The hypothesis that projectile points serve functions other than use as a head for a missile was examined by Morse and Goodyear in regard to Dalton points. The writer reexamined this hypothesis in light of a significant collection of Dalton points from Yell County, Arkansas, and further substantiates the hypothesis formulated by Morse and tested by Goodyear

Brooks, Robert L.

English

UARK (University of Arkansas )

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 27 Article 12 1973 Collection of Dalton Points from Yell County, Arkansas Robert L. Brooks University of Arkansas Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas  Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Brooks, Robert L. (1973) "Collection of Dalton Points from Yell County, Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 27 , Article 12. Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol27/iss1/12 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu. Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol.XXVI1, 197330Collection of Dalton Points from YellCounty, ArkansasROBERT L.BROOKSDepartment ot Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701ABSTRACTThe hypothesis that projectile points serve functions other than use as a head for a missilewas examined by Morse and Goodyear in regard to Dalton points. The writer reexaminedthis hypothesis in light of a significant collection of Dalton points from Yell County,Arkansas, and further substantiates the hypothesis formulated by Morse and tested byGoodyear.INTRODUCTIONThe first knowledge of Dalton came from the collection ofJudge S. D. Dalton in Missouri (Chapman, 1948). JudgeDalton had been collecting the points from a single site forseveral years. Itwas from this location that "Dalton Culture"—the lithic assembledge which accompanies the Dalton points—first was defined. At the site of Judge Dalton it is earlyArchaic with the following attributes: lanceolate serratedDalton points, expanding base drills, oval scrapers, projectilepoints reworked for scrapers, and also corner-notched,side-notched, and stemmed points (Chapman, 1948, p. 138). Itis obvious that some mixing of materials was present, but it isalso important to note that Dalton was already being viewed asa distinct point style and culture (Goodyear, 1971, p. 3.)Chapman (1948) attributes Dalton to an early Archaicmanifestation which has its roots in the "Folsom" points style.The Dalton point recently has been assigned a relativetemporal span of 8000 to 5000 B.C. The early date assignedthe Dalton pointmay also be associated with this point style inother early sites. Graham Cave has Dalton points in levels 5and 6 (Logan, 1952, p. 73). The importance of the GrahamCave finds is in relation to three radiocarbon dates from thelower levels which give Dalton a comparatively early time level.One sample from level 6 yielded a date of 7,750± 500 B.C.(M-130), a second from level 6 gave 6,880 ± 500 B.C. (M-131),and one from level 4 gave 5,850+500 B.C. (Crane, 1956, p.667). There are Dalton points in the lower levels ofother sitesas well: Modoc Rock (Fowler, 1959), Stanfield-Worley(DeJarnette et al., 1962), and Rodgers Shelter (MacMillan,1965).The purpose of this study was to examine a collection ofDalton points from YellCounty, Arkansas. Because the historyofthe Dalton point is no more explicit in Arkansas than in anyother section of the Dalton horizon, a brief summary of theDalton point in Arkansas is presented.The Dalton point has been collected in Arkansas for a longtime withlittlerealization of its cultural-historical significance.Although Dalton points with an accession date of1929 are citedin this paper, there is no evidence that Dalton points wererecognized as a distinct style until the work by Chapman in1948. The first large-scale inquiry into Dalton culture inArkansas was conducted by James Ford and Alden Redfield.Their Dalton Project Survey in 1961-1962 was an attempt tolocate Paleo-Indian sites in the Mississippi alluvium (Redfield,1971).In1962 Raymond Wood opened excavations at BreckenridgeShelter. Wood (1962, p. 90) defines a Dalton culture withpoints he typed as Breckenridge. This was somewhat confusinguntil the workofThomas in1969. Thomas (1969) considers thepoints Wood defined as Breckenridge to be of a generalDalton-Meserve typology. There have been numerous citationsof Dalton points since the Ford-Redfield study in 1961-1962.The Lace Place study by Red field and Moselage (1970) isespecially important for it led indirectly to the hypothesis andtesting by Morse and Goodyear.The Lace Place, a site inPoinsett County, Arkansas, yieldeda fair number of Dalton points. Redfield and Moselagepostulate that Dalton point variation is due mainly to atemporal shift or variation through time. Using the data fromthe Dalton Project, they conducted a factor analysis of 116concave-based lanceolate points, then worked the 116 pointsinto a dendogram. The conclusions reached by Redfield andMoselage (1970) were: (1) the Dalton point has a great deal ofregional variation, and use of a horizon for Dalton may bequestionable; "Itobscures the local relationships that may befound" (p. 39); and (2) the Dalton occupies a temporal spanand variation is a result ofchange through time (p. 28). Itwasin answer to these contentions that Morse and Goodyear'shypothesis was formulated.The writer discusses mainly Goodyear's testing of thehypothesis formulated by Morse, because the Master's thesiswritten in 1971 by Goodyear describes the resharpeninganalysis inmuch greater depth than does the edited publicationby Morse (1971).DALTONRESHARPENING HYPOTHESISGoodyear (1971, p. 37) states,The use ofthe term projectile point or Dalton pointdoes not necessarily mean tools in this class were usedas a head for a missile. Dalton Point is used here inthe conventional descriptive sense to mean a bifaciallyworked artifact with basal haft preparation and adistal end which converges at a sharp angle to formthe tip.From this statement Goodyear built the following hypothesis.For Dalton the type definition is expressed mainly in conditionof the base. According to Goodyear the body (blade) of theDalton is open to variation.The diagnostic attributes described for the Dalton base are:(1) parallel to concave stem edges in initial through advancedstages which are heavily ground; (2) ears on the basal cornerswhich usually flare outward but may hang parallel with thepoint's axis and are always heavily ground; (3) abasal concavitythat is ground in the preform stage but only to facilitate theremoval of thinning flakes, is ground basally and laterally inthe initial stage, and varies in depth but is always concave; and(4) basal thinning with one or more flute-like flakes originatingin the basal concavity and running up the axis of the point(Goodyear, 1971, p. 37-38).The body ofthe Dalton point must not be viewed in terms ofconsistent typing, but rather in a functional context. The30Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 12Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1973Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol.XXVII,197331Robert L. Brooksvariation in Dalton body size and shape is a result ofresharpening. When the body is resharpened the body size andshape are in actuality altered and modified. Morse andGoodyear attribute the various and distinctive styles of Daltonpoints to the number of times the body has been resharpened.The first evidence to support this postulation of resharpeningwas" found in the Hawkins Cache (Morse, 1971), where 18Dalton points of various dimensions were found within a2-sq-ft. area. Itis quite possible that this material is the tool kitofa single individual.The basic style for the Dalton point ofthe Hawkins Cache isa lanceolate, right-hand beveled, serrated point. Of the 18points discovered, 16 fall into three distinct groups. The fivepoints in what is termed group A have convex serrated bodyedges, the five points in group B have straight serrated bodyedges, and the six points in group C have a drill-likeappearance. The two remaining points were used as burinsaccording to Morse (1971, p. 10). The burin-stage point isreworked from an exhausted Dalton. Morse also conductedmeasurement analysis on the Dalton points from the HawkinsCache and was able to make some general statements. First,there is a consistent 4-mm loss through the stages he proposed.As the body was undergoing this 4-mm loss there was noapparent loss in width of the base. Morse also observed anincrease in the blade or body edge angle from group A togroup C. These observations confirm his placing the points intodistinct groups, for they are morphologically distinct. Inconclusion Morse believes this variation tobe the result ofbodyresharpening and not the result of regional or temporalvariation.MATERIALS ANDMETHODSA collection of Dalton points from Yell County, Arkansas,was used in this reexatnination of the Morse and Goodyearresharpening hypothesis. The points were examined by thebasic tests of Morse (1971) and Goodyear (1971) to classify thepoints into five stages: (Da completed preform stage, (2) anunresharpened stage, (3) an initialstage ofresharpening, (4) anadvanced stage of resharpening, and (5) a final stage ofresharpening. In addition, measurements were made of pointlength, stem length, thickness, subjective body width, objectivebody width, objective stem width, width at the ears, basaldepth, and angle of the blade. The measurements of stemlength, point length, and thickness are self explanatory.Subjective body width was measured where the body edgetapers off the shoulder, objective body width was measured atexactly half the length of the point, objective stem width wasmeasured at half the length of the stem, width at the ears wasthe maximum distance between the ears or from ear tip to eartip, and basal depth was measured from the deepest section ofthe concavity. The blade angle was measured by the methodGoodyear cited (p. 52), by bending a wire around the body edgethen measuring the angle ofthe bent wire. The results of thisanalysis are shown in Tables I-III.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe data in Tables I-IIIare meaningful only if used inconjunction with the data from Goodyear's metric analysis.Most data in the tables are in general agreement withGoodyear's. The variance between the sample ranges and thesample means in several cases is tobe expected. When testing acertain phenomenon, in this case resharpening, deviance mustbe expected. What is being tested is not actual identicalcharacteristics, but rather similar general characteristics. InThicknessObjective stem width 41Width at earsSubjective body widthFinal stageAdvance stageInitialstageNovaculiteFlint-chertQuartziteTable I.Dimensional Data forCollection of Dalton Points fromYell County, Arkansas.Mean DimensionPoint Characteristic Number Dimension RangeofPoints (mm) (mm)70-38Point length 494115.5 21-10Stem length 4103.5 8-01Basal concavity 41Preform basal width 01 6209-0541 0730-162141 23.5 33-19.517 1507 16.511 20.517 10.507 12.511 19Objective body widthFinal stageAdvance stageInitialstageTable II.Distribution of Physical Characteristics Among YellCounty Dalton PointsNumberOf PointsCharacteristicBasal grindingPresentAbsentMi03Lateral grindingPresentAbsent 02BevelingPresentAbsent2120Body cross sectionRhomboidBiconvex22IKPlano-convex 01MaterialIK21021Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 12https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol27/is 1/121Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXVI1,197332Table III.Blade Resharpening Characteristics of Yell CountyDalton PointsFormative Number Blade Angle Body Edge WearStage ofPoints (degrees) (mm)Final 17 52 1.5Advanced 07 4b 4Initial 11 38Completedpreform 01 32Goodyear's study 5.5-mm losses in body width from stageinitial to stage advanced and 5.0-mm losses from stageadvanced to the final stage were indicated. The findings fromYellCounty are not quite in line with these. There is a 4.0-mmloss from the initial stage to the advanced stage and a 1.5-mmloss from the advanced stage to the final stage. Although thereductions are not as great as those in Goodyear's analysis, theyretain the general reduction inbody width.Approximately 64% of the initial stage points, 71% of theadvanced stage points, and 29% ofthe final stage points showwear on the body edge. This information is in generalagreement with that mentioned in Goodyear's study. Threefinal stage points show distal-end wear suggesting somefunction similar to use as awls or drills. However, micoscopicexamination of the distal end revealed no evidence of rotarywear.DALTONVARIANTSIn this investigation two distinct catagories—Daltonendscrapers and Dalton burins—were omitted from the tablesbecause they fail to provide information relevant to theresharpening hypothesis. Because both Dalton burins andDalton endscrapers are reworkings on Dalton bases, theiraffinity to resharpening is not particularly relevant withoutpreceding remarks concerning the resharpening hypothesis.However, some general statements can be made in regard tothese Dalton variants. Dalton endscrapers are not limited toany one stage of resharpening, but are not found in the finalstage. There are examples of endscrapers in the preformcomplete stage, the initial stage, and the advanced stage.Apparently the final stage is not morphologically functional asan endscraper. In the case of Dalton burins there is a positivecorrelation with final stage points. The data indicate that onlyfinal stage Daltons have been reworked into burins.Regrettably, no analysis of wear patterns on the burin edge waspossible because of lack of time.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSThe results of Morse and Goodyear's testing of theresharpening hypothesis were compared with test data fromYell County Dalton points. The writer believes that the datafurther substantiate the hypothesis formulated by Morse andtested by Goodyear.1. Although the metric data are not identical to those ofMorse and Goodyear, they demonstrate the samecharacteristics. As in the points of the Hawkins Cache andBrand Site, the basal width remains constant throughout thevarious stages.2. From the numerous cases of consistent body edge wearfrom initial through advanced stages, it is apparent that somematerial was abraded on the body edge. According to Semonov(1964) this type of wear is observed when the artifact is used ina knife-like fashion.3. The Dalton base is found supporting an endscraper in 12cases and a burin in five cases, in addition to the body edgewear. It is suspected that the Dalton people were using theDalton point to process faunal remains, using the point in aknife-like fashion.LITERATURE CITEDCHAPMAN, C. H. 1948. A preliminary survey of Missouriarchaeology. Part IV. Ancient cultures and sequence.Missouri Archaeologist, v. 10, pt. 4.CRANE. H. R. 1956. University of Michigan radiocarbondates I.Science, no. 124, p. 664-672.DeJARNETTE, DAVID,EDWARD KURJACK, and JAMESCAMBRON. 1962. Stanfield-Worley bluff shelterexcavations. J. Alabama Archeology 8(1-2):1-111.FOWLER, M. L. 1959. Summary report of Modoc rockshelter. Illinois State Museum Papers, no. 8.GOODYEAR, A. 1971. The Brand Site: the Dalton tool kitwith an intrasite analysis. Unpubl. Master's thesis, Univ.Arkansas.LOGAN, W. D. 1952. Graham Cave, an archaic site. MemoirMissouri Archeological Society, no. 2, p. 1-86.McMILLIAN,R. BRUCE. 1965. The Rodgers shelter: Apreliminary report. /// Carl H. Chapman (ed), PreliminaryArchaeological Investigations in the Kaysinger BluffReservoir Area. Part II.National Park Service, Omaha,Nebraska.MORSE, D. F. 1971. The Hawkins Cache: a significant Daltonfind in northwest Arkansas. Arkansas Archeologist12(l):9-20.REDFIELD, ALDEN. 1971. The Dalton Project, 1961-1962.Manuscript on file with American Museum of NaturalHistory, Harvard University, University of Missouri, andUniversity of Arkansas Museum, Fayetteville.REDFIELD, ALDEN, and JOHN MOSELAGE. 1970. TheLace Place, a Dalton Project site in the western lowlands ineastern Arkansas. Arkansas Archeologist ll(2):21-44.SEMONOV, S.A. 1964. Prehistoric technology. Cory, Adamsand Mackey Ltd., London.THOMAS,RONALD. 1969. Breckenridge Shelter: a stratifiedshelter in northwest Arkansas. Unpubl. Master's thesis,Univ. Arkansas.WOOD, W. RAYMOND. 1962. The Breckenridge shelterBCR2. In C.R. McGimsey (ed), Arkansas Archeology.Arkansas Archeological Society, Fayetteville, Arkansas.32Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 12Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1973

Collection of Dalton Points from Yell County, Arkansas

ScholarWorks@UARK

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of ScienceVolume 27 Article 121973Collection of Dalton Points from Yell County,ArkansasRobert L. BrooksUniversity of ArkansasFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaasPart of the Archaeological Anthropology CommonsThis article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able toread, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking priorpermission from the publisher or the author.This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academyof Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu, ccmiddle@uark.edu.Recommended CitationBrooks, Robert L. (1973) "Collection of Dalton Points from Yell County, Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 27, Article 12.Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol27/iss1/12Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol.XXVI1, 197330Collection of Dalton Points from YellCounty, ArkansasROBERT L.BROOKSDepartment ot Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701ABSTRACTThe hypothesis that projectile points serve functions other than use as a head for a missilewas examined by Morse and Goodyear in regard to Dalton points. The writer reexaminedthis hypothesis in light of a significant collection of Dalton points from Yell County,Arkansas, and further substantiates the hypothesis formulated by Morse and tested byGoodyear.INTRODUCTIONThe first knowledge of Dalton came from the collection ofJudge S. D. Dalton in Missouri (Chapman, 1948). JudgeDalton had been collecting the points from a single site forseveral years. Itwas from this location that "Dalton Culture"—the lithic assembledge which accompanies the Dalton points—first was defined. At the site of Judge Dalton it is earlyArchaic with the following attributes: lanceolate serratedDalton points, expanding base drills, oval scrapers, projectilepoints reworked for scrapers, and also corner-notched,side-notched, and stemmed points (Chapman, 1948, p. 138). Itis obvious that some mixing of materials was present, but it isalso important to note that Dalton was already being viewed asa distinct point style and culture (Goodyear, 1971, p. 3.)Chapman (1948) attributes Dalton to an early Archaicmanifestation which has its roots in the "Folsom" points style.The Dalton point recently has been assigned a relativetemporal span of 8000 to 5000 B.C. The early date assignedthe Dalton pointmay also be associated with this point style inother early sites. Graham Cave has Dalton points in levels 5and 6 (Logan, 1952, p. 73). The importance of the GrahamCave finds is in relation to three radiocarbon dates from thelower levels which give Dalton a comparatively early time level.One sample from level 6 yielded a date of 7,750± 500 B.C.(M-130), a second from level 6 gave 6,880 ± 500 B.C. (M-131),and one from level 4 gave 5,850+500 B.C. (Crane, 1956, p.667). There are Dalton points in the lower levels ofother sitesas well: Modoc Rock (Fowler, 1959), Stanfield-Worley(DeJarnette et al., 1962), and Rodgers Shelter (MacMillan,1965).The purpose of this study was to examine a collection ofDalton points from YellCounty, Arkansas. Because the historyofthe Dalton point is no more explicit in Arkansas than in anyother section of the Dalton horizon, a brief summary of theDalton point in Arkansas is presented.The Dalton point has been collected in Arkansas for a longtime withlittlerealization of its cultural-historical significance.Although Dalton points with an accession date of1929 are citedin this paper, there is no evidence that Dalton points wererecognized as a distinct style until the work by Chapman in1948. The first large-scale inquiry into Dalton culture inArkansas was conducted by James Ford and Alden Redfield.Their Dalton Project Survey in 1961-1962 was an attempt tolocate Paleo-Indian sites in the Mississippi alluvium (Redfield,1971).In1962 Raymond Wood opened excavations at BreckenridgeShelter. Wood (1962, p. 90) defines a Dalton culture withpoints he typed as Breckenridge. This was somewhat confusinguntil the workofThomas in1969. Thomas (1969) considers thepoints Wood defined as Breckenridge to be of a generalDalton-Meserve typology. There have been numerous citationsof Dalton points since the Ford-Redfield study in 1961-1962.The Lace Place study by Red field and Moselage (1970) isespecially important for it led indirectly to the hypothesis andtesting by Morse and Goodyear.The Lace Place, a site inPoinsett County, Arkansas, yieldeda fair number of Dalton points. Redfield and Moselagepostulate that Dalton point variation is due mainly to atemporal shift or variation through time. Using the data fromthe Dalton Project, they conducted a factor analysis of 116concave-based lanceolate points, then worked the 116 pointsinto a dendogram. The conclusions reached by Redfield andMoselage (1970) were: (1) the Dalton point has a great deal ofregional variation, and use of a horizon for Dalton may bequestionable; "Itobscures the local relationships that may befound" (p. 39); and (2) the Dalton occupies a temporal spanand variation is a result ofchange through time (p. 28). Itwasin answer to these contentions that Morse and Goodyear'shypothesis was formulated.The writer discusses mainly Goodyear's testing of thehypothesis formulated by Morse, because the Master's thesiswritten in 1971 by Goodyear describes the resharpeninganalysis inmuch greater depth than does the edited publicationby Morse (1971).DALTONRESHARPENING HYPOTHESISGoodyear (1971, p. 37) states,The use ofthe term projectile point or Dalton pointdoes not necessarily mean tools in this class were usedas a head for a missile. Dalton Point is used here inthe conventional descriptive sense to mean a bifaciallyworked artifact with basal haft preparation and adistal end which converges at a sharp angle to formthe tip.From this statement Goodyear built the following hypothesis.For Dalton the type definition is expressed mainly in conditionof the base. According to Goodyear the body (blade) of theDalton is open to variation.The diagnostic attributes described for the Dalton base are:(1) parallel to concave stem edges in initial through advancedstages which are heavily ground; (2) ears on the basal cornerswhich usually flare outward but may hang parallel with thepoint's axis and are always heavily ground; (3) abasal concavitythat is ground in the preform stage but only to facilitate theremoval of thinning flakes, is ground basally and laterally inthe initial stage, and varies in depth but is always concave; and(4) basal thinning with one or more flute-like flakes originatingin the basal concavity and running up the axis of the point(Goodyear, 1971, p. 37-38).The body ofthe Dalton point must not be viewed in terms ofconsistent typing, but rather in a functional context. The30Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 12Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1973Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol.XXVII,197331Robert L. Brooksvariation in Dalton body size and shape is a result ofresharpening. When the body is resharpened the body size andshape are in actuality altered and modified. Morse andGoodyear attribute the various and distinctive styles of Daltonpoints to the number of times the body has been resharpened.The first evidence to support this postulation of resharpeningwas" found in the Hawkins Cache (Morse, 1971), where 18Dalton points of various dimensions were found within a2-sq-ft. area. Itis quite possible that this material is the tool kitofa single individual.The basic style for the Dalton point ofthe Hawkins Cache isa lanceolate, right-hand beveled, serrated point. Of the 18points discovered, 16 fall into three distinct groups. The fivepoints in what is termed group A have convex serrated bodyedges, the five points in group B have straight serrated bodyedges, and the six points in group C have a drill-likeappearance. The two remaining points were used as burinsaccording to Morse (1971, p. 10). The burin-stage point isreworked from an exhausted Dalton. Morse also conductedmeasurement analysis on the Dalton points from the HawkinsCache and was able to make some general statements. First,there is a consistent 4-mm loss through the stages he proposed.As the body was undergoing this 4-mm loss there was noapparent loss in width of the base. Morse also observed anincrease in the blade or body edge angle from group A togroup C. These observations confirm his placing the points intodistinct groups, for they are morphologically distinct. Inconclusion Morse believes this variation tobe the result ofbodyresharpening and not the result of regional or temporalvariation.MATERIALS ANDMETHODSA collection of Dalton points from Yell County, Arkansas,was used in this reexatnination of the Morse and Goodyearresharpening hypothesis. The points were examined by thebasic tests of Morse (1971) and Goodyear (1971) to classify thepoints into five stages: (Da completed preform stage, (2) anunresharpened stage, (3) an initialstage ofresharpening, (4) anadvanced stage of resharpening, and (5) a final stage ofresharpening. In addition, measurements were made of pointlength, stem length, thickness, subjective body width, objectivebody width, objective stem width, width at the ears, basaldepth, and angle of the blade. The measurements of stemlength, point length, and thickness are self explanatory.Subjective body width was measured where the body edgetapers off the shoulder, objective body width was measured atexactly half the length of the point, objective stem width wasmeasured at half the length of the stem, width at the ears wasthe maximum distance between the ears or from ear tip to eartip, and basal depth was measured from the deepest section ofthe concavity. The blade angle was measured by the methodGoodyear cited (p. 52), by bending a wire around the body edgethen measuring the angle ofthe bent wire. The results of thisanalysis are shown in Tables I-III.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe data in Tables I-IIIare meaningful only if used inconjunction with the data from Goodyear's metric analysis.Most data in the tables are in general agreement withGoodyear's. The variance between the sample ranges and thesample means in several cases is tobe expected. When testing acertain phenomenon, in this case resharpening, deviance mustbe expected. What is being tested is not actual identicalcharacteristics, but rather similar general characteristics. InThicknessObjective stem width 41Width at earsSubjective body widthFinal stageAdvance stageInitialstageNovaculiteFlint-chertQuartziteTable I.Dimensional Data forCollection of Dalton Points fromYell County, Arkansas.Mean DimensionPoint Characteristic Number Dimension RangeofPoints (mm) (mm)70-38Point length 494115.5 21-10Stem length 4103.5 8-01Basal concavity 41Preform basal width 01 6209-0541 0730-162141 23.5 33-19.517 1507 16.511 20.517 10.507 12.511 19Objective body widthFinal stageAdvance stageInitialstageTable II.Distribution of Physical Characteristics Among YellCounty Dalton PointsNumberOf PointsCharacteristicBasal grindingPresentAbsentMi03Lateral grindingPresentAbsent 02BevelingPresentAbsent2120Body cross sectionRhomboidBiconvex22IKPlano-convex 01MaterialIK21021Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 12http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol27/iss1/121Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXVI1,197332Table III.Blade Resharpening Characteristics of Yell CountyDalton PointsFormative Number Blade Angle Body Edge WearStage ofPoints (degrees) (mm)Final 17 52 1.5Advanced 07 4b 4Initial 11 38Completedpreform 01 32Goodyear's study 5.5-mm losses in body width from stageinitial to stage advanced and 5.0-mm losses from stageadvanced to the final stage were indicated. The findings fromYellCounty are not quite in line with these. There is a 4.0-mmloss from the initial stage to the advanced stage and a 1.5-mmloss from the advanced stage to the final stage. Although thereductions are not as great as those in Goodyear's analysis, theyretain the general reduction inbody width.Approximately 64% of the initial stage points, 71% of theadvanced stage points, and 29% ofthe final stage points showwear on the body edge. This information is in generalagreement with that mentioned in Goodyear's study. Threefinal stage points show distal-end wear suggesting somefunction similar to use as awls or drills. However, micoscopicexamination of the distal end revealed no evidence of rotarywear.DALTONVARIANTSIn this investigation two distinct catagories—Daltonendscrapers and Dalton burins—were omitted from the tablesbecause they fail to provide information relevant to theresharpening hypothesis. Because both Dalton burins andDalton endscrapers are reworkings on Dalton bases, theiraffinity to resharpening is not particularly relevant withoutpreceding remarks concerning the resharpening hypothesis.However, some general statements can be made in regard tothese Dalton variants. Dalton endscrapers are not limited toany one stage of resharpening, but are not found in the finalstage. There are examples of endscrapers in the preformcomplete stage, the initial stage, and the advanced stage.Apparently the final stage is not morphologically functional asan endscraper. In the case of Dalton burins there is a positivecorrelation with final stage points. The data indicate that onlyfinal stage Daltons have been reworked into burins.Regrettably, no analysis of wear patterns on the burin edge waspossible because of lack of time.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSThe results of Morse and Goodyear's testing of theresharpening hypothesis were compared with test data fromYell County Dalton points. The writer believes that the datafurther substantiate the hypothesis formulated by Morse andtested by Goodyear.1. Although the metric data are not identical to those ofMorse and Goodyear, they demonstrate the samecharacteristics. As in the points of the Hawkins Cache andBrand Site, the basal width remains constant throughout thevarious stages.2. From the numerous cases of consistent body edge wearfrom initial through advanced stages, it is apparent that somematerial was abraded on the body edge. According to Semonov(1964) this type of wear is observed when the artifact is used ina knife-like fashion.3. The Dalton base is found supporting an endscraper in 12cases and a burin in five cases, in addition to the body edgewear. It is suspected that the Dalton people were using theDalton point to process faunal remains, using the point in aknife-like fashion.LITERATURE CITEDCHAPMAN, C. H. 1948. A preliminary survey of Missouriarchaeology. Part IV. Ancient cultures and sequence.Missouri Archaeologist, v. 10, pt. 4.CRANE. H. R. 1956. University of Michigan radiocarbondates I.Science, no. 124, p. 664-672.DeJARNETTE, DAVID,EDWARD KURJACK, and JAMESCAMBRON. 1962. Stanfield-Worley bluff shelterexcavations. J. Alabama Archeology 8(1-2):1-111.FOWLER, M. L. 1959. Summary report of Modoc rockshelter. Illinois State Museum Papers, no. 8.GOODYEAR, A. 1971. The Brand Site: the Dalton tool kitwith an intrasite analysis. Unpubl. Master's thesis, Univ.Arkansas.LOGAN, W. D. 1952. Graham Cave, an archaic site. MemoirMissouri Archeological Society, no. 2, p. 1-86.McMILLIAN,R. BRUCE. 1965. The Rodgers shelter: Apreliminary report. /// Carl H. Chapman (ed), PreliminaryArchaeological Investigations in the Kaysinger BluffReservoir Area. Part II.National Park Service, Omaha,Nebraska.MORSE, D. F. 1971. The Hawkins Cache: a significant Daltonfind in northwest Arkansas. Arkansas Archeologist12(l):9-20.REDFIELD, ALDEN. 1971. The Dalton Project, 1961-1962.Manuscript on file with American Museum of NaturalHistory, Harvard University, University of Missouri, andUniversity of Arkansas Museum, Fayetteville.REDFIELD, ALDEN, and JOHN MOSELAGE. 1970. TheLace Place, a Dalton Project site in the western lowlands ineastern Arkansas. Arkansas Archeologist ll(2):21-44.SEMONOV, S.A. 1964. Prehistoric technology. Cory, Adamsand Mackey Ltd., London.THOMAS,RONALD. 1969. Breckenridge Shelter: a stratifiedshelter in northwest Arkansas. Unpubl. Master's thesis,Univ. Arkansas.WOOD, W. RAYMOND. 1962. The Breckenridge shelterBCR2. In C.R. McGimsey (ed), Arkansas Archeology.Arkansas Archeological Society, Fayetteville, Arkansas.32Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 27 [1973], Art. 12Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1973

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2919&context=jaas

Collection of Dalton Points from Yell County, Arkansas

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UARK (University of Arkansas )

ScholarWorks@UARK