SCRAP Fieldschool 1996: A Late Archaic Component at the Ashland Site, 27-GR-181
Richard Boisvert, Deputy State Archaeologist, New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources, 1996
The Ashland Site (27-GR-181) was the focus of the 1996 SCRAP Field School. The site is located in Ashland, NH near the Pemigewasset River in a wooded area. Approximately four weeks of investigation were devoted to this site, including shovel test pits and one by one meter test pits. This work was carried out on a site originally identified and tested by Howard Sargent in 1975 as part of a field school conducted in conjunction with Plymouth State College. Sargent's work went unreported but has been summarized by Hellquist (1998) in his Senior Thesis. The site is multi-component, with an historic 19th century house foundation and associated occupational debris (Healy 1997), a substantial Late Woodland component, a minimally represented Middle Woodland component, and a Late Archaic component. This Archaic occupation is identified on the basis of an association of a diagnostic projectile point and a radiocarbon date, provided through the NHAS radiocarbon dating project.
The Ashland Site prehistoric assemblage is overwhelming dominated by ceramics, with 1236 sherds recovered. The lithic artifact inventory amounted to only 176 flakes, a projectile point fragment, two biface fragments a hammerstone and a hammerstone fragment, however nearly all of these (150 flakes, the point fragment and one of the biface fragments) were associated with a single feature. It is this feature that constitutes the Late Archaic presence at the site.
Feature 1 was located in a sector of the site otherwise devoid of prehistoric ceramics and consisted of a concentration of 86 fire cracked and fire reddened rock occupying a rough oval approximately 1.8 meters long and half a meter wide. This concentration of rock was very distinctive, as most specimens were approximately 10 cm long. Stones of this size were otherwise absent from the matrix of the site which was uniformly sandy with stones limited to a size of 4 cm in diameter or smaller. The top of the feature was encountered 21 cm below the surface in an area that had never been plowed. The mass of stone extended to a further depth of 27 cm lower. The projectile point recovered in association with the feature is a broadly side notched Archaic point identified by Helquist (1998:20) as a Normanskill type point as defined by Ritchie (1971:39). It is made from a buff colored rhyolite, commonly recognized in prehistoric assemblages throughout central and southern NH. The other lithic tool from the feature is a broken, pointed, buff colored rhyolite biface that exhibits severe hinge fracturing and was evidently broken during manufacture. As such, its form is non-diagnostic and is not specifically attributable to any particular culture or period. Interestingly, the debitage from the feature is uniformly hornfels and most likely derived from sources in the Ossipee Mountains 30 km to the east. In additional to the lithics, the only other material recovered form this feature were 13 calcined bone fragments that were too small to be identified as to species.
The soil within the feature was distinct in comparison to the surrounding matrix. Within the feature the soil was a dark yellowish brown (10YR3/6) contrasting with the surrounding yellowish brown (10YR5/8) matrix. Wood charcoal was recovered during excavations and from sieving of the feature fill. The date obtained from Beta Analytic (Beta-108464) is 4810 +/- 80 radiocarbon years BP with a calibrated age of 3760 to 3370 BC at a 2 sigma range of confidence. This places the feature in the Late Archaic. . The feature evidently represents a roasting pit where small game (?) was cooked and consumed. The point left behind might reasonably be interpreted as a piece broken on the hunt and replaced at the hunting camp, possibly by one made of hornfels. The biface fragment was abandoned or lost at the same time. The nature of the Archaic presence at the site seems to reflect a very short stay, possibly only a single overnight by a small number of people, perhaps a family band or hunting party.
The significance of the dated feature lies not so much in the identification of an occupation of the site during the Late Archaic, but in the clarification of what was not incorporated in the Woodland occupation. It is clear that the ceramic period occupations at the site were substantially different in function from the Archaic occupation and also distinct from other Woodland sites in the region. The paucity of lithics potentially from the Woodland occupations at the site is notable, less than 30 specimens - mostly flakes, in contrast to the 1200 plus ceramic artifacts. This is a situation rare, if not unprecedented, in New Hampshire archaeology. The dating of the feature clearly indicates that the lithic related behavior was three millennia earlier than the activities that brought the ceramic vessels to the site and saw their breakage. Lacking this date, one might erroneously hypothesize that there was a spatial segregation of contemporaneous activities at the site, separating the lithic related and ceramic related activities during a Late Woodland occupation.
The restriction of nearly all the lithic data securely to an earlier time period brings into sharper focus the emphasis on the use of ceramics at the site and the exclusion or near exclusion of activities involving the manufacture of chipped stone tools. Certainly the possibility remains that during the Late Woodland stone tools were used on site and then removed, but it is unusual in the extreme that so few stone tools and extremely few bits of debitage can be associated with the ceramic period occupation. This suggests that the site had a special purpose, at least during the Late Woodland, and was not a conventional habitation site. A cemetery function is not proposed for the site. No human bone was recovered nor were any potential burial pits identified. The ceramics were broken and scattered and in no location was there a substantial enough concentration of sherds that might have argued for the collapse in place of a vessel that might have been left as a burial offering. Some other specialized activity would appear to account for the ceramic related activities at the site. Developing an interpretation based on negative data is always dangerous, however it seems that the smallness of the lithic assemblage in the Late Woodland component is very significant. Interestingly, the date on the otherwise mundane Late Archaic feature is what brings into focus the unusual, if not unique, nature of the Late Woodland occupation of the Ashland site. What the activity, or activities, may be that account for the use of the ceramics here is (thankfully) beyond the scope of this brief article.
References cited
Healy, Sherry H. 1997 Archaeological Investigations at the Ouvert Site: The Historic Component. Unpublished Manuscript on file at the NH Division of Historical Resources.
Hellqist, Paul
1998 The Ashland Site: Prehistoric Activity on the Pemigewasset River. Unpublished Senior Thesis, Anthropology Department, University of New Hampshire, Durham.
Ritchie, William A.
1971 A Typology and Nomenclature for New York Projectile Points. New York State Museum Bulletin Number 384. University of the State of New York, The State Education Department, Albany.