In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

77 floral archaeological materials are immensely informative and serve to remind us that the preserved data are profoundly biased. Finally, the number of sites that may be analyzed are painfully few in number, with sixteen partially excavated sites and eight reasonably well documented isolated finds of Paleoindian artifacts (figure 4.1). Among this total a third are from sites with Archaic or Woodland components, and their analyses are somewhat confounded with mixed assemblages. A summary of Paleoindian sites in New Hampshire is therefore constrained by several limiting circumstances. Whether or not New Hampshire has a large or representative body of Paleoindian sites, it is still important and necessary to move forward with interpretations of the available data. These sites cannot be understood in isolation, and the larger questions regarding the Paleoindian period require a synthesis of all available data. Understanding the larger questions of origins, intergroup relationships, change over time, and ultimate closure of the Paleoindian period and culture can only be derived from interpretations of the patterns and differences among these sites. That they are imperfect is relevant only insofar as we are concerned with the absolute certainty of our conclusions. S ummarizing archaeological data from an arbitrarily defined space is always a risky proposition. Rarely is such a summary viewed as adequate or even valid. The effort is even more unreliable if data from within the selected area are known or believed to be uneven. Presenting a summary of Paleoindian data in New Hampshire is fraught with all of these liabilities. The area of the state is quite arbitrary from an ecological or cultural historical perspective, circumscribing only one major watershed, the Merrimack (and not even all of that), the east half of the Connecticut, the upper reaches of the Saco, the middle reaches of the Androscoggin, and a collection of minor streams that feed into a very small maritime zone. The White Mountains are perhaps the only environmental zone completely within the state. Systematic archaeological survey of the state does not exist. Sites have been found, but chance discovery accounts for about half of the sites recorded, and only one site (Thorne) was found as a product of a survey carried out specifically to find a Paleoindian site; the others were found as part of CRM surveys in advance of development. Paleoindian assemblages are overwhelmingly dominated by lithics, with scant representation of faunal or floral materials. When present faunal or Richard A. Boisvert chapter iv The Paleoindian Period in New Hampshire 78 Richard A. Boisvert developed her interpretations from the perspective of the Whipple site (Curran 1984, 1987), since it was the only wellpublished Paleoindian site in the state. Drawing from her own research and supplementing it with unpublished data shared by other researchers, she offered a broad summary of Paleoindian data in New Hampshire and sketched likely research issues. The Whipple site was identified in the mid-1970s and immediately recognized as a rich and important Paleoindian site. This significance proved to be a two-edged sword, encouraging on the one hand commitment of significant resources from state and federal agencies, educational institutions , and the local community and unfortunately on the other hand looting by relic hunters. Field research documented three subareas or loci, two of which were Paleoindian encampments. The site is situated on the shoulder of a broad slope overlooking a sharp bend of the Ashuelot River and a former kettle pond that had been breached by the meandering of the river. A large assemblage of distinctive Paleoindian points and other tools were documented, both from the formal excavations and from collections made by local residents. Curran hypothesized a close relationship with the other well-known southern New England Paleoindian sites, stating, “The similarity, technologically and lithologically, of the Bull Brook and Whipple site materials [Curran 1984; Grimes et al. 1984] suggests that closely related groups occupied both ‘ends’ of the habitat scale and adjusted their exploitative strategies accordingly” (1987:304). At that time there were only four other sites with excavated Paleoindian components in the state, most of which received publication a few years later: the Thorne site (Boisvert 2005) in Effingham, the Thornton’s Ferry site (unpublished except for Curran’s 1994 comments), the Hume site (Boisvert and Bennett 2004) in Merrimack, and the George’s Mills site in Sunapee (Sargent 1982, 1990). Curran also incorporated data from the Weirs Beach site in Laconia (Bolian 1977, 1980) since it likely represented the transition...

Share