Saturday, 23 March 2019 was Archaeology Day at the Castle Museum and with well over 100 attendees the event was a great success! We had a wide variety of Prehistoric and Historic Period artifacts from Huron, Genesee, Livingston, and Saginaw Counties on display and several representatives from the Castle Museum and the Michigan Archaeological Society on hand to talk about the collections, answer questions, and share our enthusiasm for local archaeology! People brought in several fossils, a couple of rocks that look like they could be artifacts, but probably are not, and one gentleman brought in a really nice grooved ax. The goal was to engage the public in a positive way about archaeology and we certainly accomplished that. So, a huge “Thank You!!!” to all who participated. I think it is definitely worth doing again.
I am excited to announce that the Castle Museum, in partnership with the Saginaw Valley Chapter of the Michigan Archaeological Society, will be hosting Archaeology Day on Saturday, 23 March 2019! This should be a fun and interesting event with lots of really cool artifacts on display from the Saginaw Valley and elsewhere in Michigan. Do you have an old bottle, an arrowhead, or some other artifact (or a weird rock that looks like it might be an artifact) from Michigan that you’d like to know more about? Bring them in and see if you can stump the experts! If not, come anyway and enjoy the displays, chat with the archaeology folks, and check out the rest of the museum. Please note, monetary appraisals will not be conducted at this event.
A recent donation to the Castle Museum included dozens of stone artifacts, a few grit-tempered ceramic sherds, and several hundred fragments of animal bones from an archaeological site (assigned the provisional name of SH-200) located along the Shiawassee River in Saginaw County, Michigan. Diagnostic lithic and ceramic artifacts indicate the site was occupied, at a minimum, during the Middle and Late Woodland periods. The large animal bone assemblage includes 22 specimens that were intentionally modified into awls, points, hafts/handles, or scraping tools. The latter category includes 10 fragments of bone beamers.
Beamers are hide-working tools used to scrape hair and tissue from the hide prior to tanning. They functioned in a manner similar to a drawknife. The name “beamer” appears to reference the practice of stretching the hide over a wooden beam during the scraping process. Although other bones were sometimes used, beamers were generally manufactured from the metapodials (cannon bones) of members of the deer family (Cervidae). All of the specimens from SH-200 are derived from White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus).
Beamers were made by removing either the anterior or posterior border of the central shaft of a metapodial (metacarpal or metatarsal) and then grinding the two parallel lateral edges into blade-like forms. The specimens from SH-200 include two metacarpal (front leg) fragments modified on their posterior margin, three metatarsal (rear leg) fragments modified on their posterior margins, four metatarsal fragments (three of which refit – see image above) modified on their anterior margins, and one undetermined metapodial modified on its anterior margin.
Over time the blades would dull, necessitating occasional re-sharpening. Eventually the tool would become too thin to support the stresses of use and it would fracture. The specimens from SH-200 were likely used to this point and discarded. In 2002, a nearly complete example (after refitting) was excavated by the Castle Museum archaeology team at the nearby site 20SA1251 (Sommer 2007:4-5). This specimen was made by modifying the posterior border of a White-tailed Deer metatarsal. Two additional bones, the naviculocuboid and cuneiform pes, were found in articulation with proximal end of the metatarsal indicating either this end of the beamer was wrapped in some manner during use, or that connecting ligaments/tissues remained intact during what must have been a relatively short use-life.
Compared with stone and ceramic artifacts, bone tools are relatively infrequent in prehistoric archaeological assemblages from the Great Lakes region. This is especially true of surface-derived collections. The beamer fragments (and other modified bones) from SH-200 bolster our inventory of what is likely an underrepresented technological aspect of local material culture.
Well, we’ve wrapped up another field season at the Steltzriede Farm site in Saginaw Township and, in terms of area excavated, it was the biggest one yet! This year, the Castle Museum archaeology team excavated 13 1X1 meter excavation units. This compares with 11 in 2015, 10 in 2016, and six in 2017.
During the 2018 field season, we worked in two areas of the site. We spent the first part of the field season expanding our excavation in the “cabin area” where we had previously found the cellar of the Steltzriede’s original house/cabin. You can read updates from the first part of the field season here, here, and here.
The second half of the field season was spent excavating a 2X5 meter excavation block in yard area between cellar and the still-standing 1848 frame house. Shovel-testing in 2017 indicated the presence of early to mid-19th century (and more recent) material in the general area. We were hoping to find midden deposits or a well, privy, or other feature associated with the early-mid 19th century period of the Steltzriede occupation. In addition, we were hoping to learn more about the timing and extent of landscape modification / fill deposition across the site. We were only partially successful in meeting these goals.
Unfortunately, features and dense midden deposits were not to be found. Instead we uncovered a light scatter of mid-19th through 20th century debris across the area. Bricks and nails were especially common, but we also found ceramics, bottle fragments, lead shot, a slate pencil, a button or collar stud, and lots of bone fragments from cows, pigs, and even a cat! Ceramics included a few red paste and yellow paste earthenware sherds, but most were white paste wares. Decorative types present in the white paste ceramic assemblage include blue and green shell-edged, painted polychrome floral, dipt/annularware, and transfer printed.
In terms of identifying changes in site’s landscape during the 19th and 20th centuries, we had some success – assuming our current interpretations prove correct. Wall profiles in the yard area show the extent of a probable mid-20th century deposit of clay and gravel fill that appears to have been used to level the yard. Immediately below the clay and gravel fill layer is thick layer of sand, possibly derived from digging the basement under the frame house in the mid-late 19th century. The surface of this second fill layer was stable long enough to begin forming an A-horizon (a dark, organic-rich zone in the soil). The bottom of the second fill layer merges with what is probably the disturbed (plowed?) early to mid-19th century surface over a natural, relatively undisturbed, soil profile.
Our attention now turns to the lab where we have already begun processing artifacts from this year’s excavation. We have many hours of sorting, washing, cataloguing, and analysis ahead of us. A lot to look forward to!
The October meeting of the Saginaw Valley Chapter of the Michigan Archaeological Society will be held this Thursday, October 4th, here at the Castle Museum. As always, the public is invited and encouraged to attend! The official announcement from the Chapter is copied below.
First brought to light by avocational archaeologist Bernie Spencer in the late 1950s, the Schmidt site (20SA192) garnered considerable archaeological attention in subsequent decades. Excavations were conducted by Spencer and Fairchild ca. 1962, the University of Michigan in 1964, by Saginaw Valley State College in 1971, and by Western Michigan University in 1973. Accounts of some of this work were published by Harrison (1966) and Fairchild (1977). Although Late Woodland occupations were noted at the site, most of the excavated material is derived from Late Archaic components. Fairchild (1977) argues for a pre-Nipissing Middle Archaic age for at least some of the material, but this interpretation is questioned by Lovis and Robertson (1989).
Recently, some of the material excavated by Spencer was donated to the Castle Museum. Among the donated objects is an interesting cache of three ground stone celts/adzes. The cache was found in the lower (Archaic) level of the excavation (Spencer personal communication August 2018). Although briefly described by Harrison (1966:60), to my knowledge measurements and photos or illustrations of the specimens from the cache have not been published.
The first specimen is a celt/adze made of diabase. It has a well- polished bit, damaged with a single chip, and a lightly battered poll. It is biconvex in cross-section and is slightly flattened on one face. Measurements are as follows: L. 98.41 mm, W. 48.13 mm, Th. 23.39 mm, and Wt. 193.52 g.
The second specimen is an adze, also made of diabase. Both the bit and poll are heavily battered. The adze is triangular in cross-section with a prominent ridge on one face. Measurements for this specimen are: L. 89.84 mm, W. 49.15 mm, Th. 25.40 mm, and Wt. 178.70 g.
The third specimen from the cache appears to be an unfinished celt/adze. I am uncertain of the material, but it may be porphyritic basalt. The preform has a convex/irregular cross-section and is flaked around its margins. It is made on a spall struck from the outer surface of a cobble. The convex face of the preform is the (mostly) unmodified original surface of the cobble. Measurements are as follows: L. 103.87 mm, W. 55.22 mm, Th. 21.38 mm, and Wt. 164.49 g.
Despite containing only three specimens, the celt/adze cache from the Schmidt site provides evidence for the the diversity of forms of these tools produced and used contemporaneously. The Historical Society of Saginaw County is grateful these items were entrusted to our care. Curated in the Archaeology Lab and Repository of the Castle Museum, they will be preserved for current and future generations as part of Accession 2018.029. More information and examples of Archaic Period artifacts can be found here in the Archaeology section of the Castle Museum website and in the Museum’s archaeology exhibit.
Recently, I spent the evening perusing my field notes from the Castle Museum’s 2002 excavations at site 20SA1251.1,2 Although 20SA1251 is a multi-component site with Late Archaic through Historic Period occupations, most of the excavated material is derived from Middle Woodland contexts. A single radiocarbon date places a Middle Woodland component at the site between 40 B.C. and A.D. 120 (Sommer 2003a).
For this particular trip down memory lane, I was looking for unrelated information when I came across the following reference from 19 September 2002:
“… 2 bear teeth from 40-45 cm level of 495N 555E – 1 canine & 1 molar – prob. cut & ground roots.”
It immediately occurred to me that cut and ground bear teeth are not included in my report on the modified faunal remains from the site (Sommer 2007). Either I had missed the evidence of modification during the cataloguing process or my initial in-the-field assessment was incorrect. Clearly, I needed to investigate further…
The two teeth listed in the field notes are a canine (C) and first molar (M1) from the right maxilla of a Black Bear (Ursus americanus). A search through the other faunal remains from unit 495N 555E revealed a right maxillary fourth premolar (P4) and second molar (M2), as well as two small right maxilla fragments and an equally tiny fragment of a right palatine. One of the maxilla fragments contains the socket into which the lingual/medial root of the M1 fits. No additional maxillary teeth or other conjoining fragments were found in the eight surrounding excavation units.
While the C shows no evidence of modification, the lingual/medial root of the M1 has clearly been cut or ground to a flat facet. A close examination of the additional specimens revealed that the two buccal/lateral roots of the M2 are eroded, but appear to have been cut or ground to the same angle. Further, traces of grinding can be seen on the interior surface of both maxilla fragments. When articulated, the ground surface of the M1 root is flush with the ground surface of the conjoining maxilla fragment. No grinding is evident on the P4 or palatine fragment.
While not common, modified bear and other predator maxillae do show up elsewhere in the archaeological record (modified mandibles seem to be more frequently encountered). Cut bear maxillary sections from the “Hopewell-influenced” Rector Mound in Wayne County, New York are interpreted as “probably representing animal headdresses (Ritchie 1969:224-225, Plate 778-9). No functional interpretation is given for two halves of a dog maxilla from Knight Mound C°2 in Calhoun County, Illinois. They are described as having been “cut or ground so that the roots of the teeth and associated bone have been removed” (Griffin et al. 1970:28, Plate 20a). Closer to home, in fact less than a mile from 20SA1251, more than 20 ground black bear teeth from both mandibles and maxillae and a cut wolf maxilla were recovered during excavations at the Schultz site (Murray 1972:235-236, Figure 77b,c). The bear teeth “probably represent pendants prepared from ground mandibles and sections of cut maxillae bearing teeth” (Murray 1972:234). The wolf maxilla, too, is thought to have been worn as a pendant (Murray 1972:236). Murray (1972:242) describes the ground carnivore mandibles and teeth (and presumably maxillae) from the Schultz site excavations as “impressively Hopewellian.”
Unfortunately, we can arrive at no firm conclusion regarding the function of the modified black bear maxilla from 20SA1251. Unlike the examples from the Rector Mound in New York and the Knight Mound group in Illinois, there is no evidence that both halves of the maxilla were originally present and conjoined. However, given the highly fragmented nature of the recovered specimens, the missing left half of the maxilla could be a result of taphonomic (preservation) issues. As with all of the examples given, the maxilla from 20SA1251 probably dates to the Middle Woodland (Hopewell) Period.
If nothing else, this exercise highlights the importance of careful field observation and note-taking. It also demonstrates that, despite my tongue-in-cheek warning (see Note #2), field notes are most useful if you actually read them!
1 See Sommer ( 2003b) for a preliminary report on the 2002 excavations at 20SA1251. It can be accessed (here) from the Archaeology section of the Castle Museum’s website.
2 Perusing old field notes, while possibly an aid to insomniacs, can be an arduous activity and is not recommended for the faint-of-heart.