The Carter Site in Northwestern Plains Prehistory Author(s): William Martin Reviewed work(s): Source: Plains Anthropologist, Vol.

45, No. 173 (August 2000), pp. 305-322 Published by: Plains Anthropological Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25669672 . Accessed: 25/11/2012 06:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Plains Anthropological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Plains Anthropologist.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NorthwesternPlains Prehistory The Carter Site in

William Martin ABSTRACT
Excavations at the Carter site (48NA1425) on the Casper Arch in central Wyoming produced a large, well-preserved ceramic assemblage, as well as large lithicand faunal assemblages. The ceramic assemblage can be characterized as thin,well made, grit-tempered, heavily micaceous, plain and

sherds from possibly three wide-mouth jars. Similar material has not been fingernail-impressed reported in the region. The absence of any systematic classificatory scheme for ceramics in the area poses significant difficulties in trying to classify the Carter site ceramics within the two existing pottery traditions attributed to ethnic or tribal groups whose historic homelands are within the central Wyoming region. Instead, data suggest affinities with a third ceramic tradition, the Uncompahgre Brown Ware defined in the southern Rocky Mountains
teau.

and northern Colorado

Pla

Keywords:

central Wyoming; Late Prehistoric period;

ceramics;

classification.

A comparatively large, well-preserved ceramic assemblage was recovered during exca vations at the Carter site (48NA1425) in central Wyoming (Figure 1) (Martin 1999a, 1999b). The Carter site ceramic assemblage is unique not so much because of its large size, but because simi lar material has not been reported from other ceramic-bearing sites in the region. Determining whether theCarter site assemblage could be clas sified intoone of the two currentlydefined pottery groups (i.e., Crow and Shoshone/Intermountain pottery)was impossible due to the absence of sys tematic classificatory schemes using defined sets of attributes for these two traditions (Rice The current scheme used by 1987:286-287).

systematically. The rare instances of attempts to define wares have fallen shortdue to an emphasis on chronometric variables rather than physical

attributes of the pottery (Creasman et al. 1990:1 6). This conundrum is understandable given the rarity of ceramic sites inWyoming (especially from excavated contexts), the small, fragmentary condition of thepottery,and thegenerally unspec tacular character of the ceramics. The Carter site ceramic assemblage is characterized by small, thin, micaceous, fingernail impressed and plain sherds fromwide-mouth jars.
In many respects, the assemblage shares a number

assemblages like theCarter site assemblage, much less describe the variability in assemblages attrib uted to these two pottery traditions. In general, while ceramics for both groups have been de scribed?in extraordinary detail in some cases? theyhave not been defined as eitherwares or types, nor have they been used to define wares or types
William Martin, 1220 Eudora

archaeologists working in the region is based largely on reconstructed homelands for historic groups in the area (i.e., Crow or Shoshone) and suppositions about when these groups entered the region. This approach cannot accommodate novel

of attributes (i.e., vessel form, interiorfinishing, ex teriorsurface treatment, and construction methods) with the Late Prehistoric period Uncompahgre Brown ware defined in the southernRocky Moun tains and northernColorado Plateau. The goals of thispaper are to summarize the 1996 archaeological investigations at theCarter site and to provide an overview and discussion of classification of ce ramic artifacts in the region. It is hoped that this discussion will provide an elementary framework lead to a classificatory system that establishes ceramic wares and types defined on attributes and modes rather than ethnic affiliation. that will

Street, Denver,

Colorado,

80220

Plains Anthropologist,

Vol. 45, No.

173, pp. 305-322,2000

305

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS

ANTHROPOLOGIST

Vol.

45,

No.

173, 2000

>j
/

: WYOMING / v ^^-^^^
MAP /

'' V
^-x J_I

,|
L_\ 4>2

floodplains of Keg Spring Draw. This community includes no brush layer. In stead, ithas a dense layer of forbs and grasses, with no single dominant plant. Excavations at the Carter site en countered a single late Late Prehistoric period component (Figure 2). The age of the component was based on a single radiocarbon age estimate of 580 ? 60 ra diocarbon years before present (RCB YP) (corrected toAD 1280 to 1440 [Beta 101653]) from a wood charcoal sample collected from the interior a rock-filled of the three styles of recovered ar hearth, row points, and theceramic assemblage. The component was identifiedacross the entire 94 m2 excavation block and in the two isolated, exploratory 1 x 1m units, with the highest density of material found in the eastern two-thirds of the
excavation block on the stream terrace.

>

CARTER
v I/ y^-^/

>^&A
H^?\^__^Hj

.>
Powd?r _. River p?,r'? Klntrnno

Figure

1. Carter

site location

in central Wyoming.

On the stream terrace, the component was found in theupper 30 - 35 cm within overbank deposits. On the slope above the stream terrace,

BACKGROUND
The Carter site, located on a variety of landforms east and west of Keg Spring Draw at amean elevation of5995 ft (1827 m), is on theCasper Arch, a slightly elevated structure that connects the Laramide Laramie and Big Horn ranges. The site is on both sides of a narrow valley formed by Keg Spring Draw, which runs through the center of the site in a north-south direc in a rugged, tion. The site occurs area in the Wind River for semi-badland mation. Two range communities are present within or adjacent to the site: a basin shrubland community and a riparian grassland community.The basin shrubland community on the slopes and ridges above Keg Spring Draw contains a dense brush layer and a dense understory of grasses and forbs.Basin big sagebrush is thedomi nant species within the shrub layer, and western wheatgrass is the dominant plant within the understory.The riparian grass land community is limited to the wet

i~T~~n

t~t

^^j^^
PIPELINE EXPRESS CENTERLINE ?<JI' ^ P^-L | ^

.POWER / / ^^^^^^^/^^/
/ >Z ' y ? ^HJ

/ /// /
/ /' \ /

EXCAVATION-W

W/ /Vri^J

t'
=CONIOUR INILRVAL -?Z =- Z a

if (I
1 m / /

A DATUM FENCE /
TWO-TRACK ROAD DRAINAGE ' ISOLATED UNITS .

/ /// m .? / j I /

/ /

Vv

~ " Dm-

_i 1 ll 1_
and exploratory units at the Carter site,

Figure

2. Excavation

block

along Keg

Spring Draw.

306

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

the component was found 20 - 70 cm below the surface in slopewash and aeolian depos
its.

THE LATE PREHISTORIC ASSEM BLAGE

remains include a medium sized, unoxidized, rock-filled hearth (the only feature identifiedduring thearchaeological in vestigations at the site), 20 bifaces, 17 flake tools, 5265 flakes, five cores, 313 heat-altered fragments,535 ceramic sherds, a clay bead or Associated

NA1425-369

NA1425-588/120

pipe fragment,and 2258 bone fragments.Ex cluding faunal remains, the component had a an artifactdensity of 64.1 artifacts/m2, flake of slightly less than 55 flakes/m2,a density flaked stone tool density of 0.4 tools/m2, a flaked stone tool to flake ratio of 1:142, and a feature density of 1 feature/100 m2. The com to represent a single occupa ponent appears tionwith a series of interrelatedactivities that

NA1425-522

NA1425-380

include the processing of bison and prong horn and production and maintenance of tools used during the processing of these animals. The excavated portion of the site may represent a limited activity area within a larger residen tial base. Many lithic artifacts diagnostic of the Late Prehistoric period were recovered NA1425-729 NA1425-375/374 NA1425-265 from the site in addition to the ceramic arti facts (Figure 3). Arrow points and arrow point from the Carter site. Figure 3. Arrow point assemblage fragments include an untyped corner-notched arrow point, a corner fragment of a possible tenance (especially small arrow points) and raw Rose Spring-like point (Lanning 1963), one com material or core reduction for the procurement of and three fragmented Plains Side-notched plete expedient flake tools. points (Kehoe 1966), and two definite and one pos sible Cottonwood point fragments (Lanning 1963). Based on the flaked stone artifactassemblage, Carter sitewere itappears that theoccupants of the Lithic Artifacts The biface assemblage is characterized by were brought onto late-stage quartzite bifaces that the site infinished or nearly finished formandmain tained, with the exception of two preblanks (or rough outs) which suggest more initial reduction of locally available material such as brown opaque chert.Expedient flake toolmanufacture and use are

also reflected in the flaked stone tool assemblage. This pattern includes biface manufacture andmain

involved in several different activities, including the reduction and maintenance of tools brought on-site already partially reduced and procurement and reduction of locally available cobbles. The high flake and flaked stone tool densities, coupled with the high flaked stone tool to flake ratio, suggest intensive flaked stone tool production and mainte nance activities. The flake assemblage indicates several distinctive reduction trajectories, a pattern

indicated by thepresence ofmultidirectional cores knapped from locally available (within2-3 km of the site) chert and quartzite cobbles. manu A variety of rawmaterials were used in facturingand tool-using activities.The flaked stone

307

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS
Table

ANTHROPOLOGIST
of flaked stone artifact

Vol.
from the Carter Quartzite/ Porcellanite site.

45,

No.

173, 2000

1. Summary

assemblage

OtherGray ArtifactType Bifaces Final Preforms Blanks Preblanks Indeterminate Flake Tools ~1 -~ 2 1 3 4 2 1 1 11 ~2 -~ -1 Quartzite Quartzite Chert

Mudstone

Basalt

Ignim brite

Obsidian

Total

........ ~ ~ ........ ~ ~ ~ 5

10 ~ ~ 1

~ 2

~ ~

Retouched Utilized
Composite Debitage Cores

5 ~ ~18 3
~1 ~

- - ~ 5
~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ 1

3 2-

Rakes Total

2,708 2,720

987 996

1,538 1,557

7 9

1 1

20 20

2 2

2 2

5,265 5,307

tool and a core fromwhich expedient flake tools were derived (Kelly 1988:718-719). The initial re duction of the tools occurred at the raw material source (or at least not on the site itself).This was most likely the Madison formationon Sioux orCot tonwood passes approximately 20-25 mi (32-40 km) northwest of the site in northwestNatrona County or northeast Fremont County or stream cobble sources along Badwater Creek or one of its tribu

tool and flake assemblages are dominated by gray quartzite, which accounts for 51.4% of the entire flake assemblage (Table 1). Based on the lack of cortical flakes and the presence of several blanks, gray quartzite appears to have been brought onto the site as blanks, both as a long-life, multipurpose

strategies.

tool ratio for theassemblage (1:142). This suggests that some of the gray quartzite bifaces were re moved from the site as personal gear when the site was abandoned. The othermaterial types,which include various locally available quartzites, cherts, Morrison and FortUnion and porcellanites from the a variety of lithic reduction tra formations, show jectories, ranging from the complete sequence of biface reduction to final biface manufacture, core reduction, or some combination of these reduction

taries (Frison 1978:34-35). The high density of gray and theflake to flaked quartzite flakes (29 flakes/m2) stone tool ratio of gray quartzite artifacts (1:208) is much higher than the overall flake to flaked stone

Several exoticmaterial types (obsidian, ignim brite, and basalt) areminor constituents of the flake assemblage. X-ray fluorescence analysis of two small obsidian flake fragments indicates an Obsid ian Cliff source in the Yellowstone Plateau in northwest Wyoming (Skinner et al. 1998). Ignim brite, a welded volcanic tuff, probably is from the more problem area, but the source of thebasalt is atic. Basalt occurs as secondary cobbles in the Wind River Basin in central northwest Wyoming, as secondary cobbles throughout most of theBig Horn Basin in north-central Wyoming, and from Absaroka Mountains innorth volcanic flows in the westWyoming. Most of theexoticmaterial is small (<2 cm in size) flake fragments, bifacial platform flakes, or pressure flakes, suggesting that these raw material typeswere brought onto the site as finished tools and personal gear (Smith 1999).
Ceramics

and 10 shoulder sherds (1.9% by count) (Figure 4; Tables 2 and 3). No clearly definable basal sherds were noted. The majority of sherds (471) were 1 to

Ceramic artifacts include 535 vessel sherds and one pipe or bead fragment.The 535 sherds include 334 body sherds (62.4% of all sherds by count), 95 indeterminate sherds (17.8% by count), 73 neck sherds (13.6% by count), 23 rims (4.3% by count),

308

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

NA1425-357

NA1425-338

j
NA1425-340

^ NA1425-340 ^^^^^^^ ^

^ |

NA1425-355

NA1425-352

NA1425-441

NA1425-441

NA1425-340

^^^jjj^
Figure 4. Selected ceramic

NA1425-355

^^^^
site.

sherds from the Carter

309

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS ANTHROPOLOGIST
Table 2. Cross-tabulation of exterior surface

Vol.
treatment by vessel Vessel portion,

45,
the Carter Portion Neck Rim Shoulder site.

No. 173, 2000

Exterior Surface Treatment _ Body Indeterminate

Total

Fingernail impressed
Column %

3 85
Row% 63.0 25.4 2.2 3.2

8 33
24.4 45.2 5.9 34.8

6
4.4 60.0

135
100.0 25.2

Eroded
Column %

83 33
Row% 25.8 9.9. 64.8 87.4

9
7.0 12.3

2
1.6 8.7 0.8 10.0

128
100.0 23.9

Plain
Row% Column %

2139
79.5 63.8 3.4 9.5

30
11.2 41.1

13
4.9 56.5 1.1 30.0

268
100.0 50.1

Unknown3 0 Row% 75.0 Column % Total

Column %

01 0.0 25.0 1.4 73

17.8 100.0 13.6 100.0

40 0.0 0.0 23
4.3 100.0

0.0 0.0 10
1.9 100.0

100.0 0.7 535

100.0 100.0

0.0 0.9 334 95

62.4 Row% 100.0

Table

3.

Cross-tabulation

of exterior

surface

treatment

by interior surface Treatment

treatment,

the Carter

site.

Exterior

Interior Surface

SurfaceTreatment Fingernail impressed

Indeterminate 135 0 135 0 0.0 Row%

Plain

Total Smoothed

0.0 0.0 30.3

100.0 100.0 25.2

0.0 % Column Eroded 77 0 51 128 60.2 Row% 93.9 % Column 5 Plain

0.0 0.0 8 3.0 57.3 100.0 11.5 255

100.0 39.8 23.9 268 100.0 95.1 50.1

1.9 Row% 6.1 % Column Unknown 0 0 4 4 0.0 Column 0.0 % 82 Total 15.3 Row% 100.0 % Column Row%

0.0 0.0 0.9 0.7 535

100.0 400.0

8 445 1.5 100.0

100.0 83.2 100.0 100.0

310

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

but 31.0% by weight), and only two sherdswere 4 cm in size (0.4% by count and 3.3% by weight). Four of the five sherds submitted for thin section analysis exhibited coils, as did several other sherds. was noted but not quantified during (This attribute of the entire assemblage.) With theexcep analysis tion of some poorly preserved sherds,most sherds were well-fired with amedium toheavy hardness (4 on the Mohs scale). Only 128 sherds (23.9% of the entireceramic assemblage) were classified as eroded sherds due to their eroded or exfoliated exterior surfaces. A few sherds have carbon residue on theirsurfaces, some with small amounts of residue on both the interiorand exterior. Tempering agents were exclusively a combi nation of sand and crushed rock, referred to as grit. All of the sherds are finelymicaceous. It could not be determined whether the mica was a natural in the raw clay or added during clay inclusion preparation. Crushed rock,which included quartz, and granite, quartzite, rhyolite, schist,welded tuff, represented between 15 and 40% of the sherd volume. Based on the petrographic analysis, rock fragments (as well as freeminerals) are rounded, subrounded, subangular, and broken. They range in size from less than0.3 to 4 mm. Inmost cases, the clay was obtained from a streambed source and was ground prior to vessel construction (Dean 1997; Hill 1998:1-4). Shrinkage cracks and void spaces compose up to 5% of the sherds subjected to petrographic analysis. Exterior surfaces are limited toplain or finger

2 cm in size (88.0% by count and 65.8% byweight). Sixty-two sherds are 3 cm in size (11.6% by count

have been used duringmanufacture. The majority (79.5%) of plain sherds are body sherds, followed by neck sherds (11.2%), rim sherds (4.9%), indeter minate sherds (3.4%), and finally shoulder sherds (1.1%). There was no decoration on any of theex
teriors.

the creation of the fingernail impressions thatdis may placed the clay or to a paddle and anvil that

The fingernail impressions run inparallel rows around the vessel(s) parallel or slightly oblique to thehorizontal axis of the vessel(s) (Figure 5). The individual rows are often sinuous, but none of the rows overlap or touch. Sherds contain as little as
one row or as many as four rows of

deep. All of the fingernail-impressed sherds had the top of the fingernail (or the convex portion) oriented with the top of the vessel. Unlike some fingernail impressed wares from centralColorado, no finger printswere evident on any of the sherds (Benedict 1985:134-137). Fingernail impressions were found on all portions of the vessel(s) (25.5% of all body sherds, 45.2% of neck sherds, 34.8% of rim sherds, 60.0% of shoulder sherds, and 9.5% of all indeterminate sherds). Interiors show a high degree of finishing,with most showing some degree of scraping (leaving faint striations on most of the interiors).Eight of these sherds are so well finished that they appear burnished. Eight sherds do not exhibit any evidence of scraping or finishing on their interiors. Eighty two sherds (or 15.3% of theentireassemblage) have

vessel(s), and rows of impressions are separated from one another from 1 to 8mm, with a typical separation of 4 to 5 mm. Generally, fingernail im pressions are about 0.5 mm wide and about 0.5 mm

depending upon sherd size. Obviously, the larger sherds have many rows, but some of the smaller sherds had two to three rows. The impressions are continuous or nearly continuous around the

impressions,

weight) and four sherds (0.7% by count and 3.6% by weight) forwhich the surface treatmentcould not be determined. The exterior surfaces are often uneven or undulating, giving the initial impression were cord-marked or cord-impressed and that they are rough and unfinished. This uneven or undulat ing surfacemay be due to pressure exerted during

nail-impressed treatments, with plain ceramics represented by 268 sherds (or 50.1% of all sherds by count and 41.5% by weight) and fingernail impressed sherds representedby 135 sherds (25.2% by count and 41.4% byweight). (Fingernail impres sions are considered a surface treatmentand not a decorative element.) The remainder include 128 eroded sherds (23.9% by count and 13.4% by

inderterminate interior surfaces, including eight body sherds, two neck sherds, one rim sherd, and 71 badly eroded sherdswhose vessel portion could not be determined. As with theexteriors, the interi ors lacked decoration. Of the 535 sherds, 288 sherds were complete or large enough tomeasure for thickness. Sherds range in thickness from 2.8 to 6.0 mm, with an average of 4.6 ? 0.5 mm. There is no significant variation in the average thickness between thedif

311

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS

ANTHROPOLOGIST

Vol.

45,

No.

173, 2000

I_I_I

2 cm

^^^^^^^^
Figure 5. Enlargement of selected fingernail-impressed

sherds from the Carter

^^^^^^

site.

ferent body portions represented in theassemblage, with averages ranging from4.6 ? 0.5 mm forbody and shoulder sherds to 5.1 ? 0.4 mm for rim sherds. Neck sherds have an average of 4.8 ? 0.6 mm. Based solely on rim morphology, at least three vessels (Vessels 1-3) are represented.Eleven of the rims were too small and eroded to assign to any one of the threevessels. Ten sherds (two of which are refittable) were assigned as part of Vessel 1. Vessels 2 and 3 are each represented by only one rim sherd, although theVessel 2 rim refitswith a neck and a body sherd.Of those rimswhich could not be assigned to a vessel, 10 have rounded lips

and one has a square lip.None of the unassigned sherdswere large or complete enough toproduce a rimheightmeasurement. None of the23 rim sherds were decorated. All three vessels appear to be medium-sized wide-mouth jars with straighttoout

wardly curved necks, low rounded shoulders, and a general rounded body profile. The profile of the bases remains unknown given the absence of clearly discernible base sherds. The neck sherds aremarkedly constrictedwith a distinctive point of

and all of the identifiable shoulder sherds inflection, are rounded in profile. The body sherds, which compose most of the assemblage, range from flat

312

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William
Table 4. of the Carter

Martin
site faunal _Total_

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

Summary

assemblage.

Animal
Class_

No. Size
532

%
23.6 Large

MNI
mammal

Elements Summaryof Identified

Enamel, femur, flat bone, metacarpal, radius, rib, tooth, unknown bone, epiphysis, humerus,

tibia, carpal, and vertebra

1.4

32 Bison -

dissesamoid, Carpal, and radius Enamel,

pelvis,

phalange,

198

8.5 Medium

femur, humerus,

mammal 69 3.1 Pronghom 2

tibia, carpal, Astragalus, pubis,

long bone, phalange, tooth, and unknown bone ischium, lumbar

femur, humerus, scapula,

vertebra, metacarpal, radius, 50.4 1,138 mammal Cancelous metatarsal, bone,

metatarsal,

pelvis, phalange, tibia, ulna, and ulnar carpal

Medium-large

bone, enamel, long bone, metacarpal, unknown tooth, unknown epiphysis,

and vertebra

35 1
mammal

1.6 Small Canid >0.1 9.7 1.3

1
mammal

and Humerus, longbone, unknownepyphysis,

unknown bone

Small-large Small29

219

Humerus 1 -Enamel and unknownbone medium

Enamel, longbone, unknowncarpal, unknown

bone, and unknown vertebra

mammal

Very smallsmall mammal

0.2

Unknown bone

Rodent-very
small mammal

>0.1

Unknown bone

Total

2,258

100.0

to curved, with the larger sherds generally show ing greater curvature. As with other sherds in the assemblage, the interiorsof the rims show a high degree of finishing. Faunal Assemblage were In all, 2258 nonintrusive bone fragments recovered. The faunal assemblage consists of 2059 bone fragments (including 381 burned frag ments) and 199 tooth enamel and tooth fragments. Of the 2258 bone fragments, only 102 specimens could be assigned to a specific taxon, including the remains of at least one adult bison, two pronghorn, and a possible wolf-dog hybrid.The remaining2156 more general were classified only to the fragments

size classes. The faunal assemblage is dominated mam bymedium to largeanimals (50.4%), with large mals representing 25.0% and medium mammals mammal 11.6%, fora totalof 87.0%. Small to large size class represents 9.7% of the assemblage, with rodents tovery smallmammals, very small to small

mammals, small mammals, and small tomedium mammals accounting for the remaining 3.3% of the The faunal assemblage from the Carter site indicates a narrow subsistence base focused on medium to large mammals, specifically pronghorn and bison. A single mature bison (6 - 7 years in age) and twomature pronghorn are present in the faunal assemblage (Table 4). These animals ap
assemblage.

313

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS ANTHROPOLOGIST

Vol.

45,

No. 173, 2000

peared to have been killed on or close to the site, based on the presence of a large number of ele ments that cost (i.e., cra have a high transportation

Each

nia, vertabrae, and ribs). The bison and pronghorn were processed differently.The bison appears to have been only dressed out and the long bones broken open to extractmarrow, with few (if any) of the bones used in bone grease manufacture. This interpretation is based on the poor condition of bison and largemammal bones, the overall large size of thebison and largemammal bone, the iden

contained overlapping concentrations of flakes, ceramics, bone, and heat-altered rock (Fig ure 6). The remains representa limited activity area associated with the initialprocessing of theanimal carcasses, bone marrow extraction of bison and pronghorn, bone grease manufacture of pronghorn, and production and maintenance of tools used in theprocessing of animals. A1.3- to2.6-m wide area of lower artifactdensities occurred between Con centrations 1 and 2. This area included five blanks or blank fragments,a final biface, a preblank, and a composite flake tool. Concentration 1was located in the center of

lated, artifact concentrations in the center (Con centration 1) and eastern half (Concentration 2).

reduced to even smaller fragments forbone grease manufacture. Bone grease manufacture is sug gested by the small size of pronghorn and medium mammal bone, the low frequency of unidentifi

39 fragments that exhibit heat mottling. Prong horn and medium mammal bones show a much higher level of processing, with the bones first marrow and then some cracked open to extract the

tifiable long bone fragments, thepresence of intact articular ends, and the low number of bones exhib iting spiral fractures. The bison appears to have been cooked at the site, based on the presence of

the block and extended to its northern edge. It included two dense bone concentrations, a flake
concentration, a ceramic concentration, and a

able articular ends (which contain the highest concentrations of bone grease and therefore the choicest portion of thebone forbone grease manu facture), and the comparatively high frequency of may spiral fractures, although the spiral fractures be a factor of differential preservation. Also, most of thepronghorn andmedium mammal bones were

ments (including two refutable fragments), 852 flakes, 51 heat-altered rock fragments, 77 sherds, mammal Bison and large and 1071 bone fragments. bone composed most of the two dense bone con
mammal bone also present. The bone scatter

heat-altered rock concentration. Artifacts associ include three ated with this concentration retouched flake tools, two utilized flake tools, two preblanks, three arrow points or arrow point frag

with lesser amounts ofmedium to large centrations, around the two dense bone concentrations includes small to largemammal, medium to largemammal, largemammal, and bison, as well as several prong

found close to the hearth. The lack of pronghorn proximal femurs suggests that the femurwas not disarticulated from the pelvis. Instead, the femur shaftwas broken below the proximal femur and As meat removed from thedetached shaft. with the the bison, some of the processed pronghorn bone appeared to have been cooked over an open fire. Smaller mammals such as canids are notwell rep resented in theassemblage, suggesting thatsmaller animals were not an important food source, at

horn

Concentration 2, on the eastern edge of the block around the hearth (Feature 1), contained a flake concentration, a dense ceramic concentration within a ceramic scatter, a heat-altered rock con centration, and a bone concentration. Artifacts associated with thiscomponent included fourarrow points or arrow point fragments (including a Cot tonwood point found as two refutable fragments), one complete final biface, a scraper (found as two refutable pieces), a blank fragment, four utilized flake tools, one retouched flake tool, 3755 flakes 69 (71.3% of the entire flake assemblage), heat-altered rock fragments,416 sherds, and 907 bone fragments.The bone concentration includes

fragments.

least during theperiod or season of occupation of and of plant processing the site. Evidence is limited toa single burnedChenopo consumption dium seed from Feature 1,which may have been introduced into the feature as part of the natural
seed rain.

SPATIAL ANALYSIS
The block contained two distinct, but interre

a small amount of bison and largemammal bone in the northeast corner of the block, some prong horn and medium mammal bone throughout the

314

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

COMPOSITE 117N~

DISTRIBUTION MAP I
|_I

A A

A
A A

ARROWPOINT

BLANK
PREFORM

? ? ^REFIT

COMPOSITE TOOL

SCRAPER

FINAL BIFACE INDETERMINATE Q

RETOUCHED FLAKE

UTILIZED FLAKE FEATURE

PREBLANK

bx^>l E>>>>1 \$$$$ iiiiii

CONCENTRATION 1

FLAKE CONCENTRATION (>100 FLAKES/m2) inn11ii11111m DENSE FLAKE CONCENTRATION (>400 FLAKES/m2)

HEAT-ALTEREDROCK CONCENTRATION (>300 GRAMS/m2) CERAMICCONCENTRATION (21-40 SHERDS/m2) DENSE CERAMICCONCENTRATION (>40 SHERDS/m2)

j^^j

BONE CONCENTRATION PIECES/m2) (21-50

GN I

100N-I

'

'

100E? ? )

7 m ? 113E

Figure

6. Composite

distribution of artifacts and bone

from the Carter

site.

315

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS ANTHROPOLOGIST

Vol.

45,

No. 173, 2000

centration, a moderate number ofmedium to large mammal bones (particularly along thevery south ern edge of theblock), some small to large mammals, and a few small mammal bones in several isolated
areas.

The two concentrations represent a set of in terrelated activities associated with medium and large mammal processing: marrow extraction of mammal, pronghorn,andmedium mam bison, large mal bone; bone grease manufacture of some

area where the bison was processed, and Concen tration2 was the area where portions of thebison, medium mammals and pronghorn, and smallmam

gray quartzite blank fragments in both concentra tions suggest that the two work areas were contemporaneous and processing of the animals was communal. Concentration 1 appears to be an

manu pronghorn and perhaps some bison; and the facture and maintenance of tools used in the processing of the three animals. The concentra tions probably represent theactivities of twowork groups conducting similar tasks. The presence of portions of the same vessel and the presence of

tion processing locale or deposited in a midden area of a larger,more permanent settlement. In the case of the Carter site, the bone appears to have been dumped (either in a pile or broadcast) from the vessel and then scattered during subse human activity at the site or by post-depositional agents. In her ethnographic sur quent

skimmed off and further processed. When the grease from one set of bones has been extracted, another set of bones can then be processed in the container. The bones would have been scattered if the site was a short-term camp or special func

container with water and boiled. The fatwill rise to the top of the container, atwhich point itcan be

ofmodern butteror lard, and used to tanhides. An importantby-product of bone grease manufacture would have been the soup or broth left in the con tainers inwhich the bone was boiled.

vey of bone grease manufacture, Vehik (1977:169 171) notes thatbone grease was mixed with meat and chokecherries tomake pemmican, mixed and pounded into dried meats, used as the equivalent

mals were processed. In addition to the initial removal of themeat from the carcasses, marrow extraction of both bison and pronghorn bone was

DISCUSSION
Few sites in Wyoming contain ceramic arti and few assemblages have been recovered facts, from intensive, systematic,dated contexts. The few
well-documented

also conducted in these two areas, based on the typesof breaks on thebone. Intensive biface main tenance and flake tool production appears to have occurred in the center of Concentration 1 and on the eastern edge of Concentration 2, with heavy production ormaintenance of gray quartzite bifaces
in this area. The co-occurrence of small, unburned, frag

mented bone (especially medium mammal and pronghorn bone), in conjunction with the low fre quency of articulated ends, ribs, and vertebrae, heat-altered rock, ceramics, thehearth, and flakes, suggests thatnot onlymarrow extraction but bone grease manufacture was being conducted at least in Concentration inConcentration 2, and probably to some degree 1 (Vehik 1977:175). An addi

1991:116-122; Frison et al. 1996:30) or Shoshone (Intermountain)pottery (Mulloy 1958:215-216). To confuse matters, some sites (such as the Piney Creek site) contain "Crow" and "Shoshone" mate

small, poorly preserved assemblages, usually con taining only several hundred small, highly eroded sherds.Although Plains Woodland, Dismal River, Fremont, Extended Coalescent, and theoccasional corrugated or black-on-white polychrome (Anasazi) most assem ceramics have reportedfrom the state, are generally classified as Crow (Frison 1976, blages

assemblages

are characterized

as

tional supporting point is thatKeg Spring Draw, immediately to the east of both concentrations, would have provided a source of water, a critical

rial from the same context. In the southern flanks of theBig Horn and Bridger Mountains, distribution of both Crow and IntermountainTradition pottery overlaps. In fact, it is often difficult to separate Crow potteryfrom Intermountain potterywithout rims.When compared to the rest of the state, a large number of ceramic-bearing sites have been Wind River reported in the northeast corner of the Basin and on theCasper Arch north of theNorth Carter site, Platte River in thevicinity of the mostly

element in production of bone grease extraction. Bone grease is the fat contained in the bone. The extraction of bone grease requires the reduction of bone into small pieces that can be placed in a

316

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

from surface contexts documented during compliance-related inventories or subsequent test

ing.

Shoshone to material Wyoming border,and the term west of theborder, usually referredtoas some vari antor locale ware (e.g.,Owens Valley BrownWare). IntermountainTradition pottery has been dated as early as 627 ? 46 RCYBP at theFirehole Basin site (an average of two estimates) to210 ? 50 RCYBP at theNidiwh site (Chomko 1992:6). In southwest Wyoming, Creasman et al. (1990:5-7) have proposed twowares (Boar's Tusk and Skull Point GrayWare)

vada, and Utah. The term Intermountain ware is Utah generally applied topottery found east of the

Intermountain Tradition pottery isknown from a wide geographical area and has been reported from sites in Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Ne

attheEden-Farson site (Frison 1971), bringing into question the utility and validity of the temporal division of these twowares. First described byMulloy (1958), Intermoun tainvessels are "flower pot" vessels with a circular, flat (often flanged) bottom with itsmaximum diameter below the vessel orifice, although some globular vessels with and without shoulders are known. Because of the intense smoothing, temper particles cannot be seen on the surface. Construc tion is bymolding bands of clay by hand or paddle

and anvil to form thevessel walls (Frison 1991:116). Although variable, vessel walls tend to be thick, with striationspresent on both the interiorand ex teriorwalls creating an uneven or undulating or wave-like surface.Rims may be regularor unevenly finished, inwhich case the rim "rises" and "falls" (i.e., undulates) around the vessel's mouth. Rims range from incurving to outcurving, and they may have rounded or flattened thickened lips (Benedict 1985:141-142). The second pottery type characteristic of late Late Prehistoric sites in Wyoming is termedCrow pottery (Frison 1976, 1979). This pottery type appears to be contemporaneous with the Inter mountain Tradition pottery and is, in fact, found with Intermountain pottery in the same contexts at several differentsites (e.g. Piney Creek site [Frison 1976]). Although there is considerable variation in thisware, itcan be characterized as a globular- to conical-shaped vessel that has an S-shaped rim with a flat lip, straightrim, or some other rim con Neck profiles rangefrom pronounced to figuration. and the shoulder profiles range from absent, accentuated to rounded. The body of the vessel is globular with a rounded base. Decorations, which are highly variable, include lips that are incised, punctated, cord-wrapped rod impressed, or plain; necks thatare incised, impressedwith horizontal or

within this tradition,both defined primarily on dis tincttemporal boundaries. They define Boar's Tusk GrayWare as a globular, truncatedcore and typical "flower pot" vessel with a flat, flanged base and

Fingernail impressions have been reported on a minority of sherds (including smoothed-over sherds). Smoothed-over check-stamped material, found in association with Crow pottery,has been reportedfrom at least one vessel. Other than these, no decorative treatments have been reported. At least one vessel from the Firehole Basin site has fingernail impressions,which have been smoothed over (or obliterated) over the entire vessel surface. Most of the fingernail-impressed sherds appear to have only two to four rows of fingernail impres sions around them.Overall, theFirehole Basin site material is thick across the entire vessel: neck (7 mm), shoulder (8-9.5mm), and body (6-10mm). Skull Point Gray Ware is characterized as a

paddle and anvil marks. They propose dates for thisware, which is often associated with tri-and unnotched arrow points, of 250 to 650 years B.P.

roughly globular, shouldered vessel that exhibits exterior burnishing and an absence of paddle and anvilmarks. Like the Boar's TuskWare, Skull Point Ware sherds have few, ifany,decorations, although fingernail impressions are reportedon aminority of

body (5-8mm), and base (15 mm). Creasman et al. (1990:6-7) date thisware to after 250 years B.P.
However, these wares co-occur in the same feature

sherds. Like theBoar's Tusk Ware, this material is thick:rim (7-10mm), neck (9mm), shoulder (9mm),

also occasionally sand. Sherd thickness is highly variable, even on the same vessel. Like the Inter mountain pottery, Crow pottery is often associated with side- and tri-notched points. Dates associ ated with thismaterial range from 230 to 530

diagonal elements, brushed, or plain; shoulders that have punctates or that are plain; and body sherds thatexhibit grooved paddle impressions (which are often smoothed-over), check-stamped, or plain. Temper is generally crushed granite or quartz, but

317

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS ANTHROPOLOGIST

Vol.

45,

No. 173, 2000

RCYBP. Sites with Crow potteryhave been reported in the High Plains, mountains, andMissouri Coteau of north-centraland northeast Wyoming and south
east Montana.

historic Ute homeland. In the southern Rocky Mountains and northern Colorado Plateau, ceram ics attributed to the prehistoric and historic Ute

No known historically identifiedsitewith Crow pottery has been investigated. The ethnic affilia tion of Crow pottery is based largely on the fact that theCrow are theonly known group in thearea during the interval between A.D. 1420 and 1720 and that theyoriginate fromMiddle Missouri River ceramic-making groups (Frison 1976; Johnson 1979:19-20). Mulloy, attempting to apply thedirect historic approach, first introduced the concept during investigations at theHagen site in south eastMontana

have been called Uncompahgre BrownWare. Unlike Crow pottery,a number of known historicUte sites have Uncompahgre BrownWare inassociation with European trade goods and other historic artifacts. This ware is characterized by wide-mouth jars with slightly flaring rims, slightly constricting necks, wide low shoulders, and conical bases, although rounded bases are noted on the few reconstructable vessels (Reed 1994:192-194). Vessels, which are generally 20 to 30 cm tall,appear tohave beenmanu factured by coiling and scraping, but there are a few reported cases of coiling and final shaping by paddle and anvil. Tempering agents are variable

mid-1700s and the similarities between the by the Middle Hagen ceramicmaterial andmaterial from the Missouri trench, Mulloy classified theHagen site ceramics "Mandan Ware," possibly associated with the Hidatsa-Mandan-Crow group (Mulloy 1942:36-38). Frison (1976) assigned ceramic materials thathe recovered from sites in northern Wyoming to theCrow based primarily on the fact that theCrow were the only known group in the area afterA.D. 1420, and because of similarities material andmaterial found between the Hagen site on sites in thenorthern Wyoming and the surround area. Materials classified as Crow comprise a ing

to or from the Middle Missouri villages where the which lived.Based onHidatsa oral tradition Hidatsa from the stated that theCrow broke off Mandan Hidatsa villages andmoved into thenorthernplains

(Johnson 1979:19). The Hagen site produced large quantities of pottery in an area that was lacked sedentary horticulture.Consequently, it as a site unit intrusionon a direct route interpreted

(sand, quartzite, crushed granite, and schist, among others) and are usually micaceous, ranging from micaceous. Buckles (1971:505-545) absent tohighly has defined two varieties ofUncompahgre Brown Ware based on different surface treatments: plain and fingertip-impressed. The plain variety is sim ply smooth, and the finger-tip impressed variety (which is less common than the plain variety) is characterized by aligned rows of fingertip or fin gernail impressions covering the entire vessel surface, including some thathave been smoothed over orwiped away (Reed 1994:193,1995:123). The interiors show a high degree of finishing. More recently, additional surface treatmentshave been identified,including stickor tool impressionswhich resemble the same pattern as the fingernail impressed variety and possibly a corrugated variety

fine-tempered, Wyoming usually classify thin, ing in decorated ceramics as Crow without considering from the Middle other ceramic wares and traditions or Canadian plains for compara Missouri trench tive examples. For instance, Johnson (1979:23-24) notes that ceramics from the Dead Horse and Sundance sites,which Frison (1976:30-34) classi fies as Crow, are in fact Extended Coalescent traditionvessels, based onmorphological, techno logical, and decorative similarities. Although currently unreported,Ute ceramics L may occur in the area, given the proximity of the

wide range of ceramic types, wares, and traditions. Johnson (1979:18) notes thatarchaeologists work

Mexico

the following regarding Brown Ware. First, itprobably rep Uncompahgre resents a local variation of the Southern Paiute Utility Ware. Second, it shares some similarities (1995:124)

eastern Great Basin and from theColorado-New border north to the Colorado-Wyoming border. Uncompahgre Brown Ware ceramics date fromA.D. 1000-1100 to the late nineteenth century Reed 1995:120-121). (Reed 1994:188-189, notes

(Benedict 1985:137; Reed 1995:122). Ute ceramics have been reported from a num ber of sites in the Colorado Front Range to the

with Intermountainpottery from Wyoming. Third, it is somewhat similar to Athapaskan pottery types such as Dinetah Gray and Sangre de Cristo Mica ceous, although itcan be separated from these two

318

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

wares by careful analysis. Reed (1994:194-196) con most reliable sidersUncompahgre Brown Ware the Numic occupation in the area. indicator of the

prehistoric and historic Ute in the southernRocky Mountains and northernColorado Plateau (Reed 1994:192-194). The Carter site assemblage is clearly not Crow, based on marked differences in overall

fingernail impressed, heavily micaceous, thin,and manufactured by coiling and scraping. The assem blage may have technological and stylisticaffinities with Uncompahgre Brown Ware associated with

Based on technology and surface treatment, theCarter site ceramics represent a ware thathas not been reported or defined in the region. The vessels arewide-mouth jars with a rounded toconi cal body profile. They are grit-tempered,plain and

Most of thefingernail impressions onmaterial clas sified as Intermountainpotteryare limited to two to four rows along the midsection or shoulder of the

pottery,with little, ifany, decoration present. The Carter site assemblage contains only fingernail impressed and plain sherds with no decoration.

Crow pottery. Important differences between the Carter site assemblage and Intermountain pottery include overall body shape, rim form,and construc tion technique. The Carter site vessels are clearly wide-mouth jar formswith a rounded body profile, as opposed to the "flower pot" body profile of In termountain Ware vessels. Although outward curving rim forms have been reported on some In termountain vessels, most of the vessels have vertical tooutwardly slanting rimprofiles. straight,

although both of these attributesmay reflect the raw clay used in vessel manufacture. The Carter site assemblage is also not an In termountain pottery, although it shares more with the Intermountainpottery than attributes with

rim shape, body shape, surface treatment, and deco rations. It lacks thedistinctive S-shaped rimprofile, the sharp shoulder angle, stamped surfaces, and incised decorations. Similarities include crushed rock as a temperingagent and thepresence ofmica,

sherds have been reported for Intermountain pot most do not contain mica, in contrast to the tery, Carter site assemblage which is heavily micaceous. Other similarities include a rising and falling rim and uneven, wave-like, or undulating exterior sur
faces.

vessel, whereas the Carter site vessel appears to have had fingernail impressions applied over its entire surface. The fabric for both the Intermoun tain pottery and Carter site ceramics is composed makes up predominantly of grit (crushed rock) that 40-60% of the paste. Although a few micaceous

Also, Intermountain pottery is generally much thickerthan the Carter site material, and the interior of the Intermountain pottery does not show nearly as much finishing as theCarter site assemblage. The Carter site assemblage and Intermountain pottery do share a number of attributes, including surface treatmentand fabric. Plain or fingernail
impressed surfaces characterize Intermountain

Another importantdifference is that theCarter site assemblage was manufactured by coiling and then finished by scraping, whereas Intermountain ves sels appear to be constructed bymolding and then finished by paddle and anvil or scraping techniques.

with outwardly curving rims and a rounded body profile. Uncompahgre Brown Ware pottery has pointed bases, with a few rounded-base vessels reported, but there is no evidence of a base con Carter sitematerial. Both include figuration for the fingernail (including fingernail and fingertip treat ments) and plain surface treatments,and both lack any decorative elements. The fingernailimpressions are found over the entire vessel surface in both sets of pottery. The paste is composed of matrix thatcomprises 40-60% of the grit-tempered sherd volume and includes crushed quartzite, quartz,micaceous schist, crushed granite, gneissic granite grus, and igneous rock (Reed 1995:123). Uncompahgre Brown Ware is usually micaceous, whereas theCarter sitematerial is heavily mica ceous. Coiling and scraping are the primary

southernRocky Mountains and northern Colorado Plateau. Both theCarter site assemblage and the Uncompahgre BrownWare arewide-mouth jar forms

The Carter site assemblage shares many at tributes with Uncompahgre Brown Ware from the

highly finished interior surfaces and rough, plain

exterior surfaces. In fact, there are no substantial

although coiling and paddle and anvil construc tion is reportedfora fewUncompahgre BrownWare vessels. Both sets of pottery are thin and have

construction techniques for theCarter site assem blage and theUncompahgre Brown Ware pottery,

differencesbetween the Uncompahgre BrownWare andmaterial recovered from theCarter site.

319

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS ANTHROPOLOGIST

Vol.

45,

No. 173, 2000

As the above discussion demonstrates, the Carter site contains a unique set of ceramics not found elsewhere in the region. The assemblage sharesmany attributeswith Uncompahgre Brown Ware from the southern Rocky Mountains and northernColorado Plateau, includingmethods of
construction, vessel

body and rimprofiles, fabric,and surface.This ware is also associated with tri-, side-, and unnotched arrow points. It may be associated with the "Shos hone knife," although this has yet to be demon
strated.

and unnotched arrow points fabric.Also, side-, tri-, are associated with both groups of material. However, to avoid the pitfalls of attributingethnic will not affiliation to theCarter site assemblage, it be classified as Uncompahgre Brown Ware since a

shape,

surface

treatment,

and

Trying to accommodate ceramic assemblages intoan existing classificatory scheme is difficult in Wyoming due to several factors.First, ceramic ma terial is rare, and when present, the assemblages are usually small and highly eroded, and thevessels generally lack rims. Second, most archaeologists working in the state defer to Frison's broad clas

direct relationship with Ute (or Paiute) cannot be on the recovery of Based demonstrated. Brown Ware with European trade Uncompahgre goods at several siteswithin thehistoricUte home land, a direct association with theUte is probable for the Uncompahgre Brown Ware. Uncompahgre Brown Ware also shows affinitieswith the South ern Paiute Utility Ware and certain Pueblo
ware types.

sificatory scheme without critically evaluating its utility or appropriateness. As mentioned above, material from Johnson (1979:20-21) has shown that several sites classified as Crow is in factExtended Middle Missouri Trench, Coalescent wares from the based on similar decorative elements, surface treat ments, and vessel shape. She points out that archaeologists who are trying to classify assem blages in a systematic fashion need to look toother areas before they fall back on the old, general pot

micaceous

A provisional ware, Waltman Brown Ware, is micaceous pottery thathas grit proposed for thin, finished interiors, fingernail im temper, highly pressed or plain, wide-mouth jars found in central Waltman Brown Ware is a Wyoming. The term geographical term thatavoids the dangers of giv ing theware an ethnic name (Bettinger 1986:98). As defined here, two types appear to be present within thisware: plain and fingernail impressed. The plain variety has a rough exteriorwithout deco rations, and the fingernail-impressed variety has fine fingernail impressions in rows parallel or slightly oblique to the horizontal orientation of the vessel. It also lacks decorations. Rims are straight to slightly outcurved, and lips are square to rounded. Vessels are constructed primarily by coiling and scraping, but some portions of theves

tery types. This clearly is the case for theCarter materi site assemblage. Ifan attempt tofind similar als in the region had not been made, then the Carter sitewith the Uncompahgre relationshipof the Brown Ware would not have been established and thematerial may have simply been classified as

A Intermountain pottery. systematic classificatory based on defined attributes needs to be system established to organize thevarious assemblages in termsof theirspatial and temporaldistributions and

to document the variability within and between assemblages, which is considerable, based on the review of the existing literature. As Johnson (1979:21) noted, archaeologists should, following the classificatory system used in theMissouri Trench, first define wares and then types within thosewares. As it stands now, archaeologists have littlechoice but to classify recovered assemblages into two basic pottery technologies and typologies, with substantial ramifications about theethnic iden tityand age of theceramics.

sels, especially the rims, may be made bymolding. Grit can include a variety of rocks and minerals, including granite, quartz, quartzite, and feldspar, were present in the Carter among others.Both types

site assemblage, although some of the small plain sherds may represent portions of the vessel be tween therows of fingernail impressions.The plain Wise site, located in the wide-mouth jar from the Shoshone Basin approximately 50 miles west of the

CONCLUSIONS
A single late Late Prehistoric period compo nent, containing a high density of flaked stone bone, heat-altered rock, and ceramics, was artifacts, partially investigated through an irregular-shaped

Carter Site, (Wheeler 1997:129-130) may represent a plain type of the proposed ware based on its

320

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

William

Martin

The Carter

Site inNorthwestern

Plains

Prehistory

and two pronghorn and toolmanufacture andmain tenance. The site contained a diverse sample of diagnostic artifacts including Plains side-notched, Cottonwood, and possible Rose Spring-like points, and a large,well-preserved assemblage of thin, grit

94 m2 excavation block placed directlywest ofKeg SpringDraw. The remainswere found in two inter related concentrations thatappear to represent the debris primarily associated with bone marrow ex traction and bone grease making from one bison

tobe a pointless construct.Because more andmore compliance-related investigations are being conducted in areas of Wyoming containing higher densities of ceramic sites (e.g., thePowder River Basin in easternWyoming and the Casper Arch and Beaver Creek Rim of centralWyoming), an unbiased ceramic classificatory scheme will be we are to build useful, detailed, and com needed if

tempered,heavily micaceous, fingernail-impressed wide-moth jars. The and plain ceramics from three material ceramic assemblage is novel in thatsimilar has not been reported from the region. Based on

prehensive chronologies and culture histories for the region.The ware/type systemprovides ameans to this end.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Express Pipeline provided the funding for thework reported in this article as part of theircultural resource compliance program. Iwould especially like to thankTerry Larson and Bill Huhtala of Express Pipeline for theirenthusiasm and help during the course of the project. A special thanks is extended to Mike Bies, BLM archaeologist, for his enthusiasm and adept oversight of the

comparisons with other ceramic styles from the southern Rocky Mountains, the Carter site shares a number of stylistic and tech assemblage withUncompahgre BrownWare nological affinities associated with prehistoric and historicUte. While shares several attributes with the assemblage Intermountain pottery generally believed to be associated with the Shoshone, the Carter site assemblage isdifferentin termsof vessel form,sur

Express Pipeline project. Greg Fox, JimLowe, Tom Reust, Lance McNees, and Craig Smith read and commented on earlier drafts of the paper. Steve Chomko, David Hill, Ann Johnson, and Jim Benedict shared their knowledge of prehistoric ceramics in the many region. I acknowledge the hard work and dedication of the fine people at TRC Mariah Associates whose assistance inevery phase of the project made this article possible. Iwould also like to thank Linea Sundstrom for her editorial assistance and

ation, the assemblage has been classified as Waltman Brown Ware, with two types represented: plain and fingernail impressed. (One ormore of the vessels described by Wheeler [1997] from the Boysen Reservoir project in theearly andmid-1950s may represent plain types of thisware.) In short, the Carter site remains an anomaly in Northwestern Plains prehistory,with no similar constellation of diagnostic artifacts reported from any site in the While it may be audacious todefine a ceramic ware on the basis of three vessels, my intent is to point out the need for a different orientation in
region.

face treatment, and construction method. Other than thegeneral vessel shape, thisassemblage does not sharemany attributeswith Crow pottery.To avoid confusing itwith theUncompahgre Brown Ware and the pitfall of inferringa specific ethnic affili

As always, I take full responsibility for all shortcomings. This article is a heavily revised version ofMartin 1999b.

enduring patience, and Mark Miller and Steve Cassells for their insightfuland considerate comments in theirreview of thisarticle.

REFERENCES

CITED
and Archaeol Front Range. Research

Benedict, J.B. 1985 Arapaho Pass: Glacial Geology ogy at the Crest of the Colorado Center Report for Mountain 3. Ward,

Archeology Colorado.

Bettinger, R. L. Intersite Comparison 1986 of Great Basin Brown In Pottery of the Great Basin Ware Assemblages.

and Adjacent Areas, edited by S. Griset, pp. 97 105. University of Utah Anthropological Papers 111. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

ceramic classification in theNorthwestern Plains. As the concepts of Crow and Intermountain pot tery are refined and as other wares are defined, my hope is thatvarious ceramic assemblages can be examined

Buckles, W.G. 1971 The Uncompahgre Complex: Historic Ute Archae ology and Prehistoric of the Archaeology Plateau, West Central Colorado. Uncompahgre Unpublished Chomko, 1992 S. A. A Review inWyoming. Paper of Clay Ceramics at the 50th Plains Anthropological presented Conference, Lincoln, Nebraska. S. D., K. W. Thompson, and B. Sennett Prehistoric Pottery of Southwest Wyoming: A thropology, University dissertation, Department of Colorado. of An

(or reexamined) for their fitwith newly proposed Waltman Brown Ware. Such analyses may show theCarter site assemblage to be unique in the region andWaltman Brown Ware

Creasman, 1990

321

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PLAINS ANTHROPOLOGIST
Assessment. Preliminary 48th Plains Anthropological homa City. Dean, P. A. 1999 Letter report toWill Martin

Vol.
at Paper presented Conference, Okla 1999b dated February 13.

45,
Pipeline Wyoming. The Carter Site In Archaeological by TRC Mariah

No. 173, 2000

Associates, Laramie,

Frison, G. C. 1971 Shoshonean

Antelope Procurement in the Upper Plains Anthro Green River Basin, Wyoming. 16:258-284. pologist Crow Pottery in Northern 21:29-44. of theWind Association, Guidebook, River Basin. Wyo Thirtieth Annual pp. 25-37. of theHigh Plains: The in Montana Wyoming. Plains

press Pipeline W. Martin and C.S. Report Mariah submitted Associates,

Plains Prehistory. Investigations Along the Ex in Wyoming, Volume 5, edited by Smith, to Express Laramie, pp. 3-60 Pipeline Wyoming. to 3-77. by TRC

in Northwest

1976

Anthropologist 1978 The Archaeology ming Geological Field Conference 1979 The Crow 20(3):3-62. 1991 Prehistoric Academic

Mulloy, W. T. 1942 The Hagen Site: A Prehistoric Village on the Lower Yellowstone. University of Montana Pub lications 1958 in the Social Sciences 1. the for of Wyoming Historical Plains. 22. Outline

Preliminary Northwestern Publications

University

Indian Occupation Evidence.

Archeological

Archaeology

Reed, A. D. 1994 The Numic and Eastern Human

of the High Press, New York.

Hunters

Plains,

2nd Ed.

of Western Colorado Occupation Utah During the Late Prehistoric Periods. In Across the West:

and Protohistoric D. In 1995

Frison, G. C, D. Schawb, L. A. Hannus., Walter, and R. C. Mainfort 1996 Archaeology

P. Winham, Plains.

of the Northwestern

Re and Bio archaeological Archaeological sources of theNorthern Plains, edited by George C. Frison and Robert C. Mainfort, pp. 8-40. Arkansas Survey Research Archaeological ries 47. Fayetteville, Arkansas. Se

and the Expan Population Movement sion of theNuma, edited by D.B. Madsen and D. Rhode, pp. 188-1999. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Colorado: Ceramic In Archaeological Pottery of Clues to the Prehistoric and

Ute Ceramics. Protohistoric

Hill, D. V. 1998 Analysis of Ceramics from Petrographic 48NA1425. Report submitted toTRC Mariah Asso ciates, Laramie, Wyoming, Johnson, A. M. The 1979 Kehoe, T.F. The 1966 841. Kelly, R. L. The Three 1988 of a Biface. Problem of Crow 17-29. by David V. Hill.

Lives of the State's Native Peoples, edited by R.H. Brunswig, B. Bradley, and S.M. Council of Chandler, pp. 120-128. Colorado Professional Archaeologists Occasional Paper 2. Rice, P.M. Sourcebook. 1987 Pottery Analysis:A Press, Chicago. Chicago University of

Pottery. Archaeology

in

Montana Small

20(3):

Side-Notched Plains. American

Point

System

in the 31:877

Skinner, C. E., J. J. Thatcher, and M. K. Davis 1998 and Obsidian Analysis X-Ray Fluorescence Rim Measurements of Artifact Ob Hydration Carter sidian from the Hatten (48H0656), Hot Springs Wyoming. Northwest Sites, and Natrona

Northern

Antiquity

(48NA1425),and FlyingA Ranch (48NAI43I)

Research Counties, Studies Obsidian

Sides

American

Antiq

uity 53:717-734. Lanning, 1963 E.W. Archaeology Archaeology Madsen, 1994 of the Rose University of California and Ethnology Spring Site, Iny-372. inAmerican Publications 49(3): 237-336.

Laboratory Report 98-31. Northwest Research Obsidian Studies Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon. Use inWyoming and the Concept 44:271-291. of

Smith, C.S. 1999 Obsidian Curation. Vehik, S. C. Bone 1977

Plains

Anthropologist

D. B., and D. Rhode (Eds.) Across the West: Human Population Movement and the Expansion of the Numa. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Fragments and Bone Grease Manufactur Use and ing: A Review of Their Archaeological 22:169-182. Potential. Plains Anthropologist Investigations in Southern Dakota in Three

Wheeler, 1997

R. P. Archaeological Reservoir Areas ming: and Wyo in Reprints Lin

Martin, W. The 1999a

Carter Site. In Archaeological Investiga in Wyoming, the Express Pipeline tions Along Vol. 4, edited by W. Martin and CS. Smith, pp. to Express submitted 6-1 to 6-78. Report

Part HI, Boysen Reservoir. 49. J&L Reprint Company, Anthropology coln, Nebraska.

322

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.208 on Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:24:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions