Contemporary Lithic Analysis in the Southeast: Problems, Solutions, and Interpretations

10. Shifting Strategies in Chert Use from the Late Archaic to the Early Fort Ancient at Elk Fork in Eastern Kentucky

10 Shifting Strategies in Chert Use from the Late Archaic to the Early Fort Ancient at Elk Fork in Eastern Kentucky D. Randall Cooper raw material studies have been a key component of lithic analysis in the southeast for decades, mainly because of the mosaic of geologic formations with recognizable varieties of useable stone and the fact that broad gaps between these resources required logistical planning by prehistoric groups. while lithic analysts have long recognized the potential of these signature lithic types for interpreting the movement or interaction of people over the landscape, they have struggled to accurately identify these materials and to determine specific sources for materials found in archaeological contexts. Analysts also have struggled at times to assign meaning to raw material data from a particular site or study area. The complex interplay of geology, biota, and culture does not lend itself to a static mathematical model, and consequently there is no single formula for divining past behavior from ratios of local and nonlocal chert, or early- versus late-stage flakes. in the sort of exploratory archaeology that occurs so often in cultural resource management, interpretation of lithic artifacts demands a broad view of multiple data sets, any one of which could be crucial, or virtually useless, in a particular case study. For most samples of lithic artifacts from intact contexts, the analytical value can be increased exponentially by an understanding of the natural lithic sources within the reach of those who left the artifacts. lithic resource distribution is one of the few areas in which an absolute baseline can be established; thus lithic resource distribution can provide a much-needed independent variable in the science of prehistoric archaeology. establishing this baseline presents two fundamental problems: finding out where useable raw material occurs naturally and learning to recognize it when it is found elsewhere. As simple and obvious as these problems may appear, resolutions are usually beyond the scope of any single project, and few lithic studies adequately account for these important Shifting Strategies in Chert Use / 147 variables. The analysis of lithics from the elk Fork site (15Mo140) is presented here as one example of how these problems can be addressed and how the resulting data contribute to interpretations of behavior during the different occupations of the site, as well as provide implications for broader patterns of behavior in the region. Though we have not yet achieved an absolute baseline for lithic resources in the region, we have sufficient data to refine our understanding of the different strategies used to exploit lithic resources by two distinctly different groups occupying the same terrace along elk Fork. The elk Fork site is a multicomponent prehistoric site in the upper licking river drainage of eastern Kentucky (Figure 10.1). The data recovery project at elk Fork (herndon 2005) yielded more than 15,000 lithic artifacts. Most of this was flake debris, and 389 stone tools and 41 cores were included (table 10.1). The bulk of the material was recovered from unit excavation using 6.35 mm Figure 10.1. chert-bearing formations in eastern Kentucky. 148 / Cooper (.25-inch) screens, but nearly half of the flakes were recovered from flotation samples. ninety-eight percent of the lithic items recovered from elk Fork came from late Archaic and early Fort Ancient components. The two major occupations at elk Fork were separated in time by at least 2,000 years, over which major culture changes occurred. Much of what we know about the late Archaic in eastern Kentucky is based on inferences from work in adjacent regions, especially southern ohio (Vickery 1976, 1980) and the Green river area of western Kentucky (Jefferies 1996, 2008a, 2009). late Archaic sites in the ohio Valley generally show a continuation of the regional specialization that characterized earlier subperiods of the Archaic, but there are signs of increasing use of cultigens and evidence for increasing sedentism, population size, and social complexity at several sites. copper and marine shells at sites in western Kentucky demonstrate some level of interregional trade. Various models have been proposed for late Archaic settlement systems (boisvert 1986; Granger et al. 1992; Janzen 1977; Jefferies 1996; Vickery 1980; winters 1969), but most suggest a high degree of residential mobility, with some kind of sustained occupation for part of the year. At least 76 late Archaic sites have been documented in the upper Kentucky and licking river drainages of eastern Kentucky (Jefferies...