VOLUME 52, NUMBER 1
CONTENTS
From the Editors’ Digs..............................................................................................................................................2
Trowel Marks.............................................................................................................................................................2
Welcome to the Society ..............................................................................................................................................3
Book Reviews .............................................................................................................................................................3
Abstracts from the Literature ....................................................................................................................................5
Books for Review .....................................................................................................................................................11
2004 Spring Meeting ...............................................................................................................................................11
Oklahoma Anthropological Society Fall Excavations at the Pratt Site, 34GV156 ...............................................12
The Stamper Site, 34TX1, Texas County, Oklahoma Part IV: The Architecture and Features Excavated by
Fred Carder Jr. ........................................................................................................................................................16
Rock Art ...................................................................................................................................................................53
Just A Little Yucca Rope .........................................................................................................................................53
Wishing On A Star...................................................................................................................................................54
Folsom Point from Custer County ..........................................................................................................................55
More Certification Seminars Set For Spring 2004 ................................................................................................55
 OKLAHOMA ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 2004
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
1
From the Editors’ Digs
Trowel Marks
Happy New Year to everyone!
Hi Everyone!
Remember this is a new year and it’s time to renew
your Society membership. We’ve included a form to
return to Pete Thurmond for your renewal.
I hope you are moving into the "indoor season" with
the least amount of resistance. In the Indian culture,
this is the time for story telling (in our case, I guess it's
TV).
We enjoyed seeing lots of Society folks at the Fall Dig
near Pauls Valley. Thanks to all who attended. We
saw a number of new students and others so we hope
some of them will be joining the OAS. Rich would
like to thank our Dig Committee chairman, Dave
Morgan, for his usual professional job of preparing for
the dig. Dave wasn’t able to attend because of illness
(he’s fine now), but everything went smoothly
because of his preparation and Dale McHard’s pinchhitting for Dave at the dig. Look for an article by
Richard in this issue for a summary of the work done
there.
Although I did not get to go, I heard that our fall dig
in Pauls Valley was a success. Nona Maxwell said she
and Don had a good time, including the wonderful hot
dog feast. "The archaeologists are not only good
'diggers' but also great cooks! The hamburgers were
awesome!"
Ron Barnes smiled and told me that the new people
should not be allowed to dig because they had all the
luck. I heard through the grapevine that 20 projectiles
were found in one hole. Two manos, two bone awls, a
pot shard with the upper lip were also found along
with corner posts to all the houses. Wow!
Rich is hoping to get help from the Society with a
Spring Dig at the Bryson-Paddock site in Kay County.
This historic Wichita village dates to about 1740-1750
and has both Wichita and early French artifacts
including Florence-A chert scrapers, gun parts, Fresno
points and trade beads. Features we may encounter
are pits, hearths, and houses, such as the Wichita
“beehive-shaped” houses and possibly French-built
structures. We look forward to seeing you in June in
Kay County. Check the Society webpage in February
(www.okarchaeology.org) and the next issue of the
Journal on May 1 for further Spring Dig details.
Dale McHard said it was a beautiful site in terms of
the view. He had to take over Dave's job since Dave
was in the hospital. He told me he talked to lots of
visitors at the site, including a Boy Scout troop and
some from OU who had never been to a site. I only
hope this peeked their interest in archaeology.
Dale told me, too, that Pauls Valley is the home of the
pecan pie (Fields) and chocolate factories. It is the
leading pecan area in the state. (My two favorite
foods!)
This issue has the last of the four-part Stamper series.
Our thanks to Chris Lintz for a truly amazing effort in
scouring historical records and bringing his own
knowledge of Panhandle archaeology to the job of
reconstructing work at one of the earliest digs in
Oklahoma. We appreciate Chris for allowing this
series to be presented in Oklahoma Archeology.
Jon Denton reported he enjoyed the Faunal Remains
Seminar on November 22.
The board meeting will be January 24 at the OAS
Survey Building.
The Spring Conference is set for April 17 at Dale
Hall, Room #103.
As usual, we are always looking for more long or
short articles for the Journal. If you’ve got a neat find
or have read a good book, consider writing it up and
sending it in. Feature-length articles are always
needed as well.
We are working on an interesting line up of speakers.
And finally, several people have mentioned interest in
a one day field trip to Woolaroc near Bartlesville and
to Spiro this spring or summer. Please watch for more
information on these in the next Journal.
Rich Drass ([email protected])
Mary Ann Drass ([email protected])
Have a safe and warm winter.
Kathy Gibbs ([email protected])
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
2
Welcome to the Society
Kadohadacho along the Angelina and Neches rivers
and are made up of 10-12 subtribes each with a
number of villages. Bolton’s book focuses on the
culture and history of the Hasinai among whom the
Spanish clerics established a number of missions.
These missions demonstrate the importance of the
Caddo people to the maintenance of the North
American Spanish Empire.
New Members, 08/16/2003 through 12/15/2003
Sustaining
Kris, Scott, Rachel, Hailey & Trent Mayberry,
Okmulgee
Marvin & Peggy Wiebener, Tulsa
This volume begins with an introduction by the editor
(Russell M. Magnaghi) who provides the reader with
the complex events surrounding the publication of this
long anticipated and important volume. Herbert
Eugene Bolton (1870-1953) remains one of the
premier North American historians, and his efforts on
unraveling the secrets of the Spanish Borderlands, its
exploration, and its settlement in the Southwest and
California are unparalleled. Dr. Bolton has written
books on the Rim of Christendom concerning the life
and times of Fray Eusebio Francisco Kino and the
Knight of Pueblo and Plains that reveals the
explorations and adventures of don Francisco Vásquez
de Coronado among the peoples of Pecos and other
pueblos and Quivira on the Kansas prairie.
Contributing
Steve Black, Austin, TX
Heather Brady, Midwest City
Jeff Indeck, Canyon, TX
James D. Mayberry, Pauls Valley
Mell Moore, Durant
Virginia R. Oblander, OKC
Active
Richard D. Andrews, Edmond
Terence & Michelle Ashford, Alex
Victor R. Blanchard, OKC
Gerald E. Brown, Golden, CO
Nancy Kay Fletcher, Norman
Pam Koenig, OKC
Dan McGregor, Irving, TX
S. Tara & Gustavus A. McLeod, Norman
Dennis Sivert, Tuttle
Artie Southern, Midwest City
Dorothy D. & James R. Welsh, Claremore
Dr. Bolton does not confine his historical scholarship
to just the lifeworks of missionaries and soldiers of the
Spanish empire, however. Native Americans too
receive his attention, and the Hasinai work is the
result of one of these in-depth studies. By using
historical documents, Bolton is careful to sift through
the different biases reflected by the missionaries,
soldiers, politicians, and other writers who describe
the indigenous peoples of their time. For example,
Bolton warns us that in reviewing the writings of
Spanish priests for the role of women in Hasinai
society, the reader should be aware that these men of
the cloth are more familiar with women’s tasks than
men’s. As a result, the ecclesiastical writings may
consider the work of women more difficult “and this
may account in part for the somewhat distorted picture
they [the priests] give” (Bolton 2002:87). Conversely,
because of their unfamiliarity with Hasinai political
and religious institutions, these same priests may not
be aware of the role of women in decision making and
public ceremonies. As a result, the priest and
chronicler may actually project European culture
and/or biases upon the culture of the Hasinai.
Book Reviews
The Hasinais: Southern Caddoan as Seen by the
Earliest Europeans
by Herbert Eugene Bolton
Edited and with an introduction by Russell M.
Magnaghi
(Volume 182 in the Civilization of the American
Indian Series, Published by the University of
Oklahoma Press, 1987; Red River Books Edition
2002)
Reviewed by Timothy G. Baugh
The publication of this volume represents a fine
addition to the recent publications concerning the
Caddo Indians. The Hasinai represent one of the two
largest and more powerful Caddo confederacies in
northeast Texas. The other is the Kadohadacho who
are composed of a number of subtribes and live along
the Red River near what is today Texarkana, Texas
and points east. The Hasinai live south of the
The Spaniards of the eighteenth century have a special
interest in the Caddo because they very much want to
counter the moves of French traders and diplomats
into what is considered Spanish territory. Frenchmen
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
3
in his Forward. In addition, there photographs of three
Caddo people including Minnie Parton and her son
Charley as well as Little Boy or George Washington,
the latter being a Caddo-Hasinai leader. In addition,
four other photographs depict house types, pottery
(including two types of vessels and a pipe), a Works
Progress Administration excavation during the 1930s,
and an exposed burial from these same excavations.
There are two maps as well. The first is a map of
Hasinai country and the second is the Teran map that
depicts Hasinai settlement pattern within one or more
of the subtribes. These photographs and maps add
even more context to this wonderful volume that
anyone interested in the Caddo people should read.
such as St. Denis and La Harpe are contacting the
Caddo in the early 1700s and offering trade goods to
form an alliance. The Spaniards had just reconquered
the rebellious Pueblo people in New Mexico about 25
years before and do not wish to lose the northeast
portion of their New World Empire. As a result, many
of the early Spanish writers are somewhat biased in
their views of the Caddo, as potential allies, and even
before leaving their frontier towns they are fairly
certain that they need a positive “spin” in their journal
entries. Their enthusiasm for the Hasinai is so high
that to some extent this perspective has affected
Bolton’s views of the Caddo some two centuries later.
Thus, on the very first page of his manuscript, Bolton
(2002:25) states that of all the tribes living between
New Orleans and Santa Fe, “those having the highest
civilization were the Caddos.” Bolton (2002:25)
continues with a brief discussion of the Caddoan
speakers (Arikara, Pawnee, and Wichita as well as the
Caddo) and proclaims: “Of the southern group the
Caddos were socially the most advanced, as they have
been historically the most important.” Bolton, at least
to my mind, is confusing historical importance with
social complexity in the general evolutionary views of
culture that are popular during the early twentieth
century and this perspective tends to lightly obscure
the actual situation among these Caddo of the early
1700s.
The First Americans: In pursuit of archeology's
greatest mystery
by J.M. Adovasio with Jake Page, Random House,
328 pages, $26.95.
Lost World: Rewriting Prehistory - How new
science is tracing America's ice age mariners
by Tom Koppel, Atria Books, 300 pages, $26.
Reviewed by Jon R. Denton
[email protected]
Just about any book that attacks the "Clovis first"
paradigm is guaranteed good reading. We can expect a
ruckus from the "Why don't you and him fight?"
school of popular science. It's also possible we might
learn something useful.
With this note of caution in mind, the reader is
encouraged to enjoy Bolton’s insightful work. This is
one of the first ethnohistoric accounts of any native
American people, and Bolton’s writings clearly
describe the Hasinai people in all their beauty while
demonstrating the complexities of working with
historical documents. For example, tribal synonymies
(or the use of different terms for the same group of
people by different chroniclers through time) requires
patience and an understanding of the seventeenth and
eighteenth century Spanish language and the
transliteration of tribal names into the chronicler’s
own language. Bolton is able to wade through these
terms and provides valuable information for scholars
with interest beyond the Caddo. This edition of
Bolton’s work provides the reader with useful
information concerning Hasinai social, political, and
economic structure as well as more mundane
information concerning the types of houses, tools,
basketry, and pottery as well as information about
indigenous religion and war.
What we have are two books that deliver in an
intriguing way. It's hard to speak to their scientific
merit, although each strives objectively to prove a
point:
Clovis Man may have crossed the Bering Strait 11,000
years ago or so, and his ferocious hunting may have
helped push the big ice age mammals to extinction,
and he may have rushed from Alaska to the tip of
South America in a mere 500 years.
He may have done it, just as orthodox archeology
insists. But Adovasio and Koppel say Clovis was not
the first.
Adovasio points to three decades of research. He and
his crew started digging in 1973 at Meadowcroft
Rockshelter, about 25 miles south of Pittsburgh. Even
today it's a perfect place for a picnic, not far from the
Ohio River.
If Bolton’s words are not enough, Magnaghi has
furnished this volume with a photograph of Dr. Bolton
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
4
settlement in Alaska, British Columbia and California,
but the hard proof is elusive.
As a new archeologist at the University of Pittsburgh,
he scraped away the floor of a large cave. He was
surprised to find pre-Clovis materials. Over time the
crew uncovered 20,000 artifacts, many drawn from
fire pits and storage and refuse sites.
Koppel comes off sounding frustrated. His tale is
disjointed, much like the hunt for ancient mariners.
Perhaps he writes a bit too early. He might benefit by
the advance of technology, where controversial
linguistic and genetic findings shore up evidence of
the West Coast migration.
Radiocarbon dating shows humans there at least
15,000 years ago, and perhaps 1,000 years before that,
according to Adovasio. That's well before Clovis Man,
the maker of the fluted Clovis spear points first found
in Clovis, N.M.
But who wants to wait for theory to finally become
fact? "First Americans" and "Lost World" offer great
adventure to armchair archeologists. They may never
rope into a cave or slip on an aqualung to dive on a
ocean-covered village. It's great fun to follow
somebody else who does.
That's great reading if that's all there is. But Adovasio
also offers a superb, albeit at times a bit preachy,
history of North America. He covers glaciation,
megafauna, the extension theories, climate changes,
and weaponry in superb detail.
His point: Small groups populated the Americas over
a long period of time. They may have crossed the
Land Bridge, but they also may have reached America
by boats from the northern Pacific Rim.
Abstracts from the Literature
Compiled by J. Peter Thurmond
Wheeler, Ryan J., James J. Miller, Ray M. McGee,
Donna Ruhl, Brenda Swann, and Melissa Memory
2003 Archaic period canoes from Newnans Lake,
Florida. American Antiquity 68(3):533-551.
They did it, he adds, together as man and woman.
Machismo man with projectiles was aided by women
hunters with the soft goods - woven nets, ropes, snares
and baskets. Most of their food came not from
megafauna but nuts, berries, and small animals.
Low lake levels due to drought in the spring and
summer of 2000 revealed the decayed remnants of
over 100 dugout canoes buried in the sediments of
Newnans Lake near Gainesville, Florida. Radiocarbon
assays revealed that 41 of 55 canoes studied were
from the Late Archaic period, between 2300 and 5000
BP. Analysis of canoe form and comparison to the
small number of other known Florida Archaic period
canoes correct previous ideas about early canoes.
Patterns of wood choice and manufacturing
techniques known from younger canoes were in place
during the Late Archaic. The Archaic period canoes
from Newnans Lake are indistinguishable from canoes
produced in later periods and are not the crude, short,
blunt-ended types thought to represent the earliest
dugout canoes. Thwarts or low partitions on almost
half of the Archaic canoes studied confirm a long
temporal span to the canoe-making tradition of
peninsular Florida. Middle and Late Archaic groups
had boat-building and related technologies in place
7,000 years ago, and were expanding into areas with
newly emerging freshwater resources created by
higher water tables as sea level rose during the early
Holocene.
As for the distinction of the first American, Adovasio
says he doesn't know. He is certain, however, that it
wasn't Clovis man.
In "Lost World," Koppel is a journalist first, an
explorer second. He follows scientists as they search
America's West Coast for clues of an Asian
colonization.
His ancient mariners would have held snug to the
coastline, living on marine life as they paddled from
island to island as early as 15,000 years ago.
Much of their habitat is now under the sea, swollen by
great glacial sheets from the late Ice Age. Koppel
gathers the evidence by following archeologists,
biologists, paleontologists and geologists as they
search caves and underwater sites.
The artifacts are scarce, despite decades of work by
scientists Jim Dixon, Daryl Fedje and Tim Heaton.
We hear of a flaked stone, a bone artifact, a cobble
here and a scraper there. The finds suggest early
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
5
Barber, Keith E., Frank M. Chambers and Darrel
Maddy
2003 Holocene paleoclimates from peat stratigraphy:
macrofossil proxy climate records from three oceanic
raised bogs in England and Ireland. Quaternary
Science Reviews 22(5-7):521-539.
occurs earliest at Amparihibe in the northwest at
~1,130 rcyr BP.
Quantified analyses of plant macrofossil remains have
been made from three profiles of peat from raised
bogs spanning a distance of 425 km from western
Ireland to northern England. The reconstructed
vegetation of each profile is related to changing bog
surface wetness (BSW), and since the bogs are
ombrotrophic these BSW changes are interpreted in
terms of changing climate. Using age/depth models
based on a total of 49 radiocarbon dates a number of
wetter and drier phases are identified, and phase-shifts
to wetter and/or cooler climates are defined.
Prominent coincident changes to wetter conditions are
dated in at least two of the profiles to ca 4400–4000,
1750, 1400, and 1000 cal. BP and in all three profiles
at 3200, 2750–2350, 2250, and around 700 cal. BP.
These phases are related to proxy climate changes in
other terrestrial data sets from northwest Europe and a
broad degree of synchroneity is demonstrated.
We use the carbon isotope composition of paleosols to
reconstruct the history of C4 biomass on the Great
Plains from ca. 23 to 1 Ma. The proportion of C4
biomass was uniform and moderate (12%–34%)
throughout the Miocene, increased between 6.4 and
4.0 Ma, and reached modern levels by 2.5 Ma.
Ecological changes in Great Plains ungulates preceded
the increase in C4 biomass. The contrasts in the
paleosol and ungulate records may indicate initial
development of C3 grasslands after the middle
Miocene or a greater role for ecological interactions
within communities in structuring ungulate faunas.
Contrasts in paleosol records from different continents
point to regional rather than global controls on the
evolution of C4 grasslands.
Fox, David L. and Paul L. Koch
2003 Tertiary history of C4 biomass in the Great
Plains, USA. Geology 31(9):809-812.
Freeman, Craig C., Caleb A. Morse and Ronald J.
McGregor
2003 New vascular plant records for the grassland
biome of central North America. Sida 20(3):12891297.
Burney, David A., Guy S. Robinson, and Lida Pigott
Burney
2003 Sporormiella and the late Holocene extinctions
in Madagascar. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences 100(19): 10,800-10,805.
Continuing field and herbarium studies in the
grassland biome of central North America have
produced additional records of vascular plants
previously undocumented in parts of the region.
Herein we report 28 new state records for vascular
plants in Colorado (7), Iowa (1), Kansas (19), and
Oklahoma (1). These reports update the distribution
data contained in Atlas of the Flora of the Great
Plains (Great Plains Flora Association 1977) and
Flora of the Great Plains (Great Plains Flora
Association 1991). All voucher specimens are
deposited in the R.L. McGregor Herbarium (KANU),
University of Kansas, unless otherwise indicated.
Fossil spores of the dung fungus Sporormiella spp. in
sediment cores from throughout Madagascar provide
new information concerning megafaunal extinction
and the introduction of livestock. Sporormiella
percentages are very high in prehuman southwest
Madagascar, but at the site with best stratigraphic
resolution the spore declines sharply by ~1,720 rcyr
BP (radiocarbon years ago). Within a few centuries
there is a concomitant rise in microscopic charcoal
that probably represents human transformation of the
local environment. Reduced megaherbivore biomass
in wooded savannas may have resulted in increased
plant biomass and more severe fires. Some nowextinct taxa persisted locally for a millennium or more
after the inferred megafaunal decline. Sites in closed
humid forests of northwest Madagascar and a montane
ericoid formation of the central highlands show only
low to moderate Sporormiella percentages before
humans. A subsequent rise in spore concentrations,
thought to be evidence for livestock proliferation,
Excerpt: Epilobium leptophyllum Raf. (Onagraceae),
bog willowherb, an herbaceous perennial found in
fens, marshes, and seeps throughout the northern and
central Great Plains, occurring southward to Meade
County, Kansas. A small population was discovered in
far western Oklahoma on a seepy, open slope near the
Ogallala-Doxey Shale contact, 180 km southsoutheast of the southernmost Kansas population.
Voucher specimen: Oklahoma, Roger Mills County,
3.5 mi S and 4 mi W of Cheyenne on the Thurmond
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
6
latter. A different origin for Palaeoamericans and
Amerindians is invoked to explain such a
phenomenon. Under this hypothesis, the origin of
Palaeoamericans must be traced back to a common
ancestor for Palaeoamericans and Australians, which
departed from somewhere in southern Asia and
arrived in the Australian continent and the Americas
around 40,000 and 12,000 years before present,
respectively. Most modern Amerindians are believed
to be part of a second, morphologically differentiated
migration. Here we present evidence of a modern
Amerindian group from the Baja California Peninsula
in Mexico, showing clearer affinities with
Palaeoamerican remains than with modern
Amerindians. Climatic changes during the Middle
Holocene probably generated the conditions for
isolation from the continent, restricting the gene flow
of the original group with northern populations, which
resulted in the temporal continuity of the
Palaeoamerican morphological pattern to the present.
Ranch, NE/4 4-12N-24W, 35°32’51”N, 99°44’27”W,
elev 2260-2300’, gently rolling sandsage prairie and
mixed-grass prairie with abundant oak mottes, small
springfed marsh and beaver pond in upper reaches of
Sergeant Major Creek, Tertiary Ogallala Formation, 3
October 2001, Freeman & Morse 18359.
Freeman, Craig C., Caleb A. Morse and J. Peter
Thurmond
2003 Vascular flora of the Ogallala Ecotone on the
Dempsey Divide, Roger Mills County, Oklahoma.
Sida 20(3):1217-1245.
A floristic inventory of the 3,755-hectare Thurmond
Ranch and immediate vicinity, located in southern
Roger Mills County, Oklahoma, was conducted in
2001. Because of its unique geologic and topographic
setting, which has given rise to a heterogeneous
environment and long history of human habitation, the
site has been the subject of intense archeological and
paleoclimatological research since the early 1980s.
The inventory documented 85 families, 286 genera,
and 470 species of vascular plants in the study area.
The five most species-rich families, Asteraceae,
Poaceae, Fabaceae, Euphorbiaceae, and Cyperaceae,
collectively account for 51% of the species. Nonnative species comprise 10% of the total flora and
include 43 Eurasian species. Four North American
species probably were introduced by Euro-Americans,
and Native Americans may have introduced three
species. Populations of four species tracked by the
Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory were
discovered, and Epilobium leptophyllum (bog
willowherb) is reported for the first time in Oklahoma.
Collection data show a marked floristic difference
between the Tertiary Ogallala Formation and the
Permian redbeds along the ecotone. Nineteen major
vegetation alliances were identified based on
observational data, including three woodland
alliances, seven shrubland alliances, and eight
herbaceous alliances.
Mixed-grass prairie plant
communities dominate the study area landscape.
Heckenberger, Michael J., Afukaka Kuikuro,
Urissapá Tabata Kuikuro, J. Christian Russell,
Morgan Schmidt, Carlos Fausto, Bruna Franchetto
2003 Amazonia 1492: Pristine forest or cultural
parkland? Science 301: 1710-1714.
Archaeology and indigenous history of Native
Amazonian peoples in the Upper Xingu region of
Brazil reveal unexpectedly complex regional
settlement patterns and large-scale transformations of
local landscapes over the past millennium. Mapping
and excavation of archaeological structures document
pronounced human-induced alteration of the forest
cover, particularly in relation to large, dense lateprehistoric settlements (circa 1200 to 1600 A.D.). The
findings contribute to debates on human carrying
capacity, population size and settlement patterns,
anthropogenic impacts on the environment, and the
importance of indigenous knowledge, as well as
contributing to the pride of place of the native peoples
in this part of the Amazon.
Gonzalez-Jose, Rolando, Antonio Gonzalez-Martin,
Miquel Hernandez, Hector M. Pucciarelli, Marina
Sardi, Alfonso Rosales & Silvina van der Molen
2003 Craniometric evidence for Palaeoamerican
survival in Baja California. Nature 425:62-65.
A current issue on the settlement of the Americas
refers to the lack of morphological affinities between
early Holocene human remains (Palaeoamericans) and
modern Amerindian groups, as well as the degree of
contribution of the former to the gene pool of the
Jackson, Jason Baird
2003
The opposite of powwow: Ignoring and
incorporating the intertribal war dance in the
Oklahoma stomp dance community. Plains
Anthropologist 48(187):237-253.
Among the varied Native American communities of
eastern Oklahoma two worlds of dance performance
coexist. The more famous of these is the powwow.
With historical roots among the societies of the Great
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
7
Plains, it has spread to Native American communities
throughout North America. This paper examines
connections linking the powwow with the less wellknown stomp dance, a tradition associated with the
ceremonial life of native peoples whose homelands
were in eastern North America.
Plains Anthropologist 48(187):209-224.
Among 19th century Osage full-bloods, a modified
cranium, specifically a flattened occiput, was an
integral part of ethnic expression. An early archival
source documenting this practice is a sculpted bust of
Black Spirit, who, along with five other members of
the Osage tribe, toured Paris in 1827, where a local
artisan skillfully crafted this marble likeness of an
exotic visitor from America’s frontier. When viewed
in profile this bust clearly depicts a tabular occiput.
Comparative study of 124 Osages measured by Franz
Boas and colleagues at the close of the 19th century
reveals that the majority of mixed-bloods did not
possess altered crania, while full-bloods did. It will be
demonstrated that Indian-white marriages created a
domestic environment where parents chose not to use
a cradleboard as a part of infant care. Their probable
motives for this decision will also be explored. The
craniometric data analyzed in this report document an
important form of culture change among admixed
Osage Indians at the close of the 19th century.
Jacobson, Jodi A.
2003
Identification of mule deer (Odocoileus
hemionus) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus) postcranial remains as a means of
determining human subsistence strategies. Plains
Anthropologist 48(187):287-297.
Mule deer (O. hemionus) and white tailed deer (O.
virginianus) were widely utilized resources in the
Plains during prehistoric times. The two species
overlap in geographic space over a large portion of
west central North America yet utilize different
habitat within that region. In the past there have been
no reliable methods to differentiate between the
species through the use of postcranial skeletal
material. In this paper a wide variety of mule deer and
white-tailed deer limb bones are examined.
Distinguishing
morphological
and
metrical
characteristics useful for the identification of
archaeological material are presented.
Minnis, Paul
2003 Overview of ancient agriculture in the North
American Southwest. Paper presented for the
symposium “Agricultural heritage of the American
Southwest” at the annual meeting of the Crop Science
Society of America in Denver, CO on November 3,
2003.
Lea, David W. Dorothy K. Pak, Larry C. Peterson and
Konrad A. Hughen
2003 Synchroneity of tropical and high-latitude
Atlantic temperatures over the last glacial termination.
Science 301 (5638):1361-1364.
The indigenous peoples of the North American
Southwest (U.S. Southwest and northwestern Mexico)
have farmed for thousands of years. During this time
they developed a wide range of techniques and
strategies to grow crops in situations which most
would characterize as marginal for agriculture.
Documentation of these strategies offers lessons for
dryland and highland farming. To best understand
indigenous farming, we must consider social, political,
and cultural factors as well as environmental
characteristics, such as climate, water, and soils.
A high-resolution western tropical Atlantic sea surface
temperature (SST) record from the Cariaco Basin on
the northern Venezuelan shelf, based on Mg/Ca values
in surface-dwelling planktonic foraminifera, reveals
that changes in SST over the last glacial termination
are synchronous, within ±30 to ±90 years, with the
Greenland Ice Sheet Project 2 air temperature proxy
record and atmospheric methane record. The most
prominent deglacial event in the Cariaco record
occurred during the Younger Dryas time interval,
when SSTs dropped by 3° to 4°C. A rapid southward
shift in the atmospheric intertropical convergence zone
could account for the synchroneity of tropical
temperature, atmospheric methane, and high-latitude
changes during the Younger Dryas.
Paulsen, Dorte Eide, Hong-Chun Li and Te-Lung Ku
2003 Climate variability in central China over the last
1270 years revealed by high-resolution stalagmite
records. Quaternary Science Reviews 22(5-7):691701.
Logan, Michael H., Corey S. Sparks and Richard L.
Jantz
2003 Cranial modification among 19th century
Osages: Admixture and loss of an ethnic marker.
Oxygen and carbon isotopic variations in the upper
section of a stalagmite (SF-1) from Buddha Cave
(33°40'N 109°05'E) dated by 230Th/234U 210Pb and
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
8
lamination counting to a time resolution as fine as 1–3
years have recorded climate changes in central China
for the last 1270 years. The changes include those
corresponding to the Medieval Warm Period Little Ice
Age and 20th-century warming lending support to the
global extent of these events. The isotopic records also
show cycles of 33, 22, 11, 9.6, and 7.2 years. The 33year cycle could well represent the ~35-year
periodicity of climate fluctuations previously
recognized in China and Europe. Cycles of 22, 11, and
9.6 years have often been associated with the Sunspot
or lunar-orbit variations. The 7.2-year cycle was
recently identified also in tree-ring records from an
area close to Buddha Cave. These cycles suggest that
external forcing (e.g. solar irradiance) may affect the
summer monsoon over eastern China. The general
consistency between the climate characteristics
inferred from the stable isotope records of SF-1 and
those from other proxy records underscores the value
of stalagmites as recorders of paleoclimate.
and cooling ages (through
180 °C). We applied this
technique to zircons from the Lower Jurassic Navajo
Sandstone, which represents one of the largest erg
deposits in the geologic record. A large fraction of
these zircons was derived from crust that formed
between 1200 and 950 Ma, but cooled below
180
°C ca. 500–250 Ma. This history is characteristic of
Grenvillian-age crust involved in Appalachian
orogenesis (and subsequent rifting) in eastern North
America. Our finding requires the existence of a
transcontinental sediment-dispersal system capable of
moving a large volume of detritus westward (modern
coordinates) throughout the late Paleozoic and early
Mesozoic.
Editor’s Note: A very pronounced century-scale cycle
in effective precipitation is evident in their data
(Figure 6) and discussed in the text (pp. 696-697),
with pluvials from AD 730-965, 1085-1250, and
1475-1645, and interpluvials occurring AD 965-1085,
1250-1475, 1645-1900. Average duration for the
pluvials is 190 years, and the interpluvials average
200 years.
Distinct assemblages of paleosols above and below
the Permian–Triassic boundary in the Karoo Basin of
South Africa are evidence for reorganization of
ecosystems following this greatest of all mass
extinctions. The Permian–Triassic boundary is
recognized from the last appearance of Dicynodon and
from a series of negative excursions in the isotopic
composition of carbon within therapsid tusks,
pedogenic carbonate nodules, and organic matter. The
boundary is also marked by laminated beds with very
weakly developed paleosols, a change from purple
(10R) to brownish red (2.5YR) paleosols, and a thin
(10-cm) claystone breccia of reworked soil clasts.
Paleoclimatic changes include a shift from arid and
highly seasonal paleoclimate inferred from diffuse and
shallow calcareous nodules in Permian paleosols to
semiarid and less seasonal paleoclimate inferred from
deep and well-focused calcic horizons in Triassic
paleosols. An earliest Triassic shift to warmer and
wetter paleoclimate is also indicated by increased
chemical weathering, abundance of lycopsids, and
diversity of labyrinthodonts. Permian paleosols have
root traces comparable to those of open shrubland and
riparian woodland, whereas Triassic paleosols have
root traces and profile forms like soils of open
woodland. This is a significant paleoenvironmental
change, but not as dramatic a change as would be
expected from the devastating extinctions of 88% of
fossil vertebrate genera. Latest Permian therapsid
reptiles were diverse and ecologically specialized. In
contrast, the principal earliest Triassic therapsid,
Lystrosaurus, was a burrower with no specific habitat
Retallack, Gregory J., Roger M.H. Smith and Peter
D. Ward
2003 Vertebrate extinction across the PermianTriassic boundary in the Karoo Basin, South Africa.
GSA Bulletin 115(9):1133-1152.
Rahl, Jeffrey M., Peter W. Reiners, Ian H. Campbell,
Stefan Nicolescu and Charlotte M. Allen
2003 Combined single-grain (U-TH)/HE and U/Pb
dating of detrital zircons from the Navajo Sandstone,
Utah. Geology 31(9):761-764.
Radioisotopic dating of detrital minerals in
sedimentary rocks can constrain sediment sources
(provenance), elucidate episodes and rates of ancient
orogenesis, and give information on paleogeography
and sediment-dispersal patterns. Previous approaches
have been restricted to the application of a single
technique, such as U/Pb or fission-track dating, to
detrital grains. These methods provide crystallization
and cooling ages, respectively, of sediment sources
(terranes). However, evidence for source regions from
a single technique can be ambiguous because
candidate source terranes often have similar ages for a
given radioisotopic system. This ambiguity can be
avoided by applying multiple radioisotopic systems to
individual detrital grains. Here we present a method
for measuring both (U-Th)/He and U/Pb ages of single
crystals of detrital zircon, providing both formation
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
9
and two in the 2000–3000 yr BP time interval
(calibrated radiocarbon years). There was one giant
storm in the pre–5000 yr BP interval; a sea-level
oscillation in the 3500–5000 yr BP interval appears to
have destroyed most records during that period.
Previous work suggests that the position of the
Bermuda (or Azores) High influences the direction of
general storm paths for major North Atlantic
hurricanes: a position of the Bermuda High farther to
the south tends to force storms into the Gulf of
Mexico, whereas a northern position allows them to
track up the Atlantic Coast. Results here combined
with results of other workers on the Gulf Coast
suggest a more southern position for the Bermuda
High, causing more storms on the Gulf Coast in the
interval of 1000–3400 yr BP. Conversely, a more
northern position during the past 1000 yr is suggested
to have contributed to higher frequencies of storms on
the Atlantic Coast in that period. To test this
hypothesis, modern records of the movement of the
North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO, which controls the
position of the Bermuda High) have been compared
with historical records of hurricane tracks over the
twentieth century. There does appear to be a strong
correlation between the position of the NAO and the
track the storms have pursued in modern times.
preference. Its short internal nares, barrel chest, and
high neural spines would have given it greater aerobic
scope than preexisting therapsids and may have been
an advantage under conditions of hypercapnia and
hypoxia. These adaptations and associated ecosystem
changes are compatible with widespread vertebrate
mortality by acidosis and pulmonary edema in a postapocalyptic greenhouse created by the voluminous
release of methane from shallow marine and
permafrost clathrates.
Ryskin, Gregory
2003 Methane-driven oceanic eruptions and mass
extinctions. Geology 31(9):741-744.
Focusing on the Permian-Triassic boundary, ca. 251
Ma, I explore the possibility that mass extinction can
be caused by an extremely fast, explosive release of
dissolved methane (and other dissolved gases such as
carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide) that
accumulated in the oceanic water masses prone to
stagnation and anoxia (e.g., in silled basins). The
mechanism of the explosive release is the same as in
the Lake Nyos disaster of 1986, i.e., a water-column
eruption caused by the interplay of buoyancy forces
and exsolution of dissolved gas. The eruption brings
to the surface deep anoxic waters that cause
extinctions in the marine realm. Terrestrial extinctions
are caused by explosions and conflagrations that
follow the massive release of methane (the airmethane mixture is explosive at methane
concentrations between 5% and 15%) and by the
eruption-triggered floods. This scenario accounts well
for the available data, and may be relevant to other
phenomena.
Scott, D.B., E.S. Collins, P.T. Gayes and E. Wright
2003 Records of prehistoric hurricanes on the South
Carolina coast based on micropaleontological and
sedimentological evidence, with comparison to other
Atlantic records. GSA Bulletin 115(9):1027-1039.
Singleton Swash on the South Carolina coast provides
an extended record of storm events for this coast. We
used experience gained by looking at storm traces
detected as layers of offshore foraminifera intercalated
with marsh sediments from a known storm in the area
(Hugo, which occurred in 1989) to detect storm
horizons from the sediments that have been
accumulating in Singleton Swash since 5700 yr BP.
We suggest here that the most intense storm activity
occurred in the 0–1000 yr BP interval (six storms);
only three occurred in the 1000–2000 yr BP interval
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
10
Figure 9. Diagrams (modified after Forman et al.
1995) of the positions of the Bermuda High in the past
4000 yr as we visualize them on the basis of the
frequency of hurricanes on the South Carolina coast
vs. those observed by Liu and Fearn 1993, 2000) and
Liu (1999) from the Gulf (Alabama/Florida) Coast.
(A) Late Holocene (after 1000 yr BP); drought in July
in eastern United States. (B) Middle to late Holocene
(ca. 3000 to 1000 yr BP); wet July in eastern United
States. H—atmospheric high-pressure area; L—
atmospheric low-pressure area.
of modern human dispersal into Europe and the
subsequent morphological evolution of European early
modern humans.
Books for Review
Looking for a good summer read? We have the
following review copies, mostly from OU Press. If
you are interested in reviewing one for Oklahoma
Archeology, let us know. The book is yours to keep.
Archaeology of Regional Interaction: Religion,
Warfare and Exchange Across the American
Southwest and Beyond
Michelle Hegmon
Trinkaus, Erik, Oana Moldovan, Stefan Milota,
Adrian Bîlg r, Lauren iu Sarcina, Sheela Athreya,
Shara E. Bailey, Ricardo Rodrigo, Gherase Mircea,
Thomas Higham, Christopher Bronk Ramsey, and
Johannes van der Plicht
2003 An early modern human from the Pe tera cu
Oase, Romania. Published online before print
September 22, 2003, Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences. 10.1073/pnas.2035108100
Kaskaskia Illinois-to-French Dictionary
Edited by Carl Masthay
On Coon Mountain
Scenes from a Childhood in the Oklahoma Hills
Glen Ross
The 2002 discovery of a robust modern human
mandible in the Pe tera cu Oase, southwestern
Romania, provides evidence of early modern humans
in the lower Danubian Corridor. Directly accelerator
mass spectrometry radiocarbon (14C)-dated to 34,00036,000 14C years B.P., the Oase 1 mandible is the
oldest definite early modern human specimen in
Europe and provides perspectives on the emergence
and evolution of early modern humans in the
northwestern Old World. The moderately long Oase 1
mandible exhibits a prominent tuber symphyseos and
overall proportions that place it close to earlier Upper
Paleolithic European specimens. Its symmetrical
mandibular incisure, medially placed condyle, small
superior medial pterygoid tubercle, mesial mental
foramen, and narrow corpus place it closer to early
modern humans among Late Pleistocene humans.
However, its cross-sectional symphyseal orientation is
intermediate between late archaic and early modern
humans, the ramus is exceptionally wide, and the
molars become progressively larger distally with
exceptionally large third molars. The molar crowns
lack derived Neandertal features but are otherwise
morphologically undiagnostic. However, it has
unilateral mandibular foramen lingular bridging, an
apparently derived Neandertal feature. It therefore
presents a mosaic of archaic, early modern human and
possibly
Neandertal
morphological
features,
emphasizing both the complex population dynamics
2004 Spring Meeting
The Spring Meeting will be held in Dale Hall, Room
#103, University of Oklahoma in Norman on April 17.
Turn north from Lindsey St. onto Elm Ave. Dale Hall
is at the corner of Lindsey and Elm. The parking lot
on the west side of the building is open on weekends.
Be sure to park in legal parking spaces.
Hwy 9
NORMAN
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
11
Oklahoma Anthropological Society Fall Excavations at the Pratt Site,
34GV156
Richard R. Drass
The 2003 Oklahoma Anthropological Society Fall
Activity was a dig at a large Plains Village site near
Pauls Valley, Oklahoma. The Pratt site, 34GV156,
sets on a high terrace that is being eroded by the river
(Figure 1). Over 14 pits were mapped in the river bank
at this site last spring, and excavations were designed
to test the context of the remaining site and identify a
house pattern. Many Society members participated in
preparations for the excavations as well as digging for
four days from October 30 through November 2. We
had very good weather and from 30 to over 40 people
participated each of the four dig days. As usual, the
Society members accomplished a lot in a short period
of time. I want to thank everyone for their help and
enthusiasm. Dave Morgan prepared the equipment and
made arrangements for the dig, but became ill and did
not attend. Special mention goes to those who came
down early and helped set up the excavation grid and
equipment, mapped the site, and began the testing.
This excavation would not have been possible without
the assistance of Billy Hartley, Don and Camilla
Heasty, Jim Mayberry, Austin Dennis, Chip Pearson,
Dale McHard, Tom Borella, Willard Payne, Rood
Blanchard, Mike Hester, and Larry Neal. Roger Patton
volunteered to backfill the excavations with his tractor
permitting us to dig all of the last day, Sunday, and
saving us considerable work and back pain. For this
we were all thankful. The interest of the landowners,
Mr. and Mrs. Pratt, is greatly appreciated, and I hope
that they will find the results interesting.
areas where rodents had exposed artifacts, assuming
that these might correlate with features that had softer
soil from organic fill. We selected for testing four of
the most promising areas based on the reported
locations of artifact concentrations and the evidence
from rodent activity. Excavations were hindered some
by the very dry soil. We resorted to wetting the soil
enough to loosen it for excavation and screening. The
soil is mostly a sandy loam or sandy clay loam and it
will usually dig and screen easily with any soil
moisture.
In addition to the excavations, Lois Albert arranged
two Certification Seminars in the evenings. Bob
Brooks presented the Public Education Seminar and
Neil Garrison provided a flint knapping demonstration
and seminar for dig participants. Both seminars were
well attended. We also had a hamburger/hot dog
dinner before the Public Education Seminar.
Features were found in all four of the test areas. These
include pits, post molds, and hearths. Four pits were
identified with two overlapping each other (Figure 3).
We completely excavated the two overlapping pits,
Feature 15, but only uncovered parts of pits 16 and 18.
We did not reach the bottom of either of these two
pits. Excavations ended at 110 cm in both Pit 16 and
Pit 18. All of the pits contained charcoal, ash, bone,
and some artifacts such as pottery, arrow points, etc.
Soil samples were taken for flotation and I expect corn
and other plant remains to be present.
Our excavations indicate that we were either very
good or lucky in selecting areas for digging, or, more
likely, there are lots of features present at this site.
Although we did not uncover a complete house
pattern at GV156, we identified evidence for four
houses, one in each of the excavation areas. Twenty
three squares were excavated with many reaching the
bottom of the cultural deposit. The subsoil varied
across the site. In our northeastern and southwestern
test areas (E65-E70 and E3 to E6 squares), a reddish
sand subsoil occurs around 30 to 35 cm deep. In the
E36 and E37 units we encountered dark brown to
brown soil as deep as we dug, down to 55 cm. Of
interest is that the pit in E36 was distinguished by tan
soil as was the post mold in N3-E37. The soil in the
E10 units was also brown to dark brown and extended
to 70 cm in N20-E10 before we encountered a tan
sand subsoil.
Four test areas were laid out at the site and
excavations occurred in all four areas (Figure 2).
These areas were selected based on observations made
by Austin Dennis, Chip Pearson, and Jim Mayberry
who had seen the site when it had been plowed and
materials were exposed. We also attempted to probe
areas with a soil probe, but very dry conditions
negated this type of testing. Instead, we noted the
An ash-filled hearth, Feature 17, was discovered in
N18-E10 at 30 cm beneath the surface (Figure 4). This
unit also contained burned clay and artifacts at this
level, suggesting that a burned house floor is present.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
12
Figure 1. Excavations in progress near the Washita River bank at 34GV156.
our first test units, and we expanded excavations west
of the feature in hopes of finding a house. We
discovered post molds to the west, and there is a line
of post molds extending west for 3 meters. We also
identified a line of post molds extending north in two
squares. It appears that we have uncovered the
southeast corner of a square to rectangular building.
There is a lone post to the east of this corner that
would be outside of the proposed structure. This may
represent some other feature. There is no evidence for
burning of this structure. The pits in Feature 15 would
be outside of this structure.
A pit or other feature may be present in the squares to
the north of the hearth, but we could not define its
edges to distinguish a pit. Only a portion of the hearth
was excavated, but it is 23 cm deep and appears to be
about 70 cm in diameter.
Another possible hearth is present in N0-E3. This
feature is less well defined than Hearth 17 due to
rodent activity. We noted a concentration of ash at 30
cm deep and this extended almost to 35 cm. In the
square to the south, S1-E3, we found a large post
mold. This is one of the largest post molds that I have
seen in the area. It is about 40 cm in diameter and it
extended 63 cm below level 3 (the 30 cm depth).
There is some speculation that this might be an
historic post. The excavation units in this area
typically had some historic materials mixed in the
upper levels. However, the lack of any wood material
remaining in the post hole seems to indicate that the
post mold is much older than the last 100 years. I
think that this is a center post and the ash
concentration to the north is the central hearth from a
house. If this is another house, then Pit 16 would be
inside the structure or intrusive into the house pattern.
Materials recovered from the excavations are being
cleaned and catalogued. We found a good sample of
remains including Fresno and Washita points, plain
pottery, bone, and charcoal. There has been no
analysis of the material yet, but the points and pottery
suggest a Washita River phase occupation. Dates from
the river bank pits were A.D. 1290, also of the
Washita River phase. Additional radiocarbon samples
will be submitted to confirm dates for some of the
excavated features. One impression from the
excavations is that there was not a lot of bison bone
found. Most other Washita River phase sites in this
area have significant amounts of bison bone. Analysis
The northeast excavation unit contained the most
squares, 10. We encountered the pits of Feature 15 in
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
13
investigated further with future excavations. We also
completed a topographic map of the site which
included the location of the pits in the river bank. The
sample of artifacts is sufficient for comparison with
other villages in the area. Thus, we have some good
data from another, very large Late Prehistoric village
along the Washita River, and we know that the site is
in very good condition.
of the materials will determine if this initial
impression is correct.
Although we did not get a complete house pattern,
primarily due to the dry soil conditions slowing
excavations and screening, we did accomplish a lot.
We now have four potential houses that could be
Figure 2. Plan of excavation areas at 34GV156.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
14
Figure 3. Overlapping pits in Feature 15; only west half is excavated here.
Figure 4. Ash-filled hearth, Feature 17. This hearth appears to be on a burned house floor.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
15
The Stamper Site, 34TX1, Texas County, Oklahoma
Part IV: The Architecture and Features Excavated by Fred Carder Jr.
Christopher Lintz
Geo-Marine, Inc.
Introduction
away, and both organizations sought a broader support
base to preserve their early history.
This fourth article in the Stamper site series presents
one attempt to unravel the Spring 1935 excavations
that Federal Emergency Relief Administration
(FERA) excavators conducted under the direction of
Fred Carder, Jr. Carder’s involvement at the Stamper
site presents a marked contrast in political reporting
obligations, style and approach for doing archaeology
from the work Claud Stuart Johnston conducted at the
site in the summers of 1933 and 1934. The article
begins by a discussion of the historical and political
context of the project, which occurred under very
different circumstances from the conditions of work
conducted by Johnston. Next, I summarize Carder’s
approach to excavating the four main block
excavation areas and cataloging materials from the
site. Then, I discuss the methods used to decode
Carder’s field journal in order to compile features and
structures exposed in 1935 and the artifacts obtained.
I then discuss the work conducted in the north part of
the village in excavations area Txv1A with emphasis
on describing the structures and other features
encountered near the area of Johnston’s work in the
Large House, Structure 3 and the “Kiva”. Finally, I
summarize the features and structures in areas Txv1B,
Txv1C, and Txv1D in the south part of the village. I
conclude with a few summary statements about the
data obtained from Fred Carder’s work at Stamper.
This period also coincided with the very exciting
discovery in 1927 of fluted stone points with extinct
forms of bison at Folsom, New Mexico near the
headwaters of the Cimarron River which meanders
downstream into, out of, and back into the northern
part of the Oklahoma Panhandle. The scientific
acceptance of early man associated with large bison
brought a series of museum-sponsored scientific
expeditions to the region to locate comparable kinds
of archaeological materials. Dr. Etienne B. Renaud
from the Colorado Museum of Natural History and the
University of Denver launched a series of major
expeditions to southeastern Colorado, northeast New
Mexico and adjacent areas. One of his summer trips
culminated in the plundering of two major caves near
Kenton in Cimarron County in 1929 that were being
protected by the County Soil Agent, William E.
(“Uncle Billy”) Baker (Lintz and Zabawa 1984). This
outrageous intrusion prompted the Governor of
Oklahoma to direct the State Historical Society to
sponsor further salvage excavations at the Kenton
Caves under the direction of Uncle Billy Baker in
1929 and Dr. Joseph Thoburn from the Oklahoma
Historical Society in 1930. Interest in the caves died
down until some local people found mummified
human remains in another cave in 1933 while on a
community-sponsored picnic. The excitement over
the naturally mummified remains led to yet another
excavation in 1934 at cave site 34Ci-50 under the
direction of Uncle Billy’s son, Ele Baker, on behalf of
the University of Oklahoma and funded by the FERA.
Historical and Political Context of
Carder’s Excavations at the Stamper Site
During the late 1920’s, a series of social forces
converged to arouse passionate interest by Panhandle
residents in the preservation of their records and local
history. First was an effort by the original Panhandle
settlers to preserve their history and heritage. In 1927,
residents who settled in Texas County before 1901
founded the Old Settlers of Texas County Society.
The following year, 1928, settlers who moved to the
Panhandle before the 1889 Oklahoma land-run formed
the Pioneers of No Man’s Land Society (Turner
1995). But over the next half-decade, both groups
experienced dwindling numbers as members passed
At the opposite end of the Panhandle, noted historian
Dr. Joseph Thoburn from the Oklahoma Historical
Society directed several FERA-funded projects in
Beaver County during 1934. These included removal
of a series of burials from overhangs along the
Cimarron River in the northeast corner of the county
and major excavations of a playa edge dune thought to
contain ruins of a “Pueblo” near the north-central part
of Beaver County near Gate. He also dug inside an
historic masonry corral and the adjacent prehistoric
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
16
Science Department at the college whereas the vicepresident was pioneer rancher Boss Neff of Hooker.
William E. Baker, the Cimarron County Soil
Conservation agent, served as one of the first nine
directors of the Society. Baker was an avid collector
of Indian artifacts throughout the dust bowl days,
served as a field director for excavations on behalf of
the Oklahoma Historical Society and published a
series of archaeological articles in various state,
regional and national level archaeological journals (cf.
Lintz and Zabawa 1984). The first “Custodian” for
the society was Mr. Nolan McWhirter who later
participated in a series of paleontological excavations
that were funded by the Works Progress
Administration (WPA). The new society received its
Certificate of Incorporation from the State of
Oklahoma in January 1935.
ruins at the Roy Smith Site along Sharp’s Creek in the
northwest part of the county (Lawton 1966).
Meanwhile, in Texas County, the University of
California dug Miocene and Pliocene age bone beds
near Optima in 1930 (Schultz 1990). Dr. Forrest
Clements from the University of Oklahoma conducted
minor excavations at an Indian village on the Nash
property near present-day Optima Reservoir during
the summer of 1933, and Johnston led the intense
excavations at the Stamper site during the summers of
1933 and 1934. The results were first reported in
detail some 17 years after conclusion of those
excavations (Watson 1950) and in the earlier reports
in the present series (Lintz 2003a, 2003b, 2003c).
All of these scientific projects by foreign institutions
proved to be of tremendous interest to the local
residents. They witnessed with disdain the removal of
truckloads of scientific samples hauled off to distant
places for the research, educational and social benefit
of others. In 1932, regional residents and professors
at Panhandle Agricultural and Mechanical College in
Goodwell, Oklahoma founded the Panhandle Museum
Club to track, document and preserve the natural
history aspects in the region (Turner 1995:3).
Beginning in 1927, pioneer and regional leader Boss
Neff tried to establish a local museum to retain the
historical resources of the Panhandle. By 1932,
sufficient interest was generated among the earlier
settlers to begin discussions leading toward the
founding of a new society that would address the
interests spanning the length and breadth of the
Panhandle. In September 1934, the very same month
that Johnston left the Stamper site to join the faculty at
West Texas State Teacher’s College, members of the
Pioneers of No Man’s Land met in Beaver City and
passed a motion to begin meetings leading to the
establishment of the No Man’s Land Historical
Society (NMLHS).
Among the stated purposes of the No Man’s Land
Historical Society was the support for the
development of the No Man’s Land Museum and
“support for the collection, presentation and
distribution of information … on the history,
prehistory, paleontology, geology, biology, art and
economy of the Oklahoma panhandle...” (Turner
1997). The dream of establishing a museum at the
college was not realized until 1950 when the society
raised $30,000 matched by the State legislature
(Turner 1995: 6-7; Green 1979: 201). However,
interest in supporting the collection of prehistoric
artifacts began even before the Society was
incorporated.
The New Deal programs that financed scientific
studies in all three counties in the Panhandle during
the summer of 1934 presented the fledging society
with a means of helping unemployed and needy
neighbors and relatives in the Panhandle. At the same
time the program provided the rare opportunity of
supporting the scientific collection of valuable
artifacts. Dr. Fly realized that the federal grants
required naming a trained field supervisor to
guarantee successful applications for federal support.
He approached Clements of the University of
Oklahoma (OU) with a proposition to conduct a joint
project funded by FERA. The NMLHS and the
college would provide local administrative support for
further excavations in the Panhandle, and the
University of Oklahoma would supply the technical
expertise in the form of a trained archaeologist to
direct the work. The artifacts from the excavations
were to be sent to the University of Oklahoma for
cleaning, stabilization and study until such time as
On October 3, 1934, more than 60 pre-statehood
pioneers convened at an organizational meeting of the
NMLHS at the Panhandle A&M College campus in
Goodwell (Turner 1997). The members represented
the Pioneers of No Man’s Land, the Old Settlers of
Texas County and the Panhandle Museum Club. At
Goodwell, a founding committee was formed,
comprised of three people selected from each county,
and provisional officers and directors were elected to
draft a constitution and articles of incorporation. The
president of the fledging organization was Dr. Claude
L. Fly, Professor of Chemistry and Head of the
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
17
of Clements (Orr 1941). While working at Spiro, he
joined the Society for American Archaeology and is
listed as a member in the 1936-38 issues of the
journal. He also became a charter member of the
Oklahoma State Archeological Society which lists his
1938 address as Washington D.C. (Anonymous 1938).
By 1939, he dropped his memberships in these trade
organizations. I have been unable to determine the
nature of his work in Washington or whether he
continued in archaeology in some remote region or
took up some other unrelated line of work.
analysis and stabilization was completed and a report
of findings was published. But, the NMLHS retained
an interest in the collections (Harold Katchell,
personal communications 2003). Undoubtedly the
Stamper site was selected as the joint venture’s test
case due to its proximity to the College in Goodwell.
So it came to pass that Dr. Claude Fly of Panhandle
A&M College in Goodwell was to administer FERA
project No. 70-72-44 on behalf of the joint Society
and OU. The NMLHS provided local support and
administration while Mr. Fred Carder, a fourth year
undergraduate from the University of Oklahoma,
provided technical guidance for the excavations
starting in early December 1934. Originally from the
region of Cordell, Oklahoma, it seems likely that
Carder interrupted his university studies to earn a
living during the Depression. In addition to directing
a small group of relief workers during the excavations,
Carder was also required to catalog the artifacts while
in the field and to provide periodic field reports to Fly
(Carder 1935). These field reports consisted of little
more than inventory lists of catalog numbers used on a
weekly to monthly basis. But most of the ten
remaining reports do not identify or quantify the
artifacts recovered, nor do they indicate which
excavation blocks yielded the remains during specific
work periods1. Similarly, Carder’s field journal also
failed to record the dates of work after the first week
of the project. Each field report was signed by Carder
and countersigned by either Mr. Presley Calvert or
later Mr. Conan D. Hammil as the representative of
the NMLHS to ensure that the Society’s account of
artifacts obtained from the Stamper site was complete.
These are the political conditions under which the
third major excavations at the Stamper site occurred
between December 3rd, 1934 and May 28th, 1935.
This end date of excavations at the Stamper site
suggests that the closure of the dig coincided with the
termination of the national FERA Program in May
1935 (Lintz 2003a).
Apparently no further
applications were made with the replacement WPA
program to conduct excavations at Stamper.
The present article discusses the structures and
features encountered during Carder’s 1935
excavations at Stamper. I begin by discussing the
approach he used to conduct the excavations and the
methods I used to compile and analyze the data. Then
for each of the four excavation areas, I describe the
size and density of the excavation area, the structural
remains, and extramural features. I also present a
summary of the artifacts reported from each area. The
detailed descriptions of materials recovered from the
1935 excavations must await future analyses, if they
have not already been included in the assemblage
description presented by Watson (1950).
Carder’s Approach to Excavations at the
Stamper Site
When Fred Carder assumed control of the FERA
project, he apparently had very little familiarity with
the work conducted by Johnston only three months
before. Johnston retained his 1934 site map in
Canyon, TX until Clements asked for it in February
1935 (Clements 1935). And, apparently, Carder had
not read any of Johnston’s fieldnotes. This lack of
knowledge of earlier work hindered him to some
extent on one hand, but it also gave him considerable
freedom to implement whole new excavation systems
and procedures for designating work areas. Carder
dug in four areas of the Stamper site that he
designated Txv1A through Txv1D2. Area Txv1A was
located immediately north of Johnston’s work on the
“Kiva” (Structure 8) in the north part of the village,
but he only excavated a few units in this well-worked
part of the site. Instead of persisting in this area, he
shifted his crews to completely new areas in the south
portion of the village, about 100-meters away from
Txv1A. He set up new site datum points and laid out
block Txv1B mostly north of the primary datum in the
south part of the site. There is some uncertainty about
the location of block Txv1C, as discussed below.
Eventually areas Txv1B and Txv1C merged into a
With the end of the FERA program, Carder returned
to the University of Oklahoma, but he did not finish
his undergraduate degree at OU. He maintained his
passion in archaeology for a few more years. Carder
served in 1936-37 as a WPA field supervisor helping
to direct more than 70 workers in the OU-sponsored
excavations of the “Great Temple Mound” at Spiro
under the field direction of Joe Finklestein from the
University of Chicago and under the general direction
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
18
single block. Area Txv1D was located only some 25
to 30 feet (7.5 to 9.1 m) north of Txv1B, but the
excavation area was never linked up to the other two
areas in the south part of the village (Figure 1). Over
the span of six months, Carder’s crews excavated
some 4,000 ft2 (360 m2) of the site. They also
recorded to some extent more than 120 features and
perhaps exposed as many as a dozen structures3.
notes seem to reflect heat- or haste-induced
disorientation in his records. In one case, the
southernmost hole in a north-south series of aligned
postholes is referenced a set distance west of the grid
line; the other holes are noted specific distances to the
north of the adjacent hole, thus forming an alignment
across the interior of Structure 14B in block Txv1B.
However, I believe that the initial hole should have
been east of the base line which would place the
alignment coincident with the east wall of the
structure. Similarly, in block Txv1D, some artifacts
and at least one posthole feature were given grid
locations that I believe are outside the limits of the
excavation block.
Carder’s approach involved opening a series of 1.5 x
1.5 m (5 by 5 ft) units aligned to form initial trenches
in each area. These trenches were expanded laterally
in a “broadside manner” until a sizeable block
excavation was formed. Unlike the excavation style
used by Johnston, who routinely dug the inside of
stone lined structures, Carder used a formal grid
system laid out using large wooden stakes in each area
to control the horizontal provenience of features and
materials recovered4. Rows of squares north of the
primary datum were designated grid 0, -5 ft, -10 ft, 15 ft, etc., whereas other rows to the south were
designated grid 0, +5 ft, +10 ft, +15 ft, etc. Similarly,
rows of squares east or left of the primary datum were
designated grid L1, L2, L3, L4, etc., whereas those to
the right or west of the datum were designated as grid
R1, R2, R3, R4, etc. (Figure 2). In light of this
designation system, it seems that Carder was facing
south when he set up the base grid lines. Although the
field records do not record which of the four squares
around a coordinate stake received the same
designation, I have assumed for analytical purposes
that artifacts from the square southeast of the grid
coordinate were assigned the same designation.
Vertical control was referenced either to a standard
“datum depth” (DD) below an arbitrary horizontal
plane or to the depth measured below ground surface.
One major problem in sorting out the distribution of
features and structures stems from Carder’s references
to multiple datum points for individual excavation
blocks and for maintaining vertical elevation controls.
In the southern part of the village, Carder (1934b: 14)
established a “bench mark” datum at a point 32 ft 1 in
(9.78 m) at a bearing 137o E of N from a cross carved
into the rock ruins of Charles Stamper’s mule barn.
Three subdatum reference points are specifically
mentioned in relation to this benchmark (BM). The
primary datum to block Txv1B is located at 35o 1’ 40”
W of N of the BM at a distance of 47 ft 9 inches
(14.55 m). Another datum used to record elevations
of Structure 14B was established 52o W of N at a
distance of 79 ft 6 in (24.23 m) of the BM. This
would place the datum for Structure 14B
approximately at grid point –10/R7 relative to the
primary datum of grid Txv1B. A third datum,
reportedly used for block Txv1C, was set at a point 16o
W of N of the BM at a distance of 62 ft 2 in (18.95 m)
or at the grid point –20/L2 relative to the Txv1B. The
datum for block Txv1C is thus northeast of the datum
for Txv1B.
Despite the fact that Carder used a formal grid system,
his broadside tactic involved expanding the initial
trench laterally at completely arbitrary intervals. If he
recognized sufficiently interesting items in profile, he
would narrate the profile in his notebook. Thus his
field journal is replete with cryptic profile
descriptions. For instance, a profile entry located “24
inches south of the –10/ line” would designate an eastwest profile located about 13 ft (3.96 m) north of the
“0/0” base line that presumably would extend over
most or all of the length of the existing trench.
Periodically, the base trench or block would be
lengthened to capture new features found so
subsequent discussions of profiles must take into
account the changing excavation dimensions during
any part of the narrative description. Periodically the
Unfortunately these explicit datum points do not
coincide with other information in the journal. For
example, Carder (1934b: 6) claims, following
discussions of work in the vicinity of the –5R profile
of block Txv1B, that “fifteen feet (4.57 m) to the SW
we started work on a house to be referred to as
Txv1C.” The structure in block Txv1C cannot be both
southwest of block Txv1B if the datum point for block
Txv1C is northeast of the Txv1B unless there was
substantial overlap in the two grids. To further
compound matters, Carder (ibid: 24) notes that after
he followed a “diagonal line” (wall?) of a structure in
the vicinity of unit +50/L6 in block Txv1C, he
punched the “back face wall” for a distance of 76 cm
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
19
Figure 1. Map of Stamper Site Showing 1935 Excavation Areas
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
20
Figure 2. Method of Assigning Unit Numbers within the Excavation Block.
and connected the excavation block with the Txv1B
trench. The meaning of the “back face wall” of the
block excavation is unclear, but this journal entry
might indicate that Txv1C is indeed north of Txv1B. If
the two datum points are separated by only 6.7 m, as
suggested by the –20-grid reference relative to the
Txv1B datum, then it is impossible to easily reconcile
that the excavations in the vicinity of +50 in Txv1C
connected the two blocks. This assumes, of course,
that the two grids have the same orientation and
numbering system. However, one map of basal pit
features in block Txv1C has a north arrow rotated 90o
from the standard methods of designating units.
the two blocks, and, second, the extended entrances to
residential Structures 16C and 19C are now oriented
in directions other than east. The architectural studies
in residential houses along the Canadian River in the
Texas Panhandle documents that extended entrances
oriented in directions other than east are exceptionally
rare occurrences (Lintz 1986).
Finally, the
documented shapes of the two grids do not suggest
forms that easily fit together.
Other researchers smarter or luckier than I may be
able to reconcile the discrepancies in the journal. But
until more diagrams or records are found hidden in
some archives, I fear that the spatial relationship
between these two blocks remains ambiguous. Either
Carder was confused in his orientations, and/or
distances mentioned above, or he relied primarily on
using one datum point between the two blocks to plot
the spatial relationship of features and materials in
these two blocks.
In a further attempt to reconcile the spatial dilemma, I
assumed that the distance and bearing of the two
primary datum points were accurate and tried to “fit”
the shape of the respective excavation blocks together.
Using this method and assuming the same grid
orientation, I calculate that there is about a 23.10-m2
overlap in excavated units assigned to the two
“adjacent” blocks. Even if the units, features and grid
coordinates in block Txv1C are rotated 90o in an effort
to reduce the amount of excavation overlap, this
solution doesn’t work well for two reasons. First,
some overlap in excavated units still occurs between
Although it is possible that block Txv1C is northeast
of Txv1B, I have opted to retain the plotting of all
artifacts and features for both blocks relative to the
main datum of Txv1B. My main rationale for doing
this is that early sketches in Carder’s journal of the
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
21
initial trench of block Txv1B, which occurs along the
–5 trench line, show and describe alignments of
masonry slabs extending most of the length of the
trench and curving towards the south at each end.
Only two non-continuous units were initially opened
further south of the stone alignment before all other
work in Txv1B shifted to the north and west. The
length of the stones coincides to the length of the
north wall of the masonry foundations to Carder’s Big
House” or Structure 1C (designated 16C, below).
This structure is known to occur along the north edge
of Txv1C. I find it reasonable to suppose that if the
two masonry foundation alignments are to the same
house, then block Txv1B is located immediately north
of contiguous block Txv1C.
uncertain whether the recorded widths of hearths and
pits represent the maximum diameter of the features
or only the portions exposed in profile. Only
occasionally did Carder open large horizontal blocks
to expose whole structures. He rarely assigned feature
designations although he sometimes referred to items
relative to “the small vandalized house”, etc. To
further confuse matters, sometimes his journal
presented more information about a feature after
lapses of several pages of discussion of other topics.
Carder also used a shorthand to document features—
often he only provided one coordinate point (items
found on the R3 unit) and expected the reader to know
from general contexts to which N-S row he was
referring. Similarly, he sometimes forgot to indicate
whether he was talking about the positive or negative
symbols for units so that it is only from general
contexts that an analyst knows whether he was
working north or south of the base line. These
ambiguities in his journals coupled with his tendency
not to visually present maps or sketches made it
difficult to develop a comprehensive list of unique
features encountered during the 1935 excavations.
For purposes of a simplified analysis, materials from
block Txv1B are north and northwest of the base
datum, and materials from Txv1C are south of the
datum, even though the initial trench plus two units of
Txv1B occur south of the datum. Admittedly, my
solution does not resolve the discrepancy between the
layout of structures based on my interpretative
reconstruction of Carder’s grid coordinates and house
distributions depicted in the southern part of the
village on Johnson’s 1934 site map. (Compare Figure
1 against the site map appearing in Part 1 of this
series).
Despite the problems in resolving the
interface between the two blocks, the internal spatial
relationships of features, structures and artifacts
within each block are not adversely affected.
Rather than designating a specific structure or room,
and then systematically discussing all features he
attributed to the room, he mentions most features
individually, and it is up to later analysts to make
sense of the pattern of feature associations.
Sometimes the elevations or depths of features from
datum points help to sort out the patterns of
contemporaneous house parts from earlier or later
features, but unfortunately such depth information is
provided for only about half the features mentioned in
his records.
Elsewhere Carder mentions the
superposition of four hearth features of different sizes
or the occurrence of large basal pits in areas under
houses. These references provide clear indications
that multiple occupations are present in the southern
part of the village similar to the complexity
encountered by Johnston in the northern part of the
village.
In order to standardize measurements, I have
converted the English lengths of inches and feet that
were used by Carder to metric dimensions of
centimeters and meters. Thus, the dimensions of a
feature or depth below either surface or a datum
reference or even the locations of features or artifacts
from within a grid unit are reported in metric
distances. However, the original grid references (e.g.
+5, +10, -5, -10, etc.) have been retained as assigned
since they are named reference points that just so
happen to also refer to English distances from the base
grid line. Conversion of the grid system coordinates
to metric units would introduce unnecessary
confusion. So the reader is advised when a feature is
reported to be located 37 cm south and 15 cm west of
grid +10/L2, the grid coordinates are the original
English dimension references to distances relative to
the 0/0 grid point for the excavation block.
So the reconstruction of specific structures from the
various feature combinations is challenging. I confess
that I sometimes apply some intuition and guesswork
about the locations of features within the general grid
units, but I will indicate when and why I choose to
deviate from Carder’s journal text. For these reasons,
the list of features and their plottings on the area maps
are regarded as my best-guess working models of
house and feature layouts.
Undoubtedly, other
researchers could easily reach different conclusions
Most features were documented during these
numerous narrative profile descriptions. But it is
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
22
previous report, Johnston excavated parts of ten
structures during the summers of 1933 and 1934
(Lintz 2003c).
about the number, size and distribution of features
using the same records.
The identification of artifacts collected from specific
excavation areas by the 1934-1935 FERA project is
also fraught with difficulties. Artifact information is
available from three sources. First is an incomplete
catalog provided on pages 35-39 of Carder’s journal,
second are occasional artifact notations periodically
mentioned by catalog number elsewhere in the
narrative sections of his journal, and third are the
artifact inventories listed in his ten field reports
submitted to the NMLHS (Carder 1935). Carder used
an alphanumeric designation to refer to classes of
pottery (P8, P20, P40 etc.), artifacts made of bone or
stone (A9, A21, A26, A38, etc.), or ethnobotanical (?)
samples of corncobs, charcoal, cordage and matting
(E19, E28, E33, E48). Many of the catalog numbers
refer to groups of artifacts such as a “sack of
potsherds” or “artifacts associated with Cist I.” Thus,
the catalogs represent general artifact classes from
specific proveniences rather than a true catalog since
accurate artifact counts are rarely provided. Carder
must have felt that maintaining an artifact catalog was
an unwelcome chore, and many of his field reports
submitted to Fly indicate that he has fallen behind in
providing an accurate inventory of materials. More
troublesome is the fact that Carder repeated the same
catalog numbers to different classes of materials at
least nine times (e.g. A19, E19, A20, P20 etc.).
Possibly the duplication of some numbers reflect
different classes of artifacts from the same
provenience, but this might not always be the case.
Actually, the designations Txv1A through Txv1D refer
to excavation areas.
Each contained multiple
structures (Figure 3). In the case of block Txv1C, at
least four discrete structures and a multitude of
extramural features occur. I spent considerable effort
converting Carder’s field journal narratives into
profile and plan maps. Often, the profile descriptions
comprised a series of elevation points at differ
coordinates along a profile that may or may not start
on a specific grid line. These points undoubtedly
reflect changes in elevations of a single subsurface
profile line, but rarely did Carder record what the line
was meant to separate although he occasionally
indicated when a portion of the profile dealt with a
feature. Most of his tactics involved digging the
initial trench to sterile gravel then expanding the
trench laterally to form an excavation block. Thus,
many features were only documented in profile.
Unless a structure was recognized, Carder rarely
exposed features in plan view or determined what
artifacts were associated with the features or
stratigraphic layers even when clear evidence for
multiple occupations existed. Despite the difficulty in
using Carder’s records, he did a better job of
recording the density and diversity of exterior features
than Johnston did with his limited study that focused
primarily on structures.
The best way I found to use Carder’s records was to
compile a list of all features, which number about 121
from what I believe is a total 4,000 ft2 (360 m2)
excavation area, along with any provenience, size,
description, and content information. I assigned each
feature mentioned in his field notes a sequential
number with a letter prefix corresponding to the
excavation block (e.g. Feature A1, A2, A3, etc.).
Next, I plotted the data on general area maps I
developed using the coordinates of the grid system. In
many cases, the general or even specific locations of
features are known, but the sizes or shapes are not.
Some structures are reconstructed by compiling
numerous individual features, but the association of
features comprising a single structure involves some
guesswork.
Clusters of features that constitute
structures and large pits/cists which Carder called
possible structures in his notes were assigned an
alphanumeric designation. Since Johnston worked in
ten buildings, I assigned Carder’s structures starting
with the number 11 plus the excavation block
Analytical Methods
The structures and features excavated by Carder were
difficult to compile due to the manner of his record
keeping as discussed above.
The scarcity of
photographs (n=12) and maps from the 1935
excavations adds to the difficulty. Only one sketch
map of a structure and a second of a series of pit
features exist in Carder’s fieldnotes. The dimensions
of the house sketch differ from the adjoining
description of the configuration of the structure. Due
to the difficulty in using the notebook for the 1935
excavations, some people have misinterpreted
Carder’s designations Txv1A through Txv1D to refer
to individual structures rather than excavation blocks.
For example, Watson (1950: 13fn) mentions that
“Rooms 9 (sic) 10, 11, and 12 were excavated later
but no notes from (Carder’s) work have been
incorporated (into her report).” As discussed in the
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
23
Figure 3. Overview of Features and Structure Distributions Excavated by Fred Carder in 1934-35.
designation. Thus the twelve structures which I
believe are represented in Carder’s records are
designated Structures 11A, 12A, 13A, 14B, 15B, 16C,
17C, 18C, 19C, 20D, 21D and 22D in order to
differentiate Carder’s buildings from those excavated
by Johnston.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
24
The compilation of the artifact type database indicates
that about 115 (88.5%) of the catalog entries can be
assigned to a specific excavation block although in
many instances the specific grid units and locations
relative to features are unknown. Only some 15
entries (11.5%) cannot be assigned to a specific
excavation unit (Table 1). Of the artifact entries that
can be assigned to an excavation block, 17 entries
(13.1%) are from block Txv1A, 32 entries (24.6%) are
from block Txv1B, 42 entries (32.3%) are from block
Txv1C, and 14 entries (10.8%) are from block Txv1D.
My compilations (with some interpretations) of
Carder’s excavation maps are presented by individual
excavation block area in order to provide a sense of
structural and extramural feature distributions. The
maps reflect a composite of features from many
different occupations. But elevations relative to a
datum depth and/or below surface are available for
only about half of the features, and only ten percent of
the features provide both datum elevations and depths
below surface values. It simply is not possible to
correlate features over broad areas, especially when
the surface topography undulates within an excavation
block. The descriptions of structures dug by Carder
have a greater degree of uncertainty than those
buildings dug by Johnston. But insofar as Watson
(1950: 13) completely ignored Carder’s records, the
information in this article represents new information,
especially about the southern part of the Stamper site
village.
The following discussion is organized by each
excavation block designation. Specific emphasis is
placed on description of each structure or structurelike pit. The compiled feature data is presented in
individual tables for each block and presented along
with the compiled block maps.
Carder’s Excavations in the North Part of
the Stamper Village
Artifact information from the field journal and field
reports was compiled into a series of spreadsheets
containing similar artifact and provenience fields.
The three sources of data were compared and if
similar classes of artifacts were represented, then
missing observations were added to compile a master
database for about 130 artifact number entries. This
process determined that the field journal listed about
128 artifact numbers assigned to provenience lots,
whereas the letter field reports to the Society only
listed 108 artifact numbers. In 87 instances (66.92%)
the field journal and field report are in complete
agreement about the artifact identification for specific
catalog numbers.
In some 22 other instances
(16.92%), one source of information identified an
artifact type, but the other source was not identified,
and was merely left blank. In two cases (1.54%),
catalog numbers A20/P20 and A39, no specific
artifact types were identified in either the journal or
field report. In 19 other instances (14.62%), the
named artifacts corresponding to the catalog number
differed by either being a more specific clarification
(e.g. “stone implement” vs. “projectile point” [n=10])
or by being completely contradictory (e.g. “bone
implement” vs. “stone implement” [n=9]). Possibly
the seeming contradictions might refer to different
artifact classes from a single provenience lot that were
given the same catalog number, but I have no
independent means of verifying this possibility.
Accordingly, I have chosen to use the name appearing
in the journal listing and merely to annotate the field
report discrepancy under comments.
Carder’s initial excavations were started in December
1934 in area Txv1A located in the northern part of the
village near the areas dug by Johnston. Carder’s crew
opened three trenches in an “I”-shaped configuration.
But the initial work was abandoned a few days later
without mentioning the discovery of any features or
specific artifacts. The reasons for abandoning the
work in this area are uncertain. But the initial work
was started in a complexly stratified part of the site
that had been obscured by Johnston’s backdirt piles
and open excavation blocks and earlier potholes.
Perhaps Carder decided to shift work to relatively
undisturbed areas until he gained familiarity with the
range of artifacts and features of the site.
Accordingly, he had crews work in blocks Txv1B
through Txv1D in the south part of the village
throughout most of the winter.
Additional
excavations were conducted in area Txv1A during the
late spring of 1935. The spatial relationship between
the later work and the initial “I”-shaped trench is not
known. Carder’s second effort in this area opened a
block excavation located immediately north of
Johnston’s “Kiva”. For purposes of this study, the
discussion of area Txv1A is restricted to only the
block excavation investigated during the spring where
features and materials were documented in his journal.
Spring Excavation Area Txv1A
The spring 1935 excavations were initiated by the
opening of a 25 x 5 ft (7.6 x 1.5 m) long E-W trench
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
25
Table 1. Summary of Number of Artifact Provenience Lots by Excavation Area at the Stamper Site, 1935.
Chipped Stone Lithics
Projectile Point
Cache of Points
Scraper
Blade/ Large Knife Blade
Four Bladed Knife
Drill
Stone Implement
Stone Artifact
Ground Stone
Mano
Abrasion Stone
Stone with Red Ochre
Bone
Awls
Digging Stick
Notched Bone (Rasp)
Proadlescapula (sic) blade
Bone Implement
Pottery
Paint Pot (small)
Sack of Sherds
Potsherd/ Potsherds
Rim Sherd/ Rim Sherds
Rim Sherds- Decorated
Sherd with Lug
Ethnobotanical Sample
Corn Cobs
Sack of Charcoal
Charred Cord and Matting
Unspecified
Void (no identified artifact)
Sack of Rejects & Artifacts
Sack of (Unidentified)
"Artifacts from Cist I"
Sack of Sherds & Artifacts
Total Number of Proveniences
Txv1A
Txv1B
Txv1C
Txv1D
Unknown Total
2
2
1
2
3
2
1
1
1
10
1
5
2
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
4
2
2
7
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
2
6
2
1
1
1
2
15
5
1
1
1
1
15
2
2
1
1
1
1
41
11
3
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
32
2
42
1
1
14
25
2
1
1
1
3
130
30
2
32
24.6
41
1
42
32.3
14
0
14
10.8
14
11*
25*
19.2
115
15
130
100.0
1
1
17
Provenience Lots with Unit Numbers
No. of Assigned Grid
16
No with Unknown Grids
1
Total Number of Proveniences
17
Percent
13.1
20
4
1
1
1
Percent Percent
20.0
7.7
0.8
3.8
1.5
3.1
0.8
1.5
0.8
3.8
0.8
2.3
0.8
20.8
15.4
3.1
0.8
0.8
0.8
46.2
0.8
31.5
8.5
2.3
2.3
0.8
3.1
1.5
0.8
0.8
6.2
1.5
0.8
0.8
0.8
2.3
88.5
11.5
100.0
* 2 of the 11 units do not have identified artifacts -- listed as voids. Perhaps number was not used.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
26
hearths, measuring 84 and 71 cm in diameter for the
upper (A9) and lower (A10) features, respectively,
appear to represent central heating elements. The
burned earth of the upper hearth measured 5 cm thick
whereas the lower hearth was an oxidized layer 10 cm
thick. These hearths reflected a thermal feature
activity area used for a long time. The separation of
these two central hearths by about 13 cm of fill
suggests that the structure may have been remodeled
at least once. Two “dark humus lenses” (A11, A12)
were found to be superimposed immediately north of
the central hearth features, but the “humus” occurs
some 11 cm beneath the lower hearth feature and
probably relates to subfloor occupation debris. The
existence of an earlier component is also supported by
the discovery of a small (69 cm diameter) clay lined
pit containing lumps of adobe (Feature A13) that may
have occurred under the north wall of Structure 11A.
Quite likely, this pit may have been an adobe mortarmixing basin used in preparing mortar for houses in
the area.
located immediately north of the “Kiva” along the
northwest portion of what Johnston called Refuse
Area 1. The original trench was expanded northward
using the broadside method until eventually fifteen 5 x
5 ft squares were exposed.
The initial parcel
measured about 15 ft north-south by 15 to 27 ft eastwest (4.6 by 4.6 to 8.2 m) with a stepped east side to
the block that had a total area of about 375 ft2 (33.75
m2).
A total of 27 features were recorded indicating a high
feature density of 1.25 m2/feature (Figure 4, Table 2).
Based on the depth of features, it appears that culturebearing zone was between 56 and 69 cm thick which
is about 15 cm shallower than the occupation zone
thickness recorded by Johnston for the adjacent block
excavation. These features can be grouped to one
clearly defined rectangular structure (Structure 11A),
a second cluster of features comprising a poorly
defined structure (Structure 12A), and one very small
circular cist (Structure 13A). Extramural features
include three hearths (A7, A22, A27), four pits (A8,
A13, A20 and A 25), and two shell caches (A19,
A23). The structures are described below.
Structure 12A
This structure is located in the northeast corner of the
excavation block A (Grid –5 to -10/ 0 to R1). Very
little information exists about this possible structure,
which is not mentioned specifically in the field
journal. Nevertheless, individual descriptions of a
short adobe north wall segment 23 cm wide (Feature
A21), part of a plastered floor (Feature A18), and
three postholes 18 to 25 cm in diameter, forming an
alignment that might be a possible south wall (A14,
A16 and A17) suggests a structure. No information
exists to indicate an accurate size or the precise shape
of this possible building. Nor is there any information
available about any interior features. These features
were exposed towards the very end of the excavations
and the quality of records is not comparable to those
observations recorded during earlier parts of the
excavation. Unfortunately this part of the excavation
is not shown in the two known pictures of block
Txv1A. I doubt that little more will be known about
this structure unless further excavations in adjacent
units find remnants of the structure.
Structure 13A
Structure 11A
Structure 11A is defined by a constellation of seven or
eight features that compose the eastern half of a
relatively small, rectangular structure located in the
southwest corner of the block (Grid 0 to -5/L2 to L3).
The precise size is uncertain, but if two superimposed
features define a centrally placed hearth, then the
building probably measures about 3.35 m north south
by an estimated 6.10 m east west. The north and east
walls (Feature A24) were reportedly made of adobe
and field notes indicate that a single vertical stone slab
was set in the north end of the east wall (Feature
A26). A series of four posts (Features A2 to A5),
each measuring about 18 cm in diameter and spaced
along the wall about 60 cm apart, strengthen the south
wall. The precise location of these posts relative to the
wall is unknown—the posts could either be embedded
in the wall or abutting the inside or outside of the
wall. Despite these wall descriptions in the field
journal, two photographs show that a continuous
foundation of vertically set stone slabs served as
foundations for the walls (Figure 5). The picture also
shows a wall gap entry rather than an extended
entrance in the middle of the east wall. No interior
roof support posts are reported and none are evident in
the pictures. Even though no adobe-plastered floor is
mentioned, the existence of two large, superimposed
This structure is a relatively small, circular masonry
cist (Feature A6) located in the southeast part of the
block (Grid 0/R1 to 0). Carder’s notes describe this
“cache” as being the same type (plaster wall pit) as
exposed by Johnston the previous summer (in the
“Kiva”). However, Structure 13A measures only 1.19
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
27
Figure 4. Caricature Map of Features and Structures in Excavation Area Txv1A, at Stamper.
Table 2. Features Recorded by Fred Carder in Area Txv1A FERA 1934-35.
Feature
no
Carder
1934b
page
Feature Type
A1
44
Pit dug in 1934
summer
A2
44
A3
44
A4
Dia – Thick–
meter
ness
General Location
Datum
Depth
Depth
Below
Surface
Comment
nd
nd
North part of village north of Room
3
nd
1.67 m
Assumed to be Johnston's
"Kiva" (Structure 8)
Post mold 1
18 cm
nd
nd
18 cm
nd
1.92 m
nd
44
Post mold 1
18 cm
nd
Four
post
molds
(A2-A5)
encountered while digging south
wall of first (e-w) trench on west
end-- posts average 61 cm apart.
1.92 m
Post mold 1
1.92 m
nd
West end of trench was 56
cm west of 0/R2; trench is
7.29 m long. (Structure 11A)
A5
44
Post mold 1
18 cm
nd
1.92 m
nd
A6
45
Circular pit
119 cm 41 cm Behind (north ?) of 0/0 stake
2.13m top; 2.93
m bottom
nd
not
assigned
45
"Silt hard streak"
(possible floor?)
nd
3 cm Beneath 1) hard adobe mud
(unknown depth), 2) habitation layer
(12.7 cm thick); 3) hard silt (floor?;
3 cm thick); over 4) "bottom level"
24 cm thick.
1)1.77m
2) nd;
3)1.95m
4) 2.13 m.
Pit is same type as in former
excavations
(Johnston's
Kiva?); pit overlain by
stratified habitation debris.
(Structure 13A)
1)nd;
2) 13 cm
3) 3 cm;
4) 24 cm
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
28
Feature
no
Carder
1934b
page
Depth
Below
Surface
Comment
A7
46
Fire pit trace
107 cm 18 cm 109 cm from 0/0 stake to west edge 2.13 m to 2.16
of feature
m
nd
Layer of "rotten" limestone 5
cm thick and 56 cm long at
top of hearth 58 cm south of
-5 grid line.
A8
46
Pit
66 cm
nd
nd
A9
46-47 Fire (bed?)
84 cm
1.74 m
29 cm
A10
46-47 "Another show of 71 cm 10 cm 66 cm from south wall in west
fire"
(lower
profile
hearth)
46
Dark humus soil 18 cm 8 cm 15 cm from west wall of trench; 13
lens
cm below silt
47
Dark humus soil 23 cm
nd Beneath Feature A11?
lens
long;
63.5 cm
wide
1.92 m
nd
2.13 m
nd
nd
nd
A11
A12
Feature Type
Dia – Thick–
meter
ness
General Location
20 cm 18 cm north of west edge of hearth
Feature A7
5 cm West bank (edge) of trench; 84 cm
exposed in south wall; 36 cm in
north wall
Datum
Depth
A13
47
"Pit-like
structure"
69 cm
nd
nd; pit overlain by hard adobe 2.71 m (bottom)
(wall?); possibly in Grid -10/L2
A14
48
Post mold
25 cm
nd
A15
48
Rotten
(decomposed)
limestone line
nd
nd
20 cm east (right) and 81 cm south
of No 5 (Grid -5/0?)
25 cm south of -5 grid line; (Grid 5/L1?)
A16
49
Post mold
18 cm
nd
A17
49
Post mold
nd
nd
A18
50
Floor level silt
nd
nd
A19
50
A20
51
Mussel
shell
nd
cache
Pit in profile
46 cm
A21
51
Adobe wall
A22
51
Fire pit
A23
52
A24
52
Mussel
shell
cache
Adobe lens
A25
52-53 Large cist
A26
52
Adobe
house
A27
52
Fire pit
wall
23 cm
wide
58 cm
13 cm below silt (see
comment for A9)
46 cm below silt (see
comment for A9)
Pit made (lined?) of adobe;
lumps of adobe 13 to 20 cm
in diameter in pit. (Pit too
small to be structure)
(Structure 12A)
nd
nd
nd
46 cm
25 cm west of Grid (-5?)/R1
nd
69 cm
(Structure 12A)
46 cm left (west?) of Feature A16?
nd
nd
(Structure 12A)
nd
(Structure 12A)
Grid -10/0?; 33 cm west of -10; 127
2.16 m
cm south of stake.
nd Grid -10/L1; just left (west) below
2.16+ m
floor level
16 cm Grid line -10 at L3 line (-10/L3)
1.90 to 2.06 m
nd
38 cm
Yellowish brown silt 10 cm
thick in hearth (plaster?)
bottom of silt is at DD of
1.77 m (Structure 11A)
Whole pit exposed in profile.
(Structure 11A)
Decomposed limestone in
profile (not plotted on map)
nd
nd
Grid -10/0; 66 cm south; 23 cm west.
nd
56 cm
(Structure 12A)
23 cm Left (west) of wall (Feature A-21) in
profile
nd
nd
Overlies sterile clay 5 cm
thick widens to 23 cm on left
(west?)
nd
nd
Grid -10/L1; 66 cm south of stake
nd
51 cm
nd
nd
Grid -10/L4; 76 cm south; 10 cm
west
nd
28 cm
Off-set in NW direction--23
cm west over 91 cm
distance; intermittant.
(Structure 11A)
nd
Pit 1.40 m wide at top
structure made of unpacked
clay material mixed. (not
assigned as structure but
bigger than Structure 13A).
Possibly oblique in profile;
perpendicular to surface.
One rock set in adobe
located 25 cm west of Grid
10(-0?) (Structure 11A)
140 cm 64 cm "No 10", profile (76 cm east of - 2.01 m top;
top; 104
10/L2 stake).
2.65 m bottom
cm base
of 66 cm
86 cm
nd
Grid -10/L4; 1.42 m east of stake to
1.24 m west of -10/L1
18 cm 1.22 m west of stake -10/L1
1.80 m
nd
2.19 to 2.38 m
nd
Recorded in profile.
N=27 features assigned
xx
47 Deepest occupation evidence is d.d=2.50 m; overlying fill has several layers of charcoal drift materials and mottled humus.
xx
47 Ground surface slopes to right (east) from 51 cm deep to 2.44 m deep (31 cm drop).
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
29
Figure 5. Photograph of Structure 11A (Facing East). Note stone slab foundations; Beyond gap doorway is cist Structure
13A and pit features A8 and A20. Photograph courtesy Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma.
Watson (1950) does not indicate that shells from this
area were modified, and Elmer Cheatum’s (1966)
identification of Stamper site mussels references site
cataloging numbers comparable to the system used by
Johnston, not Carder. Further study of the collections
might be able to isolate the shells from these two
caches.
m in diameter with adobe and cobble walls extending
to a height of 41 cm (Figure 6). In contrast, the
“Kiva” measured about 2.4 m in diameter and was
much deeper. No information is available about the
nature of any possible entrance or the nature of
interior features. The field notes indicate that the cist
overlays stratified habitation debris that included soft
dirt and bone. This description seems to indicate that
earlier occupation debris occurred in this part of the
site and may correlate to the dark humus soil under
Structure 11A. The existence of earlier occupations
supports observations of stratified deposits made by
Johnston in the summer of 1934 during his excavation
of Refuse Area A.
Two of the three exterior hearths are located near the
northeast and southeast corners of Structure 11A.
Hearth feature A7, southeast of the structure is a large
fire pit “trace” measuring about 1.07 m in diameter
and occurring at the same elevation as the dark
humate zones from the lower occupation surface
under Structure 11A. The hearth is reportedly 18 cm
thick and had a layer of “rotten” limestone along the
top of the hearth. The shallowness of the feature
precludes it from being an earth oven, but the
reference to limestone might indicate that perhaps
some stone boiling might have been associated with
the hearth.
Exterior Features in Excavation Block Txv1A.
A series of features were found immediately east of
the gap entrance to Structure 11A and west of
Structure 12A and 13A. These features include two
mussel shell caches, (F-A19, A21), three hearths (FA7, A22, A27), and three pits (F-A8, A20, and A25).
Hearth Feature A27, near the northeast corner of
Structure 11A, measures 86 cm in diameter and 18 cm
thick. It occurs at a datum depth of 2.19 to 2.38 m,
which places it with the lower occupation zone under
Structure 11A.
Little information is provided about the two fresh
water mussel “caches” or concentrations (Features
A19, A23). Carder does not provide information
about the number of valves, the degree of clustering or
any evidence of modification to the two shell features.
Consequently it is uncertain whether these shells were
truly stashed for future intended use or merely
represent discard residues from some cooking event.
Hearth Feature A22 is located along the north wall
alignment of Structure 12A, but the stratigraphic
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
30
Figure 6. Photograph of Structure 13A (Facing S.). Note height of cist walls with possible rocks on rim. Pit features A8
(left) and A20 (right) are in foreground. Entrance to Structure 11A is far right. Photograph courtesy Sam Noble Oklahoma
Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma.
relationship is unknown. This hearth measures some
58 cm in diameter and 23 cm thick.
stone artifacts, nine proveniences of bone implements,
two of pottery, no ethnobotanical remains and two of
unspecified materials. The chipped stone artifacts
consist of two projectile points, one scraper and one
“stone implement”. The bone tools consist of seven
awls, one digging stick tip, and one “Proadlescapula”
(sic ?) blade that may be a bison scapula hoe or clay
mortar mixing tool (Huhnke 2001). The pottery is
merely listed as two lots each representing a sack of
sherds; the unspecified items consist of a sack of
unspecified materials and another sack of “rejects and
artifacts.” Among the features listed from this portion
of the site are two caches of freshwater (?) shell.
The three exterior pit features all occur near the east
wall of Structure 11A. Pit Feature A8 is a shallow
basin feature measuring about 66 cm in diameter and
only 20 cm deep. No information is provided about
artifact associations or pit contents. Pit Feature A20
occurs immediately southeast of the gap entrance to
Structure 11A. It measures some 46 cm in diameter
and only some 16 cm deep. Finally, pit Feature A25
is described as a large cist measuring 1.40 m in
diameter at the orifice, 1.04 m in diameter at the base,
and has a depth of 64 cm. The size of the pit suggests
that it might have been a storage cache pit located just
northeast of the entrance. Carder (1934b: 52-53)
mentions that this pit had “unpacked clay materials
mixed” with other sediments in the upper fill of the
pit. Perhaps this material represents either portions of
a clay cap sealing the pit or adobe mortar rubble in the
upper fill.
Carder’s Excavations in the South Part of
the Stamper Village
The initial excavations in the south part of the village
were about 100 m south of area Txv1A (Figure 7).
This initial area was designated Txv1B with some
excavations occurring both north and south of the
primary datum. But most of the work occurred north
of the 0/0-datum grid point. Subsequently block
Txv1C was set up either south or northeast of block B
but they were eventually expanded and merged
together. For practical purposes, the features and
materials found in the large contiguous block were
Artifacts found in Excavation Block Txv1A.
The 17 artifact lots were reportedly recovered from
excavation block Txv1A and consisted of four
proveniences of chipped stone artifacts, no ground
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
31
Figure 7. Photograph of General Site Area with Backdirt from Txv1B-1D (Left Background, Facing S.). Note stone slab
foundations of possible Watch House (right foreground); backdirt and excavation of House 3 in front of FERA sign (right
background); ruins of Charles Stamper house center distance. Photograph courtesy Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural
History, University of Oklahoma.
designated as grid block Txv1B if they occurred north
of the 0/0 grid and Txv1C if they were south of the
datum point point. This simplification necessitated
the descriptions of four features from block Txv1B
with the discussions of features in Txv1C although the
original feature numbers were retained as assigned.
Block excavation Txv1D was opened north of block
Txv1B and was never expanded south to connect the
two areas. The following discusses each of the
excavation areas.
density of 3.02 m2/feature. The feature-bearing zones
were about 51 cm thick in this part of the site. A
constellation of perhaps 28 features comprised parts of
two structures.
One is a well-described large
rectangular structure in the west edge of the
excavation block (Structure 14B), and the second is a
poorly defined and severely vandalized building in the
eastern portion of the block (Structure 15B).
Excavation Area Txv1B
This is a large, rectangular room with a central
channel comprised of 22 features and located in the
western part of the excavation block in grid units –15
to –25/R6 to R10. The features making up this
structure consist of 17 postholes, of which 11 are
along walls and six are on the inside; a floor plastered
with adobe; two lateral walls forming the extended
entrance; one entry step; and one of the two adobe
plaster walls lining a central channel. This structure is
the only building that is recorded by a map in Carder’s
field journal (1934a: 10B, 1934b: 16). However, this
map is only partially complete and shows only three
postholes, the south edge of the central channel, and
the outline of the main room without the entrance.
The sketch shows the structure as being relatively Dshaped with curving northeast and northwest walls.
Based on the crude sketch map, the structure measures
about 5.18 m (N-S) by 6.10 m (E-W). But the
Structure 14B
The excavations were initiated by the opening of a 25
ft long (7.6 m) E-W trench that encompasses units –
5/R1 to –5/L3 of block Txv1B and located about 24.35
m northwest of the Charles Stamper mule barn which
was used as the base reference point for the
excavations. The original trench was expanded north
and westward using the broadside method until a
relatively amorphous excavation block comprised of
some fifty-five 5 x 5 ft squares were exposed. The
block area measured a total of 1,375 ft2 (123.75 m2).
A total of 45 features were recorded to varying extent.
Four of these features (B1, B2, B6 and B7) occurred
south of the 0/0 base line and technically were in
block Txv1C and are described later with materials
from that excavation area (Figure 8, Table 3). The 41
features from north of the base line provide a feature
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
32
Figure 8. Caricature Map of Features and Structures in Excavation Area Txv1B, at Stamper.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
33
Table 3. Features Recorded by Fred Carder in Area Txv1B FERA 1934-35
Feature Carder Feature Type
no
1934b
page
B1
5
Diameter
Flint cache
See Table 4.
See Table 4.
B2
5
Firebed
B3
5, 7
Firebed
B4
7
Firepit
B5
7
B6
8
Thickness General Location
Datum
Depth
Depth Comments
Below
Surface
Located south of 0-0
Located south of 0-0
nd
nd
30.5 cm
13 cm
Firebed
76 cm (36 cm
n-s)
20 cm
Post hole
See Table 4
See Table 4
Grid -5/R2, 10 cm toward
-10 line; 38 cm to left
(east?)
Grid -5/0; 23 cm right (left?)
of -5/R4
Grid -5/R3
2.26 m
8 cm
2.04 m
51 cm
2.04 m
nd
With bone implements
Located south of 0-0
B7
8
Firepit
B8
9
Firebed
152 cm
nd
Grid -5/R3 to -5/R4; 23 cm
north of -5 grid profile
nd
nd
B9
9
Firebed
nd
20 cm
Grid 0/R5; 76 cm forward
of -10 grid row
nd
nd
B10
9
Gip, gravel and
burned earth
51 cm
nd
Grid -5/R2 to -5/R3 (found
in profile)
nd
nd
B11
10
Pit
36 cm
20 cm
B12
10
Firepit
nd
nd
B13
10
Firepit
79 cm
nd
Grid -5/0 and -5/L1. 127
cm west of -10 grid profile.
51 cm n-s; 46 cm e-w
profile square (5?)/L2.
1.49 m
nd
Extends below house floor. 38
cm of pit in grid square 5; 41 cm
in grid -5/L1. Pit 61 cm in e-w
diameter.
B14
11
"Hard
(floor?)
nd
5 cm
nd
nd
2.44 m long; 71 cm on left (west?)
side; 66 cm long on right (east)
side. 2.39 m long on south side.
(Structure 15B)
B15
11
Firepit/bed
152+ cm?
6 cm
Grid -5/R1. Possibly in -10
profile to within 38 cm of
R3 -- Layer shoots up to
make square block in
profile left of R4.
Grid -5 at R3 and R4
(strong); -10 at R3 and R4
nd
nd
B16
12
Firepit
125 cm (e-w)
94 cm (n-s)
nd
Shows in -10 profile; ends
23 cm from -15 grid profile.
nd
nd
Perfect circle. Pit fades 51 cm
from -5 grid profile, pit shows in
R2.
east-west = 145 cm; north-south
= 43 cm.
B17
12
Firebed
nd
nd
10 cm west and 13 cm
higher than Feature B16
1.37 1.43 m
B18
12
Post mold
25 cm
nd
53 cm right (west?) of -15
grid; 51 cm east of -15 grid
1.80 m
nd
(Structure 15B?)
B19
12
Flint cache
nd
nd
Located right (west) side of
post mold (Feature B18)
1.59 m
nd
Contents unspecified
B20
13
Post
(oval)
11 cm
nd
nd
nd
nd
Grid -15/R2; 76 cm south
of Grid -15; 10 cm right
(west) and 5 cm to left
(east).
nd; east side of trench
B21
layer"
mold
29-31 Tunnel
entrance
Located south of 0-0
B22
29
Post mold
13 cm
13 cm
B23
29
Adobe strip
15 cm
13 cm
deep
Grid -5/R2, 76 cm west of 1.55 m
corner; 58 cm from south
wall
Grid -10/R2; 81 cm to left 1.55 m
(east?); 28 cm from -10 bottom;
profile.
1.40 m
top
1.40 m east of Grid -30/R7
and 18 cm north of Grid 30/R7
Grid -30/R7; 89 cm south
and 127 cm east of -30/R7.
Burned earth suggests thermal
feature?
On floor; 23 cm from the -10 grid
profile.
51 cm Identified in -10 grid profile.
2.54 m left of excavation block
48 cm (Structure 15B?)
2.04 to
2.23 m.
nd
2.10 m
(floor)
nd
nd
nd
2.04 m entrance; floor level 2.23
m; adobe bottom 2.16 m.
(Structure 14B)
On outside edge of structure 14B
Adobe wall along
(Structure 14B)
entrance
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
34
Feature Carder Feature Type
no
1934b
page
Diameter
Thickness General Location
Datum
Depth
Depth Comments
Below
Surface
B24
30
Post mold
18 cm
15 cm
deep
137 cm west of Grid - 15 cm
20/R7; and 30 cm north to below
south side of posthole
2.10 m.
nd
(Structure 14B)
B25
30
Post mold
18 cm
15 cm
deep
Grid -20/R7; 99 cm north of 15 below
Feature B24 to south edge 2.10 m
of Feature B25
nd
(Structure 14B)
B26
30
Post mold
13 cm
nd
Grid -20/R7; 109 cm north
of post Feature B25
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
B27
30
Post mold
18 cm
nd
Grid -20/R7; 58 cm north of
post Feature B26
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
30-32 Post mold
22 cm
25 cm
deep
nd
nd
Several post holes exposed in
wall-- walls built around posts.
(Structure 14B)
nd
nd
Grid -20/R7; 99 cm south
(sic-north) of Feature B27
to south edge of Feature
B25
Grid-20/R7 line
2.13 m
nd
Profile shows floor lower than
surrounding
levels-"house
unquestionably dug from present
surface"
(subterranean)
(Structure 14B)
69 cm east of -25/R10
nd
nd
Close to post Feature B32; but
diameters differ. (Structure 14B)
2.79 m east of Grid 25/R12
1.60 m east of Post B31
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
nd
nd
Grid -20/R7
nd
nd
Location is very close to post
B30,
but
diameter
differs.
(Structure 14B)
"On south adobe wall were
similar posts" as on the north
edge. (Structure 14B)
No location provided
nd
nd
B28+
B29
30
Yellowish
brown
house
floor plaster.
B30
32
Post mold
13 cm
nd
B31
32
"Another post"
33 cm
28 cm
B32
32
Post mold
25 cm
30 cm
B33+
33
Posts (multiple)
nd
nd
B34
33
Post in wall
18 cm
36 cm
B35
33
Post
20 cm
nd
Grid -20/R8; 20 cm south
(of post B34?)
nd
nd
B36
33
Post
23 cm
nd
Grid -20/R9, 43 cm to
south; 33 cm to west
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
B37
33
15 cm
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
31
nd
nd
30 cm north of south adobe
wall
Grid -25/R7; 15 cm south
and 41 cm east extending
71 cm to south
nd
B38
2.16 m
nd
Possible entry step. (Structure
14B)
B39
32
Post in west
wall
Yellowishbrown
layer
mottled
with
ash
Center of north
adobe
wall-inside structure
nd
nd
Grid -25/R10
nd
nd
North edge of central channel
(Structure 14B)
B40
32
Post
13 cm
18 cm
Grid -30/R9, 56 cm west,
23 cm south
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
B41
32
Post
11 cm wide
18 cm
Grid -20/R7 135 cm south;
86 cm west
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
B42
32
Post
13 cm
8 cm
Grid -20/R8 51 cm west,
183 cm south
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
B43
32
Post
13 cm
15 cm
deep
Grid -20/R9, 46 cm west,
183 cm south
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
B44
32
Post
13 cm
15 cm
deep
Grid -20/R9, 97 cm west,
188 cm inch south
nd
nd
(Structure 14B)
If location entry for Feature B35 is
correct, then Feature B34 is 20
cm north of it. Not plotted on
map.
Surface depth is less because
adobe wall was "lower for some
reason" (Structure 14B)
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
35
Feature Carder Feature Type
no
1934b
page
B45
n=
Diameter
21, 22, Small
house
v
25
north of Tx 1C
(badly
damaged)
nd
Thickness General Location
nd
Uncertain;
possibly
associated
with
floor
Feature B14.
Datum
Depth
nd
Depth Comments
Below
Surface
36 cm Mostly adobe wall 25 cm wide
with rocks set in adobe. Signs of
fire beds under house. (Structure
15B)
45 features assigned
Minus 4 in Block C
coordinates provided in the adjacent text indicate that
the structure is rectangular and measures about 8.86 m
(N-S) by 7.32 m (E-W). Two existing photographs of
an undesignated structure that I believe are of this
structure show a subterranean rectangular structure
with two low channel walls that more accurately
reflect the rectangular shape of the foundations than
the D-shape form depicted in the sketch (Figures 9
and 10). Accordingly, I tend to trust the larger house
dimensions provided in text rather than those
measured from the diagram.
south wall posts measured 11 to 13 cm in diameter
and were irregularly spaced east to west, 1.16 m, 1.46
m and 0.51 m apart, starting from a point 1.86 m from
the southeast corner of the structure. The five to six
posts along the east wall were mostly 18 cm in
diameter with single posts with diameters of 13 and 22
cm, each. These east wall posts were spaced 99 to
109 cm apart. Only one post (B30) occurred along the
north wall; it has a diameter of 13 cm. A single post
(B37) measuring 15 cm in diameter occurred along
the west wall.
Photographs show that the walls of the structure
appear to be composed of the sediments from the
house pit. No foundation stones are evident from
pictures. The incomplete sketch map indicates that
plaster was placed along the south half of the structure
and both the map and text agree that posts probably
lined the walls, even though none are shown in the
photographs.
An extended entryway is present on the east side of
the structure. Feature B21 was assigned to the entire
entryway, whereas Feature B23 was assigned to an
“adobe strip” that might represent the south edge of
the entrance. The floor of the entrance is at a datum
depth of 2.04 m which is about 19 cm above the floor
of the central channel found at a depth of 2.23 m. No
information was recorded about the width or length of
the extended entrance but based on the plan map, the
edge of the excavation block was only some 50 cm
east of the plastered wall of the structure.
Immediately west of the extended entryway inside the
subterranean room was a fan-shaped entry step
(Feature B38) that only shows up in the room
photograph (Figure 10). It is estimated to be about 10
cm tall, but the dimensions of the step were not
recorded.
The 17 posts that are attributed to the structure form a
problematic pattern. At face value, it seems that a
series of posts occurs along the south wall, some posts
occur along the channel edges, and there are two
unusual parallel north-south alignments of posts
seemingly occurring more than one meter from the
east and west walls. However, the posts for the
eastern alignment (B24 though B28) are all based on
various distances north of the adjacent post and are
dependent upon the location of post feature B24. The
text indicates that this key post occurred 1.37 m west
of grid –20/R7 (Carder 1934b: 30). If, however,
Carder meant east of that grid point, then five to six
posts occur along the east wall of the structure. I
believe that Carder’s records are in error in regard to
this orientation. Such data-finagling procedures do
not apply to the western alignment of posts (B30, B32,
B36, and B40) because each is plotted from a different
reference grid or feature point.
The journal sketch and pictures of the room agree in
the depiction of two interesting low adobe sills
extending east-west across the length of the room.
The photographic copy of Figure 9 at the No Man’s
Land Historical Society is labeled: “Remains of adobe
walled, three room semi-subterranean house.” The
picture shows that the floor levels on either side of the
sills are at a comparable level. The sills are unlike the
depressed central floor channels commonly found in
Antelope Creek phase residential structures, which
typically have elevated floor surfaces (called
“benches”) averaging 18 cm above the depressed
central channel (Lintz 1986: 97). The margins of the
Thus, the text suggests that four of the 17 wall posts
(B41 through B44) occur along the south wall. These
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
36
Figure 9. Photograph of Structure 14B (Facing ENE.). Note lack of stones in walls and elevated extended entrance. Low
interior "walls" are probably adobe plaster on channel margins. Unknown object removed in plaster jacket from west end of
channel. Photograph courtesy Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma.
Figure 10. Photograph of Structure 14B (Facing E.). Note elevated entry step below extended entrance, adobe plaster lining
on possible channel margins and cobble cluster in vicinity of central hearth. Datum stake is inside channel. Photograph
courtesy Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
37
The room photographs also show two interesting
features that are not described in the records or in the
notes. One “feature” appears to be a possible cluster
of angular objects that might be cobbles or adobe
chunks in the middle of the central channel but
oriented at an angle to the channel axis (Figure 10).
The size of this cluster is unknown, but it seems to
have been found close to where a central hearth would
be located. It is uncertain if these materials relate to
the central hearth or collapsed rubble from a smoke
hole in the roof, as was noted in Structure 2B at the
Two Sisters site (Duncan 2002).
depressed floor channels in most residential structures
in Texas are plastered with mortar to retain their curblike form. Some structures present at Antelope Creek
Ruin 24 and Chimney Rock Ruin 51 in Texas also had
channel curbs lined with vertical stones to help
support the channel edges. In light of Carder’s
unfamiliarity with the existence of the central channel
architectural attribute, he probably mistook the adobe
curbs lining the channel margins as remnants of
freestanding wall partitions and excavated away the
low elevated floor “bench” surfaces flanking the
depressed central channel.
Support for this
interpretation is derived from the recognition of a
plastered floor surface (B29) only inside the central
portion of the channel near the entrance and not in the
areas where the elevated flanking floors would have
been.
The second item of interest appears to be a plaster
jacket encasing some unknown materials found along
the western portion of the central channel (Figure 9).
The nature and size of this item is unknown. Fred
Carder does not mention using plaster jacket
extraction methods to preserve delicate materials,
even though Johnston retrieved several burials using
this method. The wooden datum stake in these
pictures suggests that the picture is indeed of Carder’s
1935 excavation.
Possibly, the plaster-jacket
collection technique was sometimes implemented by
one of the FERA workers who might have learned the
process from C. S. Johnston.
The size of the central channel is not directly reported,
but the crude room sketch suggests that the northsouth width of the channel is either 1.0 m (based on
the east side of the room) or about 2.0 m (based on the
west side of the room). If the north-south width of the
room is 7.32 m, as suggested by the narrative plotting
of the room, and if the central channel sills are
parallel, as indicated in the photograph, then the
central channel width is either about one-seventh of
the room width (based on 1.0 m) or slightly more than
one-fourth of the room width (based on 2.0 m wide).
Since the photograph (Figure 9) shows that the central
channel encompasses more than a third of the width of
the room, I presume that the dimensions of the central
channel can be estimated at about 2.0 m (N-S) by 7.32
m (E-W). The width of the floor benches flanking the
channel would thus be about 2.66 m wide each.
Structure 15B, Vandalized House
Structure 15B is described as “a small, badly damaged
house located north of excavation block Txv1C.” It
should not be confused with a severely vandalized, but
poorly described, building located in the middle of
Txv1C that is herein designated as Structure 18C.
This structure is located in the eastern part of the
excavation grid, just north of Structure 16C in the
vicinity of grid coordinates –5 to –10/0 to R1. The
dimensions of this “small structure” and shape are not
defined, but the main components of Structure 15B
are composed of a plastered floor (Feature B14), two
postholes (Features B18, B20), and references to the
entire vandalized building (Feature B45). The posts,
F-B18 and B20, measure 25 and 11 cm in diameter,
respectively, and might represent either wall posts or
interior roof support posts. Two fire pits, F-B3 and
B12, might be interior corner hearths on the west side
of the room. However, the 43 cm difference in depths
below ground surface for these two features suggests
either that the surface slopes considerablely across this
small structure or that the hearths are not
contemporaneous with each other and possibly with
the structure. Possibly one or the other of these hearth
features represents the “signs of fire-beds observed
Of the six interior roof support posts, three (B33, B35,
and B36) occur along the south edge of the plastered
channel margins and two (B31, 32) are along the north
channel margin. Both posts along the north channel
are concentrated toward the west of the structure; the
3.8 m span between post B32 and the east wall of the
structure suggests that at least one northeast interior
support post should have been present. These five
channel-edge posts are slightly larger than the wall
posts and range from 20 to 33 cm in diameter. Most
likely they constitute roof support posts. One other
post, B40, was a relatively small post, 13 cm in
diameter, that was located in the middle of the north
bench surface. It may represent a supplemental roof
support post or perhaps part of a bin feature that
occasionally occurs near the west end of the elevated
floor benches.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
38
Artifacts found in Excavation Block Txv1B.
under the house” (Carder 1934b: 22). A “flint cache”
(Feature B19) may also be associated with this
structure although this flint cache from the vicinity of
the –10 grid line is probably different from a “cache
of projectile points from –5 grid line” as listed in the
artifact catalog from block Txv1B.
The 32 artifact lots were reportedly recovered from
excavation block Txv1B and consisted of six
proveniences of chipped stone artifacts, no ground
stone artifacts, three proveniences of bone
implements, 22 lots of pottery, one lot of
ethnobotanical remains and no unspecified materials.
The chipped stone artifacts consist of two lots of
projectile points, another cache of points, two scrapers
and one four bladed knife. The bone tools are two
awls and one unspecified “bone implement”. The
pottery consists of 15 sacks of sherds, five more of
potsherds, and one lot of rim sherds and a second lot
of decorated rim sherds.
The single lot of
ethnobotanical remains consisted of corncobs from
fire pit Feature 19B.
Very little is known about the construction of
Structure 15B. The walls are about 25 cm thick and
were composed mostly of adobe “wattle work” with
some rocks set in the mortar. No information was
provided about the existence of possible entrances,
central hearth features, or whether either of the two
postholes occurs near the walls or near the middle of
the room. The vandalism may have simply prevented
the collection of systematic observations about this
structure.
Exterior Features in Excavation Block Txv1B.
The feature descriptions also list the occurrence of a
“flint cache” from the vicinity of Structure 15B. The
kinds of implements present in the cache are
unknown, but due to differences in the reported
provenience, as discussed above, the flint cache is
probably distinct from the cache of projectile points
listed in the artifact catalog.
A series of eight exterior features are documented
between Structure 14B and 15B. Many of these
probably relate to an exterior activity area located
southeast of the entrance to Structure 14B. Seven of
the features are firepits and one is a small pit. Two of
the hearths, B15 and B16, are very large (1.52 and
0.94-1.25 m in diameter) and are probably
superimposed. These hearths, and perhaps hearth FB17 of unknown size, document the location of some
kind of thermal activity area that was used for a
prolonged period of time. Hearth Feature B8 is
another large (1.52 m diameter) burned area located
about one meter south of the cluster of exterior hearths
just described. Due to the comparable size and
proximity of these large hearths, it is possible that FB8 served a comparable function.
Excavation Area Txv1C
The excavations of this block were initiated by the
horizontal stripping of sediment over surface stones
designated as structure Txv1C (Structure 16C). As
discussed above there is considerable uncertainty
about whether block Txv1C is northeast or south of
grid block Txv1B. Most of the field notes record a
progressive expansion of gird Txv1C towards the
south until it formed a relatively amorphous
excavation block comprising of some sixty 5 x 5 ft
squares. The block area measured a total of 1,500 ft2
(135 m2). A total of 47 features were recorded to
varying extent including the four that were designated
from block Txv1B (Figure 11, Table 4). This provides
a feature density of 2.87 m2/feature. Based on the
depth of features, the culture-bearing zones were
around 65 cm thick although feature C5 was 113 cm
below surface. I believe that these features constitute
parts of four structures mentioned in the notes. One
large, rectangular structure (16C) is relatively well
described, two others (Structures 17C and 19C) are
moderately well described, and one (Structure 18C) is
poorly defined.
Three other smaller hearths (F-B4, B5, and B10) are
located around the large hearth feature B8. These
measure 30 cm, 76 cm, and 51 cm in diameter
respectively. Datum depths of 2.04 m are only
provided for F-B4 and B5, which suggests that they
were used at about the same time. Unfortunately, the
depths of the other adjacent features are not provided
to clarify whether these hearths reflect single or
multiple components.
Feature B11 is a 36 cm diameter pit found near the
cluster of small hearths and near large hearth Feature
B8. The datum depth of this pit is reported to be 1.55
cm which is 49 cm higher than the adjacent hearths. It
probably represents a separate component and activity
from those that created the hearth feature.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
39
Figure 11. Caricature Map of Features and Structures in Excavation Area Txv1C, at Stamper.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
40
Table 4. Features Recorded by Fred Carder in Area Txv1C FERA 1934-35.
Feature Carder Feature
no
1934b Type
page
B1
5
Flint cache
Diameter
Thickness General Location
nd
nd
Datum
Depth
1.77 m
nd
Grid +10/L2; 46 cm left (east) and 25 cm
south of stake +10/L1
Grid +5/0
Grid 0/L1. 66 cm right (west) of +5/L1, 23 cm
from profile
Grid +10/R1, "lower left hand" corner
1.65 m
B2
5
Fire bed
56 cm?
B6
8
Post hole
15 cm
8
Fire pit
23 cm
5 cm
6, 18 "House Txv1C"
nd
Grid +5 to +20/0 to L4
nd
nd
Square 25 (+25/0?) extends into +20/L1 for 1.19 m
nd
20 cm; and +20/0 for 18 cm.
nd
Grid +25/R1 (36 cm west of +25/R1); 1.28 m
extends 71 cm north of stake & 8 cm south
of stake
nd
Grid +25/R1?; hard layer near +25 grid line; 1.31 m
entrance narrows to 81 cm wide and top; 1.40
remained so until 30 cm of the +20 grid line, m bottom
then narrowed to 71 cm wide. Length
unknown
Grid +30/L1; 5 cm south and 84 cm west of
nd
2.13 m
(stake) # 25; north edge of pit is 5 cm south.
Grid +25/L1. 1.01 m south of +25/R2 and 1.55 m
nd
1.09 m west of +25/R2
top; 1.68
m bottom
nd
Grid +25/L1. 1.22 m south of Feature C6.
1.52 m
top; 1.62
m bottom
B7
C2
18
Fire bed
8.31 m e-w
6.25 m n-s
40 cm
C3
18
Fire bed
46 cm
C4
18
Entrance
structure
C1
C5
18, 19 Fire pit
nd
79 cm (n-s);
71 cm (e-w)
nd
20 cm
nd
18, 19 "Band in profile
(fire bed?)
19 Fire
bed
with
bone
frags.;
possibly
central
channel?
19, 21, Circular structure
22, 26
107 cm
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
19, 20 East
wall
of
House C1 (Txv1C)
nd
nd
18
Fire pit
C7
18
Small pit
C9
C10
C11
nd
30 cm
C6
C8
to 81 cm wide
narrows to
71.
2.35 m
Depth Comment
Below
Surface
10 cm
nd
nd
Extends to small circular structure in squares
nd
+35 and +40 (Feature C10)
Grid +30/L1. Mostly burned earth extending 1.55 m
from entrance of House 1C to circular top; 2.01
structure in squares +30, +35, +40; same m bottom
width.
In grid squares +30, +35, +40
1.68 m
top; 1.92
m bottom
Grid +25/L2, and +30/L2
nd
(Structure 16C)
63.5 (Structure 16C)
cm
38 cm (Structure 16C)
nd
Also see Features C11, C20, C22
(Structure 16C)
Entrance of house made by a line of
rocks-- north wall of entrance not
shown. (This entrance does not line
up with any structure)
Under floor of House (predates
Structure 17C)
potential problem with records, since
+25/L1 is not 1.22 m South of
Feature C6
nd
Extends to Structure 17C?
nd
Contains bone fragments, and 2
cores in burned earth
nd
Page 21 says may not be circular
structure. (Structure 17C)
1.68 m
level 1;
1.68 m
level 2
1.80 m
nd
Two levels (Structure 16C)
nd
Contained burned wood
1.59 m
nd
Superimposed
1.68 m
nd
Superimposed
C12
20
Fire pit
20 cm
10 cm
C13
20
4 fire pit #1
160 cm
nd
Grid +35/L2. 1.07 m north of south edge; 38
cm west of east edge of square
Grid +45/L2. 69 cm south of unit
C14
20
4 fire pit #2
183 cm
nd
Grid +45/L2. 107 cm south of unit
C15
20
4 fire pit #3
nd
nd
Grid +45/L2.
1.80 m
nd
Superimposed
C16
20
4 fire pit #4
101 cm
nd
Grid +45/L2.
2.01 m
nd
Superimposed
C17
21
nd
nd
Grid +40/L2 & +45/L2; +30/R2 & +35/R2
21
46 cm
nd
C19
22
Big pit
nd
nd
Inside and against west curve of wall of
circular structure (C10).
Grid +35/L1.
1.40 m,
1.31 m
1.92 m
20 cm
C18
Layer of charcoal
(habitation layers)
Fire pit
C20
22
Fire bed(s)
nd
nd
nd.
C21
23
Wattle
work
(adobe wall)
nd
nd
C22
23
Big
(Txv1C)
C23
24
Diagonal line
House 8.32 m e-w
6.25 m n-s
nd
nd
1.55 m
nd
nd
Grid +30 to +50/L2 line
1.13 m to
1.55 m.
nd
nd
Grid +5 to +20/L0 to L4
nd
nd
nd
Grid
+35/L5
northwesterly.
nd
nd
to
+50/L5;
extends
(Structure 17C)
Same as Feature C27 and C22?
Filled with charcoal, burned clay
lumps, bone and unburned wood.
Signs of fire beds under wall of
Txv1C (Feature C1) and under wall
of Damaged house (Feature C32?)
(Structure 18C)
Wattle work light yellow with grass
impressions. (West wall of Structure
19C)
House measured 8.32 m long by
6.25 m wide with 4 center posts
(C41-C44); east entrance (C45).
(Structure 16C)
At Grid +30L5 line not seen due to
amount of overburden-- extended
trench. (Structure 19C)
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
41
Feature Carder Feature
no
1934b Type
page
C24
24 Fire bed
C25
C26
C27
Diameter
Datum
Depth
nd
Grid +30/L5, Northwest corner.
3 in
Grid +30(?)/L4, +30(?)/L5.
nd
"Great deal of
material in fine
ashes" (midden?)
27, 28 Pit 1 of 5
165 cm e-w
137 cm n-s
nd
Grid +35/L4 between plaster in square
+35/L4 and wall of Damaged House
nd
Grid +35/L1, at south-center edge
1.74 m to 1.13 m "5 circular pits with mottled earth that
1.80 m
did not show much sign of fire"
26
nd
Depth Comment
Below
Surface
nd Lots of ashes.
Entrance
to 84 cm long
Structure C32, E
side of house
25
nd
Thickness General Location
1.55 m to
1.80 m
nd
nd
nd
Clear line of hard packed light brown
dirt overlain by thin ash layer over
thicker (11.4 cm) ash layer.
(Structure 18C)
(Between Structures 18C and 19C)
C28
27, 28 Pit 2 of 5
107 cm
nd
Grid +30/L2, NW corner.
1.74 m to 0.98 m All pits occur below all layers (under
1.80 m
house 19C)
C29
27, 28 Pit 3 of 5
76 cm
nd
Grid +50/L4, northcentral part of unit.
nd
C30
27, 28 Pit 4 of 5
152 cm e-w
114 cm n-s
nd
Grid +35/L5, SW corner
1.74 m to
1.80 m
1.74 m to
1.80 m
nd
One of these 5 pits may be same as
Feature C19
See Feature C27
C31
27, 28 Pit 5 of 5
152 cm
nd
Grid +40/L6
1.74 m to
1.80 m
nd
See Feature C27
nd
nd
Grid 25/L4
1.31 m
nd
(Structure 17C)
nd
nd
nd
nd
Located against plaster and clay wall
(Structure19C)
This is plotted as center post to
Structure 19C
(Structure 19C)
nd
nd
(Structure 19C); Fourth center post
not found
(Structure 19C?)
1.77 m
nd
Hearth was at bottom of deposit with
traces of ashes covering it
C32
28
"Damaged house"
C33
28
Post mold
23 cm
C34
27B
Center post mold
20 cm
nd
C35
27B
Center post mold
20 cm
nd
C36
27B
Center post mold
23 cm
nd
C37
27B
Post mold
18 cm
nd
Grid +30/L5; 63.5 from +30/L5 stake to east
side of post; 9 cm to south side of post
Grid +40/L3; hole is 48 cm south of +45/L4
to north edge of hole; 11.5 cm to east edge
of hole.
Grid +45/L4; 15 cm south of +45/L5 to north
edge of hole, on west edge of +45 grid line
Grid +40/L5.
C38
27B
Fire bed
nd
nd
Grid +30/L3
C39
27B
Shallow pit
nd
nd
Grid +40/L3 (97 cm south of 40/L4)
nd
nd
C40
23
nd
Vicinity of Grid +10/L1
nd
nd
C41
23
nd
Vicinity of Grid +10/L3
nd
nd
C42
23
nd
Vicinity of Grid +15/L1
nd
nd
C43
23
nd
Vicinity of Grid +15/L3
nd
nd
C44
23
nd
East wall of structure, north wall was 1.95 m
from north wall of house; vicinity of Grid
+10/L4
nd
nd
n=
NW Center post
nd
for C22
NE Center posts
nd
for C22
SW Center posts
nd
for C22
SE Center posts
nd
for C22
Entrance
for 69 cm wide
House
Feature
C22
Grid +40/L5, 101 cm west of stake
nd
Exact location is uncertain inside
house Feature C1 (Structure 16C)
Exact location is uncertain inside
house Feature C1 (Structure 16C)
Exact location is uncertain inside
house Feature C1 (Structure 16C)
Exact location is uncertain inside
house Feature C1 (Structure 16C)
(Structure 16C)
44 features assigned
+ 4 from Block B
Structure 16C: “Big House/ Structure Txv1C”.
Txv1B and it entirely occurred south of the primary
datum he established for block Txv1B. Thus, I place
this structure in grid units +5 to +20/0 to L4.
Structure 16C is a relatively well described, very large
rectangular house which Carder called the “Big
House” or Structure Txv1C.
Its description is
comprised of a general comment on the structure
(Feature C22) and specific details on the entrance
(C44) and interior roof support posts (C40 through
C43). This structure is often mentioned for the
placement of other buildings, but its location in the
block is never precisely mentioned. However, I
believe that the north wall of this structure was
exposed in the initial trench he opened for block
This residential structure reportedly measures 8.32 m
(N-S) by 6.25 m (E-W) with an extended entrance
opening on the east (Carder 1934b: 23). This was one
of the structures that he exposed in plan view rather
than trenching across the structure using the “broad
side” approach. The nature of the walls is poorly
understood. The thickness of the walls is not reported.
Rocks are specifically present on the north, south and
west walls and it is likely that these were vertical slabs
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
42
Structure 18C, “A Small, Badly Damaged House”
set in mortar. The absence of rocks mentioned for the
east wall could either be an oversight or perhaps
reflects a wall composed of something other than
rocks.
Structure 18C is a poorly described, vandalized
structure located southeast of Structure 16C. Due to
the discussion of a plastered floor remnant (C32)
southeast of Structure 16C, I believe that this structure
is in grid unit +25/L4. The structure was so badly
damaged that Carder (1934b: 21) felt that it was “not
profitable to dig.” He discontinued the excavation
trench through the structure “at the L3 profile because
the pit made by (pot) ‘hunters’ obliterated all
evidences of posts, etc.”.
Carder provides no
information about the size or shape of the house. Nor
does he give details on the nature of the walls or
internal features. He does mention the presence of an
entrance on the east side of the structure (C25). It
consisted of a “clear line of hard packed light brown
dirt overlain by a thin ash layer”. Signs of fire bed(s)
(C20) occur under the walls of both structure Txv1C
(Structure 16C) and the damaged house, which I
presume refers to the present structure. This notation
about the superposition of the two structures over the
fire beds suggests that neither structure represent the
earliest occupations in this part of the site.
The eastward-extended entrance (C44) is described as
being 69 cm wide and located some 1.95 m from the
north wall. If true, the entrance would occur north of
the bisecting axis of the structure. No information is
provided about the length of the entry or the nature of
the entry wall construction.
Carder (1934b: 23) explicitly mentions the presence of
four post roof support pattern inside the structure, but
he failed to record the size of the posts or their precise
locations within the building. No plastered floor,
central channel nor central fire pit are specifically
discussed in conjunction with this structure.
However, during the excavations of the initial trench
of block Txv1B, he mentions the discovery of a flint
cache (Feature B1) near what I consider to be the
center of the room. Also, a large (56 cm diameter)
hearth feature, B2, was exposed in the northwest
corner of the building and a second hearth (B7) that
measured some 23 cm in diameter was found near the
central axis along the west wall. It is uncertain
whether these hearths or cache features are related to
the structure or to other components in this part of the
site.
Structure 19C
Structure 19C is another poorly described building
located in the south-central part of the excavation
block in units +35 to +50/L2 to L5. Primary evidence
for this building comes from wall features (C21, C23),
remnants of a habitation layer of charcoal (C17),
possible interior roof support posts (C35, C33, C37),
and perhaps one or more interior pits (C29, 39). The
wall features consist of roughly north-south
alignments of “wattle-work (adobe) of light yellow
mortar with grass impressions” (C21) to the west and
a cryptic reference to a “diagonal line between the +35
and +50 grid lines not seen due to the amount of
overburden” (C23) to the east. The west wall occurs
in grid trench L2 and extends from the +30 to +50
grid lines; this suggests that one dimension of the
structure was about 6.1 m long. I have taken some
liberties in depicting the east and west walls to be
more parallel and of comparable lengths than the field
journals suggest; Carder (1934b: 24) indicates that the
diagonal line is actually oriented in a northwesterly
direction. The notes are silent about the presence of
rocks along the walls or the existence of an entrance
feature.
Structure 17C; “Small Circular House”
This structure is a poorly described small circular
structure located in the southwestern part of the
excavation block Txv1C of grid units +30 to +40/0 to
L1. Vandals had caused severe damage to this
structure. The records do not indicate the size of this
structure which I designate as Feature C10. However,
the fact that Carder (1934b: 19) indicates that the
building occurred in parts of three adjacent blocks
suggests that it measures more than 1.5 m in diameter
and less than 4.5 m in diameter. I have chosen to
depict the structure to include parts of a plaster floor
encountered in grid unit +30/L1. Carder (1934b: 21)
notes a fire pit, C18, measuring 46 cm in diameter is
located inside and against the west curve of the
circular wall of the structure. But elsewhere, he
claims that a second fire pit, C5, located in unit
+30/L1, occurred under the floor of a house, which
could be under Structure 17C. If this reference is
correct, then Structure 17C was not built on sterile
soil, and it possibly represents a building erected late
in the occupation span in this part of the village.
The interior features include the charcoal rich series of
habitation layers (C17) along the west wall perhaps
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
43
next to the wattle work line. This feature might either
represent an unplastered floor to the structure or
scattered occupation debris from a series of four
superimposed large hearth features (C13-C16) found
in the vicinity of grid +45/R2. These hearths were
stratified between datum depths of 1.59 and 2.01 m.
The diameter of these hearths ranged from 1.01 to
1.83 m. Their occurrence reflects the locus of
unknown activities involving some thermal processing
at this locus over a considerable period of time. These
hearths occur in the same unit as the west wall of
Structure 19C, but the stratigraphic relationship was
not documented.
a cluster of large pits, the features and debris between
Structures 18C and 19C, and a series of exterior
hearths, pits and entrances north and northeast of
Structure 17C.
Carder’s journal (1934a: 17; 1934b: 27A) contains an
interesting map that shows “the ground plan (of) all
excavations of Txv1C except the house lined in
stones.” The map portrays the grid plan with five
large pit features (C27 – C31) along the +35 and +40
grid rows and an irregular dashed line representing the
south edge of the excavation block. One prominent
extension to the south coincides with the location of
the four, stacked large hearths (C13 -16). It is
interesting to note that a “north arrow” appears on the
right margin of the map, but based on the grid number
system, it is apparently pointing to the east. “All pits
occur below all layers” or at least were recognized as
penetrating into the sterile substratum. Based on the
scale of the sketch, the smallest pit, C29, measured
only about 76 cm in diameter, another (C28) was
about 107 cm in diameter, and the other three pits
were about 150 cm in diameter. Quite likely these
represent exterior storage pits.
Several postholes (C33, C35, C36, C37) occur inside
the space defined by the east and west walls, but they
do not form any symmetrical or apparent pattern.
Instead, they tend to occur near the center and eastern
edges of the room. The posts range from 18 to 23 cm
in diameter. These postholes may or may not be
associated with the structure.
The two interior pits (C29, C39) are located off-center
of the central axis near the middle of the structure.
One pit, C29, measured about 76 cm in diameter and
was most clearly delineated near the basal layer of the
block, and consequently may not be associated with
the house. The second is a “shallow pit”, C39, of
unreported dimension that occurred along the south
wall of the excavation block. Neither pit is positively
attributed to this feature.
There is a second cluster of hearth features and debris
recorded between Structures 18C and 19C in the
vicinity of +25 to +30/L3 to L5. Two or three of
these are small hearths (C12, C24, and C38). Fire pit
C12 measured 20 cm in diameter and 10 cm deep and
contained charred wood. The dimensions and form of
the other two hearths are unreported, but both
contained ash deposits. In addition, an area (C26)
described as having “a great deal of material in fine
ashes” occurred in the vicinity of the north wall of
Structure 19C. This may be a lens of midden
sediment, but Carder does not specify whether the
“materials” represent tools, food bone scraps, or
merely charcoal chunks that is so necessary to help
clarify the nature of this noteworthy area. No useful
depth information is provided to help define which
components are represented by these features.
By my interpretations of the east and west wall
locations, there is some evidence to suggest that
Structure 19C was built relatively late in the
occupation span.
Based on maps and verbal
descriptions, the locations of pit features C27, C30,
and C31 are precisely known, as are the four
superimposed hearth features C13 through 16. Even
though the locations and orientations of the two walls
are not reported, Carder does indicate the grid units
containing the walls. And there is no place in those
units that do not cross the pit and hearth features.
While it might be possible for the pits and hearths to
truncate the walls, the continuity of the “wattle work”
suggests that it postdates these features.
Finally, another cluster of exterior features occurs
north of Structure 17C in the vicinity of Grid +25 to
+30/0 to L2. These include perhaps four hearth
features (C2, C3, C5, C6), and the entrance to an
unknown structure (C4). Three of the hearths are
relatively small (30 to 46 cm in diameter) and are
spaced more than one meter apart. The stratigraphic
relationship of fire pit C3 to the southwest corner of
Structure 16C is not discussed. The small size of
these features suggests relatively specialized, brief
Exterior Features in Excavation Block Txv1C.
Numerous features were found in areas outside the
structures, and an unknown number of features within
the limits of the houses may not be affiliated with
these structures. These are presented in three groups:
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
44
unspecified items consist of sacks of unspecified
sherds and artifacts. The excavation records also
indicate that a flint cache feature (B1) was recovered
near the center of Structure 15C in the northern part of
block Txv1C. Apparently this cache was not given a
catalog number, and the components of the cache are
not described.
exterior activity areas. In contrast, fire pit C6
measures 71 by 79 cm in size, which is nearly twice as
large as the other hearths in this area.
The most interesting feature (C4) in this area is an
entrance to some unknown structure in grid +25/R1.
The entrance is described as being a hard layer with a
line of rocks that measures 81 cm wide and remained
at that width until 30 cm from the +20 grid line when
it narrowed to 71 cm wide. The length and orientation
are uncertain, although the proximity of the +20 line
suggests that it may be oriented north-south. This
feature occurs southwest of structure 16C, and is not
affiliated with that residential structure. It also occurs
north-northwest of Structure 17C, which is of
unknown size and shape. Perhaps the entrance is
affiliated with 17C or some other unidentified
building. An extended stone lined entrance protruding
from the north side of Structure 17C seems unlikely,
but remotely possible. In considering the range of
possible other structures, it is tempting to consider the
entrance as being a part of Structure 15B—especially
since one scenario places block Txv1C northeast of
block Txv1B. Unfortunately, the configuration of the
excavation block would involve considerable overlap
in excavation units if this were true.
Excavation Area Txv-1D
The precise location of area Txv1D relative to blocks
Txv1B and Txv1C is uncertain. Excavation area
Txv1D is reported located about 25 to 30 ft (7.62 to
9.14 m) north of Txv1B. The records are unclear,
however, about whether Carder was referring to the
north and south edges of the initial east-west
excavation trench or the general space between the
edge of the excavation block or the distance between
houses 14B and 19D. Elsewhere, Carder mentions
that the datum for excavation block D is N 25o W at
105 inches (sic; 2.67 m) northeast of the BM
(benchmark) at Txv1B. There is, however, clearly an
error in the distance or bearing between the two datum
points since that distance is in the middle of block B.
In light of the proximity of the two excavation areas, it
seems unusual that the grid system was not expanded
to incorporate the discontinuous block. All I really
know is that block Txv1D is relatively close to and
north of Txv1B, but the precise location and alignment
of the units are not certain.
The density of structures and features in this area
indicates that block Txv1C contains a complex number
of occupations. The complexity is indicated by the
occurrence of four hearths (C13-16) and perhaps the
west wall of Structure 19C stratified in one spot. But
nothing is known about the time span represented by
these structures.
The excavations at Txv1D were initiated by the
opening of a 25 ft (7.6 m) long E-W trench which was
then expanded northward using the broad side method
until a rectangular excavation block of six by five or
30 5 x 5 ft squares were exposed. The block area
measured a total of 750 ft2 (67.5 m2) and only some
seven features were recorded (Figure 12, Table 5).
This provides a feature density for block Txv1D of
9.64 m2/feature. The feature-bearing zone was about
61 cm thick in this part of the site.
Artifacts found in Excavation Block Txv1C.
The 41 artifact lots were reportedly recovered from
excavation block Txv1C consisted of six proveniences
of chipped stone artifacts, two ground stone artifacts,
nine proveniences of bone implements, 21 lots of
pottery, two lots of ethnobotanical remains and two of
unspecified materials. The chipped stone artifacts
consist of three projectile points, two blades or large
knife blades and one drill. The ground stones consist
of one large mano and an abrasion stone. The nine
bone tools consist of six awls, two digging stick tips,
and one notched bone rasp. The pottery consists of 15
lots representing sacks of sherds and another two units
of potsherds, a single small “paint pot,” two units of
rim sherds and one unit of decorated rim sherds. The
two units of ethnobotanical remains consist of charred
corncobs and a “sack of charcoal”.
The two
The features consist of a “main house” (Structure
20D; Feature D1) of unknown size and shape; another
building (Structure 21D; Feature D2) that was
probably circular in form but of unknown size, a
relatively small cist (Structure 22D), and extramural
features that included a hearth (F-D7) and two
postholes (F-D4 and D5). The records for this
excavation block are very confusing. For example,
posthole F-D5 and a chipped stone knife were
reportedly recovered from specific distances outside
the limits of the excavation block. I have chosen to
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
45
Figure 12. Caracture Map of Features in Excavation Area Txv1D, at Stamper.
Table 5. Features Recorded by Fred Carder in Area Txv1D FERA 1934-35
Feature Carder Feature Type
Diameter Thickness General Location
Datum
no
1934b
Depth
page
D1
40-41 House (outline
nd
nd
Initial east-west trench placed 1.5 m
nd
of structure did
outside south of house and pushed
not show house
north (broadside); trench was 7.62 m
shape
on
(25 ft) long-- north wall (of block)
surface
very
pushed north until unit was 1.01 m
clearly.
south of -15 grid line of stakes (i.e.
0/0 to -15/0 grid [minus 1.01 m])
D2
41 Circular
nd
nd
No location provided within 15 x 25 ft
nd
structure
(4.57 x 7.62 m) trench
D3
41
D4
41
North end
plaster-like
earth
Post
D5
41
Post mold
of
Depth
Below
Surface
Hard
plasterlike is 61
cm b.s.
nd
nd
nd
84 cm south and 84 cm east of # 20
(Grid -20/0 ?).
1.77m
nd
18 cm
nd
nd
nd
18 cm
nd
76 cm west of east edge of block and
61 cm north of south edge of block
71 cm west of # 20-on the 20 grid line.
nd
nd
Comment
Fire beds and village
debris on west end of earth
trench. (Structure 20D)
"Corresponds" (resembles)
v
structure in Tx 1C (Feature
C-10?). (Structure 21D)
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
46
Feature Carder Feature Type
Diameter Thickness General Location
Datum
no
1934b
Depth
page
D6
41-42 Cist 1; circular 101 cm
nd
99 cm north; 66 cm west of Grid - 2.04 m
pit
e-w; 99
25/L2 to "tangent" (edge) point.
(top?);
cm n-s
2.29 m
(second
level)
D7
42
"Pit" (hearth?)
28 cm
nd
Grid -20/L2, extending north from
grid.
nd
Depth
Below
Surface
nd
nd
Comment
Cist had 2 levels; top 28
cm is slightly darker soil; at
51 cm, much darker
mottled with charcoal; 3
lumps
of
fired
clay.
(Structure 22D)
Reddish brown plaster and
walls and ash bed bad
small burned clay lumps.
N=7 features assigned
House is located 25 to 30 ft (7.6 to 9.1 m) north of Txv1B (house or block?)
Datum for Block D is located "N 25o W at 105 inches (sic; 2.67 m) NE of BM at Txv1B
floor segment was located along the west wall of the
main structure. No interior central hearths or interior
roof support patterns are mentioned in the existing
records. Little more can be surmised about Structure
20D other than this building probably was located in
the south edge of the block, and it might have been
rectangular in form.
shift their position into the excavation area using the
same distances in the opposite direction from the edge
of the block. Alternatively, if their reported positions
are correct, their placements offer tenuous suggestions
that the excavation block was much larger than most
of the other records suggest. This excavation block
was not productive in either the density of features or
artifact returns. Carder was probably preoccupied
with tying up loose ends in the southern part of the
village before shifting work back to block Txv1A. His
records for block Txv1D are not as complete as his
notes for other areas.
Structure 21D
Very little is also specifically reported about the
location, size or shape of this structure which is
regarded herein as Feature D2. Carder (1935b: 41)
mentions that it “corresponds the structure in Txv1C”.
I suspect that the “correspondence” probably refers to
the resemblance in size and form of this building to
his Feature C10 or Structure 17C. If true, then
Structure 21 is a circular building of unknown size.
Although the field notes do not clarify the location of
the structure, I suspect that the plaster floor designated
as Feature D3 may relate to this structure. This
structure is probably located in the west-central part of
the excavation unit in grid –15 to –20/L1 to L2.
Posthole Feature D5 may or may not be part of this
building.
Structure 20D
Even though the size of the “main structure” was not
provided, Carder (1934b: 40-41) mentions that the
initial trench was placed south of the surface
manifestations of the room and that the trench had to
be extended to capture the full length of the room.
This suggests that one axis of the building should have
been about 25 ft (7.6 m) long. He further states (ibid.)
that the north wall was found about 40 inches (1 m)
south of the –15 grid line. Based on the size and
linear nature of the trench, I assume that this is a large
rectangular structure along the south edge of the block
in grid units 0 to –10/L1 to L5. In consideration of the
size of the excavation block, the building may be
nearly twice as long (E-W) than it is wide (N-S). No
information exists about the nature of the walls, the
foundations, entrances, or internal features.
Structure 22D
The last structure excavated in the south end of the
Stamper village corresponds to Feature D6, which
Carder called Cist I. This was a small circular pit
feature measuring about 1 m in diameter and located
along the north wall of the excavation block in grid
unit –25/L2. Carder (1935b: 41-42) tells us that the
cist fill had two distinct stratigraphic layers. The
upper fill, 25 to 33 cm thick, consisted of slightly
“darker soil” from the surrounding matrix. But at a
surface depth of 51 cm, the lower fill was encountered
that consisted of much darker sediments mottled with
In light of the unambiguous statement for the location
of the north wall of the building, features comprising
the plastered floor (F-D3), the hearth (F-D7) and at
least one of the two postholes (F-D5) are outside the
location of the structure. The other posthole (F-D4) is
near or embedded within the northeast corner of the
structure. In addition, it is possible that the plastered
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
47
structure of the lead parties sponsoring the two
excavations and the lack of field maps and journals
that were passed on to Carder. This lack of continuity
hindered Carder’s ability to benefit from the insights
on architecture and material culture gained from
Johnston’s two summers of work at the site. But it
also gave him tremendous freedom in his approach
towards the excavations. Carder sometimes stumbled
in rediscovering some architectural details that
Johnston struggled to interpret.
And Carder’s
preference to use narrative descriptions over sketch
maps and his use of short hand provenience codes
leaves a lot of ambiguity in his records. Considering
that Carder had not yet completed his Bachelor’s
degree, he did an admirable job in directing the field
crew, keeping the site records and maintaining the
administrative requirements imposed by the FERA.
The differences in Carder’s excavation approach has
provided us complementary information about the
density, diversity and distribution of smaller features
present at the Stamper site compared to that provided
by Johnston.
charcoal and containing three lumps of burned clay.
The thickness of the lower zone is unreported. It is
unclear from the remaining records whether the cist
represented a storage pit back-filled with burned
materials or a small storage feature that was burned
or, more likely, some form of an earth oven.
Exterior Features in Excavation Block Txv1D.
Due to the ambiguity of the sizes and locations of
Structures 20D and 21D, it is impossible to be certain
which features are extraneous to the buildings.
Feature D7 is recorded by Carder as a “pit” 28 cm in
diameter that contained “reddish brown plastered”
walls and ash on the base with small clay lumps. The
description seems to pertain to a hearth feature with
oxidized walls and ash remnants on the interior of the
basin. This hearth is well north of Structure 20D, but
it could relate somehow to Structure 21D.
The two other features are listed as a post (F-D4) and
a post mold (F-D5). Both are about 18 cm in
diameter. I am completely uncertain whether the two
posts are related to Structures 20D and 21D or if the
two posts are part of some other unrelated extramural
feature, such as a drying rack or arbor.
So, what have we learned about the Stamper site from
Carder’s excavations? As I portray the reconstruction
of the feature distributions, we are presented with
verifying evidence for considerable stratigraphic depth
of occupations in both the north and south portions of
the village. Carder’s data suggest that non-pit features
mostly occurred in the upper 56 to 69 cm in the north
part of the village and between 51 and 65 cm thick in
the three excavation blocks in the southern part of the
village. Most of the dozen identified structures are
based on my interpretations of feature clusters and
indirect comments often stating that some features or
artifacts were found relative to such things as the
small damaged house, etc.
Artifacts found in Excavation Block Txv1D
Fourteen artifact lots were reportedly recovered from
excavation block Txv1D and consisted of five
proveniences of chipped stone artifacts, one ground
stone artifact, two proveniences of bone implements,
four of pottery, no ethnobotanical remains and two of
unspecified materials. The chipped stone artifacts
consist of two projectile points, two four-bladed
knives, and one “stone implement”.
A single
“abrasion stone” represents the only ground stone
implement. The bone tools consist of one awl and one
digging stick tip. The pottery consists of two lots each
representing “potsherds” and “sacks of sherds”. The
unspecified items consist of unspecified artifacts from
Cist I and one sack consisting of “sherds and
artifacts”.
Despite the mention of a dozen structures and the
recognition of more than 120 features, there is a
surprising lack of superimposed structures. Stratified
features in block Txv1A occur in three areas. First, pit
feature A13 is beneath Structure 11A; second, hearth
A22 is on or under the wall of Structure 12A; and the
third involves hearth feature A27 and pit A25. In
block Txv1B, the superimposed features consist of a
single series involving hearths B15 and B16, and
perhaps B17. In block Txv1C, at least five series of
stratified features occur.
The most prominent
involves four hearths C13-C16 and the foundations of
the west wall of Structure 19C. A second series of
stratified features involves hearth feature C20 and
structure 18C. Another series involves hearth C6 and
Summary
The second FERA excavations at the Stamper site
under the direction of Fred Carder, Jr. occurred only
some three months after C. Stuart Johnston ended the
first FERA excavation. Carder’s field work ran for
six months yet there was very little continuity between
the two excavations due to differences in the political
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
48
suspect that the floor surfaces flanking the central
channel were probably elevated “floor benches”, the
manner of excavation leaves this conclusion open to
other interpretations. Structure 14B in the south part
of the village along with Structure 2A and perhaps 3
(lower floor) exposed by Johnston in the north part of
the village brings to three the number of examples of
houses with depressed floor channels. As previously
mentioned, houses with central channels occurred
beneath structures lacking channels in the north part
of the village which tenuously suggests that they may
be a relatively earlier architectural attribute that
became less common through time in the Beaver
River Valley (Lintz 2003c). Nothing in Carder’s
records clarifies or changes this impression.
pit C28. A fourth series involves pit features 7 above
pit 27 and beneath the north end of Structure 19C. A
fifth involves the south wall of Structure 16C and
hearth features C3 and C20. Finally, in block Txv1D,
the number of stratified features is unknown due to the
absence of firm size and shapes for structures 20D and
21D relative to adjacent features. In contrast to the
frequent observations of multiple house floors
recorded by Johnston, Fred Carder rarely mentioned
the existence of any adobe floors, much less the
existence of multiple remodeling episodes on any of
the structures.
I can find no evidence in Carder’s records for the
recognition of contiguous or multi-room structures,
even though Johnston saw it at least three times in the
north part of the village. It seems that all buildings
that Carder found were large to small rectangular and
circular structures.
I would presume from his
excavation approach that multi-room structures would
have been identified if any were present in the south
part of the village. Perhaps the southern part of the
community represents a different period of occupation
than that of the north. We currently have no evidence
for judging the relative occupation periods between
the structures in the north and south parts of the
village.
One other attribute from Structure 14B recorded for
the first time at Stamper is the existence of an elevated
fan-shaped entry step immediately inside the extended
entry. Such entry steps have been occasionally found
in Antelope Creek phase houses, including Structures
32 and 38 at Alibates Ruin 28 (Unit II), Structure 13
at Antelope Creek Ruins 24, Structure 1 at the Jack
Allen Site and Structure 1 at the Footprint Site in the
Texas Panhandle (Lintz 1986).
One interesting contrast between 1935 FERA work
and the two previous field seasons at Stamper is that
Carder reports no evidence of human or canine burials
in the south part of the village. Does this mean that no
burials were present or merely that he and his crews
were not sufficiently skilled in recognizing human
burials? The contents of the plaster-jacket feature
shown in one photograph from the west end of
Structure 14C is unknown, but it is comparable in size
to the human burials removed by Johnston during the
summer of 1933. His field catalog sheets do not
mention the systematic collection of bones so it is
unlikely that later researchers can assess his results.
Presently, human remains have been found inside
three structures excavated by Johnston in the northern
part of the village: Structure 1A, 2 and 5, and the
question about the contents of the plaster-jacketed
feature in Structure 14C in the south part of the village
is unanswered. The presence of a half dozen burials
shallowly buried inside different parts of Structure 2
and the scarcity of village debris above the floor
suggests that the masonry foundation walls of some
abandoned houses may have served as mnemonic
markers for the community cemetery. The absence of
human remains from the south part of the village
tenuously suggests that burials of people living in this
part of the site might have been placed inside
The 1935 documents and especially the few
photographs of structures do add a few new
architectural details that were not present in the
structures investigated by Johnston. Foremost is the
evidence that some large residential structures (14B)
are made in subterranean pits and lack all forms of
masonry foundation stones. In this regard, the
structure may be similar to Structure B at the Two
Sisters site, located about five miles northwest of
Stamper which also lacks evidence of masonry wall
foundations (Duncan 2002). But, the Two Sisters
structure lacks wall posts, whereas the superstructure
walls of Structure 14B, and perhaps the south wall of
Structure 11A, apparently had closely spaced posts
supporting the upper portions of the wall. Similar
post-reinforced walls have been found in residential
structures at the Jack Allen, Footprint, and more
recently the Hank site in the Canadian River Valley of
the Texas Panhandle (Lintz 1986; Boyd and Wilkins
2001).
Structure 14B is also interesting in that it adds another
example of a residential structure with a central
channel, as defined by an adobe curb plastered along
the margins of the depressed central area. Although I
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
49
As researchers, we should be grateful to the
pioneering efforts of C. Stuart Johnston and Fred
Carder, Jr. who endured economic, personal and
political hardships and who struggled with crude
methods and procedures to leave a record of what
occurs at this 600 year-old village. Sure, the records
are difficult to use, but the data from Stamper is
available for study—and that is more than can be said
for the dozen other vandalized slab house village sites
occurring along the Beaver River, mostly located to
the east of Stamper. Much of what we know about the
Late Prehistoric High Plains adaptations in the
Oklahoma Panhandle is derived from the records and
materials from a few excavated archaeological ruins.
We owe a debt to these two men who sought to
document and preserve what they encountered during
their public works excavations long before the
discipline had developed the ideas and methods we
routinely use today. The Stamper site artifacts and
materials are every bit as relevant to researchers today
as they have ever been. I hope that this series of
articles about Stamper provide the background and
contextual setting that will enhance and facilitate
future use of materials from this important site in
addressing regional research issues.
abandoned houses in the north end of the village.
Realistically, there is no way to evaluate this idea of
sequential village use from the present data.
The real value of Carder’s excavations lies in his
discussions of the feature density and diversity of
extramural areas of the village. He recorded densities
ranging from a high of 0.8 features per square meter in
block Txv1A to a low of 0.104 features per square
meter in block Txv1D with densities of 0.348 and
0.331 features per square meter in blocks Txv1C and
Txv1B, respectively. He took some care to record
hearths, ash stains, postholes, posts, and pits from
general excavation areas. Even though many of these
features are not spectacular or especially interesting,
his observations provide insights into a more robust
range of activity areas than anything suggested from
the previous work by Johnston at the Stamper site.
Carder’s records reflect images of intense village use,
of one set of activities being overprinted by different
activities and occasionally of special use areas in the
village that saw sequential, repetitive, and perhaps
prolonged usage of certain village areas for the same
or similar activities. Further work at Stamper and
other sites along the Beaver River using modern
approaches of exposing and recording will be needed
to better understand the kinds of specific activities that
occurred at these features. But at least the documents
from Stamper hold clues into what to expect at this
and other sites in the region.
Notes
1. Ten field reports are preserved at the No Man’s
Land Historical Society at Goodwell (Carder 1935).
They report on time intervals spanning one week to
more than one month but do not indicate which part of
the villages were being worked during the reporting
period. Some idea about the time frame is provided
by the catalog of artifacts listed on the field reports.
However Carder clearly fell behind in his cataloging
efforts so that proveniences of materials listed in a
field report do not necessarily indicate that those
portions of the site were under investigation during
the reporting period. There is also a presumed gap in
reporting from March 21st until an unspecified period
before the submission of the final report on May 28,
1935. Nevertheless, it is interesting to see that the
artifact catalog list in the ten reports is essentially
complete. So perhaps the No Man’s Land Historical
Society could not provide an overseeing
representative and Carder did not produce a single
report during the last two months of the project.
For years, researchers have bemoaned the confusing
ambiguities of the Stamper site documents, the poorly
described and unlabelled photographs and difficulties
in linking specific artifacts back to their context and
house/feature associations. Many also tended to
dismiss these early collections as being too difficult to
comprehend to be useful in addressing all current
research issues. It is always more fun, glamorous and
invigorating to conduct new excavations on sites in
the Panhandle and garner new community attention
than it is to pour over collections of records and
artifacts in dank museum laboratories of sites like
Stamper. But many current research issues about
cultures require the study of sizable material
collections from single sites. The availability of large
material collections from sites like Stamper is
incredibly important.
Hopefully the context of
features defined in the present series of articles will
enhance the value of the collection or samples and
artifacts available for study.
2. Carder’s site designations follow a system
commonly used in the Midwest. Txv1A denotes that
the excavations were conducted in area A of the first
site, a village, found in Texas County.
The
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
50
superscript designations provided a quick reference to
the type of site investigated. The use of such a site
grid system perhaps suggests a strong connection
between the field methods used at the University of
Oklahoma and the University of Chicago. The latter
school provided the WPA field director for the
University of Oklahoma sponsored Spiro Mound
excavations which employed Carder shortly after
conclusion of work at Stamper.
map from Carder’s records more than a quarter
century ago. I also wish to thank Doug Boyd, that
“delinquent, nonconformist and all-around rebel of the
Panhandle who is now back in good standing,” for his
comments on an earlier draft and his perspectives on
Late Prehistoric situations in the two Panhandle
regions. Without the help of these and other people
thanked in earlier articles, the Stamper series would
have not been as thorough or as much to compile.
3. I use the term “structure” herein in much the same
manner as I did in my studies of the Antelope Creek
phase sites the Canadian River sites(*?); the term is
loosely applied to architecture and features ranging
from small cists to buildings. In the present study, I
placed considerable weight on the terminology used
by the field excavators in deciding which features
should be deemed structures. But I also acknowledge
that one “structure” (22D) has attributes that strike me
as more of an earth oven than an occupational feature.
References Cited
Anonymous
1938 Officers and Membership of the Oklahoma
State Archaeological Society. The Oklahoma
Prehistorian I (1): frontpiece.
Boyd, Douglas K. and L. Douglas Wilkins
2001 Burnin’ Down the House. Late Prehistoric
Architecture, Abandonment and Agriculture
at Hank’s Site, 41RB109, Roberts County,
Texas. Current Archaeology in Texas.
Texas Historical Commission (November
2001) 3(2): 1-7. Austin.
4. Whereas Carder routinely used wooden stakes to
control horizontal and depths dimensions of his
excavations, Johnston did not. I believe that the
existence of wooden stakes in any photograph is a
sure sign that the picture was taken during Carder’s
period of excavation in 1935.
Carder, Fred
1934a Book #1, Txv1B&Txv1C Field Notebook
(Handwritten) on file at the Sam Noble
Oklahoma Museum of Natural History,
Norman.
Acknowledgements
Several people helped me in compiling records about
Fred Carder’s work at Stamper and it is fitting that I
thank them for their contributions. Foremost, I want
to thank Ms. Sue Weissinger and Mr. Ken Turner of
the No Man’s Land Historical Society for providing
copies of photographs and records and verbal
information about the files at Goodwell on the
Stamper site and the Society. Appreciation is also
extended to Mr. Bobby Nickey and Dr. Harold
Katchell for insights and background materials
provided to me about the Guymon region and
Panhandle State University in Goodwell. I especially
appreciate all the tremendous help from Dr. Richard
and Mary Ann Drass for encouragement in
undertaking this study and for their help with the
photographs and enhanced map production. I also
thank Ms. Peggy Rubenstein and Michelle Barry for
helping me access the Stamper site pictures and notes
at the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural
History and especially for copying and sending
different versions of the journals. Dr. Craig Gerlach
of Fairbanks, Alaska, provided moral support and
insights into his early attempts to reconstruct a site
1934b Book #1, Txv1B&Txv1C Field Notebook
(Typed) on file at the Sam Noble Oklahoma
Museum of Natural History, Norman.
1935
Ten “Field Reports” dating between January
8, 1935 and May 28, 1935. On file at the No
Man’s Land Historical Museum, Goodwell.
Cheatum, Elmer
1966 Letter to Fred Schneider dated April 12, 1966
regarding
freshwater
mussel
shell
identification from the Stamper and Roy
Smith Sites. Letter on file at the Sam Noble
Oklahoma Museum of Natural History.
Norman.
Clements, Forrest E.
1935 Letter to C. S. Johnston dated February 5,
1935. On file with the C. S. Johnston Papers,
at the Panhandle-Plains Historical Museum,
Canyon
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
51
Lintz, Christopher and George Zabawa
1984 The Kenton Caves of Western Oklahoma. In:
Prehistory of Oklahoma, edited by Robert E.
Bell, pp. 161-174. Academic Press, Orlando.
Duncan, Marjorie Ann
2002 Adaptation during the Antelope Creek Phase:
A Diet Breadth Analysis of the Subsistence
Strategy at the Two Sisters Site. Ph.D.
dissertation, University of Oklahoma,
Norman.
Orr, Kenneth G.
1941 The Eufaula Mound: Contributions to the Spiro
Focus. The Oklahoma Prehistorian IV (1) 28, Tulsa.
Green, Donald E.
1979 Panhandle Pioneer: Henry C. Hitch, His Ranch
and His Family. University of Oklahoma
Press.
Schultz, Gerald E.
1990 Stop 16: Late Hemphillian Faunas of the
Texas and Oklahoma Panhandles.
In:
Tertiary and Quaternary Stratigraphy and
Vertebrate Paleontology of Parts of
Northwestern Texas and Eastern New Mexico,
edited by T.C. Gustavson, pp. 104-111.
Bureau of Economic Geology Guidebook 24.
The University of Texas, Austin.
Huhnke, Marie
2001 Form and Function: The Bone Tools from
Alibates Ruin #28. M.A. Thesis, Wichita
State University, Wichita.
Lawton, Sherman P.
1966 Pueblo Influences in Oklahoma. Oklahoma
Anthropological Society Bulletin 14: 93-104.
Turner, Kenneth R.
1995 A Brief History of the No Man’s Land
Historical Society. No Man’s Land Historical
Society, Goodwell, Oklahoma.
Lintz, Christopher
1986 Architecture and Community Variability of
the Antelope Creek Phase of the Texas
Panhandle. Studies in Oklahoma’s Past 14,
Oklahoma Archeological Survey, Norman.
Watson, Virginia
1950 The Optima Focus of the Panhandle Aspect:
Description and Analysis. Bulletin of the
Texas Archaeological and Paleontological
Society 21: 7-68.
2003a The Stamper Site, 34Tx1, Texas County,
Oklahoma, Part I: The Historical Context and
Excavators. Oklahoma Archaeology: Journal
of the Oklahoma Anthropological Society
51(2): 13-36.
Weisendanger, Martin
1975
Beneath Optima Earth. Oklahoma Today
Magazine. 25(4): 6-8, Oklahoma City.
2003b The Stamper Site, 34Tx1, Texas County,
Oklahoma,
Part
II:
Archaeological
Contribution
to
Plains
Archaeology.
Oklahoma Archaeology: Journal of the
Oklahoma Anthropological Society, 51(3): 1437.
2003c The Stamper Site, 34Tx1, Texas County,
Oklahoma, Part III: The Architecture and
Features Excavated by C. Stuart Johnston.
Oklahoma Archaeology: Journal of the
Oklahoma Anthropological Society 51 (4): 1446
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
52
Rock Art
By Seth Hawkins
Just A Little Yucca Rope
Seth Hawkins
leaves of the yucca can also supply the material you
need to finish out your fire making kit.
Have you ever imagined yourself in one of those
classic, made-for- TV, survival situations where you
end up, through no fault of your own of course,
stranded out in the "back-of-beyond" with nothing but
a toothbrush, if you're lucky, to keep you company?
Well, you might just consider it a blessing if you find
yourself smackdab in the middle of yucca-studded
wilderness, yucca glauca to be specific, but any yucca
will do. And while you're in the area you might as
well celebrate the rugged beauty of this native of the
western plains, otherwise known as soapweed,
beargrass, or Spanish bayonet, its milky-white
blossoms festooning a tall, central spike while dark
green, needle-like leaves radiate diagonally outward in
profusion from the base of the spike. Yes, enjoy the
beauty that surrounds you that is if you can rip
yourself away from the horrifying thought of your
own demise or paralyzing possibility that you might
not even be around for the next episode of "Survivor."
Anyway, nature's beauty aside, and more important,
the immature flower pods can be eaten, in addition to
the young, fleshy stalks that protrude above ground
during the spring of the year, some native groups even
roasting them in a bed of hot coals. And while we're
on the subject of stalks, these mature, woody
structures can also be used to get a roaring fire going.
In your particular situation that might not be a bad
idea. Using the stalk as both drill and hearth, you can
either twirl the drill between your hands or you can
devise a bow of hardwood to do the twirling, but in
that case you'll need some cordage. You're in luck
again! It just so happens that those long, fibrous
Now once you have that fire stoked up, roasting those
delicious stalks and buds, along with the roots of
purple mallow or thistle that you should find
somewhere in the area, you might even think about
adding some protein to the meal, and I'm not talking
locusts. Think rabbit! You have the cordage now all
you have to do is improvise a simple snare, and you've
made that four-course meal a reality. Back to the
cordage. Because a lot seems to be riding on this stuff,
if there was ever a time when you wanted to get in
touch with your technologically primitive side this
would be the time. So let's do it by the numbers, but
first an admission. I had never made cordage before,
honest, so this will be a first-person account of that
adventure. Are you ready?
My first step was to collect a handful or two of those
fibrous leaves, and having done that, which was the
easy part, I was ready to reduce that stiff, green
bundle into a limp mass of flexible fibers. Being a
total novice at this line of work, I assumed that I
would have to rid the leaves of their fleshy material by
using an anvil and hammer of wood, using soft
percussion so as not to damage the fibers. So I set to
work. Placing several leaves on the anvil, I began
thrashing the daylights out of my unfortunate subjects
until I had before me a shredded green mass of
workable strands. I repeated this process several more
times until I had a good supply of raw material to
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
53
any other device you can rig up) and then, using both
free hands, I began twisting each bundle clockwise.
(Beware of the cross-eyed phenomenon) Now, as I
continued this process, the two separate bundles were
twisted together in a counter-clockwise motion, being
held together by that same reverse twist. To get
greater lengths of cordage you "simply" splice in more
material and continue to twist. Before long you should
have a serviceable length of twine, and if you're really
getting into it, go ahead and make some full-fledged
rope. It will take your mind off the truly serious mess
you've gotten yourself into, and besides you can show
the folks back home what fun you had with
handicrafts By the way, washing the fibers gave a
pleasing off-white (I'll call it yucca white) color to the
finished product, while the unwashed fibers dried to a
light-brown hue. I should also mention the fact that
the cordage was surprisingly strong. In retrospect, I
pray that I never find myself in a survival situation
where my life is suspended by the tenuous thread of
my rope- making skill.
work with. Looking at the mess before me, I
wondered if I could clean it up a bit by separating the
fleshy from the fibrous material with a good rinsing of
water. This I did, but leaving a portion unwashed just
to see the effect it would have on the end product.
After letting the fibers dry a bit, I was ready to do the
real work of making cordage.
Now the quickest method is to take two bundles of
fibers, the amount of fibers determining the thickness
of the cordage, and roll each bundle forward
separately between the palm of your hand and thigh.
Then taking the two twisted bundles and placing them
side by side, draw the bundles towards you, creating
one strand of cordage held together by a reverse twist.
Sounds easy? Yeah, right! I regrouped and fell back
on plan "B." (Always have a plan "B" in these
situations.) I took a bundle of fibers in hand and
twisted them together until the bundle formed a kink. I
then held the kink securely between my teeth (You
can do this with your toes if you have the dexterity or
Wishing On A Star
Seth Hawkins
(based on “The Woman Who Married a Star” from The Mythology of the Wichita by George A. Dorsey, 1904,
Carnegie Institute of Washington, Publication No. 21).
that one of these might be her future husband. On
waking the next morning she found herself in a
strange place with an old, grizzled man bent over her.
As it turns out, and to her utter disgust, this was the
star she had chosen.
It seems that not only can the ability to make cordage
be a life-saver in real time, but it also came in handy
in mythical time.
In the late summer, step outside after the sun is well
below the western horizon and look low in the
southern sky. As the sun moves progressively
southward and the hot season slowly draws to a close,
you should be able to see one of the most familiar
constellations of that part of the heavens, Sagittarius
or the Archer, otherwise known as "the teapot" simply
because that's what it looks like. It was on brilliant,
sparkling stars such as these that as kids we were
encouraged to make wishes. Well, for us that might
have been ok, a harmless remnant of folklore from our
distant past, but that was not the case for the native
Wichita.
As his new wife she was ordered never to move the
large stone lying on the ground. However, when her
old husband had left the disobedient wife immediately
approached the forbidden stone. Crouching low and
straining under the weight, she forced the boulder to
the side, and below it was a gaping hole with the earth
far below. She quickly gathered the tough, sharp
leaves of a nearby yucca and twisted them into a thin
but strong rope. She slowly lowered herself towards
the earth below, but found herself suspended over the
treetops with no rope remaining. Luckily, Buzzard
soared by and delivered her to the earth below on his
back. The exhausted, young woman excitedly told her
parents of the escape from her star-husband. This is
why the Kidikides (Wichita) claim that they no longer
wish upon stars.
It seems that a long time ago a young Wichita woman
gazed into the dark, moonless sky. She noticed the
much brighter stars scattered among their countless,
dimmer relatives. Thinking that these more brilliant
stars must be virile, young warriors, she made a wish
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
54
Folsom Point from Custer County
Richard R. Drass
Chris Collier found the Folsom point pictured here in a gravel bar in Deer Creek. This point was recovered within
a couple miles of the Decker Folsom point, which was found in the 1950s. The points are from the middle section
of Deer Creek southwest of Thomas, Oklahoma. This creek is deeply incised and may be exposing deeply buried
surfaces related to the Paleo-Indian period. The Collier point is made of Edwards Chert. It is 2.2 cm wide and 3.6
cm long. One ear of the base is longer than the other.
More Certification Seminars Set For Spring 2004
Lois E. Albert, Chair Certification Council
By the time you read this article, Christmas, Hanukkah, and New Year’s Eve will all be in the past. I
hope that this was a relaxed and happy time for you and your family. I also send my best wishes to you
all for a happy, safe, and prosperous 2004.
We have planned several seminars which will be offered this spring, starting in February with Ceramic
Technology and Analysis (S8), led by Richard Drass, and with other instructors to be announced later.
The March seminar, General Survey Techniques (S2), will be a special two-day seminar consisting of a
short lecture, followed by field experience, and headed by Bob Brooks. The field portion of the seminar
will be in an as-yet undesignated area near Norman. In April, Lee Bement will once again teach the
lecture portion of Specialized Techniques: Rock Art. We would like to be able to offer the field
(practical) portion of this seminar again, but have not yet found a suitable location for it. If anyone
knows of a rock art location which needs to be recorded, and which would have relatively easy access
for a small group, please let Lee or I know. Obviously, the landowner would have to approve our use of
the land for the one- or two-day project, depending on how much rock art needed to be recorded.
As of yet, there is no official announcement of the location for the Spring Dig. However, it may be in
north-central Oklahoma. This should be set in January, and additional information will be available in
the next issue. At this time, we plan to offer General Excavation Techniques (S3) and General
Laboratory Techniques (S4). If the tentative plans do work out, and a lab is indeed set up, we hope to
keep it open some evenings for people who need lab hours for certification.
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
55
ENROLLMENT FORM FOR CERTIFICATION PROGRAM SEMINARS
______ S8
Ceramic Technology and Analysis. Time: Saturday, February 21, 2004. 9:00 a.m. Place:
Oklahoma Archeological Survey Conference Room. Instructors: Dr. Richard Drass and
others TBA.
_____ S2
General Survey Techniques. Time: Saturday and Sunday, March 27 and 28, 2004, 8:00 a.m.
Place: Oklahoma Archeological Survey Conference Room. Instructors: Dr. Robert L. Brooks
and Lois Albert. (Note that this is a two-day seminar.)
_____ S14B1 Specialized Techniques: Rock Art, Lecture. Time: Saturday, April 24, 2004, 9:00 a.m. Place:
Oklahoma Archeological Survey Conference Room. Instructor: Dr. Lee Bement.
_____ S3
General Excavation Techniques. Time: Saturday, June 5, 2004, 8:30 a.m. (Tentative) Place: TBA
(Spring Dig). Instructor: Lois Albert.
_____ S4
General Laboratory Techniques. Time: Sunday, June 6, 2004, 8:30 a.m. (Tentative) Place: TBA
(Spring Dig). Instructor(s): Lois Albert or tba.
Please include $2.00 per seminar as an enrollment fee (make checks payable to OU/Archeological Survey). In
seminars with limited enrollment, preference will be given to members who are in the Certification Program.
Some seminars may have an additional fee for reading or study materials; this is usually a nominal amount.
Indicate: ___ I am a current OAS member.
___ I am enrolled in the Certification Program.
Name: ____________________________________________________________________
Address: ____________________________________________________________________
City/State/Zip: ________________________________________________________________
Telephone: (____) _______________ (W), (____) _______________ (H)
email address:
Send this completed form with your payment (check/money order - make check to OU/Oklahoma
Archeological Survey) to:
Lois Albert, Certification Council Chair
Oklahoma Archeological Survey
The University of Oklahoma
111 E. Chesapeake
Norman OK 73019-5111
Telephone: (405) 325-7207; FAX (405) 325-7604
e-mail: [email protected]
Oklahoma Archeology, Vol. 52, No.1
56