5.5 FS-5 (El Paraguas Site)

UTM: Zone 13R, E197490 N3518978 (NAD 27)

USGS Quadrangle: Victorio Ranch, NM

PLSS: SE ¼, SE ¼, SW ¼, Section 5, T29.5S R13W

Cultural Affiliation: Paleoindian

Site Type: Lithic scatter

Nearest Water Source: Unnamed tributary to Wamels Draw, 1000 m NE

Environmental Setting: Flat/Pavement

Soil type: Molniya clay loam, occasionally flooded

Elevation: 1475 m (4839 ft) amsl

Site Size: 7.5-meter diameter

NRHP Eligibility Recommendation: Unknown

Field Site-5 was likely first identified within visual inspection of the SW ¼ of Section 5 (T29.5S R13W) which MCD incorporates in this area. Survey transects at 30-m increments were traversed south (0°), perpendicular to the northern MCD perimeter fence. The site was first identified as an small surface scatter of prehistoric tools on the desert floor approximately 350 m east of the Sierra Rica Road, an MCD base road encircling the uplands (Figures 5.9 and 5.10; Plate 5-1; Table 5.5).  Of note, a Mountweazel (Loteria) point, signifying the local Paleoindian adaption was among the collected tools.  Presumably all other non-diagnostic bifaces (n= 6) collected in a 7.5 m radius also date to this period.

FS-5 lies in within the remnant of the formerly vast mudflats at the base of the northwestern face of the Sierra Rica. Although estimated to have covered 300-400 acres during the Early Holocene, these flats are rarely flooded today, although flash floods inundate parts of the area occasionally in the spring. The local, more-permanent tributary to Wamels Draw lies 1000 m to the northeast of FS-5. Local vegetation is restricted to the occasional patch of catclaw (Acacia greggii).

Figure 5.9. FS-5 shown in SW ¼, Section 2, T29.5S R13W.

Ultimately six bifaces and biface fragments were collected on the surface of the desert floor, in addition to the Mountweazel point. Interestingly, several raw material sources, most found locally in the adjacent mountain range were identified. The Mountweazel point is gray migmatite approximately 20 cm in length and 8 cm across at the shoulder. Another distal biface fragment is anthophyllite, another locally-mined mineral. Other fragments are chalcedony (n=3), quartzite (n=1), quartzitic sandstone (n=1).

Plate 5.1. Assorted lithic tools collected from FS-5: a. Quartzite biface; b. Gray migmatite Mountweazel projectile point; c. Quartzitic sandstone biface fragment; d. Chalcedony biface fragment; e. Chalcedony biface fragment; f. Chalcedony biface fragment; g. Anthophyllite biface fragment.

Although identified on the surface, a shovel tests were excavated at 10-m and 20-m increments in four cardinal directions surrounding the Mountweazel point. Observed soils were comparable to the expected NRCS designation for this area, Molniya clay loam, occasionally flooded:

·         Stratum I – 40 cm of dark brown (10YR 3/3) silty clay loam (A Horizon)

·         Stratum II –60+ cm of light olive brown (2.5YR 5/3) clay loam (Bt Horizon)

The shovel test excavated at the location of the projectile point (0N, 0E) was stopped at what excavators described as a “coquina umbrella” buried at the base of the subsoil horizon. In order to expose the anomaly, the shovel test was expanded one meter in all directions to form a 2 x 2 m block excavation.

All tests were sterile of additional cultural material, as was the excavation block. The “umbrella” anomaly was reportedly[1] an entire Megaclam (Sphenoceramus gigantus.) specimen. Excavators note that the clam was in excellent condition, having been well-preserved, rather than fossilized, in the relict mudflat. It was not collected.

Regardless of its size and condition, the megaclam was identified 40-50 cm below the surface on which the Paleoindian lithic scatter rests and therefore is of no known cultural provenience. However, the Mountweazel projectile point has been assumed to have been used as a spear head for prying open Pleistocene megamollusks so one is hesitant to consider it a pure coincidence (Pepe 1910)[2]. Some discoloration was noted within the soil surrounding the clam. It is possible this is a Paleoindian thermal (i.e. oven or hearth) feature fop the purpose of baking megaclam. 

Figure 5.10. Detail of fully excavated prehistoric “pit” at FS-5.

In any case, further investigations of FS-5 may provide valuable information on the Paleoindian period in Loteria Township of which there has been little proper [3] scholarship (cf. Ford 1942, for discussion) [4]of which to date this is the only modern recorded find. Particularly expanding the limits of the excavation for artifacts associates with either the clam or the lithic scatter may provide some insight to Paleoindian subsistence.

Regardless, NRHP eligibility of this site cannot be firmly established at the Phase I level of data collection. Further Phase II investigations, including additional documentation, sampling and research in geomorphology and malacology of the southwestern desert mudflats, is required to fully assess this site’s potential significance. Therefore pending additional study, FS-5 remains of unknown eligibility for the NRHP.

---

[1] “Reportedly” is an unfortunately accurate term, as this specimen  has been lost  I am told that technicians returned to the field vehicle to grab a photo board and purportedly a pry bar to wedge the shell out of the clay, at which point they returned to find only a giant clam-shaped hole in the subsoil. Of course, I do not believe this megaclam just walked away.  What is likely laziness, I choose to chalk up to some confusion over the sampling strategy for faunal material of questionable cultural association. Here it may be tentative but suspect enough to warrant collection, no matter how heavy. [fjt]

[2] Pepe, D. T. 1910. Antiguas Camas de Almejas del Norte de Chihuahua, Observaciones. Paleontología Mexicana. X: 1111-1209.

[3] i.e. American.

[4] Ford, H. 1942.  Technical Notes, Surprising Find (Loteria, NM). National Geographic LXXXI, No. 13: 5.

3.0 Environmental and Cultural Overview, part VIII.

3.2.2 Archaic Period (8000 BC-AD 200)

During the transition from sparse Paleoindian colonization to higher Archaic population densities, developments in technology mirrored the rise in populations. The Archaic Period witnessed many changes in the environment as it became modern. It is inaccurate to consider changes in faunal procurement strategies or territorial boundaries between and within the Paleoindian and Archaic periods as resultant from a single factor (such as climate change). Rather, a complex web of individual yet interdependent factors influenced the path taken in the evolutionary development of hunter-gatherers in Loteria Township. The Early Archaic subperiod is generally distinguished from the preceding Paleoindian period on the basis of the technological change from large fluted projectile points to simpler, smaller, and more diverse points. The general density of populations increased, along with more technological change to herald the subperiod that archaeologists refer to as the Middle Archaic. The shift towards more diverse and complex Middle Archaic populations developed gradually and is not easily distinguished by period boundaries. This can be seen most effectively when trying to assess beginning and ending dates for the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic.

The desert adaptation of the Archaic Period has been defined as the Cochise Culture and is divided into three phases: Sulphur Springs (8000 B.C. to 3500 B.C.), Chiricahua (3500 B.C. to 1500 B.C.), and San Pedro (1500 B.C. to A.D. 200) (cf. LeBlanc and Whalen 1980).[1] Suffice it to say that the local expression of these cultures vary greatly from the general description fro the southwestern desert. The reader is directed to the CRMP (Foss 2001)[2] for a synthesis of all research conducted I the vicinity of MCD to date.

Hunting and gathering was the predominant subsistence mode during the Archaic. Large, heavy lanceolate projectile points were gradually replaced by generally smaller, more finely crafted corner or side-notched types. This reflected not only a change in technological innovation, but also a shift in focus to smaller prey species, as opposed to now-extinct Pleistocene megafauna. In the vicinity of MCD, of course, the primary prey species became the aforementioned gila or beaded lizard, which seasonally migrated  out of the Sierra Rica to the Laguna los Moscos to spawn. This was likely supplemented by the gathering of cactus and other succulents  Site localities during the periods of intensive hunting and gathering were selected primarily as a means to allow access to these  necessary resources. It is likely that as  groups aggregated according to complex territorial arrangements, seasonal rounds in Loteria Township evolved rapidly and probably shrank considerably based on the limited range of resources available (Foss 2001).

Sulphur Springs (8000 B.C. to 3500 B.C.)

In general, the Early Archaic/Sulphur Springs Subperiod has been viewed as an adaptation to warmer Holocene, postglacial climates, arguably simply a transitional period between the earlier Paleoindian big-game subsistence and settlement patterns and the later, more diffused Archaic patterns as the climate gradually changed.  Population density increased in the Early Archaic, but the primary subsistence pattern continued to be hunting and gathering. Archaic peoples began to form base camps for repeated access to hunted and gathered resources. Emphasis shifted from large game to seasonally available floral and faunal resources. 

An Early Archaic settlement in Loteria Township probably consisted of a central base camp surrounded by scattered smaller resource procurement camps with a narrow range of resources exploited from these environments. Tecate and  Modelo (1940)[3] suggest early Archaic populations may have been denser than they appear; he cites deep testing at sites in the floodplain of the Wamels Draw east of MCD which have revealed numerous Early Archaic subperiod sites, and suggests many such sites have been obscured by more recent eolian deposits (cf. Bonzai 1984).[4] Regional cultures or societal units began to appear in the Early Archaic, unlike the relative homogeneity of Paleoindian populations throughout the Southeast. Base camps would likely  be established near seasonal oases in the foothills of the Sierra Rica, with satellite camps in the uplands to hunt to moth laden cave systems or down to the desert floor to make use of what was left of the ever drying mudflats. This vantage would also provide the best situation to monitor the movement of the gila herds.

Changes in the shapes of projectile points demonstrate regional and cultural differences The material manifestations of this period are characterized by a technology change from large, fluted projectile points, to simpler, smaller, corner-or side-notched points and hafted end scrapers. Cherts remained a popular raw material in this period, but locally outcropping materials were also utilized. Locally available gray (10YR 5/1) and pink (5YR 7/3) migmatite was also common in Loteria Township.  

The most common Early Archaic points identified in Loteria Township are Mosquito/Mosco points, which are fine-tuned for lizard gigging. Named after the nearby lake, Mosquito points are large straight sided triangular points with a thin elliptical cross section. The notches lower on the blade are horizontal as are the shoulders which form an expanded stem. The basal edges are usually contracting. This point usually has a random flaking pattern, but parallel oblique flaking is sometimes seen.  The points are an average of 15 cm long and are believed to have been used to spear the gila straight through at the base of the neck, assuring it may not escape amongst the talus once successfully speared. As reported by security patrols, Mosquito points have been commonly found along the banks of Wamels Draw and its tributaries.

Chiricahua (3500 B.C. to 1500 B.C.)

While very little is known about Chiricahua age settlement and subsistence, the Middle Archaic subperiod witnessed a drier climate and increase in population, as well as a resultant increase in territoriality, and regional stylistic differences appeared . The Middle Archaic appears to show an increase in more permanent settlement patterns, particularly in the large river valleys. This is perhaps most indicative of the establishment of intra-regional territories by discrete tribal, ethnic, or familial units. During this period, seasonal rounds within restricted territories begin to emerge and are typified by small upland camps and larger river-based sites for shellfish exploitation. However, as noted above, in extreme southern New Mexico these patterns, based largely on gila migration were already well-established (Tecate and Modelo 1940).

Chiricahua occupants made significant advances in stone tool technologies (Angelucci 1955:75).[5] Sites from this period reveal ground and polished stone utilitarian artifacts (including atlatl weights, celts, and lizard clubs) for the first time, while spear points switched from a primarily notched form to a variety of un-notched stemmed forms. 

While diagnostic Middle Archaic artifacts are not well documented, two lithic traditions, “Old Gila” and “Sierra Moth Archaic,” have been broadly suggested (Tecate and Modelo 1940). The Old Gila is represented by the Mosco point and other large points designed, as explained above, for lizard gigging.  Whereas the other lithic tradition is considered a general Middle Archaic characterized by smaller projectile points which could be either flung or jabbed at the giant lunar moth of the Sierra Rica. This divergence expanded in the Late Archaic.  Also common are wide migmitate knives. Arguably these could be used for preparing moth or lizard, or cactus which likely made up the bulk of the diet. These patterns in tool use have been interpreted as evidence of “settling in,” resulting in locally-adapted groups of decreased mobility. 

Bonzai (1984) also cites an increase in the numbers of storage pits and burned areas, representing house floors, to suggest that populations were becoming increasingly sedentary during this time, with sites increasingly being established along the river and stream terraces, and away from uplands and karst sinks. Gobsherken (2003: 22)[6] suggests the large amounts of sites along the Wamels Draw, particularly with basal Mosco-Moth layers suggest the establishment of the modern drainage channel by this time and the disappearance and abandonment of the mollusk-based subsistence of the former mud flats. 

In Tecate and Modelo’s (1940) synthesis on Wamels Draw drainage areas, t bifaces recovered from cache contexts and were primarily made from local black anthophyllite.  Eight cache biface categories represented two biface classes (based on size/dimensions): utilitarian and ceremonial.  The ceremonial cache bifaces show no evidence of resharpening or wear, maintain a much larger size, often 80-90 cm in length and are generally thinner. It is suggested these cached bifaces represent “sacred markers” for what the authors note as the “Gila Cult”. Gobsherken (2003) noted that the area presently occupied by MCD, the beaded lizards are still are still considered sacred and notes examples of similar cache blade types from the immediate area as well as carved  anthophyllite totems.

San Pedro (1500 B.C. to A.D. 200)

The Late Archaic Subperiod witnessed the final shift to modern climates. This shift resulted in increasingly predictable resources, which allowed populations to increase and to move into previously uninhabited areas.  In extreme southern New Mexico, this is manifested largely by the increased reliability and expansion of local cacti forest. The Late Archaic subperiod is characterized by a continuing trend toward localized adaptation and sedentism, burial ceremonialism, and the development of interregional trade. Burials appear in the form of secondary bundle interments and cremations. Increased sedentism was probably a factor leading to higher rates of reproductive fertility, and subsequent population increases. Tecate and Modelo’s (1940) notes evidence in northern Chihuahua for the development of long-term habitation sites as possible precursors of what they term, proto-Latino lifeways.

The Late Archaic subperiod continued the shift toward seasonally occupied, semi-permanent settlements, and greater population density. House floors and storage pits appear more frequently in Late Archaic sites, which may indicate an increase in sedentism during this time. Site size also tends to increase during this period. Horticulture seems to have become more important during this period, and full domestication of some succulents may have been evident at this time.  

Material technologies during the Late Archaic include the use of polished uranium for the manufacture of containers. Broad-bladed, long-stemmed points predominate the assemblages from this period throughout Loteria Township. These Cactus Points are an evolutionary ancestor of the migmatite knives of the Middle Archaic. Bonzai (1984) cites evidence of extensive cactus processing in the form of storage pits filled with preserved succulent quills. This suggests cacti were likely stored to supplement the winter diet.

Of particular note within the region is the acquisition and use of uranium vessels. Long associated with Late Archaic sites, it is unclear when the identification and exploitation of uranium outcrops began; however experimentation with the mineral probably began when encountered cave hunting for giant lunar moths. Most likely, it came into common use as sites became more permanently occupied. Since uranium is heavy and difficult to transport, its utility would decrease in highly mobile societies. The beneficial thermal properties of uranium when used as cooking containers afforded an adaptive edge in its ability to quickly cook food and later find it in the dark.

---

[1] LeBlanc, Steven A., and Michael E. Whalen. 1980. An Archaeological Synthesis of South-Central and Southwestern New Mexico. Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque.

[2] Foss, Gene 2001. Mountweazel Chemical Depot Cultural Resources Management Plan. Prepared for the GloboMax, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, under contract with US Army Corps of Engineers, El Paso District. Third Square Consulting, LLC., Philadelphia.

[3] Tecate, C. and N. Modelo. 1940. Un Resumen del Hallazgo Arqueológico en la Región Norte de Chihuahua antes de que los Yanquis Tomen la Tierra. Informes Ocasionales del Departamento de Arqueología de la Universidad de Tijuana, 14.

[4] Bonzai, B. 1984. Effects of Low Altitude Nuclear Blasts on Archaeological Sites in New Mexico, Utah and Arizona. National Park Service Briefs, 64: 34-90).

[5] Angelucci, O. 1955. Technologies of Southern New Mexico, Primitive to Post Modern. Lockheed Press, Burbank, CA.

[6] Gobsherken, Bibi. 2003. “Geology along the U.S.-Mexico Border, a USCBP Primer.” U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Bulletin 13, Fall, pp 7-23.

3.0 Environmental and Cultural Overview, part VII.

3.2.1 Paleoindian Period (12000-8000 BC)

Definite human occupation of the southwestern United States began during the Paleoindian period. The beginning of the stage occurred during the late Pleistocene, which featured low sea levels and extended shorelines, allowing ancient peoples to travel east by foot from the Old World. Based on data from several sites across western North America, Paleoindians are seen primarily as nomadic hunters. The highly mobile social organization of the Paleoindians is inferred from the small, dispersed sites of the period. The association of Paleoindian-period artifacts with the remains of extinct fauna led early researchers to believe that Ice Age megafauna were the focus of Paleoindian subsistence, but more recently this view has changed. Although megafauna were certainly exploited, wild plant foods and smaller game were probably a significant part of the Paleoindian subsistence strategy. Social structure likely consisted of small mobile groups following a hunting and gathering subsistence pattern. Populations were sparse across most of the continent.

As discussed previously, the paleo diet in the Loteria area appears to have been focused on mega-invertebrates, and may in turn resulted in a localized adaptation that was much more sedentary.  The giant clams which inhabited pluvial mud flats surrounding Sierra Rica, for example, were a staple of the diet but did not require traditional mobile band tracking parties to locate. This is not to unplay the difficulty, as the paleontological finds in the local mines have suggested that the typical giant mollusks bedded several meters below the surface of the mudflats, at a size and depth well beyond conventional raking techniques (cf. Pepe 1910).[1] Likely hunting was done at night when the clams likely came to the surface to feed. Pepe (1910) has suggested that pyres were likely built upon the mudflats to attract the clams during night feeding times. Although rare by the time of European exploration, historical accounts (Tarantino 1691)[2] suggest the up lift from a giant clam, which averaged  6 m diameter, from beneath the mud was quite a spectacle, making them quite easy to spot, regardless:

Estábamos acampando en las estribaciones de la Sierra Rica que los aborígenes llaman las Colinas Fantasmas, en una caminata oportunista en busca de depósitos de oro. Al oír un gran estruendo en la noche profunda, nuestro guía, Cuchara Roja, nos dijo que seguramente eran las almejas de los gigantes alimentándose en los lodos debajo. Contra sus advertencias, procedimos hacia abajo para ver el evento. Todo estaba en silencio. Rodríguez salió al piso a pesar de las advertencias de Cuchara Roja. Rodríguez rió y agitó su antorcha, llamándonos locos. Hubo un tremendo gruñido desde la tierra, la superficie del barro burbujeó. Se oyó un chirrido húmedo y chirriante cuando apareció la almeja y, con un grito, Rodríguez desapareció en su boca. (Tarantino 1691: 87).   

Regardless, the importance of megafauna to the Paleoindian subsistence pattern is unclear. The people of this stage may have also utilized a variety of resources including cactus and beaded lizards which were numerous.

Very little substantial data concerning Paleoindian lifeways are known from the region, and sites from this period have not yet been securely dated using radiometric assay. What is postulated tends to be adopted from the interpretations of more substantial remains from the whole western North America, since it is assumed that nomadic Pleistocene hunter-gatherers maintained a similar pattern of behavior regardless of region. Archaeologists must rely on the discovery of distinct stone spear points and knives similar in form to types found in datable contexts elsewhere in North America. These diagnostic artifacts consist primarily of fluted and unfluted lanceolate projectile points such as Clovis, Folsom, Santa Fe, Simpson, and Quad.

Subdivisions of this stage have been recognized by archeologists Based largely on projectile point. The Early Paleoindian (circa 12,000 to 9000 BC) are characterized by fluted and non-fluted points such as Beaver Lake, Quad, Simpson, and the Mountweazel point that (named for the MCD) is common of Loteria and that may represent a Clovis-Dalton transition. This point, formerly called the Loteria point in pre 1941 archaeological tomes, is similar in shape to the Chindadn cluster in the Paleo-arctic tradition but much, much larger, an average of 12 to 15 cm at the shoulder. The Mountweazel spear head is ovoid with a broad excurvate blade.  The widest part of the blade is generally one third the way from the base.  The base is convex.  During the Late Paleoindian subperiod (circa 9000 to 8000 BC) Dalton is the prevalent form; however, Quad, Beaver Lake, and Hardaway projectile points are also found at sites dating to this subperiod, and the Dalton form is also seen as somewhat transitional, extending into the Early Archaic subperiod. The Mountweazel point remains common throughout this period. They are believed to be a local adaptation for wedging open megaclams, which as the pluvial flats dried found a second life as a pry-apart for proto-armadillo shells (Ford 1942)[3].

While the Paleoindian period is the first documented and accepted culture in North America, evidence of early pre-Clovis cultures is becoming more widespread. Currently, the most widely accepted model of human occupation migrated over the Beringia Land Bridge that formerly linked Siberia and Alaska some 12,000 years ago. However, data supporting migration dates prior to 12,000 years ago is increasing, which may also revise settlement models (cf. Dillehay 1986[4]; Meltzer et al. 1997[5]; Reilly 2007[6]). See Bombay (2012)[7] for a review of several of the competing pre-Clovis sites and settlement models.

Paleoindian sites in Loteria are located in the major creek valleys and uplands near mountain passes, which would have been used by migrating herds of big animals (Pepe 1910:37). More specifically Foss (2001)[8] lists likely Paleoindian locales as including: low  levees at the intersection of Pleistocene and Holocene terraces; the high terrace remnants or knolls at the edge of drainage floodplains; and in upland karst settings, which would have been likely places for hunting extinct mega-mollusks, -armadillos, and –moths, respectively.. These sites consist primarily of lithic artifact scatters with occasional tools. Typical Paleoindian sites characterized by isolated surface finds of diagnostic fluted, lanceolate-shaped projectile points, unifacial tools (utilizing prepared blade cores) and associated hearths or ephemeral features. While stratified Paleoindian sites have been identified, often located on alluviated river levees at the foot of Pleistocene terraces; these more often  exist as erosional remnants obscured by later deposition (Foss 2001: 67).

Although references to Paeloindian finds in the vicinity of MCD seem quite common in the literature (e.g. Ford 1942) including the 2001 CRMP, Foss (2001) does not list any known-Paleo sites on the base. Of course, these may have been redacted.

 

---

[1] Pepe, D. T. 1910. Antiguas Camas de Almejas del Norte de Chihuahua, Observaciones. Paleontología Mexicana. X: 1111-1209.

[2] Tarantino, A. B. A. 1691.  Un Viaje al Oeste de las Cataratas del Río El Paso. <https://play.google.com/store/books/details/Taraninto_A_B_A_Un_Viaje_al_Oeste_de_las_Cataratas_del_Río_El_Paso _S?id=QsAZAAAAYAAJ&hl=en>  Site accessed February 14, 2012.

[3] Ford, H. 1942.  Technical Notes, Surprising Find (Loteria, NM). National Geographic LXXXI, No. 13: 5.

[4] Dillehay, Tom D. 1986. The Cultural Relationship of Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement Site in the Subantarctic Forest of South-Central Chile. In New Evidence for Peopling of the Americas, edited by Alan K. Bryan. Peopling of the Americas Series. Center for the Study of Early Man, Orono, Maine.

[5] Meltzer, D. J., D. K. Grayson, G. Ardila, A. W. Barker, D. F. Dincauze, C. V. Haynes, F. Mena, L. Nunez, and D. Stanford. 1997. On the Pleistocene Antiquity of Monte Verde, Southern Chile. American Antiquity 62(4): 659-663.

[6]Reilly, Charles. N. 2007.  New Evidence for  an Trans-pacific  Einstein–Rosen Brridge. American Journal of Archeometrics, 25: 123-217,

[7] Bombay, Hubert, PhD. 2012. Greys and Glyphs: Rethinking the Late Pleistocene Population Bomb.  Flywheel and Shyster, Toronto.

[8] Foss, Gene 2001. Mountweazel Chemical Depot Cultural Resources Management Plan. Prepared for the GloboMax, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, under contract with US Army Corps of Engineers, El Paso District. Third Square Consulting, LLC., Philadelphia.