1

ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT THE BURRELL

ORCHARD SITE (33Ln15): 2014 SEASON

Brian G. Redmond, Ph.D.

Principal Investigator

Brian L. Scanlan, M.A.

Supervisor of Archaeology Field Programs

Meghan Marley, M.A.

Field and Laboratory Assistant

With contributions by Logan Miller and Elizabeth Votruba

Archaeological Research Report, No. 166

May 2015

©Cleveland Museum of Natural History 2015

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………….…….………………..……………………......2

INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………….4

BACKGROUND TO THE INVESTIGATIONS……………………………………………..4

Natural and Cultural Settings and Previous Investigations………………………4

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ……………………………………………………..…………...5

METHOD OF INVESTIGATION.…………………………………………………………...6

Chemical and Geophysical Surveys……………...........................………………....6

Shovel-test Survey…………….............................………………...............................7

Excavation Procedures……………….…………...…………………………………7

RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………………..9

Chemical ad Geophysical Surveys…….…………............................………………9

Excavation……………...........................…...…...………………………………….11

Topography…………………..……...………………………………………...……13

Shovel-test Survey…………………………...……………………………………..14

Features……………………………………………….……………………………..15

Post Molds………………………………………….………………………………..25

MATERIAL ANALYSES AND DESCRIPTIONS……………………………….………...26

Flaked Stone...............................................................................................................26

Ground Stone……………………………………………………………………….29

Ceramics…………………………………………………………………………….31

Worked Bone and Antler…………………………………………………….…….31

Faunal Remains……………………………………………………………………..33

Botanical Remains………………………………………………………………….34

Radiocarbon Determinations…………………………………..…… …………….34

DISCUSSION AND PRELIMINARY INTERPRETATIONS………………...……………35

REFERENCES CITED………………………………………………………………………37

APPENDIX 1: Summary Artifact Class Tabulations by Excavation Unit and Feature…..…40

APPENDIX 2: Microwear Analysis of Chipped Stone Tools from Burrell Orchard by G.

Logan Miller…………………………………………………………………………………41

APPENDIX 3: 33LN15, Faunal Assemblage Analysis by Elizabeth Votruba………………54

3

APPENDIX 4: Botanical Inventory of the Burrell Orchard Site (33Ln15) ………………..62

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project was made possible by the cooperation and support of the following

individuals and institutions. The Lorain County Metro Parks (LCMP) granted permission for

both the excavations and flotation processing on their property and provided in-kind services

such as grass mowing and backfilling. We are particularly grateful to the LCMP Board of

Park Commissioners, Director James Ziemnik, Grant Thompson, Aimee Potonic, and Brian

Holmes, for their cooperation and assistance. The Lorain County Metro Parks staff, Mayor

John D. Hunter and Sheffield Village, and Dr. Charles E. Herdendorf of the Sheffield Village

Historical Society provided enthusiastic support for both the excavations and the presentation

of related educational materials to the public throughout the project.

Partial funding for the 2014 excavation was provided by grants from the Laub

Foundation and the Albert G. & Olive H. Schlink Foundation. Additional support was

received through field school fees and the Cleveland Museum of Natural History (CMNH).

The Cleveland Archaeological Society (CAS) contributed funding for student intern Amanda

Ponomarenko.

CMNH Field supervisors Brian Scanlan, Jim Bowers, and Meghan Marley admirably

oversaw the day-to-day field operations. CAS archaeology intern Amanda Ponomarenko

provided additional supervisory assistance in the field. Ricki and Eddie Herdendorf of the

Sheffield Village Historical Society volunteered regularly in the field and greatly facilitated

our efforts within the community. Valuable assistance was also contributed by volunteers

Char Shryock, Allison Shryock, Michelle Neudeck, Marsha Rine, and Sharon Denslow.

Special thanks to our superb field crew members: Emily Scott Austin, Carole Brown, Susan

Brown, Robert Hannan, Barbara Kurtz, Nicole Lewis, Stuart Macdonnell, Larry Macdonnell,

Alicia Matheny, Nancy McKim, Linda New, Evelyn Newell, Heather Risher, Ashlie

Roederes, Anne Schoeffler, Paul Schweigert, Nancy Somnitz, Joseph Spinhirny, Joe

Tartaglia, Kelly Taylor, and Ronald Vranich.

In the laboratory, Ann DuFresne and Jim Bowers supervised the processing and

cataloging of all materials from the excavation by Archaeology lab volunteers. Numerous

volunteers, including Jack Abbott, Natalie Andras, Jackie Artman, Joann Broadbrooks,

Yvonne Carter, Tom Dalhausen, Evelyn Gelbke, John Harmon, Phil Kleinhenz, Luane

Lasky, Stuart MacDonnell, Alicia Matheny, Joe Petrulis, Ted Schvimer, Karl Smith, Nancy

Somnitz, John St. John, Ronald Vranich, and Gil Winer processed the artifacts from the field

and carried out the inventory. Assistance in the laboratory was provided by Meghan Marley

and Amanda Ponomarenko.

All the aforementioned individuals and institutions are sincerely thanked for

contributions to this project. Any errors or omissions in what follows are the sole

responsibility of the authors.

4

INTRODUCTION

This report describes the background, methods, procedures, and preliminary results of

the 2014 season of excavation at the Burrell Orchard site (33Ln15) by the Department of

Archaeology of The Cleveland Museum of Natural History (CMNH). The 2014 excavation

was carried out in conjunction with the Department’s summer archaeology field school (a.k.a

the Archaeology in Action Program) which took place between June 16 and July 11, 2014.

The investigation was directed by Brian Redmond with the assistance of Brian Scanlan.

Meghan Marley and James Bowers served as field supervisors, and Cleveland

Archaeological Society Intern, Amanda Ponomarenko, assisted with field work and limited

supervisory duties.

BACKGROUND TO THE INVESTIGATION

Natural and Cultural Settings and Previous Investigation

The Burrell Orchard site is located in the French Creek Reservation of the Lorain

County Metro Parks in Sheffield Village, Lorain County, Ohio (Figure 1). The site is

situated on a high shale promontory overlooking French Creek to the north and the Black

River approximately 600 meters to the west (Figure 2). Detailed descriptions of the natural

and cultural settings of the Burrell Orchard site, as well as the history of previous

archaeological research, can be found in the 2008 Report of Investigations (Redmond and

Scanlan 2009:3).

Figure 1: Location of the Burrell Orchard site in northern Ohio.

5

Figure 2: Physical setting of the Burrell Orchard site.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The work carried out by the CMNH during 2014 was designed to further investigate

the nature and extent of Late Archaic period cultural deposits (midden and pit features)

documented in 2008 (Redmond and Scanlan 2009). Consequently, a specific set of research

questions was formulated to guide these investigations. Paramount among these questions is

the following.

1. What is the overall extent and density of subsurface midden deposits at the site?

What kinds of cultural materials are contained in these deposits, and how are they

distributed across the site?

2. What is the nature of the distinctive clay stratum discovered in 2008? Is it a

deliberate construction of the Late Archaic site inhabitants, and if so, does it represent

a dwelling floor?

LOCATION MAP OMITTED

6

3. What is the actual temporal span of the Late Archaic component? Is it nearly a

thousand years, as indicated by our minimal radiocarbon data, or is the time frame

much more restricted, as seems to be the case with the limited range of projectile

point types?

4. What was the range of daily activities and nature of utilized resources that

characterized the Late Archaic occupation(s), and how did these activities/resources

change seasonally?

5. What pre- or post-Late Archaic cultural components are represented at the site?

6. How did the large habitation area originate, and how was it utilized? Are the cultural

deposits the result of successive (yearly?) visits to this location by small, Late

Archaic hunting and gathering bands made up of one or two extended families? Or

does the site represent a more coherent, organized settlement by a much larger social

group, such as a macroband, for extended periods of time?

The methods of investigation implemented at the Burrell Orchard site in 2014 were designed

to systematically recover the kinds of archaeological data most useful for addressing these

research questions.

METHODS OF INVESTIGATION

Chemical and Geophysical Surveys

On September 7, 2013 soil samples were systematically collected at the Burrell

Orchard site as part of a larger, grant-funded study of soil chemistry and magnetism at three

archaeological sites in northern Ohio (Nolan and Redmond 2015; Nolan et al. 2014). Recent

studies of both residual soil phosphates and soil magnetism have proven useful for

identifying the spatial extents and internal configurations of precontact archaeological sites in

the region (Cook and Burks 2011; Roos and Nolan 2012).

A total of 174 soil samples were collected at 10 meter intervals across the meadow

located north of the Burrell House from 325N to 500N. The soil collected in the field was

tested for quantities of phosphates (soil P) and for mass specific magnetic susceptibility

(MS). On May 12 and 13, 2014, Jarrod Burks of Ohio Valley Archaeology, Inc. conducted a

magnetic gradient survey of an approximately 1.8 hectare area of the meadow. Readings

were taken at 50 cm intervals across an approximately 80 meter-wide transect that extended

southward from 500N to the front yard of the Burrell House and ended at 300N.

A second magnetic susceptibility survey was conducted on October 17, 2014 by

Jarrod Burks using a hand-held susceptibility meter. Readings were taken every 10 meters

across nearly the entire meadow and extending from 500N to the driveway of the Burrell

House at approximately 277N. In addition, three 20 x 20m blocks located at the northern end

of the open field were surveyed using ground-penetrating radar (GPR). The objective of this

7

survey was to detect additional sections of the prepared clay floor discovered in units 498N

512E and 500N 512E (see below).

Shovel-test Survey

The 2008 field season focused on estimating the maximum spatial extent of the site

by assessing the overall coverage of the sub-plow zone feature (midden) deposits. The

survey indicated that the total site area was at least 4,600 m2, with a minimum site area in the

meadow south of the orchard of 1,600 m2 (Redmond & Scanlan 2009). An important

objective of the 2014 field season was to further investigate the midden deposits to answer

some of the questions raised in the 2008 survey about the origin, utilization, and occupations

of the site. To accomplish this, a more extensive and systematic survey was conducted in the

southern portion of the promontory. A series of 50 x 50cm shovel-tests were excavated at

ten meter intervals on transects running west-east and spaced ten meters apart. Each test was

excavated in arbitrary units consisting primarily of two levels: 0-20 cm below datum (b.d.)

and 20-30 cm b.d. This systematic leveling was done in order to obtain a more controlled

sample of artifacts within the upper (plow zone) stratum (0-20 cm b.d.) and the underlying

midden soil (20-30 cm b.d.). The excavation of most shovel-tests was stopped at 30 cm b.d.

after either the midden or subsoil had been exposed, and a 1-inch core sample was taken to

determine the maximum midden depth. The midden survey data were used to provide a more

accurate assessment of the spatial dimensions of the site, as well as measure of the intensity

of occupation. The primary assumption for the latter objective being that the depth

(thickness) of midden deposits denotes the relative degree of human activity at this locality.

Excavation Procedures

Archaeological excavation of the Burrell Orchard site began on June 16, 2014. Crews

of CMNH staff archaeologists, volunteers, and field school students began each week by

placing shovel-test units on east-west running transects located between the 490N and 440N

lines. This shovel-testing was conducted in order to ascertain the nature and extent of the

intact subsurface cultural (midden) deposits in the field south of the orchard. Upon

completion of the shovel-testing, crews were assigned to 2 x 2 m excavation units positioned

to either sample magnetic anomalies identified during geophysical testing or to further

explore the nature and extent of the clay stratum (possible house floor) identified during the

2008 CMNH excavations (Figure 3). All units were aligned to the site grid, which was

oriented to magnetic north (2008), and designated by the coordinates of their southwest

corners. Using straight-edged shovels and trowels, the surface vegetation was cleared, and

then plow zone soils were removed through shovel-scraping. All soils were screened through

¼ inch steel mesh, and all recovered artifacts were collected and bagged by natural or

arbitrary excavation levels.

8

Figure 3. Plan of CMNH test unit and shovel-test excavations, 2008 and 2014.

Obvious precontact pit features were assigned feature numbers; other soil stains of

possible cultural origin were identified as zones and assigned letter designations. Possible

post molds were given individual “PPM” numbers. Once a unit floor was completed, it was

digitally photographed. Finally, all features and zones were mapped in plan using metric

tapes and recorded on standard CMNH excavation plan forms. All pit features and selected

post molds were sectioned in half or by quarter. The fill of each feature was removed either

in 10 cm intervals or by cultural stratigraphy, if such could be discerned. All fill from pit

features was dry-screened. In addition, five- to ten-liter samples of soil from pit contexts

were recovered for subsequent water-flotation processing. Charcoal and other carbonized

botanicals were recovered by hand during excavation or collected during sediment screening.

The project was concluded on July 15, 2014. All wooden grid stakes, other than

those located on the perimeter of the landform, were removed. The wooden stake at 500N

490E was replaced with a 75 cm long section of galvanized steel pipe fitted with a steel cap

to serve as a permanent datum marker. Wooden grade stakes were pounded flush with the

ground surface at 500N 506E and 500N 520E to serve as future reference points. In addition,

aluminum gutter spikes were left in all four corners of unit 498N 512E for the same purpose.

All excavation units were completely backfilled by LCMP staff on July 16, 2014 using a

compact track loader.

LOCATION

MAP

OMITTED

9

All artifacts and material samples from the 2014 excavations were returned to the

Department of Archaeology at CMNH for processing, cataloging, and analysis. Artifacts

were washed, sorted, inventoried, and labeled with catalog numbers (CMNH Identification

No. 1082A). The remaining soil samples collected for flotation were processed on-site

immediately following excavations. The identification and preliminary analyses of all

diagnostic artifacts have been completed and are reported herein. Samples of organic

material were submitted to Beta Analytic Inc. for AMS radiocarbon dating, and selected

botanical samples were sent to Karen Leone of Gray and Pape, Inc. for analysis. The results

of these studies are discussed below. In addition, selected specimens of the flaked stone tool

assemblage were loaned to Logan Miller for microwear analysis at The Ohio State

University. This sample included stone tools from both the 2008 and 2014 field seasons.

The complete report of analysis is provided in Appendix 2.

RESULTS

Chemical and Geophysical Surveys

The phosphate survey data show two major high points, the first is located in the

northern portion of the landform and the other is confined to the southwestern corner (Figure

4). The rest of the map shows consistently low values for the phosphate data. The northern

concentration corresponds closely with the identified extent of subsurface midden deposits at

Burrell Orchard (see below). The southwestern concentration most likely represents at least

one recent (historic) episode of burning, as well as organic debris from farm activities.

Both magnetic susceptibility distributions also exhibit major spikes in the northern

portion of the landform, which correspond quite closely to the known spatial extent of the

subsurface midden deposits (see below) (Figures 5 and 6). There are also lower spikes along

the southwestern edge of the site partially overlapping the largest soil P concentration and

most likely the result of historic burning.

The magnetic gradient survey revealed that the area of highest magnetism was located

at the northern end of the field and measured approximately 0.42 ha in size (Figure 7).

Several possible feature anomalies are visible within this zone; however, others are

undoubtedly masked by the intense magnetism of this area of midden deposits. Discrete

areas of high magnetic readings are visible at the south end of the map in areas of historic

burning and in scatters of metal debris from the former barn (Figure 7).

Perhaps most informative was the ground penetrating radar survey conducted within

three 20 x 20 m squares at the northern end of the midden area. As anticipated, the survey

appears to have successfully detected a large extension of the prepared clay floor exposed in

unit 498N 512E (Figure 8) (see below).

10

Figure 4: Spatial (plow zone) distribution of soil phosphate (mg/kg) for 33Ln15 (map by

K. Nolan).

Figure 5: Spatial (plow zone) distribution of Frequency Dependent (FD) mass specific

magnetic susceptibility (MS) for 33Ln15 (map by K. Nolan).

11

Figure 6: Spatial distribution magnetic susceptibility readings for 33Ln15 (map by J.

Burks).

Excavation

During the 2014 field season, a total of 20.75 m2 of surface area was exposed through

the systematic excavation of three 2 x 2m units, and thirty-five 50 x 50 cm shovel-test units

(Figure 3). This excavated area represents approximately 0.33% of the estimated total site

surface area (see below). Excavation and shovel-test units revealed the existence of

extensive and deeply-buried midden deposits, various pit features and post molds. The grid

coordinates, artifact descriptions, and tabulations for all recovered artifacts are listed in

Appendix 1. The results of these excavations are described below.

12

Figure 7. Spatial distribution of magnetic gradient readings (adapted from map by J.

Burks).

13

Figure 8. Results of ground-penetrating radar survey of northern site area showing

possible clay floor extension at 65 to 67 cm below surface. (red color indicates areas of

strong radar reflection in high contrast imagery) (Adapted from map by J. Burks).

Topography

As previously discussed, the Burrell Orchard site rests upon a shale promontory

bounded by French Creek to the north and the Black River bottomland to the west. The

promontory peaks at 191.0 meters before gradually sloping to the north, west, and east edges

of the site. A topographic survey of the site area south of the old orchard was completed in

2014 to further delineate surface relief (Figure 9). The survey revealed that a ridge-like

feature, which includes the maximum site elevation at 460N 510E, runs through the site

approximately along the 510E grid line. The area to the west of this ridgeline slopes

downwards almost immediately around the 500E line towards the bluff-line overlooking the

Black River valley. The area to the east of the ridgeline is relatively flat, with overall relief

of about 30 cm up to the 550E line, at which point the downhill slope increases considerably

to the east. The northern portion of the site slopes predominately to the northeast, with the

exception of the region surrounding the highest elevation on the ridgeline. Conversely, the

southern portion is relatively flat, except for the western and easternmost edges.

14

Figure 9. Surface topography of the Burrell Orchard site south of the old orchard.

(contour interval is 0.10 masl)

Shovel-test Survey

Midden Extent and Thickness

The spatial limits of the site were redefined in 2014 as midden deposits were

identified as far south as 440N 520E, as far west as 470N 497E, and as far east as 460N

557E. Thus, the minimum spatial extent of the site situated south of the old orchard is 3,600

15

m2

(0.89 acre). If the estimated area of the site within the old orchard is added to this figure,

then the total site area is approximately 6,350 m2

(1.57 acres). The western limits appear to

follow the topography as midden deposits stop where the terrain begins to slope; the eastern

limits do not. A map of midden depths (Figure 10) reveals that these deposits are thickest in

the level areas. The midden then gradually thins along the sloping topography to the east and

west, while gradually declining to the south and ending along the middle of the 440N

transect. These results indicate, not surprisingly, that the promontory was most intensively

occupied in the highest and flattest regions. Of course, at least some degree of midden

thinning in the downslope areas may also be due to excessive soil erosion that undoubtedly

commenced with historic land-clearing and intensive agriculture.

Artifact Distributions

The artifact data resulting from the shovel-tests surveys in 2008 and 2014 were

combined to provide a more comprehensive interpretation of the utilization and occupation of

the site. Only fire-cracked rock (FCR) weights and chert debitage counts were included in

this study, as the concentrations of other artifacts (i.e. bone) were too minimal to be

conclusive. In the plow zone (0-20 cm b.d.), the artifact data revealed that the highest counts

of debitage are predominately located along the ridgeline elevation (Figure 11), while the

highest weights of FCR are located about ten meters to the east, along the 520E grid line

(Figure 12). On the eastern edge of the site, high concentrations of both artifact classes occur

between 470N 550E and 450N 555E. This eastern concentration conjoins with the 510/520E

area along the 440N line, revealing an area of low concentration just to the north, between

450-470N and 530-540E. The elevation of this area is relatively high and flat, indicating that

perhaps these artifacts were culturally determined. That is, this non-random artifact

patterning may suggest that the low density area was a location deliberately kept free of

refuse, with debitage and FCR deposited to the east and west. Such spatial segregation of

activity areas may suggest a more organized settlement by a large group, and further

exploration of the low concentration area will be able to verify if such segregation did indeed

occur at the site.

Features

During the 2014 field season a total of seventeen features were identified (Figure 13).

Five of these were excavated completely, and twelve were partially excavated, since the

remaining portions extended beyond the limits of the excavation units. These latter features

are reported as “incomplete” excavations below. Three of the four primary classes or types

of features first recognized in 2008 were recorded in 2014 on the basis of overall

morphology, stratigraphic location, and contents. These classes are smudge pit, cooking pit,

and clay floor. In addition, an indeterminate type is represented. The distinctive rock cluster

feature type, consisting of siltstone slabs and FCR, was not identified in 2014; although,

several apparent siltstone slab fragments were found during the course of excavation.

16

Figure 10. Areal extent and depths of midden deposits. (Depths in meters below surface;

contour interval is 0.05m)

Figure 11. Distribution of chert debitage counts from shovel-test survey.

17

Figure12. Distribution of FCR weights (in grams) from shovel-test survey. (Contour

interval is 100g)

The smudge pits ranged from 30 to 53 cm in diameter (Table 1) and were cylindrical

in form. Often dense deposits of charcoal or burned nutshell were found in the feature’s

lower fill. Where charcoal could not be discerned, these pits appeared very dark

Figure 13. Composite of 2014 excavation unit floor plans (relative locations of units not

all to scale).

18

brown to black due to their rich organic fill (Figure 14). These features were most likely

used to smoke animal hides. Five smudge pits were recorded during excavations, and one or

more examples were found in each of the large excavation units (Table 1).

A second class of feature is a large, flat to round-bottomed pit with diameters in the

range of 36 to 160 cm (Table 1). Eight of these pits were identified during excavation. All

were characterized by relatively high densities of FCR and layers of both dark, organic soils,

and red, heat-oxidized soils (Figure 15). Thus, these features have been designated as

cooking pits under the assumption that food preparation was their primary function.

In addition to cooking pit features, three additional thermal features characterized by

areas of red, heat-oxidized soil were designated as features. These oxidized soil lenses

indicate in-situ heating (burning) episodes and may represent prehistoric surface fires that lay

directly on midden deposits. It is also possible that these thermal features represent the base

of cooking pits, the upper fill of which was either indistinguishable from, or truncated by,

midden strata. What follows are narrative descriptions of features representing each defined

type. Related contextual and morphological information can be found in Table 1.

Smudge Pits

Feature 14-08

This feature measured 32 cm in width, extended 28 cm south from the north wall,

reached a depth of 70 cm b.d., and incompletely excavated. In profile it contained a very dark

grayish brown fill with a very dark/black thin layer lining its bottom. Feature 14-08

contained burned bone, FCR, and an anvilstone.

Feature 14-09

This semi-circular stain extended 25 cm northward from the south unit wall and was

incompletely excavated. In plan, it was approximately 53 cm in diameter and appeared dark

in color. In profile, no stratigraphy was discernible. Feature 14-09 contained a few chert

flakes, flecks of charcoal; two small FCR fragments were recovered from the profile wall.

Table 1: Inventory of Pit Features

Fea.

No.

Unit

Coordinates Type

Plan

Form

Degree of

Excavation

Max.

Length(cm)

Max.

Width(cm)

Max

Depth

(b.d.)

14-01 498N 512E oxidized soil

lens

ovoid complete 68 60 37

14-02 498N 512E cooking pit ovoid complete 60 43 46

14-03 490N 497.5E Indeterminate circular incomplete 110 no data 25

14-04 490N 497.5E cooking pit ovoid complete 160 130 79

14-05 500N 512E Indeterminate circular incomplete 138 no data 66

19

Fea.

No.

Unit

Coordinates Type

Plan

Form

Degree of

Excavation

Max.

Length(cm)

Max.

Width(cm)

Max

Depth

(b.d.)

14-06 500N 512E oxidized soil

lens

circular incomplete 60 no data 61

14-07 500N 512E Indeterminate circular incomplete 84 no data 61

14-08 500N 512E smudge pit circular incomplete 32 no data 70

14-09 490N 497.5E smudge pit circular incomplete 53 no data 48

14-10 490N 497.5E smudge pit circular incomplete 30 no data 49

14-11 498N 512E

500N 512E

clay floor irreg incomplete no data no data no data

14-12 490N 497.5E cooking pit circular incomplete 80 no data 96

14-13 500N 512E cooking pit ovoid complete 69 48 85

14-14 500N 512E smudge pit circular complete 30 30 91

14-15 490N 497.5E smudge pit circular incomplete 53 no data 56

14-16 498N 512E oxidized soil

lens

circular incomplete 44 no data 59

14-17 498N 512E Indeterminate circular incomplete 36 no data 66

Feature 14-10

This feature appeared as a semi-circular stain extending 30 cm eastward from the

west unit wall and was incompletely excavated. In plan it was approximately 30 cm in

diameter and appeared very dark gray in color. In profile no stratigraphy could be discerned,

and the feature bottom was irregular. It contained only charcoal flecks.

Feature 14-14

This pit measured 30 cm in diameter, 40 cm deep, and extended to 91 cm b.d. In

profile it contained easily discernible stratigraphy. Layers of gray-brown and brown silt

overlay a black, wet clay that contained charcoal. The remaining feature fill also contained

charcoal, as well as bone and FCR. The section profile of this pit revealed that it was capped

by the clay floor, Feature 14-11.

Feature 14-15

This small semi-circular stain extended 12 cm westward from the east unit wall and

was incompletely excavated. In plan it was approximately 53 cm wide and appeared dark in

color. In profile, no stratigraphy could be discerned, and the feature exhibited a round

bottom. Charcoal flecks and one piece of FCR were recovered.

20

Figure 14. Section profile of smudge pit Feature 14-14 (note sunken yellow clay floor

layer in upper profile and concentration of carbonized material at base of feature).

Cooking Pits

Feature 14-02

This feature appeared as a circular stain bordered by an area of red-oxidized soil. It

measured 60 cm northeast to southwest, by 46 cm northwest to southeast, and extended to 46

cm b.d.. In profile it exhibited a relatively thin, very dark brown layer bordered and underlain

by the reddened-oxidized lens. Feature 14-02 contained charcoal, calcined bone, unburned

bone, chert flakes, and FCR.

Feature 14-04

In plan, this large ovoid feature measured 160 cm southeast to northwest, by 130 cm

northeast by southwest, and reached 79 cm b.d. Due to time constraints, only the southwest

half of the pit fill was excavated; a soil sample was extracted from the remaining portion for

flotation processing. In profile, it exhibited a rounded bottom and displayed distinct

stratigraphy. A mottled, dark brown silty clay was overlain by a dark, organic rich layer that

was capped by a mottled, dark and reddened oxidized layer (Figure 15). Feature 14-04

21

contained both burned and unburned bone, charcoal, FCR, worked antler, and small amounts

of chert. In addition, a drilled bone fragment was recovered.

Feature 14-12

This large, basin-shaped feature appears to have been re-excavated and used as a

cooking pit. Although plan dimensions were indeterminate and amorphous in the upper

layers, it measured approximately 80 cm by 80 cm, and extended to 96 cm b.d. This pit

continued into the north and east walls and was, thus, incompletely excavated. In profile

feature 14-12 displayed irregular layers indicating possible reuse and eventual backfilling

with clay subsoil. The feature contained charcoal, burned and unburned bone, FCR, and one

large slab of burned siltstone on its southern margin at the east unit wall.

Feature 14-13

This feature measured 69 cm by 48 cm in plan and 21 cm thick; it reached to 82 cm

b.d.. In profile it appeared as a shallow basin with a deeper portion on its western margin; the

fill was a consistent black clay loam. Feature 14-13 contained charcoal, bone fragments, and

FCR. This shallow pit was found beneath Feature 14-5.

Figure 15. Section profile of cooking pit Feature 14-04.

Oxidized Soil Lenses

Feature 14-01

This feature measured 60 cm by 68 cm in plan and occurred at 37 cm b.d. In profile,

it was thin and appeared as an oxidized red-gray lens. Feature contents included charcoal,

22

calcined bone, chert flakes, and FCR. Siltstone slabs were recovered from under the east half

of the feature.

Feature 14-06

This feature measured 60 cm by 50 cm by 16 cm thick, reached 61 cm b.d., and was

incompletely excavated. In profile, it exhibited a dark grayish-brown fill overlain by a layer

containing gray-brown ash, which was then capped by a red-oxidized lens (Figure 16). It

contained small amounts of chert and FCR.

Figure 16. Section profile of oxidized soil lens Feature 14-06 (note ash layer in center of

pit fill).

Feature 14-16

This feature measured 44 cm north to south and extended 16 cm eastward from the

west wall; it reached 59 cm b.d. and was incompletely excavated. In profile (at the west unit

wall), Feature 14-16 appeared as a discrete lens within the midden fill, and above the clay

floor (Feature 14-11). The lens contained bone fragments and FCR.

Clay Floor

The clay floor recorded in units 498N 512E and 500N 512E consists of a three to five

centimeter thick stratum of yellow-brown clay sediment that occurs just a few centimeters

above the base of the midden deposits; it was designated as Feature 14-11. In all respects,

this clay layer appears to have been constructed and used by the site inhabitants and is

23

described as a “floor.” This floor was first identified in the lower portion of Stratum II in

unit 500N 514E during the 2008 field season (Redmond and Scanlan 2009: 19). During the

current season, the clay layer was exposed at approximately the 40 cm b.d. level in the

eastern portions of units 498N 512E and 500N 512E. The largest exposure of this surface

occurs in the latter unit and is distinguished by red-orange (heat-oxidized) stains in the

eastern section of the floor (Figures 17 and 18). Bordering the western margin of Feature 14-

11 are seven post molds (described below).

Figure 17. The clay floor (Feature 14-11) as exposed in unit 498N 512E. (Note fire-

reddened areas on the floor; proposed structural post molds marked in white.)

Pits of Indeterminate Function

Due to their unusual morphology and contents, the function of the following small

features could not be determined.

Feature 14-03

This shallow, dark stain measured 110 cm long, extended 19 cm out from the north

wall of the unit, reached 50 cm b.d., and was incompletely excavated. The feature contained

very dark brown to black soil, FCR, and flecks of charcoal. In the unit wall profile, Feature

14-03 appeared as a depression in the midden but was otherwise indistinguishable from

surrounding midden soils.

24

Figure 18. South wall profile of unit 498N 512E showing clay floor layer near base of

midden. (Note fire-reddened section of floor at lower left [southeast corner]; vertical scale

marked in 10 cm increments.)

Feature 14-05

This large, dark grayish-brown feature covered the southwest quarter of 500N 512E,

measured 138 cm by 95 cm, reached 66 cm b.d., and was incompletely excavated. In profile

it appeared to be indistinguishable from the surrounding midden soils. Feature 14-05

contained charcoal, bone fragments, and a deer antler tine tip.

Feature 14-07

Similar to Feature 14-05 in character, this feature measured 84 cm x 63 cm x 8 cm

thick, reached 61 cm b.d., and was incompletely excavated. In profile it appeared as a lens

that was indistinguishable from surrounding midden soils. Feature 14-07 contained charcoal,

chert flakes, burned bone, and FCR.

Feature 14-17

This feature measured roughly 36 cm in diameter, extended to 66 cm b.d., and was

incompletely excavated as it extended into the east unit wall. Due to having been identified at

a lower level (58 cm b.d.), it was measured as having been only 8 cm in thickness. In plan it

appeared as a very dark gray, thin lens, and contained FCR, and one piece of bone. Notably,

the lower part of this pit penetrated through the clay floor (Feature 14-11) for several

centimeters and into sterile subsoil.

25

Post Molds

During the course of the 2014 excavations, numerous possible post molds (PPMs)

were identified. For each PPM that was cross-sectioned and confirmed (n=24), the diameter

at the point of definition and the maximum depth (b.d.) were recorded. Post mold summary

data can be found in Table 2.

Table 2: Post Mold Summary Statistics

N=24 Diameter (cm) Depth (cmbd)

Average 7.25 53.25

Stnd. Dev. 2.49 9.54

Maximum 15.00 68.00

Minimum 4.00 32.00

Only one potentially significant configuration of post molds was identified during the

2014 season. This involved an arc of seven post molds that ran along the western edge of the

clay floor in unit 498N 512E (see above). These post molds were very similar in form, with

an average diameter of 6.29 cm and standard deviation of 1.11 (Figure 19). All post molds

Figure 19. Field section drawings of three post molds along the margin of the clay floor

Feature 14-11 in Unit 498N 512E.

26

penetrated the clay floor to between 9 and 16 cm beneath its surface. Distances between these

posts averaged 37.96 cm with a standard deviation of 8.58.

MATERIAL ANALYSES AND DESCRIPTIONS

Flaked Stone Tools

Projectile Points

The remains of five diagnostic projectile points were recovered in 2014, these are two

complete points and three bases. One of the complete points (1082A138-03) is a lanceolate

form with a straight base. It has been reworked below the waist producing a slightly tapered

stem (Figure 20 A). Made of Columbus-Delaware chert, the point was found in the eastern

half of unit 500N 512E at a depth of 35-38 cm b.d., which places it near the top of the

midden deposits. The other complete point (1082A125-06) is stemmed; although, the basal

edge has broken off (Figure 20 B). Thus, the typology of the point is hard to determine with

certainty, but its size (70.8 mm x 28.5 mm x 6.7 mm), triangular blade, and biconvex cross-

section most closely match the attributes of the Saratoga point cluster (Justice 1987: 154-

159). It is made of an unusual, mottled or banded material somewhat resembling Plum Run

chert and was found in unit 490N 497.5E at 29 cm b.d. in the plow zone.

The three bases recovered were all from stemmed points. In terms of stratigraphic

locations, two were from the midden and one from the plow zone. Two of the bases are

made of material common to the site (Upper Mercer and Columbus-Delaware cherts). The

Upper Mercer base (1082A125-05) was reworked along one lateral margin, which removed

the shoulder, perhaps for use as a rougher knife or scraper (Figure 20 C). The remaining

base (1082A122-03) is small and square in form with slight tapering of the lateral margins

and little flake-scarring, except along the edges. This point is made of greywacke (a.k.a.

argillite), a rough and coarse-grained, metamorphosed sandstone (Justice 1987). Greywacke

is not a common material for projectile points in most of Ohio, but various Late Archaic

(Satchel Complex) cultural expressions in northwestern Ohio, southeastern Michigan, and

southern Ontario used it extensively (Kenyon 1980; Lovis 2009: 737; Stothers and Abel

1993: 33-34).

27

Figure 20. Selected flaked stone artifacts described in text.

Drills

The remains of seven drills were recovered during the excavation: two complete

specimens, two bases, and three tips. One of the complete drills was found fragmented in the

28

northeast quadrant of unit 498N 512E at two different depths in Stratum III (midden). The

base (1082A131-22) was discovered at 48 cm b.d. and the tip (1082A131-24) at 54 cm b.d.

When reassembled, the drill measures 12.07 cm in length, 1.51 cm in width, and is made of

gray variety of Flint Ridge chert (Figure 20 D). It tapers gradually in outline from the tip to a

slightly expanded base and has a flattened cross-section near the base before gradually

becoming more biconvex toward the tip. The other complete drill (1082A127-01) is similar

in form with a slightly expanded base, but is complexly biconvex in cross-section (Figure 20

E). It was found in Feature 14-04 at 36 cm b.d. and is made of gray Upper Mercer chert. It

is 7.79 cm long, 1.29 cm wide, and has a more rounded tip than the aforementioned drill.

The two drill base fragments were found in shovel-tests. One of the bases

(1082A114-02) is similar in form to the complete drills, with a slightly expanded base

(Figure 20 F). It is made of Upper Mercer chert. The other base (1082A097-02) is T-shaped

and made of Flint Ridge chert (Figure 20 G).

Bifaces and Fragments

Two nearly complete, bifacially-flaked artifacts were recovered in 2014, both of

which were made of Columbus-Delaware chert. The nearly complete biface (1082A138-01)

is thick and coarsely flaked (Figure 20 H). It is tear drop in shape and would be complete if

not for its missing tip. One other biface (1082A099-02) from plow zone deposits may have

originally been produced as a notched projectile point, as it appears to exhibit corner

notching (Figure 20 I). One of the ‘notches’ is broken off as well as is the ‘tip.’ It is thin and

finely flaked, exhibiting some pressure flaking on one side.

Cores

Only one core (1082A125-09) was found at the site in 2014. It was recovered in unit

490N 497.5E at 35 cm b.d. This blocky artifact was made of Columbus-Delaware chert and

exhibits large flake scars along all of its surfaces.

Microwear Analysis

A sample of flaked stone tools was examined for microwear by G. Logan Miller; his

report is included as Appendix 2. Perhaps the most surprising result of this study was the

observation that four of the drills were utilized on dry hide rather than wood, bone, or stone

(Table A2-1). These specimens exhibited greasy-looking, dry hide polish and edge rounding,

which are thought to result from perforating prepared (dried) leather, such as a deer hide.

The polish and wear patterns on these drills suggest that they were manipulated with a

twisting motion and may have been used in a similar fashion to bone awls used for making

holes in hide. Such leather working would have been essential for the manufacture of tailored

clothing, floor mats, bags, or even dwelling covers. Such products represent the end stage of

deer processing, with earlier stages well represented at the site by the abundant, butchered

fragments of deer bone and antler and the many smudge pits most likely used for smoking

hides (Redmond and Scanlan 2009).

29

More expected was the wear present on one rather heavily damaged drill tip (1082A-

032-03) which indicated drilling of stone and another drill (1082A-013-04) was used on bone

or antler. Several projectile point fragments exhibited wear patterns commonly attributed to

meat-processing and at least two other points were used as a projectiles (Table A2-1).

Ground Stone

Adzes/Celts

A total of eight ground stone tools were recovered in 2014: one adze, one celt, one

celt preform, four hammerstones, and one anvilstone. The adze (1082A131-11) was found in

unit 498N 512E at 35 cm b.d., in the upper part of Stratum III (midden). It is made of

greenish-gray, dacite porphyry and is 10.2 cm long, 4.43 cm wide, and weighs 175.4 grams

(Figure 21 A). The bit is beveled in a C-shaped style and is chipped along the edge on one

Figure 21. Selected ground stone artifacts discussed in text.

30

side, signifying possible traces of use. The poll is narrow, angling to a point on one side,

with a small amount of pecking occurring on the end. The entire surface of the adze is

polished.

Both a second celt (1082A125-03) and a celt “preform” (1082A125-12) were

recovered in unit 490N 497.5E, in Stratum IV (plow zone) and III (midden) respectively.

The celt (Figure 21 B) is made of a gneissic greenstone and is 9.26 cm long and 3.93 cm

wide. It is well-ground and is polished predominately on the bit and poll. The bit edge is

battered from use. The celt “preform” is a waterworn pebble of fine, banded sandstone. It is

conical (celt-like) in shape with battering occurring only near what would be the bit end, but

this end is neither fully shaped nor is the stone polished. It measures 15.3 cm long by 5.23

cm wide. Its identification as a celt preform is tenuous.

Hammerstones and Anvilstones

One hammer/anvilstone (1082A131-02) was found in Stratum IV (plow zone) of unit

498N 512E. It is sandal-shaped with two flat faces and only minute evidence of possible

battering along the margins and on both faces (Figure 21 C). The concurrence of its weight

(303.8 g), material (granodiortite), and lack of similar stones nearby, however, imply that the

stone may have been minimally utilized as a hammerstone. The other three hammerstones

show definitive signs of use in the form of battering. One specimen (1082A117-03) is made

of micaceous sandstone and weighs 249 g. It was discovered in shovel-test 470N 530E in

Stratum III (midden). It is conical in form with battering occurring along the margins and

possible pitting on the flat face, indicating that it might have also been used as an anvilstone

(Figure 21 D). The other two hammerstones were found in unit 490N 497.5E. One

(1082A125-02) was found in Stratum IV (plow zone) and is oblong in form, and may

represent a reused celt (poll) fragment (Figure 21 E). It is made of greenstone and weighs

115.8 g. The other hammerstone (1082A125-10) was found in Stratum III (midden).

Spherical in form, it is flat at one end and battered along the other. It is made of granitic

stone and weighs 281.6 g (Figure 21 F).

The anvilstone (1082A142-01) was found in the southern half of Feature 14-08, a

possible smudge pit. One of the ends of the stone appears to have been broken off, as the

edge is jagged. It has one shallow, irregular pit on each of its flat surfaces, and a minute

amount of battering on one end. It is made of an identified variety of stone and weighs

236.4g.

Bannerstone Fragment

A grey slate fragment (1082A131-17) from a bannerstone was recovered at the

interface between Stratum VI (plow zone) and III (midden) in the southwest quadrant of unit

490N 512E. The fragment is 39.5 mm, 15.2 mm wide, 7.7 mm thick, and weighs 4.2 g. It

appears to contain the central drill hole of a winged bannerstone (7.1 mm in diameter) as the

31

margin edge is worked flat (Figure 22 A). Another drill hole (4.15 mm in diameter) is

located to the side of first drill hole, on the “wing,” and may have been a repair hole (Figure

22 B).

Ceramics

A total of four sherds of prehistoric pottery were recovered in 2014. All four are grit-

tempered bodysherds and were scattered in plow zone and midden deposits among several

excavation units. One sherd has a cordmarked surface, one is plain, and the surface of

another is eroded. The final sherd exhibits part of a stamped design executed with a dentate

tool with rounded teeth. This style of decorative treatment has been documented on Late

Woodland period, Western Basin Tradition pottery from northwestern Ohio dating between

ca. A.D. 750 and 1000 (Stothers and Abel 2002: 76).

Worked Bone and Antler

Ten pieces of worked faunal material were recovered in 2014. Several of these

consisted of minimally worked fragments of bone and deer antler. The most significant

specimens include the following. A possible bone awl fragment (1082A138-04) was found

in the western half of unit 500N 512E in Stratum III (midden). It measures 32 mm long with

a diameter of 17.8 mm. The artifact tapers toward a point; although, the actual tip has broken

off. Tool marks form vertical grooves or facets along the length of the bone and resemble

marks resulting from carving or whittling (Figure 23 A). Only portions of the bone appear to

be lightly polished, signifying that it may not have been used regularly. The artifact is

currently in three pieces, but can be easily reconstructed, as it was for the measurements

provided above.

A fragment of cut antler (1082A138-10) was found in the eastern half of unit 500N

512E in Stratum III (midden). The fragment measures 64.9 mm long and 23.7 mm wide.

Four incisions appear on one side in vertical pairs. The two near the end of the fragment are

shallow and cut across the surface grain and thus appear to have been recently made during

excavation. The two central marks, however, are deep V-shaped cuts that were made with a

sharp edged tool. The purpose of cutting the antler in this fashion is unknown.

An antler fragment containing a drill hole (1082A127-04) was found in the southwest

half of Feature 14-04. The fragment is rectangular in form, measuring 15.1 mm long, 11.9

mm wide, and 14.7 mm thick (Figure 23 B). The drill hole, 1.8 mm in diameter, is centered

in the fragment, but a break line on one end suggests that the artifact may have originally

been longer. The opposite end has been ground. The surface of the fragment is polished,

with the exception of the broken end.

32

Figure 22. Slate bannerstone (?) fragment showing exposed central bore hole (A, at

arrow), and possible repair hole (B, at arrow).

Perhaps the most significant modified bone is a small carved and drilled fragment of

thin cortical bone (1082A131-24). It measures 25.2 mm in length, 11.0 mm wide, and 2.9

mm thick. The one intact margin of this fragment has been carefully ground with a finely

carved notch forming a rounded, tang-like corner (Figure 23 C). The specimen is broken at

33

both ends indicating that it is part of a once longer artifact. The remains of a drill hole are

apparent near one end. In form, this tool most closely resembles carved bone pins found on

Figure 23. Selected bone and antler artifacts described in text.

Middle to Late Archaic base camps in the lower Ohio River Valley “Black Earth” sites and

Green River Archaic components in Kentucky (Jefferies 1997, 2008).

Faunal Remains

The identification and analysis of all faunal material recovered during the 2008 and

2014 seasons was undertaken by Elizabeth Votruba. The complete report of analysis is

included as Appendix 3. Analyzed faunal remains from midden and feature contexts

revealed a wide spectrum of terrestrial and aquatic taxa dominated by whitetail deer. Other

species included fox and gray squirrels, red fox, muskrat, opossum, raccoon, and woodchuck.

Evidence of wild turkey, turtle, and several types of fish, including catfish and freshwater

drum was found as well. This array of game species would have been readily available in

either the lowland/riverine or upland/forested environments found in the vicinity of the site.

Nearly equal weights of deer axial and appendicular elements were represented in the

sample, which indicates that whole carcasses were returned to the site for processing.

Worked and butchered antler make up the largest segment of cervid remains at 28.5% by

weight, indicating its value as raw material for tool manufacture. The relatively high

34

recovery of squirrel bones (46.5% of non-cervid mammal remains) point to their possible

importance in the diet. However, this phenomenon may alternately be related to the fact that

site inhabitants apparently spent significant time at hickory nut groves in the fall (see

discussion of botanical analysis below), where foraging squirrels would have been abundant.

Botanical Remains

Eight samples of botanical remains were sent to Karen Leone of Gray and Pape, Inc.

for expert identification and analysis (Appendix 4). These samples consist primarily of light

fraction residues from water flotation processing and are derived from seven pit features and

one oxidized lens (Table 3). The botanical assemblage is dominated by wood charcoal,

primarily from oak and hickory, and most nutshell is from hickory and black walnut trees.

Seed remains were not recovered. Leone summarizes the results as follows.

Macrobotanical analysis completed on eight flotation-processed soil samples

from the Burrell Orchard site identified just two plant classes: wood and nuts. The

wood assemblage is consistent with a surrounding mixed oak forest at the site

location and an ash-elm forest closer to the waterways. The high density of nutshell

recovered provides evidence of intense fall nut harvesting/processing at six of the

eight features analyzed (Features 14-02, 14-03, 14-04, 14-05, 14-07, and 14-12).

While wood and nut taxa recovered from the 2008 and 2014 assemblages are

similar, quantitative differences between the two assemblages are significant enough

to indicate a difference in activities that took place near the features analyzed.

Botanical evidence from the majority of the 2014 features support intense nut

processing activity while the intensity of nut processing near the 2008 features

appears to be lower.

In sum, botanical data from the Burrell Orchard site is consistent with trends

seen at other Late Archaic sites in Ohio. Overall, (2008 and 2014 assemblages

combined) the Burrell Orchard wood density is high, nut density is high, and seed

density is low – with no evidence of native seed cultigens. Based on the botanical

evidence recovered, site occupants were exploiting the surrounding forests for nut

resources during the fall months and intensely processing the harvest near select

features (Leone 2014: 9).

Radiocarbon Determinations

Three samples of carbonized nutshell were submitted to Beta Analytic, Inc. for AMS

radiocarbon assay. The calibrated results are provided in Table 4 and document at least two

sequential human occupations spanning the twenty-fifth through twenty-second centuries

B.C. Two of the three samples are derived from vertically stratified contexts. One sample

(Beta-390426) was collected from midden deposits located beneath the clay floor (Feature

35

14-11) in unit 498N 512E at a depth of 63 to 69 cm bd. The second sample (Beta-390427)

was collected from Feature 14-02, the small charcoal-filled thermal feature located in an

activity

Table 3: Botanical Samples Submitted for Analysis

Catalog No. Unit, Level Fea. No. Feature Type 1082A0133-01 Unit 498N 512E, 33-42 cm bd 14-02 Cooking pit

1082A0126-01 Unit 490N 497.5E, 40-50 cm bd 14-03 Indeterminate pit

1082A0127-03 Unit 490N 497.5E, 40-76 cm bd 14-04 Cooking pit

1082A0139-01 Unit 500N 512E, 50-58 cm bd 14-05 Indeterminate pit

1082A0140-01 Unit 500N 512E, 50-65 cm bd 14-06 Oxidized soil lens

1082A0141-03 Unit 500N 512E, 51-61 cm bd 14-07 Indeterminate pit

1082A0130-02 Unit 490N 497.5E, 40-79 cm bd 14-12 Cooking pit

1082A0136-01 Unit 498N 512E, 53-66 cm bd 14-17 Indeterminate pit

surface between 33 and 42 cm bd. An examination of Table 4 reveals that the resulting,

calibrated radiocarbon date ranges for these two samples are statistically distinct (at the two-

sigma level) and chronologically stratified. The assay for the large pit, Feature 14-04, is

statistically distinct only from the earliest, subfloor midden, date range. Thus, it could

represent an occupation contemporary with that of Feature 14-02.

Figure 24 illustrates the combined calibrated date ranges for the 2008 and 2014

excavation seasons. As can be clearly seen in this figure, the two dates from 2008 easily

bracket the 2014 assays. Only the assay on bone from midden Stratum III is significantly

younger than the rest.

Table 4: Burrell Orchard Site Radiocarbon Determinations – 2014

Lab. No. Feature No. Material Conventional 13C/12C 2 Sigma

Calibration

Median cal

date

Beta-390426 subfloor

midden nutshell 3930+/-30 BP -26.2 2485 to 2340 BC 2413 BC

Beta-390427 14-02 nutshell 3770+/-30 BP -23.9 2285 to 2060 BC 2173 BC

Beta-390428 14-04 nutshell 3880+/-30 BP -25.5 2465 to 2230 BC 2348 BC

DISCUSSION AND PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS

Over a four-week period in 2014, The Cleveland Museum of Natural History Field

School tested 22.25 m2 of the Burrell Orchard archaeological site. A significant body of data

was produced from this rather limited investigation. The results reported above can now be

used to address the research questions that were formulated at the outset of the project (see

above).

36

Figure 24. Two sigma calibrated date intervals for 2008 and 2004 radiocarbon assays.

In terms of spatial extent of the site, methods of geophysical survey and shovel-

testing revealed a minimum area of 4,200 m2. Adding the area of the narrow promontory to

the north covered by the former orchard—where previous testing revealed additional Late

Archaic midden deposits (Redmond and Scanlan 2009: 6)—the total possible site area

increases to 6,850 m2.

The completion of the systematic shovel-test survey in 2014 revealed

that the subsurface midden deposits achieve maximum thickness of about 75 cm below

surface in the north-central section of the meadow and then thin gradually to less than 25 cm

(i.e., plow zone thickness) at the periphery. The shovel-testing also indicated that the midden

contents are dominated by chert debitage and FCR, with significantly lesser amounts of bone

being preserved. The highest densities of chert and FCR appear to be concentrated in north-

south trending concentrations near the center of the site.

The 2014 excavations successfully defined a large section (or sections) of the

prepared clay surface discovered in 2008. It indeed appears to be a deliberate (cultural)

construction by the Late Archaic site dwellers and is referred to herein as one or more

activity surfaces or floors. Discrete areas of heat-oxidized clay in the southernmost section

of these floors (eastern half of Unit 498N 512E) indicate that individual fires or hearth

features were made on these floors. Further, an apparent arc of post molds recorded along

the western margin of this same floor section strongly indicates that wooden post structures

of one form or another were constructed on chosen sections of the clay surfaces. Whether

these surfaces were all dwelling floors remains uncertain. A dated sample of nutshell

recovered from a thin midden stratum beneath this same floor points to the construction of

the latter shortly after ca. 2400 B.C.

If all five radiocarbon determinations are considered, the maximum duration of site

occupation is nearly 800 years (cal. 2571 B.C. to 1775 B.C.) (Figure 24). The three 2014

radiocarbon dates derived from correctly stratified samples, however, cut this possible

37

occupation span nearly in half to 425 years (ca. 2485 B.C. to 2060 B.C.), which may be

closer to the true duration of site occupation.

The information derived from the 2014 excavations support the original interpretation

of this site as a seasonally reoccupied base camp focused on the processing of deer and nut

resources (Redmond and Scanlan 2009: 49). The discovery of significant amounts of deer

bone and antler, smudge pits, stemmed lanceolate point and knife fragments, and hickory

nutshell continue to support this assessment of primary site activities, as it does fall to winter

seasons of occupation. Stratified radiocarbon determinations from the midden deposits

reveal that seasonal reoccupations took place over no more than four centuries at some kind

of regular frequency. The confirmation of the clay activity floors now indicate, however,

that significant effort was put into the construction of activity areas and possibly dwellings

during each occupation. Such a level of labor input strongly suggests that each occupation

was of greater duration than just a few days. The recovery of virtually no pottery or

diagnostic stone tools of other eras point to the Late Archaic occupation as paramount, with

subsequent visits having been relatively short-term and culturally ephemeral.

A deeper understanding of the true nature of the Burrell Orchard Late Archaic

occupation remains elusive. We do know that deer and nut processing was important in at

least the northern area of the site (south of the old orchard), however, activities of other kinds

by more than a few families (such as a macroband) cannot yet be supported due to limited

subsurface investigations elsewhere on-site. Very general patterns of chert and FCR spatial

distributions may hint at the possible segregation of tool manufacture and hot-rock cooking

(or at least FCR dumping) in discrete areas of the site, but further analysis and testing are

needed to confirm this. The ultimate determination of how the clay floors were used, as, for

example, loci for simple meat and nut-processing activities versus the floors of substantial

dwellings, may provide the most significant insights into the scale and intensity of the Late

Archaic occupations of the Burrell Orchard site.

REFERENCES CITED

Cook, Robert A. and Jarrod Burks

2011 Determining Site Size and Structure in Cases of Low Surface Visibility: A Fort

Ancient Example. American Antiquity 76: 145-162.

Jefferies, Richard W.

1997 Middle Archaic Bone Pins: Evidence of Mid-Holocene Regional-Scale Social Groups

in the Southern Midwest. American Antiquity 62: 464-487.

2008 Holocene Hunter-Gatherers of the Lower Ohio River Valley. The University of

Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

38

Justice, Noel D.

1987 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Midcontinental and Eastern United States.

Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana.

Kenyon, Ian T.

1980 The Satchell Complex in Ontario: A Perspective from the Ausable Valley. Ontario

Archaeology 34:17-43.

Leone, Karen L.

2014 Paleoethnobotanical Analysis of Eight Features from the Burrell Orchard site

(33Ln15) in Lorain County, Ohio; Results from the 2014 Field Season. Unpublished report

of analysis on file in the Department of Archaeology, The Cleveland Museum of Natural

History.

Lovis, William A.

2009 Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations and Alternative Perspectives on the Michigan Archaic:

Research Problems in Context. In Archaic Societies: Diversity and Complexity across the

Midcontinent, edited by Thomas E. Emerson, Dale L. McEltrath, and Andrew C. Fortier, pp.

725-754. State University of New York Press, Albany.

Nolan, Kevin C. and Brian G. Redmond

2015 Geochemical and Geophysical Prospecting at Three Multicomponent Sites in the

Southwestern Lake Erie Basin: A Pilot Study. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 2:

94-105.

Nolan, Kevin C., Brian G. Redmond, and Christina R. Spielbauer

2014 A Rapid and Inexpensive Method for Investigating Community Structure in the

Southwestern Lake Erie Basin: A Pilot Study. Report of Investigations 85, Volume 1 and 2,

Applied Anthropology Laboratories, Department of Anthropology, Ball State University,

Muncie, Indiana. Archaeological Research Reports, No. 165, the Cleveland Museum of

Natural History.

Redmond, Brian G. and Brian L. Scanlan

2009 Archaeological Investigations at the Burrell Orchard Site (33Ln15): 2008 Season.

Archaeological Research Report, No. 156. The Cleveland Museum of Natural History.

Roos, Christopher I, and Kevin C. Nolan

2012 Phosphates, Plowzones, and Plazas: A Minimally Invasive Approach to Infer

Settlement Structure of Plowed Village Sites in the Midwestern USA. Journal of

Archaeological Science 39(1): 23-32.

Stothers, David M. and Timothy J. Abel

1993 Archaeological Reflections of the Late Archaic and Early Woodland Time Periods in

the Western Lake Erie Region. Archaeology of Eastern North America:21:25-109.

39

2002 The Early Late Woodland in the Southwestern Lake Erie Littoral Region. In

Northeast Subsistence-Settlement Change A.D. 700-1300, edited by John P. Hart and

Christina B. Rieth, pp. 73-96. New York State Museum Bulletin 496, 2002.

40

Appendix 1: Summary Artifact Class Tabulations by Excavation Unit and Feature

(Data available by request to senior author)

41

Appendix 2: Microwear Analysis of Chipped Stone Tools from Burrell Orchard

(33 LN 15)

G. Logan Miller

Introduction

Twenty eight chipped stone tools recovered during excavations led by Brian

Redmond of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History at Burrell Orchard (33 LN 15) in

Lorain County, Ohio were examined for microwear patterns. The microwear sample included

artifacts from CMNH excavations in 2008 and 2014 as well as general surface collections by

the Burrell Family. The sample consisted of 12 complete and broken large lanceolate

projectile points. Redmond and Scanlan (2009:30) report that these points are most similar to

Adder Orchard and Steubenville point types. Eight additional projectile points and biface

fragments were included in the sample. The sample also included eight drills and drill

fragments, two of which refit (Table A2-1).

Microwear Analysis

In this study, the method of microwear analysis developed by Semenov (1964) and

modified by Keeley (1980) was used to identify the wear traces on the artifacts. This

procedure includes examination of micropolishes, striations, and damage scars that form on

the edges of chipped stone tools when they are used to perform specific tasks (cutting,

scraping, etc.) on certain types of materials (bone, wood, hide, etc.). These are then compared

to the same features on experimental chipped stone tools used for similar tasks to interpret

the prehistoric activities. Examination is conducted at high-power under incident light at

magnifications ranging between 50x and 500x (see Gijn 1990; Keeley 1980; Miller 2014 for

details on techniques of microscopic examination). Prior to the microwear analysis, the

artifacts were photographed so that the occurrence of wear could be recorded (Table A2-1).

Then the implements were cleaned in an ultrasonic cleaner with liquid soap before they were

examined under the incident light metallurgical microscope. The results of this microwear

analysis are presented below.

Lanceolate Points

The relatively small size of catalog #1082A-24-03 indicates that it is a heavily

resharpened projectile point. The base of the point exhibited hafting wear. There is no

evidence of use on the blade. It is likely that resharpening has removed previous traces of

wear and the tool was lost or discarded prior to reuse.

Catalog #1082A-85-01 is a large, complete lanceolate point (Figure A2-1). The

artifact exhibits bright linear streaks of polish at the tip which are indicative of use as a

projectile. Numerous hafting bright spots are present on the base of the tool, indicating that it

was hafted during its uselife (Rots 2010).

The tip of Catalog #1082A-85-44 is missing due to a lateral snap or bending fracture.

While a portion of the blade remained intact, no use-wear was noted on the artifact. Hafting

bright spots were observed on the base.

42

The tip of Catalog #1082A-85-09-38 exhibited a similar lateral snap to 1082A-85-44.

However, the edge of this tool contained dull polish with large pits and rounded edges

indicative of contact with dry hide (Figure A2-2). Striations parallel to the working edge of

the tool indicate that it was used in a cutting motion. Hafting polish was also observed on the

base.

Catalog #1082A-125-05 also is missing the tip due to a lateral snap. The base of this

artifact contains hafting polish. However, one of the shoulders was removed by retouch and

the entire working edge of the tool exhibits generic weak polish. Generic weak polish is the

beginning stage of polish formation and is non-diagnostic of any particular material worked

(Vaughan 1985). The presence of this polish on the blade and in the haft area, in addition to

hafting polish, indicates that this artifact was removed from its haft, retouched, and then

briefly used while handheld.

Catalog #1082A-85-28 had a very similar use life to 1082A-125-05. The base of this

artifact contains evidence for hafting. One shoulder was removed by subsequent retouch and

contains greasy invasive polish indicating that edge was used to butcher meat (Figure A2-3).

This wear pattern indicates that the tool was de-hafted, retouched, and then used for meat

butchery. Any potential uses while hafted remain unknown.

Catalog #1082A-85-09 is the midsection of a probable lanceolate point. There was

one small spot of stone polish on the broken corner of this tool. It is possible that this corner

was used to engrave or groove stone. However, that the polish only appears on one face of

the tool suggests that this is a technological abrasion from the break or retouch. No other use

wear or hafting traces were observed.

Catalog #1082A-25-06 is a heavily reworked lanceolate point. The surface of this

artifact was highly crystalline from either heat treatment or chemical patination. It "glittered"

under incident light, making it difficult to identify wear traces.

Catalog #1082A-138-03 is also a heavily resharpened lanceolate point. Meat polish

was noted along the most intensively retouched edge of the tool. Hafting polish was also

observed on the base. It is unclear whether or not the tool was hafted when used to butcher

meat.

Catalog#1082A-36 is the blade and tip of a stemmed or lanceolate point. No evidence

of utilization was observed on the artifact.

Catalog#1082A-125-06 is a large stemmed point with a broken base. The artifact

exhibits bright linear streaks of polish at the tip which are indicative of use as a projectile.

What remains of the haft contains many hafting bright spots.

Catalog #1082A-47-01 is the blade and tip of a probable lanceolate point. The artifact

contains no evidence of utilization.

43

Drills

Two drill fragments, Catalog #s 1802A-131-22 and 131-34, refit to form a large

complete drill. The microwear present on these two fragments is typical of the surprising use

that characterized many of the drills recovered from Burrell Orchard. A dull, greasy polish

that contains large pits when well-developed occurs along the tip, lateral edges and

highpoints of the surface topography throughout the tool. This polish along with the

associated edge rounding is characteristic of dry hide. The location of the polish as well as

the appearance of striations both parallel to and at angles to the working edge indicate that

this tool was used in a twisting motion to perforate dry hide. The microwear evidence occurs

across the upper third of the tool. The middle third of the tool exhibits no evidence of use

while the bottom third contains evidence of hafting.

Catalog # 1082A-28-07 is a drill with a broken tip. A dull, greasy polish that contains

large pits when well developed and is associated with edge rounding occurs along the lateral

edges and highpoints of the surface topography throughout the remaining upper portions of

the drill blade. The location of the polish as well as the appearance of striations both parallel,

to and at angles to, the working edge indicate that this tool was used in a twisting motion to

perforate dry hide. This action was probably performed while the tool was hafted as the base

of the artifact exhibits extensive evidence of haft wear.

Catalog # 1082A-127-01 is a complete drill. Similar to 28-07, extensive dry hide

polish and striations indicate that this drill was hafted and used to perforate dry hide (Figure

A2-4).

Catalog #1082A-024-04 is a complete drill but it is smaller and thinner than the

others. The tip of the artifact contains greasy dry hide polish and edge rounding. This tool

was also used to perforate dry hide but it contains no evidence of hafting.

Catalog #1082A-032-03 is the tip of a drill. Bright, flat polish as well as extensive

edge damage at the tip of this tool fragment indicates that it was used to drill stone (Figure

A2-5).

Catalog #1082A-013-04 is another complete drill. Extensive use related edge damage

reduces the width of the tool for about the upper two centimeters. Throughout this area

numerous patches of bright polish that are restricted to the working edge and contains very

small pits were documented (Figure A2-6). This polish and edge damage is characteristic of

drilling bone/antler. Microwear evidence from the base of this tool indicates that it was also

hafted.

Catalog # 1082A-045-07 is a complete drill that contains no evidence of use. The

existence of hafting bright spots indicates that the tool was hafted. It is difficult to explain

why a finished and hafted stone tool was not used. Perhaps it was lost or reworked before

discard. It may only have been used very briefly and thus wear patterns did not form.

44

Other Bifaces

Catalog #1082A-030-02 is a roughly triangular shaped biface fragment. The dull,

highly greasy and invasive polish on this tool is indicative of use in meat butchering.

Catalog #1082A-035-01 is a small biface fragment with no evidence of utilization.

Catalog #1082A-024-09 is a stemmed point base and blade identified by Redmond

and Scanlan (2009:30-31) as a transitional Middle to Late Archaic Genesee point. Microwear

patterns indicate that this artifact was hafted and used to butcher meat.

Catalog #1082A-030-04 is a Madison point with a broken tip. The artifact exhibits

evidence of hafting but not of utilization.

Catalog #1082A-85-08 is the midsection of a large thin biface. Dull, greasy polish

along both lateral edges of the artifact reflect its use as a butchering implement.

Catalog #1082A-030-03 is a broken or unfinished Brewerton side notched point. No

use-related or hafting wear was observed on this artifact.

Catalog #1082A-050-04 is a projectile point base, potentially of a lanceolate point.

No use-related or hafting wear was observed on this artifact.

Catalog #1082A-138-01 is a small, thick biface. The presence of edge rounding and a

dull polish with large pits indicates that this tool was used to scrape dry hide.

Summary

Overall, 17 of the 28 artifacts examined in this sample exhibited use related

microwear traces. Most of the tools were utilized for hunting and subsequent processing

animal products. The lanceolate points were used in three general activities. Two points

exhibited use as projectiles, two were used for butchering meat, and one was used as a dry

hide knife. No evidence of multiple uses was identified on any of the points. However many

of the points were resharpened and evidence of earlier uses may have been removed. All but

two of the lanceolate points with intact basal haft portions displayed evidence of hafting. The

drills were also used for three different tasks. Four drills, represented by five tool fragments,

were used to perforate dry hide. In this case the term drill is a misnomer as their function was

more in line with awls than drills. One drill was used to drill stone and one was used to drill

bone. All but one of the drills were hafted. Of the remaining eight bifaces examined, three

were used to butcher meat and one was used to scrape dry hide.

45

References Cited

Gijn, Anne Louise van

1990 The Wear and Tear of Flint: Principles of Microwear Analysis Applied to Dutch

Neolithic Assemblages. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 22, University of Leiden.

Keeley, Lawrence H.

1980 Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis. University

of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Miller, G. Logan

2014 Ritual, Craft, and Economy in Ohio Hopewell: An examination of Two

Earthworks on the Little Miami River. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Department of

Anthropology, Ohio State University, Columbus.

Redmond, Brian G., and Brian L. Scanlan

2009 Archaeological Investigations at the Burrell Orchard Site (33LN15): 2008 Season.

Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Archaeological Research Report No. 156.

Rots, Verle

2010 Prehension and Hafting Traces on Flint Tools: A Methodology. Leuven University

Press, Leuven, Belgium.

Semenov, Sergei A.

1964 Prehistoric Technology. Barnes and Noble, NY (trans. M. W. Thompson).

Vaughan. Patrick

1985 Use-Wear Analysis of Flaked Stone Tools. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

46

Table A2-1: Burrell Orchard Microwear Results

CAT# CMNH Artifact Type Flint Type/Color Used Motion Material Worked Notes

1082A-013-04 Drill Gray Yes drill bone? hafted

1082A-138-01 Biface Gray Yes scraping dry hide

1082A-024-

04 Drill White Yes perforate dry hide

thinner than

others, no

hafting

evidence

1082A-028-07 Drill Gray Yes perforate dry hide hafted

1082A-127-01 Drill Gray Yes perforate dry hide hafted

1082A-131-24 Drill tip Gray Yes perforate dry hide

tip of 131-22,

weakly

developed

1082A-131-22 Drill, broken

tip Gray Yes perforate dry hide

hafted, base

and

midsection of

131-24

1082A-85-09-

38

Lanceolate

point base Tan Yes cutting dry hide hafted

1082A-125-05 Lanceolate

point base Black Yes ? generic weak

hafted,

retouched

and used

after removal

from haft

1082A-030-02 Biface Dark Gray Yes butcher meat

1082A-85-28 Lanceolate

point base Black Yes butcher meat

hafted,

resharpened

and used

after removal

1082A-138-03

Lanceolate

Projectile

point

Gray Yes butcher meat hafted

1082A-024-09 Stemmed

point base refit mottled gray Yes butcher meat hafted

1082A-085-08 Biface

midsection Gray Yes butcher meat/bone

1082A-032-03 Drill tip Gray Yes drill stone

1082A-050-04 Biface base black No

1082A-035-01 Biface

fragment black No

1082A-045-

07 Drill Gray No hafted

1082A-025-06 Lanceolate

point White ?

hafted, no

use but

quartzlike or

patinated

obscuring

wear

1082A-024-03 Lanceolate

point Black No hafted

1082A-85-09

Lanceolate

point

midsection

Gray No one spot of

stone polish

47

CAT# CMNH Artifact Type Flint Type/Color Used Motion Material Worked Notes

1082A-036 Lanceolate

point tip Black No

couple of

spots of stone

polish

1082A-47-01 Lanceolate

point tip Black No

1082A-125-06

Lanceolate

point, broken

base

Black banded Yes projectile

1082A-85-44

Lanceolate

point, broken

tip

Gray ?

hafted,

probable

projectile

break

1082A-85-01

Lanceolate

Projectile

point

Black Yes projectile hafted

1082A-030-04 Madison point,

broken tip Grey/red No

hafted,

heated

1082A-030-03 Projectile

point Gray No

48

Figure A2-1. CMNH catalog # 1082A-85-01. Bright linear streaks of polish diagnostic of

use as a projectile are visible at the tip of this lanceolate point(Upper Right). Polish and

bright spots indicative of hafting are also pictured (Lower Right). Dashed white lines indicate

the extent of hafting wear. Both inset photographs were taken at 187.5x magnification.

49

Figure A2-2. CMNH catalog # 1082A-85-09-38. Early stages of dull polish and edge

rounding with pits forming indicating use on dry hide (Upper Right). Faint striations parallel

to the working edge signal use in a cutting motion. Hafting polish was noted throughout the

base and slightly above the shoulders (Lower Right). Both inset photographs were taken at

187.5x magnification. Dotted white lines indicate extent of dry hide polish and dashed white

lines indicate hafting area.

50

Figure A2-3. CMNH catalog # 1082A-85-28. Dull greasy polish diagnostic of meat butchery

extending well back from the working edge (Upper right). Hafting bright spot indicating the

point was hafted earlier in its use-life (Lower Right). Both inset photographs were taken at

187.5x magnification. Dotted white line indicates the extent of meat butchering wear.

51

Figure A2-4. CMNH catalog # 1082A-127-01. Dull pitted polish and edge rounding with

striations indicative of perforating dry hide (Upper right). Hafting bright spots and polish

(Lower right). Both inset photographs were taken at 187.5x magnification. Dotted white lines

indicate extent of dry hide polish and dashed white lines indicate hafting area.

52

Figure A2-5. CMNH catalog # 1082A-032-08. Bright, flat areas of stone polish identified in

an area of extensive edge damage on the tip of this drill (Upper right). Inset photograph taken

at 350x magnification. Dotted white lines indicate extent of stone polish and edge damage.

53

Figure A2-6. CMNH catalog #1082A-013-04. Bright polish with very small pits and

restricted to the edge of the tool, diagnostic of drilling bone/antler (Upper Right). Hafting

bright spot and polish (Lower Right). Both inset photographs were taken at 187.5x

magnification. Dotted white lines indicate extent of bone/antler polish and edge damage and

dashed white lines indicate hafting area.

54

Appendix 3: 33LN15 Faunal Assemblage Analysis

Elizabeth Votruba

Introduction

Burrell Orchard is located in the Sheffield Township of Lorain County, northern

Ohio. It is a unique archaeological locality dating to the Late Archaic period (ca. 4000 years

before present). Six 2x2 meter units and two 1x2 meter units were excavated in the 2008 and

2014 field seasons. Each unit contained prehistoric cultural artifacts and human modified

faunal materials. In total, the units yielded 3398 grams (g) of faunal material recovered from

pit features and each unit’s midden. A possible clay floor was identified in the two adjacent

units 498N 512 E and 500N 512E.

This report details a reconstruction of the probable subsistence patterns and provides

preliminary interpretation concerning the Late Archaic occupation of Burrell Orchard. The

research methods addressed the following questions:

1. What was the use or purpose of each feature? What activities took place on site?

2. What animals were humans exploiting for subsistence at Burrell Orchard?

3. How can the faunal data be interpreted for indications of cultural patterns such as

subsistence strategies, settlement patterns, seasonality, environmental information,

etc.?

Methods

The faunal analysis was undertaken at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History

Archaeology Lab. The faunal remains were washed, counted, weighed, and sorted based on

provenience information by CMNH volunteers. Using comparative collections provided by

the CMNH Archaeology Lab, each bone was first classified based on general categories of

bone type (axial or limb, element identification). Taxon (class, family, genus and species)

was then identified, if possible. All data were recorded in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet,

including analytical considerations such as taphonomic processes (burned, gnawed, broken,

etc.) and indications of human processing (i.e. butchery, bone processing for marrow

consumption, cooking, working). The results are presented below. Due to the fragmented

nature of the remains, weight, rather than quantity, was used as the primary quantitative

variable followed by NISP calculations.

Results

In total there were 3398 grams (g) of faunal material recorded (see Table A3-1 for

NISP). 913 g (27%) were burnt. About a quarter of the remains (883 g, 26%) were too small

55

(less than 2 centimeters in diameter) or too poorly preserved to be identified to taxon; 2515 g

of material were identifiable by class. The majority of these remains (2413 g, 96%) belonged

to mammals; 50 g, (2%) were identified as bird; 48 g (2%) as fish; and 4 g (<1%) as reptilian.

One species of bird was identified: Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo). Two types of fish

were recovered: Freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) and a catfish (Ictaluridae family).

The only kind of reptile identified was turtle.

Table A3-1: NISP (Number of Identified Specimens)

Of the 2413 g of mammalian remains, 1112 g (46%) could be further identified to

species. The largest proportion of mammalian bone fragments (1069 g, 44.3%) were the

56

remains of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Deer limb bones (513 g) were

recorded in slightly greater proportion to axial bones (441 g). However, the most common

elements of deer identified were fragments of antler shaft (177 g) and antler tine (128 g),

followed by astragali (110 g) (See Table A3-2).

Table A3-2: Tabulation of elements of deer

Element Weight (g)

Antler shaft 177

Antler tine 128

Astragalus 110

Calcaneus 50

Carpal 15

Cranium 18

Femur 3

Humerus 49

Mandible 3

Maxilla 2

Metacarpal 12

Metapodial 30

Metatarsal 10

Pelvis 11

Phalanx 16

Podal 20

Radius 42

Rib 11

Scapula 46

Tarsal 9

Tibia 37

Tooth 58

Ulna 8

Vertebrae 59

Unidentifiable 145

Total 1069

After deer, the mammalian bone fragments largely belonged to small mammals and

rodents. The second most common animal identified was squirrel (20 g, 1.8% of mammalian

remains). See Table A3-3 and Figure A3-1 for reference.

57

Table A3-3: Distribution of mammalian species at Burrell Orchard

Mammal Habitat (Source:

wildlife.ohiodnr.gov)

Weight

(g)

Percentage of

total (n=1112)

Percentage of

total, excluding

deer (n=43)

Deer Forested, with water

access 1069 96.1%

Dog Adaptable, forest 2 0.2% 4.7%

Large

Mammal

Total

- 1071 96.3%

Fox Wide range 2 0.2% 4.7%

Muskrat Freshwater rodent 4 0.4% 9.3%

Opossum Woods, wetlands, near

water 3 0.3% 7.0%

Raccoon Wooded w big trees, near

water 4 0.4% 9.3%

Squirrel sp. Woodland, agricultural 20 1.8% 46.5%

Woodchuck Open grasslands, open

woodland (hibernates) 8 0.7% 18.6%

Small

Mammal

Total

- 41 3.7%

Total

Mammal 1112

58

Discussion & Conclusion

The following discussion addresses the research questions listed above.

Feature Functions

Numerous features (see Table A3-4) were identified as areas of possible activities,

such as cooking pits or smudge pits (Redmond and Scanlan 2009). The results of faunal

analysis support the feature types previously suggested.

FOX, 2, 5% MUSKRAT,

4, 9%

OPOSSUM, 3,

7%

RACCOON, 4,

9%

SQUIRREL SP,

20, 46%

WOODCHUCK,

8, 19%

DOG, 2, 5%

FIGURE A3-1: WEIGHT (g) AND PERCENTS OF

IDENTIFIABLE MAMMALS EXCLUDING DEER, BY

WEIGHT (g)

59

Table A3-4: Faunal Contents of Features 1

The greatest weights of faunal material were recorded in Feature 14-04, Feature 08-

03, and Feature 14-05. Feature 14-04 also contained the greatest weight of deer remains on

the site, followed by Feature 14-05. The highest concentration of fish bones was recorded in

Feature 08-26, followed by Feature 14-04 and Feature 08-03. The most bird bone was

60

derived from Feature 08-17 (one wild turkey humerus), followed by Feature 14-14. Reptiles

(turtle) were recorded from only two features: Feature 8-03 and Feature 08-16. Squirrel

bones appear to be scattered throughout the site, without any apparent concentrations in

features.

Feature 14-04 and Feature 08-03 were similar in form and composition. Both were

large basins that were likely used as cooking pits based on the high frequency of burnt

remains and fire-reddened soils found in Feature 14-04 and Feature 08-03 respectively. The

breadth of fauna reported in both assemblages suggests that the Late Archaic residents

exploited a wide variety of animals for subsistence. Feature 14-04 contained deer, squirrel,

bird, and fish bones. Feature 08-03 had a similarly diverse faunal assemblage as Feature 14-

04, including deer, raccoon, turtle, bird, and fish bones.

Numerous differences were observed, however, between the two features. Lower

weights of deer were recorded in Feature 08-03 (18 g out a total of 134 g) than in Feature 14-

04 (91 g out of a total of 196 g). Feature 08-03 contained twice as much fire-cracked rock

than Feature 14-04. Contrastingly, 28% (38 g from a total of 134 g) of the faunal material in

Feature 08-03 was burnt, while 59% (117 g out of a total of 196 g) was burnt in Feature 14-

04. These observable differences may indicate that two different fire-related activities took

place in each feature.

Subsistence Strategies

The Late Archaic residents of Burrell Orchard exploited locally available fauna. As

indicated above, deer accounted for the majority of the inhabitants’ subsistence strategy;

however, the results may be due in part to biases in preservation. The small mammal remains

(including rodents, canids and a marsupial) suggest a woodland environment with

accessibility to water. Squirrel, raccoon, and opossum could be hunted in the oak and hickory

forests in the vicinity; muskrat could be pursued on the banks of the Black River or French

Creek and brought back to the site; fox may have been hunted opportunistically in the wide

range of habitats that the species occupies. These conclusions are supported by the findings

of the botanical analysis (see below).

Seasonality

The consistent presence of faunal materials throughout the uncommonly thick

stratigraphic profiles of the excavated units indicates that Burrell Orchard was intensely

occupied for numerous centuries. The recovery of shed antler indicate that the site was

inhabited during late fall and early winter months. The relatively equal weights of deer axial

bones versus deer limb bones suggests that deer was transported back to the site as whole

carcasses for processing and consumption, rather than selected body parts. Additionally, the

highly fragmented nature of the bones may indicate that the occupants were extracting

marrow for subsistence, which would provide great caloric value during cold months. High

quantities of nutshell and squirrel bones may additionally represent activity on the site during

61

fall months. Lastly, the finds of human-modified bone, antler tools and awls, suggest that the

site was not solely used for hunting but also for other activities, such as hide-smoking and

sewing. This further substantiates claims that people continually occupied Burrell Orchard

and used the site as a base camp, rather than as a temporary and occasional hunting blind.

The residents of Burrell Orchard used diverse subsistence strategies to exploit food resources

and hunted animals that could be found locally.

Future excavations at Burrell Orchard will benefit from water screening in field

methods, which will potentially illustrate a greater diversity in classes of fauna, revealing

bones and teeth of smaller fauna.

References Cited

Redmond, Brian G. and Brian L. Scanlan

2009 Archaeological Investigations at the Burrell Orchard Site (33Ln15): 2008 Season.

Archaeological Research Report, No. 156. The Cleveland Museum of Natural

History.

62

Appendix 4: Botanical Inventory of the Burrell Orchard Site (33Ln15) 2014 (Leone

2014: Appendix A)

Provenience Feature 14-

02

Feature

14-03

Feature 14-

04

Feature 14-

05

Feature 14-

06

40-50 cm

50-65 cm

Soil Volume 10 L 7 L 5 L 6 L 15 L

Ct Wt Ct Wt Ct Wt Ct Wt Ct Wt

Wood Total 28 0.41 26 0.5

3 62 1.73 46 0.70 53 0.96

Wood-Representative Sample 20

20

20

20

20

ash (Fraxinus sp.)

7

2

elm/hackberry (Ulmaceae) 1

2

1

hickory (Carya sp.) 16

4

10

5

6

maple (Acer sp.)

1

1

oak (Quercus sp.) 3

14

2

6

9

walnut (Juglans sp.)

unidentified / bark

6

4

Nut Total 286 7.46 23

0

5.0

5 145 3.85 322 8.97 74 1.59

black walnut (Juglans nigra) 28 0.73

36

0.8

8 15 0.50 31 1.57 18 0.35

butternut (Juglans cinerea)

6 0.18 2 0.06

hickory (Carya sp.) 258 6.73

19

4

4.1

7 130 3.35 285 7.22 54 1.18

nutmeat: walnut (Juglans

sp.)

Grand Total 314 7.87 25

6

5.5

8 207 5.58 368 9.67 127 2.55

63

Appendix 4 (continued)

Provenience Feature 14-07 Feature 14-12 Feature 14-17

50-56 cm

Totals

Soil Volume 15 L 7 L 5 L

Ct Wt Ct Wt Ct Wt Ct Wt

Wood Total 161 1.97 26 0.65 15 0.26 417 7.21

Wood-Representative Sample 20

20

15

155

ash (Fraxinus sp.)

9

elm/hackberry (Ulmaceae)

4

hickory (Carya sp.) 2

7

2

52

maple (Acer sp.)

2

oak (Quercus sp.) 16

13

2

65

walnut (Juglans sp.) 2

3

5

unidentified / bark

8

18

Nut Total 310 6.93 155 3.31 31 0.73 1,553 37.89

black walnut (Juglans nigra) 62 0.91 18 0.39 3 0.03 211 5.36

butternut (Juglans cinerea)

8 0.24

hickory (Carya sp.) 247 5.97 137 2.92 28 0.70 1,333 32.24

nutmeat: walnut (Juglans sp.) 1 0.05

1 0.05

Grand Total 471 8.90 181 3.96 46 0.99 1,970 45.10