Utah Statewide Archaeological Society Newsletter, Volume 2, Number 3, October 1956

lJTAH STATE H/STOR!CAL ,~O(,~iCTY 337. ST1\TE CtiiTOL ;,5ALT LAKE ,CITY. UTAH UTAH ARCHEOLOG~

I

A Newsletter Vol. 2, No. 3

October 1956 CONTENTS

Editor's Notes

Page 1

Third Great Basin,Archeological Conference Jesse D. Jennings

Page 2

1956 ArcheoloBi9al University of Utah

(

Activities of the James H. Gunnerson

Page

41

Recent Publications

Page 15

University of Utah Site Survey Form

Page 16

,1

U.~ah ArcheoloQ: is distributed quarterly to mf;lmbers of the Utah StatewiQe Archeological Society. All c9rrespondence sho~ld be directed to the Editor--James H. Gunnerson, Department of Anthropology, university of Utah, Salt LakeCity~ Utah.

With the advent of fall~ field activities are nea.rly over, 80 the prepal:ation of a preliminary report of the Unive't~sity of Utah t a summer field activities has been sr.-eeded up ~lO that you \>1:1.11 receive it '(.mile it 18 atill neWOe 1'0 many of you,partt'S of the report will not be news since 1 have had the good fortune of seeing some of the members of the USAS during the swmner" Conference ''DMIII

C'-.IJ.'

1iI ....

'*"It-...

' t ~s

gratifying to see tha~ several USAS members attended t;he Great BaBin Archeological c;ortference held 1n Salt Lake . City August 19~21, but it was d1aappointing that not more of' you ~ere able to be preS'ent" , Next ' year' the c:onference will be held in AugUSt in san Fra~cisco, and it will probably not be held in Utah again for about four years.

There were not enough members of the USAS a.t the conference at anyone time to justify trying to bold

a separate session.

n'l this connection, I would like

to get the reaction of the mexobera of the USAS to the idea of holding meetings , in various parte of ·the state. wherever there are enough members in a comnronity to make it practicable There 115 a good chance of my being able to attend at least Bome of the meet ing a " Another 0

possibility which should be con8idered is that of holding an annual meeting» perhaps in Salt Lake City 9 for our entire organization" If you have any ideas concerning ,either of these suggestions I would greatly appreciate hearing themo

-USAS Starting with Volume III, receipt of .!!,t:ab

!r£"'1!~1&gX

will

be contingent upon your paying one dollar a year membership dues in the UtahStatewlde Archeological Societyp Shortly after this was first announced in this newsletter last Jtme, payment

was received from one member. , A notice to the effect that ntet'Gbe'r'" ship fess are due will be enclosed in the next newsletter g

~i.. ,~. Sut"V.!.YAn i ncreasing

number of people are showing an interest in reporting the location of archeological sites to the University of Utah and inquiring as to the be.st way to do so"

Therefol."e, at:t&.ched

to thi$ issue of the newsletter is 4 copy of the Site Su~vey Fo~ which w~ use to recor.d such tn£ol~tion~ 't he variQus headings are rem.inders of the tyx,e of info:rm.ation which is useful , to us in our attempt to c ompile a record of as nliiny Utah arc;heological I would like to encourage all the members of the USAS who care t.n do eo to send us information conc.eming archeological sites which they know about ~ If any' (,')f you have sites which you would like to have entered in our file 3> 1 Tr3ill gladly send you as h ny survey sheets 8S you need0

sites a8 possible.

,

Mt1,aeu5:1.'

~I~"",,"~~

•

There contluue to be nUtilt~:tflU8 1ce:queatB from people wanting to v iai.t the tvIuseum of AnthY.'("Jpology on the University of Utah campus ( ,n week ends ~ )~8t springS' we had the Museum open Saturdays aUld >;,:ounc1 that many people were coming in~ Becauae of t.his intet'est ll

'lief ~have decided to have the :MUseum open even more on week ends;

gO

until mid"'winter fl at least g the museum will be open on Saturdays ::i;roUl 10:00 ,Q."ID" until 5:00p.m. and on Sundays from 1:00 p~m" urr.til 5:.00 poOl .. ~ Ott week days. it, will still be Open from 8,;00 80m" until 5:00 p.m •. e)Ccept on holiday. obseiVed by the

Vniversity. '~a1ned by

A map showing·the location of the mUseum may be

ob~

'W'.t:iting to the MuseUlll of Anthropology ..

Is ~

'1111.8

~,;....,..~,... .

X have asked Jesse Do Jennings to present an of the 1956 Gr.eat Basin Archeoiog:lcal Conference. waG the Chail"ll1an of the progr~ cormnittee and was a large elttent for the high qual:Lty of the entire

evaluation ·Drc> Jennings responsible to

program.

I t hae 'b~en again posa1~1~ to get at a nominal cost the overQr un on a page of illustrations from another article covering much i:he same material netV'sletter.

th~lt

is reported in this issue of the

tHIRD GREAT BASIN ARCHiroI..ooXCAL ·CONFERENCE AN EVALUATION

Jesse

D~

Jennings

An eval'ilation of the Grea.t Basin Conference is d1ffi(!ul.t

bec&use of the wide range of the papers presented. ' However" nearly ~11 . the papers were carefully worked out and well pr.eaented; all of them added a little to the amall store of knowledge of (;:n~at

Basin prehisto)."Y * I was muc;h impressed by the sustained mti:'ong l.nterest which led to almost one . hundred per cent attenc)"muce 8.t all session.s" It was also vel:y encouraging to discover. tb.~t the fin.al registration l~a.S 80 persona instead of the 50 we had expected; several were non.-proi:c8Bional Utah people interested in archeology ..

Th.e high poin.t of the tttJO days is hurd to aelect One ".m.s Genera,]. Clu~J.xrf~l1 F.my··Cooper Cole I e. b~ln(Juet address to Gome 60 peopl.e.. It: WI;\S one of the most effactive statem.fmt~ on the ncient1f:tc .m~~thod :tn a:ccheology I h~lVe. evai:~ h~ard.oI\ 0

Al'RotitelC high po:tnt wa.!!a the :!~{~d:toc . .n:,·bon symp!!'lisiwn..

Here adva-coate!" v:tgorously .'Attacked the validity of an eati~ted 15% of ~ll l:h~l published dates (.1J2!rived. through radiocarbon t.echniques.. He 'f1farned ggQln~t an unc'l"i,tical belief

Chax'h~f) HU.l1t",

as

d~3.1 u 0

3

in the r sult@..

He alao emph2sbad the carelessness which bad collecting of emmptes. This carele8snes8, of dlgger'B first respon9ibi11ty~ but the laboratory

eharacterl&~d ,~~c~

cours2 p is

~he

{nen have also been \m$\lrat'e, p~~bap8 indifferent. to the possibility of field contam:f.nation before and during ' collection. lhmt ga.ve point to his remarks by 'showing that several known stratigraphic sequencer; were revax8,a d in the publ1Bhed dates.

A.e might be eXpected th.e response to hiB paper wee spirited.'

Several cU.scuas i ons c'~ntered around this matter of val:l.dity.

Even thougb ric ÂŁ:lnal summing up was attempted, it .eamed to . . that several of ~r. Hunt' 8 criticisms were sustained. However, the symp()81um membe1.'S seemed to agree that data. reached through

the

~ad!ocarbon cec~mlque

would become increasingly valid in

view of Improved It.tbQratory technique. a greater awareness of contamination proY"lems, and the beginning of greater cauCion on the part of archeologists &\d geologists in interpreting the ~e8ult8.

In any case, a single dat~ for one locality does not constitute proof of age.

from the Auclear scientists present we a1.0 learned of .everal new approacMs to too pr.oblem of r~dloactive <latina through the usa of other elements than carbon.

Among the otller papers, the new early man 8ites were quite interesting. One was the report of dwarf maumotbs in association ,dth exzens1va fb;e (bar becue pit) on Santa Roea Island. The single radiocarbon dat~ he~e wae 27,000 B.C. more interesting was the 35;000 B.. C. date for Clovis fluttJd pOints at a. site near Dallas. In both CAse8 there waa but a 6ingle date, and these finds must be held suspect until other , evidence is weighed. On the strength of the evidence as , presented A~ the conference I am much more inclined to accept the Dalles site 4;han the Santa Rosa claims. ~ven

Fram the tenner sit~ in southeastern Ari~ona eignt mammoth skeletons and several Clovis fluted pointa were reported but no L~dioc&rbon dates have been run.

This excellent slte was skillfully excavatedo If it can be dated it will provide an important fixed point 1n the chronology of the so-called Llano culture¡.

In any case the meetings were st:l.mulating and fun to attendo I hope that fOOre of the supporters of the Univere1tyof Utah l,_

arGheologic~l p~ogr4m can a~tend the next salt take City sessions.

A~ consolation to those who did not .mttend this past ccnfo?:ence, moat of the p~per8 prementad ara now in the hands of ,the edito~

of the , yP.1V!t!.~...2LUtltl1or~Y.!tf!~if-!i...ra2ar!. an~ should be @.vailabls ' in I~t1nted foi?m iv.a ~ faw lOOnths .

4 1956 ARCHEOLOGICAL AC'l'lVrtllS OF THÂŁ UNIVERSm OF UTAH James H. Gunnerson In spite of the .bo~t intermittent seaaon, the Utah .

Statewide Archeological Survey bad a succes8fUl summer. Three weeks were devoted to making teat excavationa at rremont &1~es near Emery_ Utah, which had previously been recorded by .he Survey (Gunneraon, 1955). This work. was financed jointly by the Yniveraity

of Utah . .search :rund and the Department of Anthropology at the tmlversity of Utaho The crew consisted of only one paid Worker (ll1ehard Graham of fairview, Utah)" one full-time volunteer, occasional other volunteers, and the writer. Since eve%fone involved bad bad professional training or e;cp.rience~ the crew. although small, was efficiento An additional weeJt and a half wa. devoted to checking sites whicb had been reported to us in Uintab. Sari Juan, Emery, Sevier" and Millard Counties ..

EXCAVATIONS Te.t excavationa were ....de a t four sites near Emery (Fig.. 1).

Last year the Univel"eity of Utah excava ted two small Fremont culture sitea in this . . . general area (Taylor, 1955). This year it was decided to make teate at some of the larger villages to dete~lne whether or not there are any obvious differences in architecture and artifact inventory between the large and small s.ites and to select a l.r.se site for intensive excavation next summer . All of the sit.s tested bad been extenaively damaged by er0810n and/or amateur digging 80 that excavation of these sites

la i in one sense. salvale arcbeologya

Emery Site The first site tested was the Emery aite (42Eaa47), located about three IIliles northea8t of Emery, Utah and reported tio the aurvey by Dixon and Paul Peacock of Emery CI Ac this s:lte, the obvious surface or shallow atructures had been for the moat part destroyed. The survey did, however, locate one deep pit house which had been damaged relatively little Q The fll1 in this bouse was extremely bard, which, along with the great size of the structure (Xt was about 26 feet in diameter and 4 feet deep) permitted our small crew to excavate only about one quarter of it.

From careful excavation of thiS quadrant~ however .. we were able to learn a gJ:le&t deal about the ' 'or1ginal structure J and to Ncure enough pottery fra~t8 and other artifacts for analYSiS, which

will be done this winter.

Th~

site was located on a low. irregular ridge about two miles out from the foot of the WaMtch Mountains.. An intermittent stream and a seep w.re near by.. Part of the surrounding

U

â&#x20AC;˘

level i8 now cultivated.. Into this ridge, which is partly-decomposed shale, t.he pithouse had .been dug. of this round structure was a fireplace, surrounded adobe rim and apparently originally paved with flat

made up of At the center by a ' modeled stones" but

/

UTAH

\

/

I

), \ '

I

._

I

Pig" 1 '-

.

.- -- - -- J

6

only tho.e slaba partly under the adobe rim wre left in the part of the fireplace uncovered. The fireplace was about 2 feet in 41ameter. SUrroundtng tlw fireplace were sevel'al.:poet hol... The lar...t. located nol'the••t of the fireplace ael 42 1nchea fl'C8 the wall, was 11 mch.. c1eep.. 7\ locbe, :tache. in diameter. and conta1neel IIIICh decayed wood. An inter••tins variation 1n POlt hole. was also noted at this house whez:e ' two poata bad been . set 1a broad .hallow buin8. whloh we14l theD f 'i 1led with adobe. .

It 18 possible that the.. poets were added to support a salllnl roof .fter c0Il8truct:1oD __ c~l.ted. The d1Uifts of the basin would have paxmttted the 81idtDg of the bottome of · the postl toto poaU:iOD while the top. of the posts were _ b l.t the roof tillbers.

Otha:r poet boles, wen frcMD about 3 to 7 inches in diaMter and.

3 to 6 1nchea deep. !he,. .foDll8d no def1Dite pattern except that ·for the .,at put they ...re. about hal1~ . , betweeD the f:l.re-

place and the wall.

The floor of the hc;MJee waa saucer-shaped, about 6 inches hlgher at the edge than 10 the aaieldl•• and covered with clay which in plac.. was aa IIIICh as three mcbee th:1ck. The clay was apparentl)' used to 8IIIOOth the. irregular aba1e pit bottGID. In DO place could definite ev;~c. of wall pla.te~ be found. althoup the~ was a sreat cleal of nearly aterl1e C18,. founel in the fl11 of the pit. 'Ibis t ended to form a 18y~r nearly reatins OD the floor 111 the mlddle of the houae and extending to a~c ·t wo feet abcwe the floor at the eclge. lD SOIIMI places there'; wer. large irregular blockS of this matertal. There ..... to be little question but: ~hat this clay was I'ODf material which hacl fallen into ~e bouse. afte~ it wae abandoned. The ooly evidence of an entrance found in the portion excavated was a sandstone ci18k about two· feet: 'in diameter and two inches thick, which was found broken near . th, floor north of the fireplace and about half way to the wall . This presumably bad been a cover for a roof opening. probably the entrance. Associated with the floor of the house. 'was a Utah-type llletate, turned Up.ide down over a mano.

·

.

"

.

Other artifacts found 11\ th'is excavation included: broken pottery J disks cut from br okian....pottery, Ullwo1:'ked animal bones. bone aw18, bone gam:l,ng pieces. ' chipped fli:nt ialplemen.ts. and charred corn cobs. . .

of a badly dlstuUbed hearth was uncovered • . This had originally been about IJz feet Blaewhere on the Site,. the

~ema1na

in diameter and slab paved, and MY well have be4an in a surface structure Whose other features bad been destroyed. One . interesting .saociation with the hearth, however, washalf of a charred bean.

7 M'~Gt; Cb~~M!e BU;e e~·=-·-~1~"<J5ttc-w"n(:e

site (42B'V28) is luc~ted about ll~ ,mi.lem eouth" 0@.f3t: f1<Xl/l;) PA~0mGl: ' i: Junction on a broad, level fla~ along l£:Ast Chw.lnce (;:,:J8~~k, 'sbout el tulle f}:om where tile creett leB"lY:2s ~;h.e ElOt;l1i;~~bae. Tile 8i~e W'&s called to the attention of the $u1:'1Iey by t4'.i:o Stewa:t"t Wyltie. St.n:face materJ.al ie abundant &t this egtensive

but oxC2vetion

site~

confi1~d

Qur fears

~hat

wind eroaion had

de€Jt roye d mWJh of the .occupation level. 100 condi-~ ' 01'1 WQS act.~1l1 1y wo:a:ee tllan 'r1e' bad fet.4red~ cd.uce in ,most pl6\ces sevexal f eet of soil had"apparently bl~i1l off. In one pl f1l1ce, pro~bly the l~inG of ~ heQ~ th p on the th'J;?~e la&-ge post holes dug into the containing much clay, preeumably to stabili~e pcst$~

we found burned e4rthg sur-face..

Around it "1ere

sandy soil end t:

SMl'ruiJ

likely that tbis was ttihat remained of the bottom of a

pit house, the remainder havtng eroded away.

A few scattered

post holes were found in another area suggesting a square of eonle kind. In still another area, a stonealined ' hearth was found on the surface but nothing definitely Associated with it could be found •

•~O\!ll.-9_§R.F.~n(i

Thin s ite (42Sv23) 1s located ,about 200 y&rde from and ti'ell

above Last

ct~nce

Creek near a mountain meadow.

This site baa

been ,badly damaged by digging an,d by. road construct·ion, since

the Fremont J"f.Ulction.;.Fremont Road has cut throughlt' about 12 miles south of Fremol'Bt Junction. TIle most obvious structure at the' site 1s on top' of a smali kno'~,l and is outl ined . with a ring of boulde1~B about 28 ft. ,in d1QDl~ter At the north side of this ring is one much larger boulder, incorporated into the ring.

S:tnc~ this structure has been d1,!g in Ill2ny times we lt~ere not able to salvage a great. deal of informat:1nxf. We were a.ble, howevelb to find ~a~t of: a central 'fireplace represented by bunled earth ' 0

but too badly distrubed for us t.o determine the construction of it. To the ~'7est of the fireplace we f ound 8 group of thre~ po@t hf'.lle13 and a short row of stones suggestive of a deflector ~ Around the ot.~te:r edge of the arec';! inclosed by the qouldel' rlngj)

a row of pout holee was \

'

fO~ld.

These apparently hed been

6pac~d

about gil' feet apaxt but ~ot all of ' them co~ld be complGltely verifi.ed p eepecially on the l()v-leest aid.e t'1here the erosion has baen the gr.eat;~flt. There were a f@t<J' ot.h®l." post hQle,~ t<Jhich (MY Mve been part of an itUler ring of of poets about 11 ft in di&meter.

There aeemm to b~ :U.ttle doub';; then p that this bad been a str.uctureo 0

of th~,!1 iiltructure about 2lio feet we house (Fig" 3an) Thie; 6$trtSct:ure h~cl been a~1:c{;r-;ymted al~m;\t 1% feet :tnto the ground alK1.d ~ja.B ow~l {[1ith d!·:~nmJt~r~ of 10 .t!ua 1.2 feet..

J~st to one side of f;he center W$l.8 a s~;Qne.·~p.aVGl!dD adobe r.1mmad f:i.!."eplSl.ce. ikt'otmd the fireplace e::n,d almut- l.1: feet from ite cmn <"an: we:te . tbree poet i oles ~jith f.k~cl.!tlye[~ F~Bt ' but.ts i~ them. fA. prob$hle :roMt'th roa~! hole ~1~, B 'I'@ th.e fj{.'HAtheaat eXG~v.mtel\ .a ~oo.tall pU;

m

8

in an area distrubed by rodents. Ar.tifacts were not especially numerous from this site but incluged among them were chipped stone implements, worked bone and broken pott~ry. A skul~ from a large bird was found on the floor of the small pit house.

Snake Rock ThIS-site (42Sv5) is situated on a low boulder-strewn ridge near Ivie Creek, near where the canyon begins to broaden out. The site has been greatly damaged by many people digging into it, since it is l ocated conspicuously beside t;he high\,1ay about 2 miles east of Fremont Junction. There,at one t~,were several rooms outlined with basaltic boulders but nearly all of these have been tlearly completely dug auto .The one remain.ing ring had only a small hole dug into it so we were able to clear out half of it and determine what these structures were like.

Through test pitting, we were able to locate a second pit house of different construction which had been built ove~ at least one older structure.

The rock-outlined house (.Fig~ 3c) was about half cleared and was" found to have been excavated about 3 ' feet i nto the ground and to have been about 10 feet in diameter. \: In two places in the portion of the house excavated, la.rge boulders had been left in place and had formed part of the wall of t he pit.

Around the pit , had apparently been laid a wall of basaltic boulders . After the abandonment of the house, thi s boulder wall had collapse'd and many of the boulders had fallen into the pit ~rid ~"et:e.;.: mi~ed with the house fill. From the numbers of boulders found in t he 'fill., the wall above the surfa~e of the ground must have been a t least two feet bigh. The floor of t he pit house consisted of a layer of clay. in the middle of t he ~loor was a stone-paved, adobe-rimmed fireplace full of a sh '~nd char e.)al o There was no evidence ¡that the walls of this house had been plastered or spec ially prepared in any w/!.y " The second excavat i on (Fig. 2; 3b, d) was about 35 feet northeast from the first. Here, one pit house t l18. S half excavated a This one was a~out 15 feet in diameter and had apparently been excavated about 2 feet below the then surface, partially into undistrubed earth but mostly into midden fill. The walls, which sloped outl'l7ard, and the floor had been plastered ~>'i th clay Arl adobe-rimmed fireplace was situated in the centero A small pit, probably a post hole, was found , southwest of the fir.eplacea A test trench through this house disclosed a lower use surf ace .. probably a house floor (J:louse III) p under, and t her efor e earlier. than, the upper (House I). One wall of this lower house showed no spec ial preparation and the other had 0

9

\

5

FiSo 20

\

Simplified plan (above) and profIle of excavation ·e xposing portions of three structures (Houses I,

III &

IV~

at Snake Rook (42Sv5)o (See Flgo 3 b & d) Q

10

apparently been removed by the const1~ction of ~ ,wall of stone and adobe which probably represents a structure (House IV) of intermdiate age. Present plans call fo~ the return of a party from the University of Utah next summer to complete the excavation commenced this summer The preponderance of the artifacts from this site, as from the others, consisted of broken pottery, worked and unworked stone and worked and unworked bone.

0

I

Conclusions The sites tested this summer are all assignable to.the Fremont culture ~rss, 1931; Wormington, 1955) and would not seem to differ too greatly in age from those sites excavated in 1955 by the University of Utah in the same area. There do seem to be some differences in architecture between these two groups of sites in that Some of the structure types encount,e red in 1955 were not encountered this year. This: could be due in part " t~ " the limited ' Qlewt of work done "this year in the large s.ttes as compared to the complete excavation ~f the two small sites in 1955. Hence, any conclusions based on the limited testing of these sites would probably be premature. This summer's work bas established that there 18 still some info~tion to be salvaged from these larger but vandalized site80 SURVEY Ulntah Count y .

Jesse Do Jennings and James Ho Gunnerson made a visit to Thorne Cave (42Unl26) near Jensen g Utah (Fig. 1) at the invitation of Mr. Robert Thorne who had discovered the cave and who gave a brief report of it at the Great Basin Archeological Conferenceo The cave was apparently occupied during a period of alluvial depOSition in the canyon, which resulted in a filling of the cave and a sealing off of the material in it. Rae'e nt erosion has exposed the cave and the cultural levels in ito The geological situation at the cave suggests that the cultural material in it could well have considerable antiquityo Mr. Thorne is awaiting a Carbon 14 date for charcoal from the cave sent to the carnegie laboratory.

San Juan County

Several sites on Elk Ri~ge (Fig 1) in San Juan County, reported by Richard Lewi.s of the tJ~f3. Geological SurveYli were also visited by Jennings and Gunners~nG Sites were both in the open and in caves or rock shelters and would appear to ,be mostly Pueblo II although Pueblo I occupation may also be represented One site, Lewis Lodge (42a256), consists of about 45 rooms strung along a narrow ledge under an overhango Included is one kiva with roof intact and several rooms in near-perfect conditiono This site is \V'el1 concealed and difficult to get to, "t'lhich may well 0

0

11

acc ount for its good preservation. One open sit e (4288271) and another site (428a272) which is part l y under an overhang' coul d well have had 100 to 200 ~ooms each . Such a size is suggested by' t~e rubble piles and, at the latter site, by upperstorey be.am sockets in the cliff faceo This area would well repay a large-scale excavation programo Lewis estimated that there are proba~lya thousand sites 1n the Elk Ridge area.

Sevier Ri~er D~ainage A quick trip was made into the Sevier drainage ~n the Richfield area to determine whether or not the Pre.n<>nt culture exte~ded into t~ls area.

It had been followed to a~~ost the divide on the east side of the Wasatch , Mountains, bu't village sites had not been checked on ' th.e west side of the Wasatch.

' Mrs. Laverna Hyatt took the 8urlley party to a village site over1t.~ak1ng the Sevier Rive r south of Josep.h.

A preliminary examination of the materia.l f rom this ette suggests closer a ffiliation with material fur ther west and south than with the Fremont material The party wa ~ also taken to several of the many pictograph panels in Clear Cr eek Canyon along the highway from Joseph to Cove Fort. These are, for the most part, well preserved even though they are easily acc~ssible. The elaborate designs which are con8idered . ~oBt characteristic of the Fremont culture are not presente (42Sv29)

Further north, near Scipio, Ernest Herbert took the survey party to two sites that would seem to be very s~ilar culturally to t~e Joseph site. One of these is 'e specially interesting in that i t is semicd.rcular and about a quarter of a mile in radius.

Most of it has been cultivated for up~to 40 years, but there , appears to .have been very little erosion so that . ~. t lil>l ilkely that pit houses would still be ' intact if present. .

Since these sites in the Sevier drainage are not directly pertinent to the current p~~ry research problem of the University, except in the dellmitin.g o;f the Fremont area. it is unlikely that additional work will be done in the area in the

immediate future.

12

Literature Cited Gunnerson, James H. 1956. "Utah Statewide Survey Activities--1955." Utah Archeology. Vol. 2, No.1. pp. 4-12. Salt Lake City.

Taylor, Dee C. 1955. "Archeological Excavations Near Salina, Utah. '

Utah Archeoloax, Vol. 1, No.4, pp.

Lake City.

3-8~

Salt

Morss, Noel 1931. "The Ancient Culture of the Fremont River in Utah. " Papers of the Peabody~useum of American Archeology and Ethnologx, Harvard Universitx. Volo XII, No .3.

Cambridge, Mass ..

H. M..

1955. l1A Reappraisal of the Fremont Culture." Proceedings of the Denver Museum of Natural History, No. 1.

Denver, Colo.

Wo~ington,

1'-

13 L

a. House II at Round Spring (42Sv23). Note the adobe-rimmed, stone-paved hearth, near the center of the house floor. Two post holes are evident to the right of the hearth. The bank of Last Chance Breek can be Been in the bac}tgro\Dld. b. Work at Snake Rock (42Sv5). 'fhe pin at the lower right hand comer i8 in the fireplace of HOUSEl I', the southwest half of which has been uncovered. The man with t~he cap ,18 standing on the floor of House III. - The, man at the left is above a .action of an adobe and stone¡;wlil:l 'which probably 1.s part of a structure (Houle IV) of age intermediate between House III and HoUle I (the most recent of the three. A aection of curved sloping, adobe-plastered wall Oi'IQouae '. I lB"'about tangent to and to the r.ight of the shovelo .

This section of wall has been removed in d ~ The camera is facing approc1mately north. Ivie Creek ii at the foot of the canyon wall in th~ backgroURd. " j

c. House II at Snake Rock (42Sv5) before the floor was completely cleaned. An adobe-riDnAd. 8tone-pa,ved hearth was later uncovered under the ashy area above and to the right of the arrow (pointing north and one foot long)o The rocks to the left, and in the back grQund are on the . surface of the ground and were part of the wall of the structures. A few of the boulders shown in the profllein the lower . right and the one large isolated boulder on the floor had apparently' all fallen into the house pit as had many others ll7hich were removed during excavation. do View facing southeast across the finished excavation shown in progress in 1!t; the profile at the left (see also Fig. 2) bisects House I (far-half of excavation), cuts across the northeast corner of House III (near balf of excavation) and intersects a third house. The large boulders at the :car side of the excavation had been left in place when House I was excavatedo The near portion of the floor and wall of. House I have been removed, exposing the floor of House 111" eo Facing south along Lewis Lodge (42Sa256) on Elk Ridge showing ruins of many rooms . Kiva I (see I,,) is located just this side of the '1T"-shaped door in the centex' of the picture" fo Facing approzimately east inSide' Kiva I at Lewis Lodge (42Sa256).

Note part of small square niche at lower 1eft~ one of the six pilasters in the center, (flanked O:'"'l either side by the banquette) and tm cribbed roof overhead. .

'-

15 NEW PUBLICATIONS PERTINENT TO trrAH ARCHEOLOGY Daugherty, Richard D. 1956.

"Early Man in the CoiuilI.bia Intermontane Province."

Universit:y of Utah A:!1!:brOl)olo&ical Pa pers , No. 24.

Salt Lake City. 123 pp. .

The initial purpose of this publication is to summarize the known information concerning early man in the Columbia Intermontane Province with special emphasis on t:he Lind Coulee site. A full report of this site, however, will be published separately.

Daugherty also briefly summarizes .all of the early man information from western North America. A table, listing 193 early man sites by state and including such information as location, artifacts found, paleontology, geology, radiocarbon dates and references provides a hurldy source of information.

Meighan, Clement W., ll!!.

1956 "Archeological Excavations in Iron County, Utah r, qni~ersity of Utah Anthropol ogica l Paper s , No. 250 Balt Lake City. 132 pp.

This is a report of the 1954 eKcavations by the summer archeological field school of the University of California, Los Angeles, a Puebloid site at the north edge of Paragonah, plus a short description of near-by petroglyphs. U.C.LoA. has subsequently devoted two more summer's work to this site.

The work marks the return of archeological investigation to the area after a gap of nearly 40 years since Neil Mo Judd excavated part of the same site in 1915 and 1917 for the University of Utah and the Smithsonian Institutiono 0

Wormington, H. Mo and Robert H. Lister 1956 "Archeological Investigations on the Uncompahgre Plateau is West Central Colorado."

Denver .Museum of Natural Hi ~.!: Q,ry Proceedings: No .. -2., Denver, Colorado. 12.9 pp.

The authors of this publicat:ton report excavation of several archeological sites, mostly rock shelters or caves, which share a nonceramic tradition representing a time span of prob~b1y several thousand yearso This tradition, which they have called the Uncompahgre complex, is Similar f:o the Desert cu1tln'e of the Great culture of the Great Basino Other sites, reported from the same general area. seem to have a shorter and probably later time span. A date of cao 1150 AD is suggested for the most recent occupation by the associated pottery found at one siteo

Department of Anthropology

University of Utah Archeological Survey

(1)

Site No.

(2)

County

Photo No .

(3) State

-----

1. Map Reference 2. Type of Site

3. Cultural Affiliation (if known) 4. Location

Sec .

T. R. -------------------------------------------5. Owner and Address ----------------------------------------------6. Previous Owners --------------------------- --------------------7. Tenant ------------------------------------------------------8. Informants -----------------------------------------------9, Previous Designations for Site ---------------------------------------10" Site description, position, & surrounding terrain. ____________________

.!

12, Depth and Character of Fill._____________________________________ _

13. Present Condition

--------------------------------------------

14 . Material Collected 15. Material Observed

------------------------------------------------

16. Material Reported and Owner ______________________________________ 17" Recommendations for Further Work ________________....,......____________ 18. Was site mapped by survey party?

Recorded by

Wh,attype of map ? _ _ _ __ -~--- .----- ,

','

. Date

----------------