essay

Projectile point classification and Middle Archaic stratigraphic relationships in the Picacho area

Prehistoric hunter-gatherers of south central Arizona: the Picacho Reservoir Archaic Project, by Frank E. Bayham, Donald H. Morris, M. Steven Shackley (13)Published In 1986 • Pages: 217-246

By: Bayham, Frank E..

AbstractBrief abstract written by HRAF anthropologists who have done the subject indexing for the document
Bayham examines and analyzes the projectile points from various sites at the Picacho Reservoir and he compares the points from the Buried Dune (AA:3:16)and Arroyo (AA:3:28) sites. Both these sites have C-14 dates and indications that their stratigraphy is fairly intact. He examined the feasibility of using Chiricahua and San Jose/Pinto points as time indicators. One problem with using projectile points as chronological indicators is that they are frequently re-used by later people in the Southwest. At the Buried Dune and Arroyo sites the Chiricahua and San Jose/Pinto points have mutually exclusive distributions but are contemporary. The two sites were also used at different seasons of the year and the Buried Dune site represents a short term occupation by a mobile group while the Arroyo site was intensively used for a longer duration.
SubjectsDocument-level OCM identifiers given by the anthropology subject indexers at HRAF
Weapons
Dating methods in archaeology
Chronologies and culture sequences
Post depositional processes in archaeological sites
Settlement patterns
Annual cycle
traditionCulture name from the Outline of World Cultures (OWC)
Middle-Late Desert Archaic
HRAF PubDateThe date HRAF published the document
2010
RegionThe area the document pertains to
North America
Sub RegionThe more specific area the document pertains to, which is located within the Region
Southwest and Basin
Document TypeMay include journal articles, essays, collections of essays, monographs, or chapters/parts of monographs
essay
Evaluation
Creator TypeThe type of person writing the document, e.g. Ethnographer, Missionary, Archaeologist, Folklorist, Linguist, Indigenous Person, and so on.
Archaeologist
Document Rating A ranking done by HRAF anthropologists based on the strength of the source material on a scale of 1 to 5, as follows: 1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good, useful data, but not uniformly excellent; 4 - excellent secondary data; 5 - excellent primary data.
4: Excellent Secondary Data
5: Excellent Primary Data
AnalystThe HRAF anthropologist who subject indexed the document and prepared other materials for the eHRAF culture/tradition collection
Sarah Berry; 2010
Field DateThe date the researcher conducted the fieldwork or archival research that produced the document
1983-1984
Coverage DateThe date or dates that the information in the document pertains to
Middle Archaic and Late Archaic and Protohistoric; 5000–4000 BP and 2640±220–1840±150 BP and 460±60 BP
Coverage PlaceLocation of the research culture or tradition (often a smaller unit such as a band, community, or archaeological site)
Picacho Reservoir area, south-central Arizona, United States
NotesAdditional notes
Frank E. Bayham
For bibliographical references see document 22: Bayham, Morris, Shackley
LCSHLibrary of Congress Subject Headings
Indians of North America--Antiquities