Chapter 8: Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Research
8.3 Some Final Thoughts
Gravers are a fascinating and much under-studied lithic tool occurring during the Paleo-Indian time period. The objective of this study was to document how these tools were made and, via an integrated consideration of tool morphology and a detailed examination of surface and edge wear on the tools, how they were used and for what purpose. Ultimately the goal was to produce a typology of these tools that reflects the underlying production and use strategies, in the hopes that it would aid future studies about this particular class of stone tool.
Gravers are made in a number of ways, on many different materials, and on many different flake types, depending on what was at hand at the site on which they were found. Gravers were made not only on flakes made from the creation or maintenance of a biface, but also on blocky core flakes, as well as on tools which had reached the end of a previous use-life or utility for another function. Retouch on the gravers was minimal, often solely restricted to the spurs that were used themselves, rather than any other area of the flake/tool on which the graver was formed. There was no evidence of resharpening or maintenance on the gravers, suggesting that it was easier/quicker or more
convenient/effective to make a new graver than it was to resharpen and reuse one already in existence. The lack of consistency in type of flake that gravers are produced on,
coupled with the fact that they are created from minimal retouch, and are not resharpened or maintained points to the fact that gravers are an expedient tool. In other words, they seem to be created to be used and discarded at the location of use, once they have reached their maximum utility. Although it is possible that they may have been created in advance of their use, there is little evidence to suggest that gravers and other simpler, quickly produced tools were transported in their finished form -- most seem to have been made on the spot as needed (see also Deller and Ellis 2011:126, 143). Had they been
transported in advance of use, perhaps some of the gravers should have shown evidence of retouch, but lacked evidence of use-wear.
Unlike Boast’s (1983) study, that found Folsom gravers to be used primarily as butchery tools, this study shows that Paleo-Indian gravers as a whole were used in a variety of motions, against multiple worked materials and were used in different use- related activities. Paleo-Indian gravers from southern Ontario sites were primarily used as graving, boring and compass-graving tools. The high incidence (84%) of edge damage to the tip of the gravers, as well as to the dorso-lateral edges (55%) of the gravers sampled strongly supports this conclusion. Polish was mainly recorded on the tip (50%) of the archaeological specimens. The higher incidence of polish on the tip of the specimens can partly be explained by the increase of damage to the lateral edges, which would remove traces of polish. Furthermore, although none of the gravers had the distinctive shank characteristic of a coring graver, several of the archaeological gravers in the study also displayed the use-wear seen on compass-gravers described by Tomenchuk and Storck (1997). The constant rotary motion of compass-graving would also create a higher instance of polish on the tip of the graving spurs, as the tip would be in constant contact with the material being worked.
The replication experiment further supported the conclusion that the
archaeological gravers were used to grave and bore medium hard to hard materials. The wear patterns found on the archaeological artifacts most closely resembled the wear patterns seen on the replications that were used on wood, shell, bone and antler. The replication experiment also corroborated the results of Tomenchuk and Storck (1997). The replicas used in compass-graving displayed the characteristic undercutting of the tip of the pilot spur, as well as different types of use-wear on adjacent spurs, and different degrees of wear on the inside and outside edges of the spurs. The experimental data should not be given as much weight as the archaeological use-wear data, however, as they were controlled. The experiments lacked the diverse conditions that would have been experienced by archaeological artifacts before, during, and after their discard. The replication experiment resulted in data that was not precisely in agreement with
experiments performed by other researchers, although this may have been a result of the length of time of use, or the inexperience of this researcher.
Although some gravers appear to have been used as butchery tools, the Paleo- Indian gravers were primarily used for wood and bone/antler working. Although based on
preliminary data, it would appear that over time, gravers tended to become used on materials which would last for longer periods of time (e.g. bone vs. meat). If more
gravers could be found from the Crowfield time period, it would be interesting to test this hypothesis. If the compass gravers were used as Tomenchuk and Storck (1997)
suggested, in creating wood and/or bone/shell disks/rings, then it would be interesting to examine whether there were changes over time, especially as double and multiple-spur gravers are used on harder materials more often than single-spur gravers. Were wood disks made more frequently during the Gainey and Parkhill Phase, followed by mainly bone/shell disk production during the Crowfield Phase? Could this change indicate a shift in the importance of a more permanent display of culturally meaningful objects?
Unfortunately, as only one graver from the Crowfield Phase was utilized during this study, it is impossible to explore this avenue of study at present. Future studies could test this hypothesis, or could be used to test the spread of cultural traditions across the time and space covered by Paleo-Indian sites.
Although a major goal of this study was to create a typology of gravers, which took into account both morphology and function, it proved difficult to achieve this goal. There was no clear-cut corroboration between form and function. Double-spur gravers were not solely used to compass-grave bone, for example. Also, blank type seems to have influenced what types of gravers were employed such as complex ones that are more often associated with biface thinning flakes -- perhaps because the presence of thin edges all around provides more locations on which to easily make spurs. So the occurrence of some of the morphological types employed here such as complex may depend upon what blank forms were available at a site.
It is the belief of this author that one could separate gravers into a tool category that is subdivided based on the number of spurs, and the motion in which they are used. In other words, single-spur gravers could be classed separately from double-spur coring gravers, which could be classed separately from multiple-spur coring gravers, which could be classed apart from complex gravers. This division is not based solely on
morphology, but is also based on functional and culturally meaningful graver forms. The occurrence of these various forms in Paleo-Indian toolkits across time and space could then be compared in order to reveal cultural relationships. In the future, comparisons of
Paleo-Indian toolkits containing different graver forms may also provide evidence of the diffusion of contemporaneous cultures across the landscape (Storck 1988; 1991).
This study used a methodology that was designed to provide information about the use and function of stone tools. As hypotheses regarding the function of gravers have rarely been tested, use-wear analysis was extremely helpful in determining whether any of the hypotheses which had been previously suggested had actual merit. The function of Paleo-Indian gravers has been clarified, although not to the degree that this author would wish. Although this study provides some preliminary results regarding the use and function of Paleo-Indian gravers, more work needs to be done. The context of graver discard should be better recorded and examined, in order to determine links in the lithic assemblages. The lithics found in context with the gravers could then also undergo use- wear analysis in order to determine whether the graver(s) were used in a special activity area, or were part of a personal toolkit. Since some of the gravers in this study could hypothetically have been used to create wood or bone disks, similar to some at the Fisher site (Tomenchuk and Storck 1997), studies of other gravers from this and later time periods should be undertaken to determine if this wear pattern continues over time. Over time are compass gravers used to create disks from materials that will last longer (e.g. antler vs. bone vs. wood)? Do double-spur compass gravers occur more often than multiple-spur compass gravers? Are the different forms used against the same materials, or do they differ? As can be seen through this research regarding graver creation, use, and function, more questions than answers remain. It is the hope of this researcher that
through more comprehensive use-wear analysis of total assemblages that the reasons for the existence of gravers during the Paleo-Indian time period can be further elucidated and explored.
REFERENCES CITED
Ackerman, Robert
2008 The Late Holocene Adaptation in Southwestern Alaska. Alaskan Journal of Anthropology 61(1&2):83-92.
Adams, William Y., and Ernest W. Adams
1991 Archaeological Typology and Practical Reality: A Dialectical Approach to Artifact Classification and Sorting. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Adovasio, J. M., J. D. Gunn, J. Donahue, and R. Stuckenrath
1978 Meadowcroft Rockshelter, 1977: An Overview. American Antiquity 43(4):632- 651.
Andrefsky, William (editor)
2005 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Andrefsky, William
1986 A Consideration of Blade and Flake Curvature. Lithic Technology 15:48-54. 1994 Raw-Material Availability and the Organization of Technology. American Antiquity 59(1):21-34.
2006 Experimental and Archaeological Verification of an Index of Retouch for Hafted Bifaces. American Antiquity 71(4):1.
2008a Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use, and Curation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
2008b Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Bamforth, Douglas B.
1986 Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51(1):38-50. Binford, Lewis R.
1977 Forty-seven Trips: A Case-Study in the Character of Archaeological Formation Process. In Stone Tools as Cultural Markers, edited by R. V. S. Wright, pp. 24-36. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.
1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies.
Journal of Anthropological Research 35(3):255-273.
1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs' Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45(1):4-20.
Boast, Robin M.
1983 The Folsom Gravers: A Functional Determination Through Microwear Analysis. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Colorado, Denver.
Bordes, François
1961 Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Vol. 1, L'Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux.
Bradley, J. W., A. E. Spiess, R. A. Boisvert, and J. Boudreau
2008 What‘s the Point?: Modal Forms and Attributes of Paleoindian Bifaces in the New England-Maritimes Region. Archaeology of Eastern North America 36:118- 172.
Brink, J. W.
1978 Experimental study of microwear formation on endscrapers. MA ed. University of Alberta,
Burke, Adrian L.
2006 Paleoindian Ranges in Northeastern North America Based on Lithic Raw Materials Sourcing. In Notions de territoire et de mobilité: exemples de l'Europe et des premières nations en Amérique du Nord avant le contact européen, Vol. 116, edited by C. Bressy, A. Burke, P. Chalard and H. Martin, pp. 77-89. Études et Recherches Archéologiques de l'Université de Liège, Liège.
Cahen, D., and F. Van Noten
1971 Stone Age Typology: Another Approach. Current anthropology 12(2):211- 215.
Curran, M. L.
1984 The Whipple Site and Paleoindian Tool Assemblage Variation: A Comparison of Intrasite Structuring. Archaeology of Eastern North America 12:5-40.
Curwen, Cecil
1930 Prehistoric Flint Sickles. Antiquity 4:179-186. Deller, D. B.
1988 The Paleo-Indian Occupation of Southwestern Ontario: Distribution, Technology, and Social Organization. PhD ed. McGill University, Montreal, QC. 1989a Interpretation of Chert Type Variation in Paleoindian Industries,
Southwestern Ontario. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by Christopher J. Ellis and J. C. Lothrop, pp. 191-220. Westview Press, Boulder.
1989b Interpretation of Chert Type Variation in Paleoindian Industries, Southwestern Ontario. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by
Christopher J. Ellis and Jonathan C. Lothrop, pp. 191-220. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Deller, D. B., and Christopher J. Ellis
1984 Crowfield: A Preliminary Report on a Probable Paleo-Indian Cremation in Southwestern Ontario. Archaeology of Eastern North America 12:41-71; 41. 1988 Early Palaeo-Indian Complexes in Southwestern Ontario. In Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Paleoecology and Archaeology of the Eastern Great Lakes Region, Vol. 33, edited by R. Laub, N. Miller and D. Steadman, pp. 251-263. Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences, Buffalo.
1992a The Early Paleo-Indian Parkhill Phase in Southwestern Ontario. Man in the Northeast 44:15-54.
1992b Thedford II: A Paleo-Indian Site in the Ausable River Watershed of Southwestern Ontario. Memoirs Vol. 24, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 2001 Evidence for Late Paleoindian Ritual from the Caradoc Site (AfHj-104), Southwestern Ontario, Canada. American Antiquity 66(2):267-284.
2011 Crowfield (AfHj-31): a unique paleoindian fluted point site from southwestern Ontario. Memoirs Vol. 49, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Deller, D. B., Christopher J. Ellis, and James R. Keron
2009 Understanding Cache Variability: A Deliberately Burned Early Paleoindian Tool Assemblage from the Crowfield Site, Southwestern Ontario, Canada. American Antiquity 74(2):371-397; 371.
Dobres, Marcia-Anne
2000 Technology and Social Agency. Blackwell, Oxford. Ellis, Christopher J.
1987a Gainey Fluted Points. KEWA 87(5):4. 1987b Barnes Fluted Points. KEWA 87(5):5.
1989 The Explanation of Northeastern Paleoindian Lithic Procurement Patterns. In
Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by Christopher J. Ellis and Jonathan C. Lothrop, pp. 139-164. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado. 2011 Measuring Paleoindian range mobility and land-use in the Great Lakes/Northeast. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 30(3):385-401.
Ellis, Christopher J., Dillon H. Carr, and Thomas J. Loebel
2011 The Younger Dryas and Late Pleistocene peoples of the Great Lakes region.
Quaternary International 242(2):534-545. Ellis, Christopher J., and D. B. Deller
1988 Some Distinctive Paleo-Indian Tool Types from the Lower Great Lakes Region. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 13:111-158.
1990 Paleo-Indians. In The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650, edited by Christopher J. Ellis and N. Ferris, pp. 37-64. Ontario Archaeological Society,
London.
1991 Investigations at Small Early Paleo-Indian Sites in Southwestern Ontario, 1990: Culloden Acres, Bolton and Murphy. iii + 312 pages. Ontario Archaeological Licence Report on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Heritage Branch, Toronto, Ontario and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. 1997 Variability in the Archaeological Record of Northeastern Early Paleoindians: A View from Southern Ontario. Archaeology of Eastern North America 25:1-30; 1. 2000 An Early Paleo-Indian Site near Parkhill, Ontario. Vol. 159, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Hull.
Ellis, Christopher J., Albert C. Goodyear, Dan F. Morse, and Kenneth B. Tankersley 1998 Archaeology of the Pleistocene-Holocene Transition in Eastern North America.
Quaternary International 49/50:151-166; 151. Ellis, Christopher J., and M. W. Spence
1997 Raw Material Variation and the Organization of "Small Point" Archaic Lithic Technologies in Southwestern Ontario. In Preceramic Southern Ontario, Vol. 19, edited by Phillip Woodley and Peter Ramsden, pp. 119-140. Copetown Press, Dundas, Ontario.
Ensor, Bradley E.
2009 Chipped stone debitage, material selection, and expedient tool production in Southeast Michigan. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 34(2):199.
Evans, Sir, John
1872 The ancient stone implements, weapons, and ornaments, of Great Britain. D. Appleton and company, New York.
Frison, George C.
Frison, George C., and Bruce Bradley
1980 Folsom Tools and Technology at the Hanson Site, Wyoming. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Frison, George C., and Dennis J. Stanford
1982 The Agate Basin site: a record of the Paleoindian occupation of the northwestern High Plains. Academic Press, New York.
Fullagar, R.
1991 The Role of Silica in Polish Formation. Journal of Archaeological Science
18:1-25.
Gao, X., and Chen Shen (editors)
2008 Archaeological Study of Lithic Use-wear Experiments. Beijing. Science Press, Beijing.
Gilreath, Amy
1984 Stages of Bifacial Manufacture: Learning from Experiments. Paper presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Portland, Oregon.
Goodyear, Albert C.
1979 A Hypothesis for the Use of Cryptocrystalline Raw Materials Among Paleo- Indian Groups of North America. Vol. 156, University of South Carolina, Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology,
Grace, Roger
1989 Interpreting the function of stone tools: the quantification and computerisation of microwear analysis. Vol. 474, B.A.R, Oxford.
Grimes, J., W. Eldridge, B. Grimes, A. Vaccaro, F. Vaccaro, J. Vaccaro, N. Vaccaro, and N. Orsini
1984 Bull Brock II. Archaeology of Eastern North America 12:159-183. Hanson, Caitlin
2010 The Early Paleoindian occupation of southern Ontario: temporal and spatial trends. Unpublished MA thesis, School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Hayden, Brian (editor)
Hayden, Brian
1984 Are Emic Types Relevant to Archaeology? Ethnohistory 31(2):pp. 79-92. Irwin, Henry T., and H. M. Wormington
1970 Paleo-Indian Tool Types in the Great Plains. American Antiquity 35(1):24-34. Jackson, Lawrence J.
1994 Gainey Phase Occupation in the Southern Rice Lake Region, Canada. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. 1997 Caribou Range and Early Palaeo-Indian Settlement Disposition in Southern Ontario, Canada. In Caribou and Reindeer Hunters of the Northern Hemisphere,
edited by Lawrence J. Jackson and P. Thacker, pp. 132-164. Avebury Press, Glasgow, Scotland.
1998 The Sandy Ridge and Halstead Paleo-Indian Sites: Unifacial Tool Use and Gainey Phase Definition in South-Central Ontario. Vol. 32, Museum of
Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Judge, W. J.
1973 Paleoindian occupation of the central Rio Grande Valley in New Mexico. 1st ed. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Karrow, P. F., T. W. Anderson, A. H. Clarke, L. D. Delorme, and M. R. Sreenivasa 1975 Stratigraphy, Paleontology, and Age of Lake Algonquin Sediments in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Quaternary Research 5:49-87.
Karrow, P. F., and B. G. Warner
1990 The geological and biological environment for human occupation in southern Ontario. In The archaeology of southern Ontario to AD 1650, Vol. 5, edited by Christopher J. Ellis and Neal Ferris, pp. 5-35. London Chapter, Ontario
Archaeological Society, Keeley, Lawrence H.
1974 Technique and Methodology in Microwear Studies: A Critical Review. World Archaeology 5(3):323-336.
1977 An Experimental Study of Microwear Traces on Selected British Paleolithic Implements. PhD ed. University of Oxford,
1980 Experimental determination of stone tool uses: a microwear analysis.
Keeley, Lawrence H., and Mark H. Newcomer
1977 Microwear Analysis of Experimental Flint Tools: a Test Case. Journal of Archaeological Science 4(1):29-62.
Krieger, Alex D.
1944 The Typological Concept. American Antiquity 9(3):271-288. Lancashire, Susannah C.
2001 Early Palaeoindian trianguloid end scrapers: an analysis. Unpublished MA Thesis, Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont. Le Blanc, Raymond J.
2009 Some implications of high-latitude osseous technologies for forager