth increment could be compared to some standard i t was decided to measure from the f i f t h - t o - l a s t to the second-to-last growth increments. The l a s t growth increment was then calculated as a percentage of the four previous years. The f i f t h - t o - l a s t growth rin g was a r b i t r a r i l y selected because l i p fragments and broken valves usually had at lea s t f i v e growth increments v i s i b l e . The growth rate i n clams i s not uniform throughout the year. The l e a s t growth occurs i n mid-winter; t h i s produces the winter check r i n g . Spring and summer account for the majority of s h e l l growth because of optimal temperature and food supply conditions (Quayle and Bourne 1972:8). Keen (1976:29) divides the growth year in t o quarters. The f i r s t quarter includes the winter check r i n g and up to twenty-five percent of the average annual growth; the second quarter i s early summer, the t h i r d quater i s l a t e summer, and the fourth quarter i s autumn and ear l y winter before the winter check r i n g . This means of grouping the percentage of average annual growth subsequent to the l a s t winter check ring has the advantage of being r e a d i l y interpretable i n terms of season. A problem i s encountered, though, when a clam i s 382 harvested toward the middle or end of a good growth year that was preceded by a number of bad growth years. In t h i s instance the l a s t growth increment can exceed 100% of the average annual growth of previous years. It i s unclear whether the few instances of t h i s phenomenon should be assigned to the fourth or f i r s t growth quarter therefore they have been kept separate i n this analysis. The numbers of valves f a l l i n g into each quarter or into the over 100% category were counted for each a n a l y t i c a l unit and these t o t a l s are expressed as percentages of the t o t a l number of valves from each a n a l y t i c a l unit i n Table XLIV. At least h a l f of a l l valves i n each a n a l y t i c a l unit are found i n the f i r s t quarter. This suggests that winter or early spring i s the time of year during which most butter clams were gathered. It may be i n f e r r e d one step further that the most l i k e l y period of s i t e occupation was between mid-winter and spring. With two exceptions over two-thirds of a l l valves f a l l into the f i r s t growth quarter. The two exceptions are both a n a l y t i c units from the Gulf of Georgia component and these two units are the only ones to contain valves whose l a s t growth increment exceeds 100% of the average annual growth of the previous four years. Also, these two a n a l y t i c units contain higher percentages of valves i n the t h i r d and fourth quarters than any of the other u n i t s . These phenomena may suggest two things. One, the presence of clams i n the 11 >100%" category may suggest that ec o l o g i c a l TABLE XLIV Relative Frequencies of Butter Clam Valves i n each Growth Percentage Category, DiSe 7. growth percentage category l o t excavation natural component N 0.0-24.9% 25.0-49.9% 50.0-74.9% 75.0-99.9% >100.0% unit stratum 81 2 B unknown 15 80.0 20.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 81 3 A disturbed/ 44 68.2 25.0 6.8 00.0 00.0 h i s t o r i c 73 5 A disturbed/^ 29 69.0 20.7 6.9 3.4 00.0 h i s t o r i c 73 3 F Gulf of 70 50.0 21.4 18.6 7.1 2.8 Georgia 73 4 I Gulf of 13 53.8 00.0 15.4 15.4 15.4 Georgia 73 1 G92 Marpole 32 78.1 12.5 6.2 3.1 00.0 73 5 G/0 Marpole 16 81.2 18.8 00.0 00.0 00.0 384 conditions for good clam growth were les s prevalent during the time period of the Gulf of Georgia component. Clams harvested i n a good year would therefore show r e l a t i v e l y large amounts of growth r e l a t i v e to previous years thus loading up the over 100% category as well as the t h i r d and fourth quarters when i n f a c t they were gathered e a r l i e r i n the year. Two, a c u l t u r a l change may have taken place, the role of the Deep Bay s i t e a l t e r i n g somewhat i n the annual subsistence round. Instead of being as i n t e n s i v e l y occupied during the f i r s t quarter a decreased emphasis was placed on f i r s t quarter occupation and an increased emphasis was placed on l a t e seasonal occupation. The s h i f t i n emphasis of occu- pation may r e l a t e to the most recent stages i n the develop- ment of the spit i t s e l f . Possibly inter-group c o n f l i c t and the establishment of a f o r t i f i c a t i o n at the s i t e contributed to the apparent s h i f t i n seasonal e x p l o i t a t i v e emphasis. 385 APPENDIX V COMPOSITION OF TRANSFORMED ARTIFACT CLASSES, LOT 73, DiSe 7. Transformed A r t i f a c t Class O r i g i n a l A r t i f a c t Class u t i l i z e d f l a k e microblade obsidian flake quartz c r y s t a l flake u n i f a c i a l l y retouched flake b i f a c i a l l y retouched flake biface cobble/flake core large chipped stone point heavy duty u t i l i z e d flake medium duty u t i l i z e d flake l i g h t duty u t i l i z e d f l a k e microblade microblade core obsidian f l a k e quartz c r y s t a l f l a k e heavy duty u n i f a c i a l l y retouched fl a k e medium duty u n i f a c i a l l y retouched fl a k e medium duty b i f a c i a l l y retouched flake l i g h t duty b i f a c i a l l y retouched flake retouched s l a t e fragment heavy duty biface l i g h t duty biface cobble/flake core u n i l a t e r a l l y shouldered point base b i l a t e r a l l y shouldered point base side notched point base f l a t base, contracting edge point base point t i p fragment broad, symmetric l e a f shaped point p a r a l l e l edged point 386 Appendix V (continued) Transformed A r t i f a c t Class O r i g i n a l A r t i f a c t Class triangular point chopping tool abrasive stone t h i n ground s l a t e point thick ground sla t e point ground sla t e knife ground sla t e fragment c e l t saw ground stone pendant stone d i s c bead triangular stemmed point triangular unstemmed point u n i f a c i a l chopping t o o l b i f a c i a l chopping tool coarse texture abrasive stone medium texture abrasive stone f i n e texture abrasive stone abrasive stone/saw edge retouched abrasive stone t i p fragment, thin ground s l a t e point medial fragment, t h i n ground s l a t e point thin triangular ground s l a t e point th i n corner notched ground sla t e point t h i n basal notched ground sla t e point thick ground s l a t e point thick ground sla t e point base medium thick ground sla t e knife thin ground slate knife b i f a c i a l l y bevelled ground sla t e fragment u n i f a c i a l l y bevelled ground s l a t e f ragment b i f a c i a l l y abraded s l a t e fragment u n i f a c i a l l y abraded s l a t e fragment c e l t saw ground stone pendant stone d i s c bead 387 Appendix V (continued) Transformed A r t i f a c t Class O r i g i n a l A r t i f a c t Class i n c i s e d s l a t e s p l i t bone awl bone point wedge base bone point u n i l a t e r a l l y barbed bone point ulna t o o l b i r d bone whistle bone bipoint worked tooth bone pendant bead bone chisel/wedge worked bone fragment sea mammal bone implement u n i l a t e r a l l y barbed antler point antler point antler ring antler wedge incised s l a t e s p l i t bone awl polished bone awl heavy duty bone point l i g h t duty mammal bone point b i r d bone point polished bone rod wedge base bone point u n i l a t e r a l l y barbed bone point ulna tool b i r d bone whistle mammal bone bipoint b i r d bone bipoint worked sea mammal bone tooth zoomorphic bone pendant mammal bone bead b i r d bone bead mammal bone chisel/wedge sea mammal bone wedge worked bone fragment sea mammal bone implement u n i l a t e r a l l y barbed antler point antler point antler r i n g antler wedge 388 Appendix V (continued) Transformed A r t i f a c t Class O r i g i n a l A r t i f a c t Class antler foreshaft antler tine f l a k e r antler composite toggling harpoon valve antler fragment i n c i s e d antler tine shel d i s c bead pecten s h e l l dentalium s h e l l s h e l l ring Mytilus californianus s h e l l implement ochre mica wood", antler foreshaft antler t i n e f l a k e r antler composite toggling harpoon valve adzed antler fragment abraded antler fragment i n c i s e d antler t i n e s h e l l d i s c bead pecten s h e l l dentalium s h e l l s h e l l ring Mytilus californianus s h e l l implement ochre mica wood copper copper

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
Canada 15 5
United States 13 0
Japan 3 0
China 1 56
Germany 1 0
India 1 0
Brazil 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 14 8
Kingsville 4 0
Tokyo 3 0
St. John's 3 0
Eugene 2 0
Redmond 1 0
Nanchang 1 0
St Louis 1 0
Frankfurt am Main 1 0
Mountain View 1 0
Mumbai 1 0
Victoria 1 0
Sunnyvale 1 0

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

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items

<