ML20053E872
| ML20053E872 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 05/27/1982 |
| From: | Jolley R BUILDING TECHNOLOGY, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053E861 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8206100165 | |
| Download: ML20053E872 (83) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:-- - - - - E F i 1 1 I I I I I I I ARCHAEOLOGICAL I INVESTIGATIONS IN THE I CLINCH RIVER I BREEDER REACTOR l PROJECT AREA 1981 -1982 BuiklingConsei vationTechnology REP 188M'a888887 A PDR j
lI .I I I I ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT AREA 1981-82 I I By Robert L. Jolley 1982 Building Conservation Technology, Inc. Nashville, Tennessee I I
l ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The 1981-1982 archaeological investigations of the CRBRP project area were funded by the CRBRP Project Office and managed by the Cultural Resources Program, Tennessee Valley Authority. John C. Coverdale of the Cultural Resources Program provided supplies, reports, maps and aerial photographs. Ken E. Yat:es and Joseph A. Woodruff of the CRBRP Project Office provided project maps and environmental information. Robert Newman served as the Principal Investigator and handled all administrative aspects of the project. The crew for the first four weeks of the project consisted of Mike Griffin (Field Assistant), Colleen Hamilton and Mark Febbo. After inclement weather delayed field work, the following served on the crew: Mike Griffin (Field Assistant), Jerald Ledbetter (Backhoe Consultant), Jean Spencer and Mark Febbo. Maps and figures were draf ted by Marion Drescher Newman and ethnobotanical remains were examined by Andrea Shea Brewer. I ' I 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements ... ... ............. . . . . . . . 11 List of Tables . .. . ... .. . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . iv List of Figures . ... ... ...... . . .... . . . . . . . . v Chapter I. Introduction ... .... ........ . . . . . . . . 1 II. Environmental Context . . . .. .... . . . . . . . . . . 4 III. Previous Archaeological Work . ... . . . . . . . . . . . 7 l Synopsis . ...... . .. . .......... . . . 7 Previously Recorded Sites Within the CRBRP Area . . . . 9 IV. Lithic Resources .... . .. .... . . . . . . . . . . 15 V. Lithic Typology ..... . .. . ..... . . . . . . . . 17 W VI. Field Methods ... ... . .. . ..... . . . . . . . . 20 Introduction .. ..... ..... . . . . . . . . . . 20
.I Shovel Cut Testing . . . .. ... . . . . . . . .
Shoreline Survey ... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 20 21 Buried Sites Reconnaissance . ... . . . . . . . . . . 23 VII. Results of the Survey . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Introduction .. ... . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . 25 lI Site Descriptions . . . .. .... . . . . . . . . . . 25 Loci Descriptions . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . 41 Prehistoric Loci . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Historic Loci .... .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . 43 VIII. Excavations at 40RE165 . . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . 50 IX. Lithic Analysis . . . . . . .. .... . . . . . . . . . . 60 X. Recommendations ..... . ........ . . . . . . . . 65 XI. Summary and Conclusions . . .. .... . . . . . . . . . . 68 References Cited ... ...... . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . 73 lii l
w
LIST OF TABLES Table Page
- 1. Cultural material recovered from each site . . . . . . . . . . 28
- 2. Cultural material recovered from prehistoric loci . . . . . . . 42
- 3. Cultural material recovered from historic loci . . . . .. . . 44
- 4. Cultural material recovered from 40RE165 . . . . . . . . . . . 55
- 5. Lithic resources utilized at each site . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
- 6. Tool classes by lithic resource type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
- 7. Retouched / utilized flakes by flake type . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 l 8. Site components and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
- 9. Relation of site types to nearest water . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 4
4 1 iv i
1 I 1 I LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page
- 1. Aerial photograph of project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 i
- 2. Location of chert resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
- 3. Location of shovel cut transects and shoreline survey . . . . 22
- 4. Location of backhoe trenches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
- 5. Location of newly recorded archaeological sites . . . . . . . 26
- 5. Location of loci ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
- 7. Ceramics recovered from 40RE106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
- 8. West profile of Backhoe Trench 4 (40RE106) . . . . . . . . . . 40
- 9. Locus 19 rock mounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
- 10. Locus 19 rock mound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
- 11. Locus 20 rock mounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
- 12. View of 40RE165 shoreline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 1
- 13. Backhoe Trench 6 (40RE165) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
- 14. Backhoe excavations at 40RE165 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
- 15. Bact. hoe trench profiles (40RE165) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
- 16. Plan view of features 1 and 3 (40RE165) . . . . . . . . . . . 56
- 17. Selected lithic artifacts recovered from 40RE165 . . . . . . . 57
- 18. Prehistoric site types within the project area . . . . . . . . 69 I
V
1 I. INTRODUCTION I A cultural resources survey was conducted of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant project area (Figure 1) during the winter of 1981-1982 by Building Conservation Technology. The purpose of the work was to determine if any sites were eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Places. Portions of the CRBRP area were previously surveyed for cultural resources and a number of historic and prehistoric sites recorded and tested (Schroedl 1972; Fielder 1975). Schroedl's work focused on relocating and excavating sites previously recorded within the project area in 1941 by Charles Nash and Fielder's work focused on a survey of Bear Creek Valley. All sites extensively investigated, with the exception of 40RE124, were prominent sites located on the riverine bottomlands. The uplands and portions of the bottomlands were not investigated at that time since no sites were previously recorded there. This survey focuses on the identification of archaeological resources within the uninvestigated areas. The architectural resources within the project area had been previcusly identified and recorded (Schroedl 1974c). The areas previously investigated by Schroedl (1972) and Fielder (1975) were not resurveyed. Through the use of a shoreline survey and deep testing program in the riverine areas and a shovel cut testing strategy in the upland areas,17 previously unrecorded sites were discovered. In addition, three
W 9 ., a
'" ,y . a
<:p _
. e b i .
l .. . q
\
I o
'p 1:
3
'[
x , _ s g s I , , .. f ;1 g 3., . 7. e A. I ,1, . 1. .. 1 1 ,m < e m < e 3.ce . ... I
3 previously recorded sites were redefined and 20 artifact loci recorded. I No significant archaeological resources were found within those areas of the CRBRP project boundary which are presently subject to direct impact. I l i I
4 II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT The project area is located in the western part of the Ridge and Valley Physiographic Province (Fenneman 1938). The terrain is rugged and I varies from rolling hills to mountains (DOE 1981: 2.4-2). The province is characterized by parallel ridges and valleys that run in a northeast-southwest direction. This orientation is the result of folding and fracturing that occurred 230 to 260 million years ago (Miller 1974:3). The CRBRP is located on a meander of the Clinch River between river miles 14.5 and 18.6. The headwaters of the Clir.ch River are in southwestern Virginia. The Clinch River, a southwesterly flowing stream, is a tributary of the Tennessee River. Although there are five small tributary streams within the CRBRP area, only one, Grassy Creek, is named. The project area is underlain by sedimentary rocks of Ordovician age (DOE 1981: 2.4-1), Rock types in the immediate vicinity consist primarily of siltstone and limestone. Most of the ridges are underlain by cherty dolomite, shale or sandstone (Swann et al.1942:2) . The topography of the project area is primarily uplands and valley slopes. Over 60 percent of the land has a slope greater than 20 percent and over 40 percent has a slope greater than 30 percent (DOE 1981:2.7-21). Elevation ranges from 740 to 1120 feet AMSL. I Soil types of the CRBRP area have developed from residuum, colluvium, and alluvium (DOE 1981:2.7-2). The major soils are Clarksville, Talbot and Fullerton and the lesser soils are Pope, Wolf tever, Colbert, Upshur, Sequatchie, Roane, Lehew and Nolichucky. These soils are not well suited for agricultural purposes.
5 The climate of the project area corresponds to Koppen's (1931) designation of a humid, mesothermal, subtropical climate. The mean annual rainfall is 53.5 inches and the mean temperature is 57.9 F (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 1974). The average frost free period is 196 days (Swann { et al. 1942:7). The project area is located in the Ridge and Valley section of the Oak-Chestnut Forest Region (Braun 1950:192). Oak communities dominate the mountain slopes and the main valley floor and mesophytic hemlock communities occur in the mountain valleys. This forest region has also been called the oak-deer-chestnut faciation (Shelford 1963:38). This biotic community has been destroyed by lumbering and the chestnut blight (Shelford 1963:38-39). The forest region has been so altered that its original composition can be determined only by the presence of dead chestnut trees in the areas most recently invaded by the chestnut blight (Braun 1950:192). Nearly six-hundred taxa of vascular plants have been recorded in the project area (DOE 1981: 2.7-7). A list of sixty-two species of potential food plants has been compiled for the Upper Tennessee River Valley (McCollough and Faulkner 1973:23), all of which are found in the vicinity of the project area (Olsen et al.1966) . The project area is included in the Carolinian Biotic Province (Dice I 1943:16), which is characterized by a rich faunal assemblage. Cleland (1966: Appendix G) lists 303 vertebrates, excluding fish, that occur in this biotic province. White - tailed deer and turkey are abundant and constitute the most important animal species of the area (Shelford 1963:28). At least 116 species of fish are presently known in the Upper
r 6 L Tennessee River system (McCollough and Faulkner 1973:14). Ten species of turtles , forty species of pelecypods and 32 species of aquatic gastropods are known to occur in East Tennessee (Hickman 1937; Carr 1952) . I . I I I ' I I . I - I I 5
a. I 7 III. PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK Synopsis The first ce orded archaeological investigations in the Clinch River Valley occurred during the late nineteenth century. Cyrus Thomas (1894: 364-366) conducted an archaeological survey of part of the lower Clinch River and recorded mound complexes at the Lee Farm site (40RE27) and Jones Island (40RE28). No sites were recorded by Thomas within the CRBRP area. Further archaeological work in the Clinch River Valley was not undertaken until the construction of Norris Dam in 1933-34. Norris Dam inundated portions of the upper Clinch River and the lower Powell River. This work, conducted under the auspices of the WPA archaeological program, resulted in the recording and excavation of a large number of sites, including the total excavation of four Woodland burial mounds (Webb 1938). In 1941, an archaeological survey of the lower Clinch River from the mouth to river mile 28 was conducted by Charles Nash in conjunction with the construction of Watts Bar Reservoir. The Nash survey concentrated on locating sites adjacent to the river; secondary streams and upland areas were not examined. Sites were not excavated and a report was not prepared because of the outbreak of World War II. Five archaeological sites (40RE104, 40RE105, 40RE106, 40RE107 and 40RE108) were located and recorded within the proposed CRBRP area. Nash recorded one of the sites as a i village and mound, three as large villages and one as a small site with
' unknown cultural type.
The Melton Hill Dam, located on the lower Clinch River at river mile 23 was completed in 1963. Archaeological survey and excavations were
I
- conducted within the reservoir prior to the completion of the dam. A number of sites were recorded and tested; however, only two were excavated (McNutt and Fischer 1960; McNutt and Graham 1961) . One of the excavated sites was a possible Late Woodland burial mound (Cole 1975:9).
An archaeological survey of the CRBRP area was conducted in 1972 for the Tennessee Valley Authority. All five of Nash's previously rec <r ded sites were relocated and tested (Schroedl 1972:4) . Four historic Euro-American settlements and an historic Euro-American ceinetery were recorded. These sites include the remains of three historic farm houses, an isolated log structure and a cemetery (Schroedl 1972:4) . Two of these historic sites, 40RE120 and 40RE121, were mapped the following year (Thomas 1973). Both sites were occupied in the latter part of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Additional historic sites survey was conducted in 1974. The 1974 survey attempted to locate structures shown on a 1940 TVA property map (Schroedi 1974c) . A number of these structures were relocated, however, no site numbers were assigned. Although archival research was not conducted, a late nineteenth to early twentieth century occuprtion date was suggested for all historic structures (Schroedl 1974c:28). An additional three prehistoric sites (40RE138, 40RE139 and 40RE140) were recorded within the CRBRP area during the survey for the proposed Exxon Nuclear Facility (Fielder 1975) and a nurvey of the Oak Ridge Reservation (Fielder 1974). Archaic and Woodland components and one cave site were identified within the CRBRP area as a result of this work. A number of other prehist.oric and historic sites have been recorded in the adjacent areas (Fielder 1974, 1975; Fielder et al.1977) . I
^
v I ' Schroedi's 1972 survey of the CRBRP site was followed by extensive 1 testing and excavation (Schroedl 1973a,1973b,1973c,1973d,1974a,1974b,
)
1975a, 1975b). Work focused on the excavation of 40RE124, a Late Woodland i l burial mound and 40RE108, a multi-component shell midden. The excavation of 40RE108 has not been formally reported; however, the excavation of 40RE124 has been incorporated into a Mastors Thesis on the Hamilton Mortuary Pattern in East Tennessee (Cole 1975). The excavation of the mound suggested a relationship between Late Woodland and Early Mississippian cultural development (Cole 1975:19). Additional work in the region includes investigations at an Early Mississippian site located near Oliver Springs (Hood 1977) and excavation of a Dallas phase platform mound near Clinton (O'Brien 1976) . The most recent work conducted was a cultural resources survey of the meander bend downstream from the CRBRP site (GAI 1981) . Previously Recorded Sites Within the CRBRP Project Area A total of sixteen sites had been previously recorded within the CRBRP area. These include four historic houses, one historic cemetery, ten prehistoric habitation sites and one cave site with both prehistoric and historic components. The following is an inventory of these sites. 49RE104 This upland site was recorded by Nash in 1941. He described the site as a small village or camp (100 feet in diameter) and assigned it to an unknown cultural type. The site was tested by Schroedl in 1972 and no further work recommended. Schroedi's (1972:4,6) investigations, consisting . of six test units, recovered only one flake. i
10 40RE105 This site, located on the first terrace of the river, was surveyed in 1941 by Nash. He recorded a large village (1500 by 200 feet) and a mound (50 by 5 feet). The site was categorized as a Middle Valley component. The village portion of the site was relocated and tested by Schroedl in 1972. Eleven test units were excavated and only one flake recovered. The mound was relocated the following year and assigned a separate site number (40RE124) . 40RE106 This site, located on the first terrace of the Clinch River, was recorded by Nash in 1941. He recorded a village (1200 by 200 feet) with a surface scatter of mussel shell and pottery. The site was categorized as Upper and Middle Valley Woodland. In 1972, the site was resurveyed and tested. A total of fourteen test units was excavated and only one wire nail recovered (Schroedl 1972:6) . Since most of the site had been destroyed by grading and bulldozing, no further work was recommended. 40RE107 Charles Nash recorded 40RE107 in 1941. The site, situated on the first terrace of the Clinch River, was originally recorded as being 1,000 feet long and 200 feet wide. The site was categorized as Upper Valley Woodland. 40RE107 was relocated and tested in 1972. Since initial testing suggested that undisturbed cultural deposits occurred below plow zone, additional testing was recommended (Schroedl 1972:7). Additional testing, consisting of backhoe trenches and hand excavated units, was subsequently conducted (Schroedl 19 75a, 1975b). Since undisturbed cultural deposits were not encountered, no further work was recommended. I
y _ - 11 40RE108 This site is situated on the first terrace of the Clinch River. It was recorded by Nash in 1941. A shell concentration was recorded and the site categorized as Upper and Middle Valley Woodland. The site was relocated and tested in 1972. Woodland ceramics were recovered and an eroded shell midden recorded (Schroedi 1972:7). Two additional shell middens were located on this site the following year (Schroedl 1973d:1-2). All three middens were excavated (Schroedl 1973c, 1973d, 1975a, 1975b). A Mississippian period cultural affiliation was suggested for one of the middens (Schroedl 1975a :1) . 40RE119 This site number was originally asnigned to the Hensley Cemetery, a Euro-American early twentieth century site (Schroedl 1972:9). The site number was later reassigned to Fort Southwest Point (Thomas 1977). 40RE120 This is an historic site, located in the uplands, consisting of a limestone fireplace, a limestone lined root cellar and a brick lined well or cistern (Schroedl 1972:9). The site was mapped and photographed the following year (Thomas 1973). 40RE121 This historic site, located in the uplands, consists of a well, a cellar and two small outbuildings (Schroedl 1972:9). The site probably dates to the middle of the nineteenth century. The following year two additional structures, a well house and barn, were located and the site mapped (Thomas 1973) . i i I
I 12 40RE122 This historic site consists of a wood frame house, a well house and a shed (Schroedl 1972:12; Schroedl 1974c:23). The site probably dates to the early twentieth century. 40RE123 The site consists of a single isolated log structure. The absence of windows and fireplaces suggests that the structure was utilized as a storage facility (Schroedl 1972:12). The half-dovetail construction technique suggests that the building dates to the second half of the nineteenth century (Schroedl 1972:12). The site was destroyed by vandals before the structure could be mapped (Schroedl 1973b). 40RE124 This mound was originally located by Nash in 1941 and was recorded as part of 40RE105. The mound was given a separate site number by Schroedl in 1973. The mound was tested the same year and was recommended for complete excavation (Schroedl 1973a). Complete excavation of the mound yielded thirty-four burials and revealed three mound construction stages (Cole 1975:18) . The mound was radiocarbon dated to the Late Woodland period (A.D. 700-900). 40RE125 This site is situated on the Clinch River at the mouth of Grassy Creek. It was recorded during Fielder's 1974 survey of the Oak Ridge Reservation. The presence of limestone tempered cord-marked ceramics indicates a Woodland period cultural affiliation (Fielder 1974:50,112). No further work at the site was recommended (Fielder 1974:50). 1
13 40RE128 This site was recorded by Schroedl in 1972; however, it was not included in his survey report (Schroedl 1972). The site was recorded as a " camp" and mussel shells and one corner notched projectile point / knife were recovered from the surface. Testing was not deemed necessary at 40RE128. 40RE129 This " site" was recorded during the 1974 survey of the Oak Ridge Reservation (Fielder 1974:53). It is situated on the first terrace of t%e Clinch River. The site is a mound three to four meters high. The mound was tested and determined to be an Anglo-American feature dating tu tha first half of the twentieth century (Schroedl 1974b:3). 40RE139 This site, situated on the right bank of Grassy Creek, consists of a lithic scatter. No diagnostic artifacts were recovered from the site. The site was recorded during a survey of the proposed Exxon Nuclear Facility (Fielder 1975) . The site was not investigated by Schroedl, probably because no recommendations for further work were suggested by Fielder (1975:31) . 40RE140 This is a cave site with prehistoric and historic occupations. The site was located and tested during a survey of the
~
proposed Exxon Nuclear Facility (Fielder 1975:33). A Late Archaic and Early Woodland cultural affiliation was assigned to the site. The I
J 14 i
; historic occupation, consisting of fruit jars, iron barrel hoops and
- corroded sheet iron fragments suggests a moonshine still (Fielder l
I 1975:33). lI i l !I 1 ) l i !I I
f 15 i IV. LITHIC RESOURCES l Chert outcrops within the CRBRP project area on ridges situated in the center of the project area (Figure 2) . Chert occurs in both nodular and tabular form and is usually covered by a thin layer of residual soil. Chert occurs in two major geologic units, the Knox Group and the Chickamauga Group (Burns and Roe 1980:2.5). There is a wide range of variation within the Knox and Chickamauga Groups; however, the two groups are distinct from one another. Knox chert is colored white, pink, brown or grey and is medium grained. Some examples are characterized by red oxide crystalline inclusions. Knox chert is nodular and tabular in form. Chickamauga chert is colored light grey, dark grey or black and ranges from coarse to fine grained. Fine grained examples are lustrous and translucent. Some examples of Chickamauga chert are characterized by blue and white crystalline inclusions. River cobbles are another source of chert. Although no river cobbles were collected in the field, a number of archaeological specimens had cortex characteristic of river worn cobbles. I
, 16 M \
; \
l ! )jf a ') Q . - ' \M i_fY_1Lxy,:'.^.. .
. \
\
ff___- .apf l j 1g ,/7 } -
t .
;F y :y x,~ , p
, V Y'jpf G, ,'q
/
.v g, : " -
/
~
,/
,fi wh "lfL,\G
//-
4 (\ A
, . _/, s 2 :p x NS f. '//f
,' -= ^ /, .
\
s
)t f sf p 'ft' \
' "A,? q, . ky7p(f,i&(f( 9/ / y, \
y
, .e , ^,~ \
. . . s f'. c V r r' f .A \
}
- y?f*j',f . & p* ? ~ ^' y - .
$}. ': \
(^U : ks'6 s,9.h}Q. Q< ([h k}y
.y i) (< w y - .
.'u.;f.bl(/CD)x (I u ' y~03, g..
e
.4, 6g
- m ,
-f -3 J df . 'y, .- f. , ' '
ll x .
) .
f" j
&., .9 p 4 ~m J_
1 y
" , D ,4 / ~ {~l' }, ' 74,& f, I i
%(\
" ; . t ,' y ,/ y s,[-j (,ly,g:q}) -' , _
a .
<- 4 , ovj<d ,s' ,
~ ~ - . ~m
( ' j' (' / ;i -- f e,,39 f . 4 9,p? l c {l . . s-
* ~ ! ]
{g M . f~ {f CUNCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PFOJECT fc q' pu . ix . w - -- m..
- ; 9'u '; ' i
') -/q 1 W;;j;([(, . r.
== an* $no
(, ,) ( Ip-],% ' t , , .- g'& , M)?h
- l
,$ /,,[t ..-- ww '8 49 nox
- E ,
,['"; N(x ";> , .sf '
j[A ' " , ,,. g Aj : ,\ p cmenauauca i ,i ' q c :,. , .x ,.
\, f ;a - 4 7 u7 ,'I $ ?kY 0l,
; j. 4, h^; '<?'S gwp N 3 y l \ k,. ,,h'[ M y[3' [ N \
%+hjf'.kk#// -
.c M ' ~ -
, f f l : ?'l p ' ' -t \
; . t ,
g g~
'% h Q [Y F D~ . k,l Y,-[ )?\ .
? n ;
. , 'f
~
L % _3
. y ;n , ( ,
R (: y, R x Q' ,M L_ .L: ,-<;O! g '; t.! ,/l
'dk - ,7 v l- , s 1 '$LY) l l
- x s g y
- j /
' f g/
l x .
- c !u ; Pigure 2. Location of chert resources.
i
a. 17 V. LITHIC TYPOLOGY A lithic typology was formulated using morphology, lithic reduction sequences, manufacturing techniques and macroscopic wear patterns as distinguishing criteria. The typology for debitage uses lithic reduction sequences and manufacturing techniques while the typology for tool classes uses morphological characteristics and macroscopic wear patterns. A typology incorporating lithic reduction sequences aids in determining lithic processing activities at a site. Lithic reduction sequences also reflect the size, kind and availability of raw material sources utilized. Lithic typologies established for Middle Tennessee (Faulkner and McCollough 1973:63-159) and East Tennessee (Schroedl 1978:159-175; Chapman 1979:183; Kimball 1980:84-85) have in most instances used lithic reduction as a criteria for flake categories; however, in no instance has it been used for core categories. Three core categories were established to measure the degree to which raw material was processed: limited flake cores, random flake cores and core nuclei. Limited flake cores represent the first stage of core reduction, random flake cores the intermediate stage and core nuclei the final stage. More importantly, these core categories may reflect site function. For example, a high incidence of limited flake cores would be expected at lithic extraction sites. The typology used for tool classes is comparable to other Middle and East Tennessee typologies (cf. Faulkner and McCollough 1973; Kimball 1980). Definitions for the tool classes used herein can be found in these reports. Since the debitage categories used by this investigator vary from other typologies, each category will be defined.
18 Flake Categories Decortication Flakes that exhibit cortex on the outer surface. Plat Flakes that do not exhibit cortex on the outer surface. Bifacial thinning / resharpening Flakes that have been removed from a biface during manufacture or resharpening. These flakes are characterized by a faceted striking platform, a convex profile and previous bifacial flake scars on the outer flake surface. Core trimming flake Flakes that were detached from a core to prepare a new striking platform. These flakes are generally thicker than flat flakes and are characterized by a well defined striking platform. Shatter Flakes that have no striking platform or bulb of percussion. Burin Spalls Waste flakes produced during the manufacture of burins. These flakes are characteristically thick and triangular in cross-section. Bipolar Flakes produced by the bipolar technique. These flakes are characterized by crushed ends and abrupt hinge fractures. Core Categories Limited Flake Cores that have a limited number of flakes removed (less than five) and retain over 75% cortex. These unreduced cores were probably discarded because of poor knapping properties. Random Flake Cores, irregular in form, that display no patterned removal of flakes and can not be categorized as limited flake cores or core nuclei. Core Nucleus Cores that are exhaasted. No additional flakes can be removed or platforms prepared.
{ 19 Blade Cores from which blades are struck. Bipolar Cores produced by the bipolar technique. These cores are characterized by two opposing , platforms. The platforms are l I shattered or crushed and the flakes removed fractures. display abrupt hinge Core Fragments The remnants of cores that were shattered. I I I I I I
~
I I I I
- I VI. FIELD METHODS Introduction A multitude of factors must be taken into consideration when designing any archaeological survey. These factors will differ with the nature of the archaeological resources, the size and homogeneity of each survey universe, the research design, the research objectives, the field conditions and economic considerations (cf. Schiffer et al. 1978).
Visibility and accessibility are factors that most affect the reliability and efficiency of archaeological surveys in the Eastern Woodlands. Only one of these variables (i.e., visibility) presented a problem with the application of survey techniques to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor project. The presence of extensive vegetation and the possibility of buried sites precluded a conventional surface survey. Consequently, three discovery techniques were employed. These were: 1) a shovel cut testing program; 2) a shoreline survey and 3) a buried sites reconnaissance. l l ( Shovel Cut Testinq The shovel cut testing program was used in areas that had extensive vegetntion cover (i.e., forested areas) . These areas encompassed the majority of the project area and included all the uplands and portions of older alluvial terraces (Figure 3) . A recent overview of site discovery techniques has indicated that shovel cut testing is the best site discovery technique for forested environments (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1980). l l
21 Previous investigations of upland areas in East Tennessee have indicated that many upland sites are small and contain sparse debris densities (cf. McIlhaney 1977; Davis 1980). Since similar sites were anticipated for the CRBRP area, a discovery technique sensitive to the detection of small discrete sites had to be employed. The Chartkof f's study (1980:98-120) distinguished three different shovel cut techniques: the shovel probe, the shovel divot and the shovel scrape. The shovel probe and shovel divot techniques both consist of excavating shovel cut holes. The difference between the two is that dirt from the shovel probe method is screened through 1/4-inch mesh while dirt from the shovel divot method is inspected with a trowel. The shovel scrap technique consists of removing vegetation and the top layer of soil by shovel scraping. The shovel probe technique, the most sensitive of the three shovel cut techniques, was selected for the CRBRP project. Transects were placed in all high probability areas (i.e., flat areas and ridge tops) and shovel cuts excavated at twenty-five meter intervals. Each unit was the size of a shovel width (33 cm.) and was excavated to subsoil. All excavated dirt was screened through 1/4 inch hardware cloth. A total of twenty-six transects was completed and 335 shovel cut tests excavated. An additional 160 shovel cut tests were excavated to determine site dimensions. The shovel cut technique was successful in discovering fourteen previously unrecorded archaeological sites. A total of 15 one meter square test units was excavated to subsoil at eight of these sites. The purpo:c of this additional testing was to determine site stratigraphy and obtain an artifact sample to access site function and site significance. I
22
/
\
n.5.,- - \ J../']-3:n.
- N
; r sr A,,d-:p\}~'~?'
J, , ,' b w ;
-.a
. :, j ' g --' 3: '
,)? h : . &'/ . ';
Jf 0 ',u 'Ql l _
/ ?( , ,gf
\
(' l' / ,
' f%kNlR$'r (Gs@M{%j$'g kyg@crM ,e . > _f .
j M'3R#Mf~
.j'.6 p
-~~-'-
f 'p
~ '
( , g << i f) < ( Ij'
' {, .- - $ ll ,, A) El
/ ..
WNCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT j'
*\
/ \ Q(i*'-
j ) (i;f^,c
,: /' 9,' 7.. y,r...) f, l w
~"
( ' i -; , . .. j'" l k >[., ;l6 ?l(ll G1 ' t
,,m> f;} -
[ '
,...e t = , sger,
- L'*TS W 5"onttme manytv
( 3 ,; ; ;, s [, -(k #f' pgn 5
\'% p-p;
\ , [,._, ,, - xx.v,og\ '\
.!< e <
\ \, % ;- -
3
'5 . \.I_) ,
., k,
(-[ .] 1 1,j{
%,% ll 's
' q G %nr@s y,p)f
/\. I ?if ' ',
s .,, ., j 1 x'~4.$ , Q[2._
'~
y/L]4'-:}j . ,,j \ w .
- Q _~ ., t 3l$'
~~
~
% &. ~ ....-,
,l
~. -
(,,
~.. n Piqure 3. Location of shovel cut transects and shoreline survey.
s 23 Shoreline Survey 1 A pedestrian survey of uninvestigated portions of the shoreline was conducted (Figure 3) . Archaeological sites exposed along the shoreline were readily visible, thus, shovel cut testing was not necessary. Three previously unrecorded sites were located using this survey approach and two previously recorded sites redefined. Buried Sites Reconnaissance A buried sites reconnaissance was conducted (Figure 4). Chapman (1978) has formulated a model predicting the occurrence of buried sit <s in the Tellico Valley. According to Chapman (1978:142), areas below river constrictions, the lower ends of islands and the inside of the lower ends of river bends are locales for buried sites. Aspects of Chapman's model were used at CRBRP; however, dense stands of trees and terrain prohibited backhoe access to all such identified locales. A total of 8 backhoe trenches was excavated. All backhoe trenches were at least 5 meters long and at least 1.2 meters deep. I I
- _-.__._._m.. . .. _... .
24
/
\
A g:,f< ' \d s\.g
/,SJ ' &f'QlQ
,) g'~8'R' &l
{. 1b 'uf ,A -
-^ \ N I
,f lY' j,
,9 'f" bhl). E:'i'd _,
jj ? l' ) If -y Ah${th'ffy). 'NfbN'&C dv - w A , A i [h h;fh
~N i
we p/ ,,3.%y/
- s. . Q% -
;(s c 4 t%4' com en,
,y f m: ~
;) l;: lb
, t. ? ,
'^
, - - ::f *W ~' ~l '
l jf- sP_ -l ~'s 'N L
$h 1[
e
/ , ih ky _
/
f/ ; Q 1NCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT
=- - -
{y.9 m m:j .v ],up,: c;n . .. w j.; e,
.w.
Q' ]l{(v7;a . ojhf
.s
.nm,; ' .y
,;b)
; g n;lhij, q r,
, ,w a ~
l l. N , !jY ! y i l// 'JQG Mg',. fUl \ i/ % gs M g[fIQ(V} M ;' [s y 'q
\ % % C W. ! k?hQ \
'\ %. 't 7h G
'$p'" , \
+\)-s f{M % y q s',"@<g.:b[$p{: %- j e \
? \
$@l
'~ , KEN w .; f4 ! l,:
\
~), *'
', ' , ~.
fl*2: / ' l l . x 1 m N
.. l~R~1 CI/
% I M3 i/ / mT's
/
l "N x w.., -
/ .l N m.:h. .h~ ... /
N N'w",h Figure 4. Location of backhoe trenches.
- - - - -- wy---- -
l 25 VII. RESULTS OF THE SURVEY Introduction A total of 17 previously unrecorded sites was discovered (Figure 5), three previously recorded sites redefined, and 20 loci recorded (Figure 6). A site was defined as any area of human activity for which a boundary could be established. The minimum requirements for a site were three items of cultural debris within a 50 square meter area. A locus was defined as any occurrence of less than three items of cultural debris. Late nineteenth and twentieth century historic occupation were categorized as loci also. Tables 1, 2 and 3 provide detailed descriptions of the materials recovered from each site and each locus. A generalized description of the artifacts is included in each site description. The site inventories include the location, dimensions and work conducted at each site. Site Descriptions 40RE151 Location: 350 53' 07" North Latitude 84 22' 33" West Longitude The site is located in the uplands adjacent to the bottomlands. Site Dimensions: 145 meters (NE-SW) by 50 meters (NW-SE) l Work Conducted: Surface collection of disturbed areas l 9 shovel cut tests i 3 test units (1 x 1 meter) Cultural Types: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material 1 unifacial perforator l 2 utilized / retouched flakes
- 70 flakes l 5 cores and core fragments I
l lIl
26
\
,/ . J\
,A
.Jh"& '
- . , s
\
N
./ 1 O'((ri,~'-'A \
/k n .. '
,y;, , .,n n.;,o ~ c<
d' -! i Q[ t^: '='[ , I l
%Q:~I'Q ${$ N
. ? (;- y f f j' \ ,y:I% yp)'I ' ../)y' g' g' \j ,
$Y < -
s5 V ,V 4)'
,- %Vt b ./%,- __ # ~ ~" cD'~
N wh s/
!1
- i if "/' # , / ' [ %,,,,, w.
/sst&T [gg & 'il' -c p g" '
.i hh46"[
.h MN:j, '/ l ([z?
// /, so n w
?
jf CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT
'l f '. b', >I
; y., /} O;m b$'b'f,?'
b ,sc ' fg j )(g g: 4; ?l l,l l
' . ' ~ ~. ~~ .. . ~ ~ ' ' '
-Sa art = s erav
. W i ; . ,. .;*' w . s i
' ~-
"/
# WAEMICAL SITE l
j.
-;., _' " ' .y ' / : 'gp w. .
\, j ~ ~(m(j 3Ih'h'k'kh,\
n, cs! p,/tj, l' .r Q/i&y +u , < t s
\ J '
s
%. y f( , ;f,w .-, -/ b(.(/ .
gh)S,y// _> - 'q' f, -; ;.W : p: ,,. p g .; : ^ - 4o nc,e i
, , i . s- . m x
\ '
\ '; c' ,..!
VI j -
! /
(/ ,
\
' ... 'Nm'.7.i w no w ' / .;N[f D' w n, is, *" *4 '
~ $ffxW(('ff':'
- f
~ .<, - w
.a n ier -
O,
/
/
- x ._
Figure 5. Location of newly recorded archaeological sites.
---m -- - - - = K- e - ->-A m,- a -ss a
- - - - - - - - - . ,,e 5 _ _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - , __
M
- W"- ..%,
27 i /
- ,s i
$q[
,f e.r w
n :- f .
,j D ' w;' r1\
._ n i.1, f:-ll
,f_ *^- [
} l 4 '6 aff- t) [: - Tam
, y; ~y
, Q,
, ,' 3 l ,, o . . ~
2 A ,-Q' ,') W )=yy/l! A.. _ff C . P P_ /~ s i jI , / 9 ' S ; g g ye. g y ; f h+ ,. g,.s j ey \ G~. s e' s ~ , s g.- c. .n m lgXfl%y- ' l . 'z Qg\ h% Q}8 5 % $( d)q 96 l
,o s . np' , . -
y & *eG Q - .. ~
' i w'- -
E' 7 . f 4 k ( TSk ' '
/~f}
/'b g g
s g CUNCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT I /
,e !
l q) - l, ;L dG,I{g ,
; u:,7 -
d n
- rt ,
J/y. _i.
- c -
J **
~~ vc ~ s *cu
. ,,s b sr c', A , s . -
1i ' t 1
\ l,i\ ,, Q c9 ;,J y.
~~'
_ , ;Q/j' b'.f, g) ej-y w
/
- s. \
;# Le,- -
( g L6. 7C(/ s ,
$)S D' -
!, k '
%) " k%lh[.*$ i*
ll "u Tg~Q-Q Mug V(6; -
\
e'. m s ... h u s. - a- --1.
28 Table 1. Cultural material recovered from each site. TOOLS DEBITAGE Bifacial Unifacial Cobble Flakes Cores
- i 8
. .a 1 0 6 ? 8 E t e t 3 8 0 8 3 E 3 5 .5 e E E R t 5 0 3 - c E e e B E 1 8 s R B
S 2* 5 % i E # 8 2 % e k ~ 3 =l 2 # ~ Q C 3 3 $ 1
; $ 2 3 3 :: , B 3 t u u .c ii u E e
* * = "
8 x 8 % L ? 2 R t 3 2 B 8 2 "
'E S 3 3 $ 1 t 3 2 8 % a E # R ii ? ! R 8 E k & C e s 5 2 8n 8 C 2 8 8 2 3 e e 3 8 E 40RE151 2 1 7 24 5 33 1 1 4 40RE152 8 2 12 45 5 37 2 1 1 4 40RE153 3 4 3 1 11 4 1 1 5 40RE154 1 7 15 20 1 2 42 1 2 1 1 8 2*
40RE155 1 1 4 1 40RE156 4 85 19 4 83 11 8 37 40RE157 2 3 3 2 4 3 1 3 40RE150 15 176 47 1 7 87 1 10 7 1 17 40RE159 10 1 24 15 2 42 1 4 40RE160 1 5 9 2 16 5 40RE161 2 3 3 40RE162 1 2 6 40RE163 2 2 1 13 1 40RE164 1 3 5 1 3 2 2 18* 40RE165 3 2 1 2 37 22 7 3 28 1 3 9 40RE166 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 1 2 2 1 40RE167 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 40RE106 1 5 3 8 1 1 1 40RE125 1 1 2 1 Total =1290 7 7 3 62 2 3 3 1 3 331 232 23 24 417 6 34 26 2 4 100 cweight in grams
29 Comments: The cultural material recovered indicates that this was a habitation site. 40RE152 Location: 35o 53' 07" North Latitude 84 22' 42" West Longitude This site is located in the uplands adjacent to the bottomlands. . Site Dimensions: 100 meters (E-W) by 50 meters (N-S) Work Conducted: 11 shovel cut tests 2 test units (1 x 1 meter) Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 2 blade-like flakes 8 utilized / retouched flakes I 99 flakes 8 cores and core fragments Comments: The cultural material recovered indicates that this was a habitation site. 40RE153 Location: 35o 53' 35" North Latitude 84 22' 40" West Longitude This site, situated in the uplands, is located 750' west of the Clinch River. Site Dimensions: 100 meters (SW-NE) by 25 meters (NW-SE) Work Conducted: 4 shovel cut tests Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 3 retouched / utilized flakes 19 flakes 11 cores and core fragments Comments: Chickamauga chert occurs at this locale. One hundred percent- of the cultural material recovered was Chickamauga chert. The occurrence of locally derived chert and the high incidence l of cores suggests a lithic extraction site.
30 40RE154 .I Location: 35g53'08"NorthLatitude 84 22' 53" West Longitude The site is situated on an alluvial terrace. Site Dimensions: 150 meters (NW-SE) by 60 meters (NE-SW) Work Conducted: 17 shovel cut tests , 4 test units (1 x 1 meter) Cultural Types: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 1 thin biface/ knife fragment 7 retouched / utilized flakes 81 flakes 12 cores and core fragments 1 burnt sandstone Comments: The cultural material recovered suggests a habitation site. 40RE155 Location: 350 53' 21" North Latitude 84 22' 29" West Longitude I The site is situated in the uplands 250' west of the Clinch River. Site Dimensions: 25 meters (NW-SE) by 10 meters (NE-SW) Work Conducted: 3 shovel cut tests Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 6 flakes 1 core fragment Comments: An undetermined portion of this site was . destroyed by road construction. The aforementioned site dimensions reflect the portion of the site that was undisturbed. 40RE156 Location: 35 0 53' 43" North Latitude 84 22' 48" West Longitude
ll >1 This site is situated in the uplands in the center of the meander bend. Site Dimensions: 20 meters (NW-SE) by 20 meters (NE-SW) Work Conducted: 8 shovul cut tests 1 test unit (1 x 1 meter) Cultural Type Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 4 retouched / utilized flakes 191 flakes 56 cores and core fragments I Comments: Knox chert outcrops at this locale. presence of 98.4% Knox chert in the lithic The assemblage and a high incidence of decortication I 40RE157 flakes, shatter and limited flake cores suggest a lithic extraction site. I Location: 350 53' 47" North Latitude 84 22' 42" West Longitude This site is situated in the uplands Site Dimensions: 90 meters (NE-SW) by 45 meters (NW-SE) Work Conducted: Surface collection of disturbed areas .I 7 shovel cut tests Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 2 retouched / utilized flakes 12 flakes 7 cores and core fragments Comments: Knox chert occurs at this locale. The sample of cultural material recovered is small; however, the presence of 95.2% Knox chert in the lithic assemblage and c high ratio of decortication flakes, shatter ci1 limited flake cores suggests a lithic extractia.. site. 40RE158 Location: 350 53' 53" North Latitude 84 22' 35" West Longitude The site is located in the uplands 250' west of the Clinch River.
32 Site Dimensions: 150 meters (NE-3W) by 25 meters (NW-SE) ~ Work Conducted: 7 shovel cut tests 1 test unit (1 x 1 meter) I Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural material: 15 retouched / utilized flakes 269 flakes 35 cores and core fragments Comments: Knox chert outcrops at this locale. The high percentage of this chert (98.1%) in the lithic assemblage and a large percentage of decortication flakes, shatter and limited flake cores suggest a lithic extraction site. 40RE159 Location: 35g53'30"NorthLatitude 84 22' 58" West Longitude 1 This site is situated in the uplands. Site Dimensions: 180 meters (NE-SW) by 20 meters (NW-SE) Work Conducted: Surface collection of disturbed areas 16 shovel cut tests 1 test unit (1 x 1 meter) Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 1 blade-like flake 10 retouched / utilized flakes 73 flakes I 5 cores and core fragments Comments: Chickamauga chert outcrops at this locale. The I high percentage of Chickamauga chert in the lithic assemblage (94%) and the high ratio of decortication flakes and shatter suggests a lithic extraction site. 40RE160 Location: 35854'12" North Latitude 84 21' 52" West Longitude Site Dimensions: 85 meters (SW-NE) by 15 meters (NW-SE) Work Conducted: 9 shovel cut teste ' 2 test units (1 x 1 meter)
33 Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 1 retouched / utilized flake 32 flakes 5 core fragments I Comments: The cultural material habitation site, recovered suggests a 40RE161 Location: 35 54' 13" North Latitude 84 21' 55" West Longitude This site is situated in the uplands. Site Dimensions: 50 meters (NW-SE) by 10 meters (NE-SW) Work Conducted: 3 shovel cut tests Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material: 8 flakes I Comments: This appears to have been a small habitation site. 40RE162 Location: 35g53'22"NorthLatitude 84 21' 57" West Longitude Site is situated in the uplands. Site Dimensions: 10 meters by 10 meters Work Conducted: 7 shovel cut tests Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric Cultural Material Recovered: 1 retouched / utilized flake 8 flakes Comments: This appears to.have been a small habitation site. 40RE163 Location: 35853'37" North Latitude 84 22' 32" West Longitude
34 Site is situated in the uplands adjacent to the Clinch River. Site Dimensions: 10 meters (E-W by 5 meters (N-S) Work Conducted: 4 shovel cuts Cultural Type: Undetermined prehistoric , [ Cultural Material: 2 retouched / utilized flakes 16 flakes 1 core ~
r, Comments: This appears to have been a small habitation /
site. , , 40RE164
}
Location: 35g53'08"NorthLatitude r 84 22' 25" West Longitude 3, Site is situated on an old alluvial terrace. _ Site Dimensions: 100 meters (N-S) by 25 meters (E-W) , Work Conducted: Surface collection of disturbed area [ 3 shovel cut tests 1 test unit (1 x 1 meter) '
^ /
Cultural Type Undetermined prehistoric [ - Cultural Material: 1 retouched / utilized flake ' 14 flakes >
,1 2 core fragments 2 burnt sandstone Comments: The cultural assemblage indicates a habitation site.
40RE165 T Location: 35g53'12"NorthLatitude 84 23' 09" West Longitude ' d ,f E Thie site, currently situated along the '. I shoreline, is located on an alluvial' terrace. [ Site Dimensions: 100 meters (NW-SE) by 25 meters (NE-SW)
' /.
Work Conducted: Shoreline survey ' 2 backhoe trench excavations ' { < i ( . b 1 I ..
v _ . 35
/
eCultural Type: Early Archaic and Late Archaic Cult 4ralMaterial:
- 1 Kirk Corner Notched projectile point / knife 1.Iddins Undifferentiatd Stemmed projectile
' , point / knife (cf. Chapman 1981:77) r 1 fragmented projectile point / knife haft I r element 2 pitted hammerstones 1 unifacial perforator .
2 retouched / utilized flakes 'I 98 flakes 12 cores and core fragments Comments: The excavations conducted at this site are discussed in the following section of the report. The above artifact listing includes those recovered during excavation, j 40RE166 Location: 35 0 53' 08" North Latitude 84 23' 02" West Longitude I l This site, currently located on the shoreline, is situated on an alluvial terrace. Site Dimensions: 750 meters (NW-SE) by 50 meterc (NE-SW) Work Conducted: Shoreline survey 1 backhoe trench Cultural Type: Middle Archaic, Terminal Archaic, and Middle l Woodland Cultural Material: 1 Stanly Cluster projectile point / knife { (cf. Chapman 1977:34-35) 1 Haywood Triangular projectile point / knife 4 (cf. Keel IT/6:132-133) r 1 steatite bowl sherd L 1 pitted hammerstone 1 notched netsinker
- g. 2 thick biface's/ preforms y 11 flakes 3 cores Comments: A six meter long and two meter. deep backhoe trench was excavated at this site. Although the trench was placed where the shoreline survey indicated the greatest debris density, no L cu1ture1 remeins were encountered.
[ E F
I 36 I A moderate amount of fire-cracked rock and a sparse amount of lithic debitage were present on the shoreline. Middle Archaic, Terminal Archaic I and Middle represented. evidenced by a Woodland Stanly components A Middle Archaic occupation is Cluster are projectile point / knife. (cf. Chapman 1977:34-35); a I terminal Archaic component is evidenced by a steatite bowl sherd and a Middle Woodland occupation is suggested by a Haywood Triangular projectile point / knife (Keel 1976:157). 40RE167 Location: 35 North Latitude 84]52'58" 22' 38" West Longitude i This site, currently located en the shoreline, I is situated on an alluvial terrace. Site Dimensions: 200 me*.ers (NW-SE) by 50 meters (NE-SW) Work Conducted: Shoreline survey Cultural Type: Early Archaic, Woodland and Mississippian Cultural Materials: 1 Kirk Corner Notched projectile point / knife I 1 1 1 limestone tempered plain sherd shell tempered plain sherd thick biface/ preform 5 flakes 2 cores and core fragments Comments: Early Archaic, Woodland and Mississippian I components are present at this site. A moderate amount of fire-cracked rock and a light amount of lithic debitage occur on the shoreline. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED SITES 40RE125 I Location: 35 54' 14" North Latitude 84@23'22" West Longitude This site, currently located on the shoreline, is situated on an alluvial terrace.. Site Dimensions: 200 meters (NE-SW) by 25 meters (NW-SE) Work Conducted: Shoreline survey I I I
I 37 Cultural Types: Terminal Archaic and Woodland Cultural Material: 2 steatite bowl sherds I 1 limestone tempered residual sherd 1 thin biface/ knife 1 retouched / utilized flake 1 flake l Comments: This site was previously surveyed and tested by l Fielder (1974:50, 1975:19-23) and Archaic, j' Woodland and Historic period components t= recorded. 40RE106 Location: 350 53' 03" North Latitude 84 22' 18" West Longitude EN Site Dimensions: 275 meters (NE-SW) by 25 meters (NW-SE) I Work Conducted: Shoreline survey 1 backhoe trench Cultural Types: Woodland Cultural Material: 2 Long Branch Fabric Marked (Figure 7a) 1 Watts Bar Cord Marked (Figure 7b) I 3 Candy Creek Cord Marked (Figure 7c) 7 Mulberry Creek plain 1 sand tempered residual I 1 fragmented haft element of a projectile point / knife 5 thin biface/ knife fragments 3 retouched / utilized flakes I 10 flakes 1 core I Comments: A moderate amount of cultural material, including fire-cracked rock, was present on the surface of this site. The presence of Watts Bar Cord Marked and Long Branch Fabric Marked I ceramics suggest an Early Woodland cultural affiliation. Nash recorded this site in 1941 as a village I with a surface scatter of mussel shell and pottery. Schroedl (1972:6) excavated fourteen I test units at the site but failed to recover any prehistoric remains. Since the site appeared to be extensively disturbed, no further work was recommended. The site was resurveyed two years later and a cultural horizon below the plow zone discovered. (Fielder 1974:41). Since potential for a buried site existed, a five meter long and
38 I I I
- I i
I a b I I 9 ** e O 5 meses."emame"mamm- CM IN O I 2 I Figure 7. Ceramics recovered from 40RE106: a) Long Branch Fabric Marked; b) Watts Bar Cord Marked; c) Candy Creek Cord Marked. l .I .I I l I L . . . -
i I 1.7 meter deep backhoe trench was excavated. 39
)
-g Cultural material (i.e., flakes and fire-cracked J
- g rock) was present in the plow zone and dark 1 brown loam with charcoal mottling was observed below the plow zone (Figure 8). This soil zone appears to have been deposited over a former bank of the Clinch River. Similar deposits were recorded at 40RE108 (Schroedl 1974a
- 3).
l
- I il lI d
!I 4 'k i
- I lE
!I j
_ . . . - _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ , . , . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ _ ~___.._____. _ . . _ . . . . - _ . , - _ . , _ . _ , . .__
l 40 lg DATUM
- I
! e .- 7 ll II l CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT ]g 40 RE 106 i O 1 2 ! M FT i O 3 6 4 4 l WEST PROFILE ! @ PLOWZONE
@ DARK BROWN LOAM WITH CHARCOAL MOTTLING
@ LIGHT BROWN SILT j 8 FIRE CRACKED ROCK l
LITHIC DEBITAGE Figure 8. West profile of Backhoe Trench 4 (40RE106) . b~
ll Loci descriptions Prehistoric Loci No. 1 Location: Uplands Discovery Technicp:e: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 flat flake 1 bipolar flake No. 2 I Location: Discovery Technique: Cultural Material: Uplands Shovel cut testing 1 decortication flake No. 3 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 limited flake core No. 4 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 flat flake ll= No. 5 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 flat flake No. 6 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 decortication flake No. 7 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 random flake core No. 8 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 core fragment I No. 9 Location: Discovery Technique: Uplands Shovel cut testing 7 Cultural Material: 1 flat flake No. 10 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 1 flat flake I
r" _ E _ E . E 8 $w* u* ocwecnW sW9o n$ neoOllnoS nn g m$w** %on y wb >~* 1 E E E t < tpw>o ~ 5%teWj e8r oWeo@on>~ o" E omm$w? t
~
C3>m$**WW ow$or r n nko0 3 s E s e k e v a i s l s n m F r K r o
/ s o d t s e f e a s o t v e z r e n n i r i o k i i n P l f a n s o K / i r l n n g e t P / e t e F o i n k e s e n e c U P i h i a k u r e e c a / e t T m l a e o m g
l a f d l k a m F l l C i f i e a i c l i F c a t i B h i l i a r r r d u r r c B c c - t i T e a e m N a F e k u a e r c t l t o l i n c o f d o t a e t o i d e o e o i i t i a c a f r a p m n r n r r h h e n l e l i a h i i a o i o P T T R U B D F B C S B L R C B C e 5 H H H N H w H a H s u H m H 4 H o t H e H o w E U H
'M w w s ~ w M s
u H M H H M 5
,1<
43 I No. 11 Location: Alluvial terrace Discovery Technique: Shoreline survey Cultural Material: 1 bifacial thinning flake No. 12 Location: Alluvial terrace Discovery Technique: Shoreline survey Cultural Material: 1 St. Albans Side Notched projectile point / knife 1 core fragment Comments: This locus is situated on the opposite side of a small secondary stream from 40RE165. Considering the affects of constant wave action and riverbank erosion, these two artifacts most likely came from 40RE165. Historic Loci No. 13 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 4 undecorated whiteware 1 aqua bottle glass No. 14 Location: Uplands I Discovery Technique: Cultural material: Shovel cut testing 4 undecorated whiteware 49 glass (43 clear and 6 purple-
,E tinged)
E 1 machine cut nail 1 metal bolt , I washer Comments: This locus represents the previously recorded property of John M. Robinett's heirs (Schroedl 1974c:13). The two limestone chimneys depicted in Figure 12 (Schroedl 1974c:16) are still standing. An examination of the building debris indicated that both machine cut and wire nails were used in construction, suggesting a late nineteenth to twentieth century occupation. No. 15 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing
. Cultural Material: 1 co'rroded wire I Comments: This shovel cut was located next to a small twentieth century dump.
No. 16 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing I
g g g g 3 W E E E E E E
*4 '
O T E w w w w w w 0 g co 4 m m
- W 3 5
4 a
. m a w 5 n
m 5 Undecorated g 5 - - w H , n e m n Annular c w w w " ft
- H W N " c Clear a g M M Aqua B m
re cm H H * @ Purple-tinged n M M w Machine Cut w 2 , a o j H H r o Wire y 0 M N . Corroded M
. g M M Bolts y p ,
n g H H O. B Washers g g H H . Wire O m o w
- 8 Coal "
w W Cinder M W
45 Cultural Materials: 3 glass (2 clear, 1 purple-tinged) 1 wire nail 1 corroded nail 4 coal l 1 cinder
'ents: Cut limestone slabs and machine-made brick were present on the surface of this locus, suggesting the presence of a historic I structure. The machine-made brick and wire nail suggests a late nineteenth to twentieth century occupation.
i 1
..on: Uplands siscovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Materials: 2 undecorated whiteware 4 glass (3 clear and 1 purple-tinged)
Comments: This locus measured less than five meters in length, suggesting a historic dump. No. 18 Location: Alluvial terrace Discovery Technique: Shovel cut testing Cultural Material: 11 clear glass Unassigned No. 19 Location: Uplands Discovery Technique: Surface Survey Cultural Materials: None Comments: This locus consists of a cluster of nineteen stone mounds (Figure 9) . The mounds cover an area 60 meters (N-S) by 80 meters (E-W) and vary in height from .4 to 1 meter (Figure 10). The mounds consist of cherty-limestone rock mixed with little or no soil. Since the rock mound cluster was outside the impact area, testing was not conducted. This locus may be a cluster of prehistoric burial mounds. The mounds are similar to prehistoric burial mounds excavated in the adjacant Powell River drainage (Webb 1938) and the Little Bear Creek watershed, Alabama (Oakley 1975). Like the prehistoric stone mounds of the Powell River drainage, they occur on the tops of ridges and are not associated with prehistoric occupational debris (Webb 1938:363). On the other hand, this locus may represent historic collections of rock gathered from plowed fields. However, there is no evidence that this area was cultivated and it would be disadvantageous for a farmer to clear his field by randomly piling rock over a relatively large area (cf. Oakley 1975:264). I
i N l I I l *
, e' N
l @ s I g e l @ e 1
- g O i
I e i I I CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT LOCUS 19 0 10 20 30 M Om: I Figure 9. Locus 19 rock mounds. I _ _ , _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . - . . . . . . _
. . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - _ . . _ _ ._ _ _ . . . _ ~ _ . . . _ _ , . _ _ _ _ . . . - _ . _ . . . , , . _ -
47 } .I I iI
? ,
' i.- ~ . ' -
.j/
f .,i
, . I ~ } ' j7
,,.f ** *
' f f ' ' ' , '(-
..) ' ' 4 p
y
*l , :-' 4I %r',H _
f ?,
,-.) s,.' , : /, 3,7 ; l l
. r. - '..
T. . _._ . , e
f ~ ' '
5 .Q. 1,'. { s- - 5 ' ; -
' ' , ' ,,; ., ? ,_ ~ ,o ..- _ '.- '
I .l
~
4; *
- r. _b ,
J *I-' '** ' }
'r. . .
.; 4- ,. _
~
7~,# '**- -
- j. ,
* ~,L,.,;__! --
~
~ 4: - , - 2 , , .y - :-
,-s,--.~ <-
% a ,? -
_' ' 5. . T g g l .r' ,
%Q}'*
EI , ,Y 4 * ?.- < fs' pr A*/' l
,% es ' ' " ,% '_ _ <, Jc . , /'- ,'
.? ,; '; v *r , .
l Figure 10. Locus 19 rock mound. ,i . il i i i L.________. _ _____ .. ..
l 48 The evidence remains inconclusive. The dating and function of I these mounds investigation. can be determined only by further Since it is not known whether these rock mounds are a significant prehistoric site or an insignificant historic feature, a permanent site number was not assigned. No. 20 Location: Uplands < Discovery Technique: Surface survey Cultural Material: None i !g Comments: This locus consists of fifteen stone mounds (Figure 11) . The g mounds cover an area 65 meters (N-S) by 55 meters (E-W) and vary in height from .5 to 1 meter. The mounds consist of cherty-limestone rock mixed with little or no soil. The same problem with determining the function and assigning a cultural affiliation for Locus 19 applies to this locus. I Since these factors remain unknown, a permanent site number was not assigned. !I E I I I I I I . I I I
49
- I N l
I 1 l E @ !E 4 i e @ l
- B
- ee
- I * @
e l e I I
$P i
I i I e 1 I I CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT LOCUS 20 g. FT O 50 00 l I Figure 11. Locus 20 rock mounds. 4 I I
l 50 VIII. BACKHOE EXCAVATIONS AT 40RE165 I A backhoe test trench was excavated at 40RE165 (Figures 12 and 13), a newly recorded shoreline site. After prehistoric cultural material was encountered one meter below the surface, the excavacions were expanded and I Backhoe Trench 8 excavated (Figure 14). A > ..izontal datum was established so that excavated levels of the backhoe trenches could be correlated. Figure 15 illustrates the profiles of both backhoe trenches and Table 4 provides provenietce data on the cultural material recovered. 1 A 1.3 by 1 meter unit was excavated in Backhoe Trench 6. Two 10 centimeter levels were screened through 1/4 inch mesh. Lithic debitage was sparse and fire cracked rock light to moderate in these levels. The last five centimeters of Level 7 were sterile, indicating that the cultural zone was less than 20 centimeters thick. 1 Two features were defined in Backhoe Trench 6 (Figure 16). Feature 1 1 was a concentration of fire cracked rock and Feature 3 was an oval shaped pit. Two pitted hammerstones were recovered from Feature 1 and one Kirk Corner Notched projectile point / knife (Figure 17a) was recovered from Feature 3. I Backhoe Trench 8 was excavated eight meters to the east of Backhoe Trench 6. The purpose of this trench was to determine the areal extent of the buried cultural deposits discovered in Backhoe Trench 6. The floor of this trench was excavated in one meter square units. Four levels were excavated in Unit A, one in Unit B and one in Unit C. Each unit was hand excavated in 10 centimeter levels and all dirt screened through 1/4 inch mesh. An Iddins Undifferentiated Stemmed projectile point / knife (Chapman I
I se I l 5 1 I ~ I l I __ I D U
' W i e% FI ;
I CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT 40 RE 165 u g e
-- m" FEATURES I a 3 I Figure 16. Plan view of Features 1 and 3 (40RE165) .
I
51 I \ lg
\
\ i \ ' ,
\
, . (..
1 ' I k.- ' L ,-'
=c= 4% .
^3- & ~~ ,
5
,. g g-w '-g I .,w..,-{. . '.e m,,- - ?. 7 %, g.
.. g .- - ~;' ,~ -
2,x ' -
.=
.}~ .
g-sw a e *
. t "
p
- g:; .
'? '
O 2_ ~~ 't
. g.. g 4'R g+,
g, ?-
,w n
. , pe- .k.g4 .,
~ : .
~
s .. a. P i Figure 12. View 0f 40RE165 shoreline. 1
~
W W m w r-'.ur [_,__------ __,..,e,a-v*'~"
52 E [ ~ ] . , m. '-
'j M _ ,e
- .i l *; __
=
u 5
'; *.,'Q . . < '
l ..
'h , [ *j .'
l - & '?f5$.:
?!$57Y h . . .. '*l I.?'*-
- .l. ,;;. _, ; s v '
, e }9 l o. * '4 .' jf.,.'.
, i, .
Figure 13. Backhoe Trench 6 (40RE165).
53 l W/ aQ x i i x,,N% </4 64
~
xs BHT 6 9 9, (4 BHT 8 .- m x I CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT O 50 100 200
. METERS CONTOUR INTERVAL 2 FEET C ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE
- BACKHOE TRENCH Figure 14. Backhoe excavations at 40RE165.
____________________________E_*_ _ _ - . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . . - _ - _ . . _ _ _ _ _ __j
._ _. .. . . - ~. . -- - .. _ . .-. . . . - - .. . -. - ... --.. - . - _ . ..
i, I j l E y
-\
~
N@
\-
- a DAIADE N '
= * *. @
LEvf L 6 _ , II a-L EVEL 7,A rs 7' 1
\ v BACKHOE TRENCH 6 i
I 1 CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT 40 RE 165 0 50 m f - "# 'CW
-~
6 ' FT o_ _ . _ .s e _ _ _3 4 b ! SOUTHEAST PROFILE j _ @ ! Darum--~LINE ~
) -
@ PLOWZONE w
@ YELLOW / BROWN SILTY CLAY t~
LEVEL , -w'-- 3 e , .( , __
@ YELLOW / BROWN COMMCT CLAY II \@ --
g -
@ ME Dt VM BROWN CLAY
,_ @ wEDiuu mown CaumcT ctAv UNIT A I UNIT B I UNIT C t 1 ----- BEGNNING OF HAND EXCAVATIONS
- LITHIC DEBITAGE BACKHOE TRENCH 8 O FIRE CRACKED ROCK Ln b
Figure 15. Backhoe trench profiles (40RE165) . r
d o H o t* c ta c N t* t* t* H a c n N N t* ta n en H 8 H n a 3a uomeoawo nameomec g cy m < *~ < ra<<<co roam <<sn 3 e no es e tc e o n H h H m O m sk# mwwHn "Ekg H et a e rr o e a n
> #Ek"##$
mea 4mmo n r n D # 8 m y wg o E w H H H Proiectile Points / Knives N 9 2 Thin Biface/ Knives $ m Y Thick Biface/ Knives M $ c
- w w Retouched / Utilized Flakes a e-m H H Unifacial Perforators m E "
Blade-like Flakes H w w n G Pitted Hammerstones g Q H tr H Notched Netsinkers e g U s H 4Wes H w . Decortication m w H w A AmwH H w Flat n N
- w H ww w Bifacial Thinning y 8 x O I' W w . . 2 O n Core Trimming m g .
s a w H l m w WmmH H ^ Shatter > E O O M a H H Bipolar $ Limited Flake $
" "" Random Flake Core Nucleus @
Bipolar
- Nm H Core Fragments I
a H mu mmw $ y w **$Q y*8 Fire Cracked Rock
- 56 i
I I I "
.I i
il l F3 I KIRK CORNER
/~ NOTCHED P.P./K 1
I O C
' 00,h I 9 FI ;
l
; o t
I
; CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT 40 RE 165 O 50 I M FT o 5 1 1.5 2 FEATURES I83 I
I Figure 16. Plan view of Features I and 3 (40RE165) . I . I
57 E I _ I e a b 4 c 0 5 CM IN O l 2 i Figure 17. Selected lithic artifacts recovered from 40RE165: a) Kirk Corner Notched projectile point / knife; b) Iddins Undifferentiated Stemmed projectile point / knife; c) unifacial perforator. I
58 1981: 77) was found forty centimeters below the surface in Unit A. A medium brown clay soil zone adjacent to the feature may be midden. A small sample of ethnobotanical remains was recovered from the excavations and analyzed by Andrea Shea Brewer. The sample includes two hickory nut fragments (Backhoe Trench 8, Levels II and III) and one persimmon seed (Feature 1). 1 The two diagnostic projectile points / knives suggest an Early Archaic and a Late Archaic occupation. The majority of cultural remains in both backhoe trenches occur at approximately the same depth from the surface and are in the same soil horizon, the upper portion of the yellow brown compact clay zone. This suggests that the cultural zones of the two trenches were deposited at the same time. The presence of one Kirk Corner Notched projectile point / knife and feature types known to date to the Early Archaic period in East Tennessee (Chapman 1977:97-107) suggests an Early Archaic affiliation for this horizon. I I I I I I
59 40RE165 FEATURS DESCRIPTIONS Feature 1 Description Concentration of fire-cracked rock with minor charcoal mottling I Dimensions: .6 x .5 meters Contents: 2 pitted hammerstones 8,628 grams of fire cracked rock Feature 2
Description:
Basin shaped pit with organically staired fill and charcoal mottling Dimensions: .8 x .8 x .3 meters Contents: 2 retouched / utilized flakes 21 lithic debitage 79 grams of fire cracked rock I Comments: Approximately one-half of this feature was excavated; the remainder is in the southeast wall of Backhoe Trench 8. Feature 3
Description:
Oval pit with organically stained fill and minor burnt clay and charcoal mottling Dimensions: 'I Contents:
.4 x .4 x .4 meters 1 Kirk Corner Notched projectile point / knife I Comments: Approximately one-half of this feature was excavated; the remainder is in the southeast wall of Backhoe Trench 6.
I I l I 1 I I I l I I
60 IX. LITHIC ANALYSIS A total of 1304 lithics was recovered from 19 sites and 12 loci. The sample includes bifacial, unifacial and cobble tools, steatite bowl sherds and lithic debitage. Table 5 provides data on the type of lithic resources utilized at each site. Less than 1% (N=10) of site debitage is bipolar. The majority of the bipolar debitage (N=8) is from habitation sites. I This suggests that the bipolar technique was not extensively used at lithic extraction sites; however, temporal differences in the use of bipolar industries in the Little Tennessee River Valley of East Tennessee have been discerned (Chapman 1977: 89) and the age of 1.he lithic extraction sites located within the CRBRP project area is not known. Five upland sites can be defined as la..3c extraction sites (40RE153, 40RE156, 40RE157, 40RE158 and 40RE159). Knox or Chickamauga chert outcrops at all five sites. These sites are identified as lithic extraction by lithic assemblages that co.nsist primarily of' local chert and by a high ratio of decortication flakes, shatter and ' limited flake cores. The presence of lithic extraction sites in all -locales known 'to I have chert deposits suggests extensive exploitation ofi this resource. < -
\
i, The lithic sample is biased towards Knox chert because of the 'one meter square test units excavated at ' two Knox chert extraction sites. Thus, generalized statements about differential utilization of chert > I resources cannot be made. However, preliminary statements on utilization of chert types for tool classes (Table 6) can be made. The sample suggests no differential utilization for unifacial tools but a possible ; preference of Chickamauga chert for bifacial tools.
' / p,1 - .
/- ,l
[
}
Table 5. Lithic resources utilized at each site. '/ , [ . s Sample Knox Chickamaug) Unidentified Quartz Sandstone Steatite' - Size Chert [ A 40RE151 78 23.1% 55.1% 18.04 3.8% [ 40RE152 117 9.4% 45.3% , -44.4% .9% 40RE153 33 100.0% 40RE155 7 28.6% 42.8% 28.6% 40RE156 251 98.4% .8% I { 40RE157 21 95.2%
.8%
, 4.8%
40RE158 319 98.1% 1.3% .6% [L 40RE159 99 3.0% 94.0% 3.0% 40RE160 38 28.9% 36.9% 34.2% 40RE161 8 25.0% 12.5% 62.5% 40RE162 9 22.2% 33.3% 44.44 ( 40RE163 19 63.2% 35.8% t 1 [ B 40RE154 101 18.8% 49.5% 31.7% 1.04 40RE164 17 23.5% 47.1% 29.4% ( ( 40RE106 20 25.0% 60.0% 15.0% 4CRE125 5 60.0% 40.0% 40RE165 118 39.0% 24.6% 34.7% { 40RE166 21 38.1% 28.6% 1.7% 19.0% 9.5% 4.dt 40RE167 9 44.4% 55.5% Total 1290 55.1% 28.6% 15.3% .4% .2% .2%
~'
A = Uplands B = Second Alluvial Terrace [ C = First Alluvial Terrace { [ [ T -
62 I < Table 6. Tool classes by lithic resource type. t t 4 i U !E i
- E o i
n ? lE E : lE 2 : J 5 S E .S 3 4
- & 6 E &
, Sample Size l Projectile Points / Knives 7 0 4 3 0 Thin Bifsces/ Knives 7 2 3 2 0 Thick Bifaces/ Preforms 3 1 1 1 0 Retouched / Utilized Flakes 62 22 27 13 0
, Unifacial Perforator 2 0 1 1 0 Blade-like Flakes 3 0 2 1 0 Totals: 84 25 38 21 0 I
1 1 I l l
63 Most investigators pigeonhole flakes into a retouched or utilized flake category without considering the flake type. A previous study of West Tennessee utilized / retouched flake types has indicated that a relatively high percentage of flakes (30%) were utilized because of limited raw materici resources and that certain flake types (i.e., flat 1 l and bifacial thinning) were intentionally selected for utilization (Jolley 1981:45). The CRBRP sample suggests that flat flakes were selected for utilization (Table 7). The low percentage of retouched / utilized flakes (6%) recovered from the CRBRP project area in comparison to Hatchie River, West Tennessee retouched / utilized flakes relates to a greater availability of lithic resources in the CRBRP area. I 4 I
64 I Table 7. Retouched / utilized flakes by flake type. I Decortication 14 22.6% Flat 29 46.8% Bifacial Thinning 1 1.6% Core Triming 3 4.8% Shatter 15 24.2% Bipolar J 0.0% 62 I Unutilized Retouched / Percentage of I Flakes Utilized Flakes Utilized / Retouched Flakes I Decortication 331 14 4.2% Flat 232 29 12.5% Bifacial Thinning 23 1 4.3% Core Triming 24 3 12.5% Shatter 417 15 3.6% Bipolar 6 0 0.0' Total 1,027 62 6.0% (average) I
65 X. RECOMMENDATIONS A total of 17 previously unrecorded sites and two potentially significant loci was recorded. Sufficient documentation and analysis permit preliminary recommendations for National Register eligibility. l Table 8 provides a summary listing of major site components and recommendations. I Site 40RE165 is a significant cultural resource. It is the first buried Early Archaic (8,000 - 6,000 B.C.) site discovered in the Clinch River Valley. The site contains undisturbed cultural deposits. Three features (two pits and a concentration of fire cracked rock) were discovered. Ethnobotanical specimens were recovered from the l excavations. The site contains data relevant to Early Archaic settlement and subsistence in the Clinch River Valley. The site will not be impacted I l by the proposed CRBRP construction plans. l Two clusters of rock mounds are a potentially significant resource. Since it could not be determined whether they are a significant prehistoric resource or an insignificant historic feature, permanent site numbers were not assigned. Prehistoric stone mounds with burials have been excavated in the adjacent Powell River drainage (Webb 1938). The two l mound clusters within the CRBRP project area are similar to prehistoric mounds (Webb 1938:363); however, they may represent historic collections of rock gathered from plowed fields. The dating and function of these mounds can be determined only by site excavation. Since both rock mound clusters are cutside of the impact area, the sites were not tested. l l l 1 1
TABLE 8. Site components and recommendations. CULTURAL COMPONENTS RECO.*EENDATIONS E 1 m3 m m 3 $o u $ 3 n Q 3% 2 2 G 1 22 3 3 8 8 la a8 3 E Site Number 40RE151 X 1 40RE152 X 1 40RE153 X 1 40RE154 X 1 40RE155 X 1 40RE156 X 1 40RE157 X 1 I 40RE158 40RE159 40RE160 X X X 1 1 1 40RE161 X 1 40RE162 X 1 40RE163 X 1 40RE164 X 1 40RE165 X 3 40RE166 X X 2 l 40RE167 X X X 2 Potentially Significant Loci L-19 X 2 L-20 X 2 l Key For Recommendations
- 1. No further work necessary.
I 2. Further evaluation necessary if the proposed construction plans are altered and the site is impacted.
- 3. Significant resource eligible for inclusion to the National l Register of Historic Places.
I I I L m l
~ 67 in the CRBRP { The proposed plans for the CRBRP, as outlined environmental report (DOE 1981) and indicated on detailed site plan maps dated 3/3/81 and boring location maps dated 8/25/81, will have no adverse impact on cultural resources that are eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Places. If construction plans are altered and any of the archaeological sites recommended for further evaluation affected, then the aforementioned recommendations apply. It is further recommended that an archaeologist monitor construction activities proposed along the shoreline between E194+00 and E196+00 (see Site Plan Map dated 3/6/81 by Burns and Roe). Dense stands of trees prevented deep testing of this area. Although no significant archaeological sites ware recorded here during the sho' reline survey, a significant buried site may be present. I I I I I I I
68 l l XI.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS l A total of 17 previously unrecorded archaeological sites and 20 loci was discovered. All sites and 12 of the loci were prehistoric, 6 loci were historic and two loci unassigned. The prehistoric resources date from the Early Archaic to Mississippian periods and the historic resources date to the late nineteenth and twentieth century. Twelve of the prehistoric sites were habitation and five lithic extraction. A shovel cut testing program was used to discover 14 sites and 16 loci. Shovel cut tests screened through 1/4 inch mesh and placed at 25 meter intervals proved to be an effective site discovery technique. The effectiveness is demonstrated by the discovery of four sites with dimensions of 25 meters or less. All sites and loci visible on the surface, including small historic dumps, were detected by the shovel cut testing program. Critical to the discovery of the sites was the use of 1/4 inch mesh. Considering the sparse debris densities and the small flakes recovered, few of these sites would have been discovered without screening the shovel cuts. Other investigators working in the Western Tennessee River Valley and Little Bear Creek Reservoir, Alabama have found screened shovel cuts to be a successful discovery technique (Doug Prescott, personal communication and Guy Weaver, personal communication). The intensity of survey coverago and the effectiveness of the methods suggest that most if not all archaeological sites located within the project area have been recorded. This provides an opportunity to examine prehistoric utilization of the meander bond. A grand total of 27 prehistoric sites has been recorded within the project area (Figure 18) . These include: 20 open habitation, 5 lithic extraction, 1 sheltered
(D 1 / E ,) \
,,l- 'Nb. y
/ l\
,,[' ,Y~ Q l Q
~
t
/$ ' '> .
?, Y hj' < j i j '
f' ,bh7
; > ;fu,r; .
;ww ,e kr
,) ,u' ~ Y', ,
) "
. \
/ - \
p { c. 'k-: .j /., /'Q-['~, /#g,6., , j, 7,.
.s p ]!
; [ ["
) 0/'a,r'~
( { #N,'52(\
\
g-- , l
\ --
'Q .
. . f. (
"\ ' ( _h Y/' k Q N-' 'f f o - e
.U k NrdIW
\
p A .,
.. / Q \ *hl I
%Nf&)')%.f f j'@'I.M ,0\ LIM 3
i E@$hSldfdA'S% j
- RE '09
/ 3l l(,'M(c. '4 DJkJ ,I e,.-. f l ,g3'.6 f y :,udir,,l
.. ),.y 3 y/ / . '; f .
I ( j./ o // .. j J J Y f r - h / " 7 f[,40st157 [.k ' CUNCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PROJECT l .. , , .4onrise-y/ /'r/ , . w
,, '.' .,,s: g 9 L , ? n l / \
I
't Jr.. -
;,^
/ . . . .
-7 f
/ /i - ( g, '.[4ont ..,,,,,,,,,,',,ur '~
l
-.tc ;*gf fm m'Jv: -
..+
esyg t n 4 / ; ,,_ , p >'7 y c 3,". c:3, K3 '/9 / z,q ;xy i E %;\,o, g 'y ,. r. , eo miss
%,% ' g M ,(; [ ,] - ,
l yMCN O L (' Q lG.),,,,lf
. ~ no e pt 24 / I *o et s'9 -
x -- tw l' hll 4occg48 ,/ 4c ario4 %,9 40 RE l0S 40 $T 12$ Natier %)) - Figure 18. Prehistoric site types within the project area.
. . . ~ __._
70 habitation (cave) and 1 burial / ceremonial site (mound). The distribution of all habitation sites suggests a riverine orientation. All upland open habitation sites are located on low lying uplands adjacent to the Clinch River or adjacent to an unnamed tributary located in the eastern portion of the project area. The only sites that do not display a riverine orientation are the lithic extraction sites. I Table 9 provides data on site type and elevation and distance to nearest water source. These dsta suggest that elevation above water and distance to nearest water source (either temporary or permanent) were significant variables for habitation sites. The mean for habitation sites } was 19.5 feet elevation above water and 185 feet distance from nearest water while the mean for lithic extraction sites was 134 feet elevation above water and 410 feet distance from nearest water. The absence of habitation sites over 90 feet elevation above water and 800 feet distant from nearest water source explains the absence of prehistoric sites in the northern portion of the project area. The data recovered from the CRBRP project area can be used to predict .I the location of other sites in the region. However, the results of a recent survey of the meander bend downstream from the site of the CRBRP are not consistent with our survey results. "he GAI (1981) survey of Campbell Bend failed to record any prehistoric upland sites. Investiga-tions at the CRBRP suggest that a greater number of upland sites should be lI present at Campbell Bend; the lower elevation of the uplands and the constricted shape of the mean@ .- bend allows easier access to riverine resources. These inconsistencies may be the result of different environments or the use of different survey methods. The environments are I I l
71 Table 9. Relation of site types to nearest water. I I Sample Elevation above Distance to Size Nearest Water Nearest Water l p Range L ~ Open Habitation 20 0- 90' 0 - 800' Lithic Extraction 5 100 - 165' 250 - 800' L cave 1 145' 600-Mound 1 40' 900' f Mean Open Habitation 20 19.5' 185' Lithic Extraction 5 134' 410' Cave 1 145' 600' Mound 1 40' 900' t I l L ~
72 the same with the exception of sandstone ridges at Campbell Bend. The survey coverage and the survey methods were not the same. Only 25% of the uplands was subjected to a shovel cut testing program at Campbell Bend and the survey methods did not include screening of shovel cuts. Consequently, valid comparisons of site distribution and density between the two meander bends cannot be made. I I I 1 I
- I
,I I 1 I l l I I l I I 1 I I - _
73 REFERENCES CITED Braun, E. Lucy 1950 Deciduous Forests of Eastern North America. The Blakiston Company, Philadelphia. Burns and Roe 1980 Preliminary Safety Analysis Report for The Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant. Carr, Archie 1952 Handbook of Turtles. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Chapman, Jefferson ll
- B 1977 Archaic Period Research in the lower Little Tennessee River Valley
- 1975: Icehouse Bottom, Harrison Branch, Thirty Acre Island, Calloway Island, Report of Investigations, No. 18, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, l 1978 The Bacon Farm Site and a Buried Site Reconnaissance. University of Tennessee, Department of Anthropology, Report of Investigations, No. 23, and Tennessee valley Authority Publications in Anthropology No. 9.
I l 1979 The Howard and Calloway Island Sites University of Tennessee, Department of Anthropology, Report of Investigations 27 and Tennessee Valley Authority, Publications in Anthropology 23. 1981 The Bacon Bend and Iddins Sites: The Late Archaic Period in The Lower Little Tennessee River Valley. The University of Tennessee, Department of Anthropology, Report of Investigations, No. 31 and I The Tennessee Valley Authority Publications in Anthropology, No. 25. I Chartkof f, Joseph L. , and Kerry K. Chartkof f 1980 The Discovery of Archaeological Sites: A Review of Methods and Techniques. Report submitted to the U.S. Forest Service, Berkeley, California. E Cleland, Charles E. I 1966 The Prehistoric Animal Ecology and Ethnozoology of The Upper Great Lakes Region. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Anthropological Papers No. 29. l I Cole, Patricia E. 1975 A Synthesis and Interpretation of the Hamilton Mortuary Pattern in East Tennessee. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Davis, R.P. Stephen, Jr. 1980 A Preliminary Report of Probabilistic and Nonprobabilistic I I Archaeological Sampling in Industrial Area II, Tellico Reservoir, Tennessee. Tellico Archaeological Survey Report No. 2. Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee. I
L 74 Department of Energy ~ 1981 Environmental Report for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Dice, Lee R. 1943 The Biotic Provinces of North America. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Paulkner, Charles H. and Major C. R. McCollough 1973 Introductory Report of the Normandy Reservoir Salvage Project: Environmental Setting, Typology and Survey. Report of I Investigations No. 11, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee. I Fenneman, Nevin M. 1938 Physiography of the Eastern United States. McGraw Hill, New York. Fielder, George F., Jr, I 1974 Archaeological Survey with Emphasis on Prehistoric Sites of the Oak Ridge 19servation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 1975 Cultural Resource Survey of the Exxon Nuclear Facility, Oak Ridge, Tennessee: An Interim Report, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Fielder, George F., Jr., Steven R. Ahler and Benjamin Barrington 1977 Historic Sites Reconnaissance of the Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak I Ridge, Tennessee. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. GAI Consultants, Inc. 1981 Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. Report on a Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation of the Tennessee Synfuels Associates Site, Oak Ridge Reservation, Roane County, Tennessee. Hickman, Mary E. 1937 A Contribution to the Mollusca of East Tennessee. M. A. Thesis, I University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Hood, Victor I 1977 The Davis-Noe Site (40RE147); A Study of Functional Variability in Early Mississippian Subsistence Settlement Patterns. M. A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Jolley, Robert L. 1981 An Archaeological Sample Survey of the Loess Hills Region of the I Hatchie River in West Tennessee. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University.
F
>s ll Keel, Bennie C.
1976 Cherokee Archaeology, A Study of the Appalachian Summit. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Kimball, Larry R. I 1980 Description of Lithic Artifact Categories. In A Preliminary Report of Probabilistic and Nonprobabilistic Archeological Sampling in Industrial Area II, Tellico Reservoir, Tennessee. Tellico Archeological Survey Report No. 2. Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee. Koppen, W. 1931 Grundriss der Klimakunde. Walter De Gruyter Company, Berlin. McCollough, Major C. R. and Charles H. Faulkner 1973 Excavation of the Higgs and Doughty Sites I-75 Salvage Archaeology. Tennessee Archaeological Society Miscellaneous Paper No. 12. Knoxville. McIlhany, Calvert W. 1977 Archaeological Survey of the Middle Nolichucky River Basin of Northeastern Tennessee. Report on file at the Tennessee Division of Archaeology, Nashville. McNutt, C. H. and F. W. Fischer 1960 Archaeological Investigations in the Upper Melton Hill Reservoir, Anderson County, Tennessee, 1960. Report submitted to National Park Service.
.g '3 McNutt, C. H. and J. Bennett Graham 1961 Archaeological Investigations in the Lower Melton Hill Reservoir, Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, Tennessee, 1961. .I Report submitted to National Park Service.
Miller, Robert A.
- I 1974 The Geologic History of Tennessee. Bulletin 74, Division of Geology, Nashville, Tennessee.
l 'g Oakley, Carey B. g 1975 Stone Mounds of Little Bear Creek. In Archaeological Investigations in The Little Bear Creek Reservoir by Carey B. Oakley and Eugene M. Futato, pp. 175-269. Research Series No. I 1. Office of Archaeological Research, The University of Alabama. O'Brien, Michael J. 1976 Excavation of a Dallas Component Mound, Anderson County, Tennessee Report on file, Tennessee Division of Archaeology, Nashville. l Olsen, J. S., G. Cristofolini and S. Cristofolini, editors 1966 Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Flora 1. Preliminary Alphabetic Inventory of Vascular Plants. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee II l
76 ! Schiffer, Michael B., Alan P. Sullivan and Timothy C. Klinger ! 1978 The Design of Archaeological Surveys, World Archaeology 10 (1): 1-29. Schroedl, Gerald F. 1972 Archaeological Reconnaissance and Test Excavations in the Clinch River Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Plant Site Area. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1973a Test Excavations at 40RE124 in the Clinch River Liquid Metal Fa'st Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1973b Salvage Archaeology in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Progress Report for October 1973. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority 1973c Salvage Archaeology in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Progress Report for November 1973. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1973d Salvage Archaeology in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Progress Report for December 1973. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1974a Salvage Archaeology in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area Progress Report for January and February 1974. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1974b Test Excavations at Site !9RE129 in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1974c Historic Sites Reconnaissance in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1975a Archaeological Investigations in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. Progress Report for December 1974. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1975b Archaeological Investigations in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Area. A Progress Report of Fieldwork and Analysis Conducted Between January 1975 and October 1975. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority. 1978 The Patrick Site (40MR40), Tellico Reservoir, Tennessee, University of Tennessee, Department of Anthropology, Report of Investigations 25 and Tennessee Valley Authority Publications in Anthropology 22. Shelford, Victor E. 1963 The Ecology of North America. University of Illinois Press, Urbcna.
77 Swann, M. E., Wallace Roberts, E. H. Hubbard and H. C. Porter 1942 Soil Survey of Roane County, Tennessee. United States Department of Agriculture Bureau of Plant Industry. I Thomas, Cyrus 1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. Twelf th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington, D.C. Thomas, Prentice M. 1973 A Map of Two Historic Sites in the Clinch River Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Plant Area, Roane Couni;y, Tennessee. Report submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville. 1977 Archaeological Investigations at Fort Southwest Point. Cepartment of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. U. S. Atomic Energy Commission 1974 Draft Environmental Statement, Radioactive Waste Facilities, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
- g Webb, William S.
i5 1938 An Archaeological Survey of the Norris Basin in Eastern Tennesee Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 118. Washington, D. C. I I I I I I I I -}}