Old Dirt - New Thoughts

Last week I had my World Prehistory class engage in a little experimental archaeology. I told them that we would explore the labor and leadership requirements for the building of monumental architecture. We decided to replicate a Woodland tradition earthen mound - only we used whatever equipment we could find in my lab and snow to build with. It took less than an hour to build our 6 foot high mound.

According to our calculations we would need to repeat our mound-building efforts 4545 times in order to build a respectible 30 ft tall Hopewellian mound, or 14,285 times to accomplish the average of the 14 construction efforts for Monks Mound. As in all classic experimental archaeology exercises, this one certainly gave us a unique perspective on monumental architecture of the ancient world. 

 Mound-building experiment

World Prehistory class (mound is in the background)

I have posted on the Aniakchak Wiki excerpts from my field journal. Katie Johnson Ringsmuth, an historian with the Park Service, asked me to put this document together last summer. She’s interested in recording the recent experiences of scientists and researchers that work in the park as part of her park history.

I’m not sure whether my journal excerpts have any historical or literary significance. But, I have always been interested in reading other people’s published field journals because of my fascination with the scientific process. So I offer my own contribution for readers with similar interests. (Note, I carefully censored all reference to that most troublesome member of my crew - JAG- so you won’t find any of my lengthy and justifiable rants about this person in my journal excerpts. Sorry for those of you who were hoping to get the true story behind the canned oranges.) 

It’s not often that Minnesota archaeology makes it big in the news. Apparently archaeologists with the Leech Lake Heritage Sites Program have found a deposit of lithic artifacts in sediments overlain by glacial outwash. They estimate the age of these artifacts at 13,000 to 14,000 years old given this stratigraphic setting.

The site was discovered as part of a CRM project undertaken prior to the construction of a new road near Walker, Minnesota. Unfortunately it sounds like the construction may go forward despite the potential importance of this find.

Minnesota archaeologists generally do not dig beneath glacial deposits because of the assumption that most areas of the state were uninhabitable until after the final retreat of the ice. The Leech Lake Heritage archaeologists would have probably never even found the site had it not been for an odd twist of events.

While investigating the path of the road, archaeologists came across a pit they thought might be related to the fur trade, said Thor Olmanson, director of the Leech Lake Heritage Sites Program and tribal archaeologist. But they quickly discovered that the pit was a 1960s child’s play fort, complete with a cap gun and other toys. Nevertheless, they dug down several feet below the pit’s floor, and they found a fragment of stone believed to be from toolmaking. That “was very puzzling,” Olmanson said, “so we decided to keep digging to see what was going on there.”

I love the idea that forty years ago some kids built a fort directly on top the oldest site in the state, and that’s why we archaeologists were lucky enough to find it.

The newspaper account includes photographs of two artifacts. The most convincing is described as an “axe-like” tool. It looks to me like a chunk of TRS (Tongue River silica) with some flakes removed from one edge. TRS is a common chipped stone raw material found in glacial deposits throughout western Minnesota. (Update: I had a chance to see this object and it’s actually siltstone).

(photo from StarTribue 1/11/2007)

Unfortunately, the photographic evidence is not sufficient to say whether this is a human-manufactured tool or simply a busted rock. On-the-other-hand, I know Thor and some of the other archaeologists mentioned in the newspaper account. I trust that the years of digging in northern Minnesota have made them very competent at telling artifacts from geofacts. I just wish they had an indisputable tool to show us. Where’s the blade core or bifacial point? That’s what I want to see. Hopefully we will soon be able to get our hands on the archaeology report from this project. Then we can add Minnesota to the Pre-Clovis map!