oa 74 part 01 pilon layout - Ontario Archaeological Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Pilon A Stone Tool Cache from the Hudson Bay Lowlands 9Figure 5. Composite of three views of the Ouissinaougouk cache during excavation (CD97-211:68,74,76). Visible in the middleimage is the thick, blanketing layer of sand overlying the dark, humic deposits in which the cache lay.cm x 10 mm.Morphologically this specimen resembles noother found to date in the Hudson Bay Lowlands,but then again, projectile points are not common.Similarly, the point does not fit within any knownlate prehistoric projectile point descriptions for theSubarctic. The general size and hafting characteristicsargue for an earlier dating, possibly in very LateArchaic or Initial Woodland times. The quality ofthe chipping is high and hints at the latter timeperiod rather than the former. Finally, a radiocarbondate of 1,120±50 years B.P. (Beta-77802) wasobtained for the birch-bark fragment which laydirectly under the cache. Nearby, a radiocarbondate obtained on charcoal from a stratigraphiclayer slightly higher than the one which contained
10 Ontario Archaeology No. 74, 2002Figure 6. Bifaces: GfJi-2:165(a); GfJi-2:166 (b); GfJi-2:167(c); GfJi-2:127 (d).the cache, yielded a date of 870±100 B.P. (Beta-7926). Laurel ceramic sherds were associated withthat sample. Thus, radiometric determinationscorroborate a late Initial Woodland dating for thecache (the Woodland period in northern Ontariois usually divided into Initial, Terminal andAceramic; see Pilon 1998).Bifaces (Figure 6b-d, Table 2)Three artifacts in this cache are termed bifaces.The items included in this broad category sharea number of attributes, foremost among thembeing the fact that they lack standardized shapes.Rather, all three exhibit clear evidence of coarseoverall bifacial reduction of the blanks and morecareful finishing of at least one edge. In fact, thecontrast between the finished edges and theunfinished edges is quite remarkable. In twoTable 2. Metrics of the Ouissinaougouk cache bifaces.Artifact Length Width Thickness(cm) (cm) (mm)GfJi-2:127 5.8 4.3 11GfJi-2:166 3.6 5.5 8GfJi-2:167 5.2 5.2 11instances (Figure 6b, c), unfinished edges arethick and actually present flat surfaces perpendicularto the facial plane of the implements. Effortsto thin these edges are attested to by multiple hingefractures emanating from these platforms. On theother hand, the longest edges on these tools exhibitfine, bifacial retouch. The third specimen (Figure6d) shows greater success in bifacially shaping ofthe piece, yet small remnants of the cortical surfaceof the original core are visible at either extremity. Itwould thus appear that these bifaces represent the
Page 1 and 2: 4 Ontario Archaeology No. 74, 2002A
Page 3 and 4: 6 Ontario Archaeology No. 74, 2002F
Page 5: 8 Ontario Archaeology No. 74, 2002a
Page 9 and 10: 12 Ontario Archaeology No. 74, 2002

oa 74 part 01 pilon layout - Ontario Archaeological Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?