Culture and Ecology of Chaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin

---------------------~---- ---- ------82 Chaco Project Synthesisfrom the present. Burned materials and hearths suggestedhuman use of the rockshelter.When Neller (1976a) compared the site locationand chipped stone artifacts from this and the dune siteswith data from Judge (1973), he did not think therockshelter or dune sites had functioned as basecamps, processing camps, or armament sites. Heconsidered the use of this rockshelter as a specialpurposearea; the triangular, broad-shouldered petroglyphof a man (Figure 3.15) is similar to otherBasketmaker II art and might indicate a religiouspurpose. He also considered seasonal use and habitationamong the alternatives.Except for an anomalous cache of San Joseprojectile points, almost all the chipped stone materialcame from the uppermost stratum of Atlatl Cave.Although some of the deposits were stratified, most ofthe chipped stone artifacts could not be separated stratigraphically;thus, Neller considered all to representa single homogeneous cultural horizon (BasketmakerII). Approximately 85 percent of the material wasclassified as flakes, most of which were closetogether, which Neller interpreted to mean use of thecave for stone tool production. A few of these flakeshad polish that might result from cutting yucca, and aknife had attrition that could result from cutting wood.Other types of stone included one graver, one spokeshave,two knives, a few scrapers, and utilized flakes.There were no drills, point fragments, or preforms.These, plus cut yucca leaves and some cut wood in theshelter, suggested that a few activi ties were carried outin the shelter.Gillespie (1982) untangled the stratigraphy of therockshelter. By then, there were two radiocarbondates from upper and lower hearths in area A; theyindicated considerable time differences (DIe 591 at4240.±70 B.P. corrected to 4,855 B.P.; DIC 588 at2330+85 B.P. corrected to 2,405 B.P.). He noted alack of natural stratigraphic distinctions within thisarea and divided it into three units: unit 1, an upperlayer; unit 2, a mixed layer; and unit 3, material froma crevice. The five San Jose projectile points had beenrecovered from all three units, all within 30 m(Gillespie 1982:9). Two points were from unit Al(grids 2 and 48), two were from unit A2 (grid 49,mixed), and one was from unit A3 (grid 2). Becausethese units proved to have different radiocarbon dates,he indicated that either the association of the pointswith dates is spurious because of mixing or misinterpretationof the spatial relationships, the dating isfaulty, or the Irwin-Williams sequence and dates arenot directly applicable (Gillespie 1982:9). The firstexplanation seemed most probable. Artifacts recovered(mostly from unit AI) were small woodenartifacts, basketry fragments, yucca ties, cordage,bone tools, chipped stone debris and tools, andevidence of corn.Although there was much mixing due to pack ratactivity, area B produced three radiocarbon dates (DIC794 at 2220.±100 B.P. corrected to 2,275 B.P.; DIC592 at 2700.±65 B.P. corrected to 2,860 B.P.; andDIC 590 at 2730.±65 B.P. corrected to 2,900 B.P.).This area contained poorly delimited hearths andburned rocks. Cultural materials included smallwooden artifacts, a fragment of a wooden atlatl, ayucca sandal (Figure 3.16), basketry fragments,cordage, yucca ties, fragments from a rabbit-fur robe;and chipped stone debris. Evidence of corn wasrecovered.Gillespie considered this record to represent asporadic, short-term camp site. Use probably fellwithin the En Medio phase of the third milleniumbefore the present. Because the corn kernels and cobsfrom both area A and area B were fragmentary, theydid not add much to knowledge about early corn, butthey could be assigned to the range of 2,200 to 2,900B.P. (ca. 950 to 450 B.C.).Most of the faunal remains were not attributableto human occupation of the shelter. Gillespie'sanalysis did, however, provide information that couldassist with reconstruction of paleoenvironments. Thepresence of one species of bat (Lasionycterisnoctivagans) suggested a woodland environment; andthe prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) suggestedgreater effective moisture and better developedgrasslands in the past (Gillespie 1982:94-96). Thefew faunal remains that could be tied to culturalbehavior were insufficient to reconstruct minimumnumbers of individuals (MNI) or meat weight calculations.Burning on 13 percent of the bones fromlarge mammal species, however, did indicate humanuse. These species included Odocoileus sp. (deer),Antilocapra americana (pronghorn), and Bison sp.(bison), Although smaller animal bones had less