NbTj-9

Sandy beaches are rare along the perimeters of most of the lakes in the southwest Anderson Plain. One such beach, albeit a short one, is located in the north-east sector of Hyndman Lake. In addition to probable late prehistoric remains on a low terrace behind the modern sandy beach artifacts were found on a relic beach approximately 100 m from the lake shore. This discontinuous feature consists of a ridge of coarse sand and gravel which rises slightly above the surrounding poorly- drained terrain. It measures no more than 20 m at its widest point and roughly 70 m in length. The vegetation cover on this ridge is predominantly caribou moss with a few spruce trees, especially along its eastern perimeter. The terrain on either side of this ridge is characterized by hummocky muskeg. Fifty metres to the east a steep, high hill defines the edge of a plateau which appears to be part of a complex of glacial deposits which includes eskers. Today, the narrow corridor, formed by the lake shore on one side and the steep hill on the other, serves as a route for caribou moving along the east end of Hyndman Lake. In fact, a well-worn caribou trail runs down the centre of the relic beach.

Excavations took place in the inland area of the site over the course of the 1990 field season (Pilon 1991) and again in 1992 (Pilon 1992). As a result, three separate distributions were sampled. Artifacts were found immediately under the surface vegetation. The coarseness of the terrace matrix was such that a distinct humus layer had not formed. Rather, the upper 5 cm of this gravelly sand had a higher than usual humic content. Artifacts had managed to move into this layer as well.

Area A (6 m2)

This area consists of a 2 m x 3 m block excavated in 1990. A very dense, but well-delimited concentration of lithic remains was found centred on a combustion zone. The feature was comprised of a basal layer of bright-orange oxidized sandy gravel (basically the upper portion of the relic beach deposits) which contained, in its uppermost few centimetres, charcoal flecks, numerous minute pieces of calcined bone and many fire-cracked rocks.

The associated lithic scatter was comprised of just under 3000 pieces and was made up of a very large proportion of primary debitage. The distribution of this large quantity of material suggests that an actual physical barrier, such as a skin tent, was involved rather than simply the vagaries of events during and following occupation.

Distinctive artifacts include four incomplete, delicately flaked bipointed projectile point fragments, a badly heat-spalled "mitten- shaped" burin with a notch on either proximal edge which may indicate its method of hafting, along with the mid-section from a second burin, and microblades (10). Only two possible burin spalls--they may be microblades--were found.

A single stemmed biface was recovered. The stem is lobate or lingual in shape. The remains of the triangular blade of the biface is separated from the stem element by a point of inflection which forms a slight shoulder. Judging from its size, the implement more than likely was designed as a hafted knife.

One complete uniface was recovered which warrants detailed description. Its length is 1.12 cm and its maximum width is 0.56 cm. In outline the implement is lanceolate with a slightly asymetric point. The edges are formed by carefully and steeply retouching the edges along both lateral margins while the basal edge is a snap. If shape were the only criteria necessary for attributing a possible function to this artifact, one might be tempted to refer to it as a point or a knife. However, given its reduced size, I am more inclined to assume that 1) the tool was hafted, and 2) such hafting would leave very little of it protruding. Therefore I propose that this implement functioned as a hafted graver.

Two implements were found which exhibit intentional grinding. One is nothing more than a large flake with a bifacially ground, convex edge. The second is the extremity of a large chipped biface. Grinding was then used to alter the edge of the implement as well as portions of its faces. At least four flakes were recovered which exhibited some limited dorsal grinding, and one of the unifaces, a notched flake, also has evidence of grinding on its dorsal surface.

Even though an overwhelming proportion of the debitage collection consisted of siliceous argillite, most of the lithic implements were manufactured from fine-grained cherts). Both the siliceous argillite and the cherts appear to have been derived from local secondary deposits.

Tool frequencies and raw materials, NbTj-9-Area A

CHSA
BUBU
Burin2---
Pièce Esquillée--33
Projectile Point4---
Scraper-2--
Blank/Preform4-1-
Retouched/Used Flake-4-12
Retouched Burin Spall----
Other-1*-5**
Total107420

CH-chert SA-siliceous argillite B-biface U-uniface
* notch ** 1-retouched microblade, 1-perforator, 3-notches

Area B (4.5 m2) and Area C (6 m2)

Both Area B and Area C were initially identified on the basis of the presence of fire-cracked rock clusters (Pilon 1991: 24). These are located within 15 m of Area A and are presumed to be related to its occupation.

The artifacts from both areas confirmed the original suspicion that the fire-cracked rock clusters were indeed centres of activity by bearers of the Arctic Small Tool tradition. A number of important similarities can be described, yet there are some significant differences.

The collections from these two Areas are relatively small, not only in terms of their respective totals, but especially with regards the number of implements recovered. Additionally, few of the tools are complete.

Only four artifacts warrant specific mention. The first, found in Area C, is a small bifacial bipoint manufactured of fine-grained chert. Although the flaking exhibits refinement, the classic ripple effect is lacking. However, the craftsman may have experienced difficulty in thinning the piece which remained quite thick in the lower half of the tool.

A second biface of note was also recovered in Area C. It appears to be manufactured from a large cortical flake of poor-grade siliceous argillite. It has a marked plano-convex cross-section resulting from most of the shaping having been perfored on one face, but the edges are bifacially retouched. The implement is lanceolate in shape with a straight, thick base, and a rounded distal tip. The tip thus confers an apparent asymetric plan to the implement. Both faces of the tool exhibit extensive wear of all arrisses. Rather than being indicative of use or even the intentional grinding by the artisan, this attrition has the appearance of having been produced by water tumbling or perhaps simply as a result of having been carried around in a skin bag for quite some time. As undiagnostic as it may be, the association with the Arctic Small Tool tradition occupation is good and there is no evidence to suggest occupation by any other cultural tradition at this specific locality.

Finally, there is a complete artifact which is similar to diminutive graver found in Area A. It appears to have been made from a fine chert burin spall. Its plan is lanceolate with steep ventral edge retouch. However, the edges adjacent to the pointed tip can be said to be bifacially retouched. It measures 1.18 cm x 0.4 cm x 0.16 cm. Another burin spall exhibits bifacial distal retouch at its tip, but lacks the lateral retouching. It also suggests use as an engraving tool.

Burin spalls and burin fragments, as well as microblades were present in both areas and demonstrate that these items were part of the inventory of implements and technologies employed by the occupants in both areas.

As in Area A, raw materials are dominated by locally derived types, but fine- grained cherts were by far preferred for the manufactured of formal implements such as projectile points and burins. All but one of the large metamorphic rock flakes, which have been tentatively identified as greywake, were recovered from Area B, where they occurred in good association with ASTt material. Many cortex flakes were found which show that the occupants were reducing local cobbles. A number of biface thinning flakes of this material were found which demonstrate that it was also being used to produce more refined, albeit large, implements.

Tool frequencies and raw materials, NbTj-9-Areas B & C

CHSA
BUBU
Burin-2**--
Pièce Esquillée----
Projectile Point1---
Scraper-1--
Blank/Preform--4***-
Retouched/Used Flake-1-1
Retouched Burin Spall---1
Other2*---
Total3442

CH-chert SA-siliceous argillite B-biface U-uniface
* both appear to be retouched burin spalls and were likely used as gravers
** one is definitely a burin fragment while the second is questionable
*** three of these conjoined to form the lanceolate biface

Dating

Two wood charcoal samples, taken from the hearth feature in Area A, were submitted for radiocarbon dating. The results were 820±70 B.P. (S-3362) and less than 100 B.P. (S-3378) respectively. In spite of good context, the dates are obviously wrong. Three considerations might explain these results. Firstly, the soil which contained the charcoal consisted of a coarse sand with fine gravel. Such a porous soil could allow the downward movement of carbon deposited more recently. Secondly, the modern vegetation cover was made up primarily of caribou moss, which, when dry, shrinks and thereby exposes the underlying mineral soil to contamination. Lastly, the relic beach has been used by migrating caribou within the recent past. These animals have left a well-marked trail which coincidentally crosses the site. This prominent feature may well have been used over centuries. Such traffic could easily account for surface disturbances which in turn would lead to contaminating carbon.