Archaeological spatial analysis of DiRi 14
Date
1982
Authors
Eldridge, Morley
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
This thesis presents a spatial analysis of DiRi 14, a prehistoric site near Hope, B.C. Behavioral inferences are made from patterns within the data suggested by cluster analysis. These inferences are compared to behavioral inferences made at other archaeological sites in the region.
Three components are found within the DiRi 14 assemblage. Component 1 dates from about 6000 BP, and yielded a ~mall sample not suitable for spatial analysis. Component 2 dates from around 3000 BP, while Component 3 dates to about 1000 BP. A large assemblage of lithic artifacts from the latter two components provided the data on which the spatial analysis is based.
Techniques of spatial analysis are examined, and cluster analysis chosen because it is able to compare non-contiguous excavation units. This ability to compare non-adjacent units is unique, and tends to outweigh some of the disadvantages inherent in the method.
Within Component 3, a decrease in the number of clusters was found as distance from the river increased. This reflects a more intensive use of river frontage space, with a greater number of activities performed there. Some evidence of woodworking was found in every area of the site, and it was the dominant activity in areas away from the river. Manufacturing and maintaining weapons and tools, and preparing hides was concentrated in an area near the riverbank, but some evidence of these activities was found in other parts of the site as well. One activity that seems to have been undertaken only near the riverbank is fish butchering. Both sexes appear to have been active in most areas of the site.
Large structures are not evident in Component 3 deposits, but the dense concentration of fire-cracked rock and artifacts on some portions of the site suggest that it was a dwelling site, rather than a temporary resource-utilization locale. There is circumstantial evidence that the site was not occupied in either the late summer-early fall main fishing season or in the winter.
In Component 2, two major clusters were revealed, implying similar activities within each major cluster, but with large differences between the activities. One major cluster was connected with woodworking and the other with fish butchering and tool maintenance and manufacture. Similar to the later Component 3, most activities were concentrated near the river, but overall there were fewer activities in Component 2 compared to Component 3. Fish processing was present in Component 2, although the ground slate knife was nearly absent. It is suggested that microblades and quartz crystal "microliths" fulfilled a similar function.
It seems probable that DiRi 14 was a resource utilization center in Component 2, where wood was obtained and processed (although fine woodworking tasks were rarely undertaken), and where people worked butchering fish. Ancillary tasks occurred principally nearest the river. Long-term habitation seems unlikely.
Spatial analysis at DiRi 14 made possible behavioral inferences which might not have been discovered if the analysis had not been performed. Behavioral inferences made by other researchers in the area have tended to be tacit assumptions, although a trend to more careful inference can be seen in the literature . This tendency culminates in the spatial analysis by Archer (1980) of a Skamel phase site a short distance away from DiRi 14. It is suggested that the variability observed by early researchers in assemblages of different time periods, and interpreted to be indicative of major social change, may instead reflect special task areas or seasonal use sites. It is proposed that close attention to spatial analysis and behavioral inferences may help avoid such problems in future revisions of the regional culture-history model.