Date of Award:

5-2015

Document Type:

Thesis

Degree Name:

Master of Science (MS)

Department:

Sociology and Anthropology

Department name when degree awarded

Sociology, Social Work, and Anthropology

Committee Chair(s)

Steven R. Simms

Committee

Steven R. Simms

Committee

David Byers

Committee

Kenneth P. Cannon

Abstract

Archaeology in the western United States frequently employs pedestrian survey of the ground surface to locate and identify archaeological sites. Proponents of alternative survey techniques suggest that site-based survey may be inherently flawed and will not accurately detect, document, or account for artifacts located outside of site boundaries. Site-based survey identifies artifacts, and then searches the area more intensively in an attempt to identify a spatial break in artifact presence. Nonsite approaches utilize point plotting of all discovered artifacts in order to quantitatively identify relationships between artifacts. Quantitative analysis removes a level of researcher bias from the interpretation of past behavior. A comparative study utilizing both approaches in southern Idaho provides data to assess the effectiveness of each method to identify spatial distributions, associations, and patterning among archaeological materials.

This project was partially funded through the National Park Service (NPS), City of Rocks National Reserve, Idaho and implemented by the NPS, Utah State University Archaeological Services, and the Utah State University Department of Anthropology.

Nonsite survey met predicted expectations by identifying 28 percent more artifacts than site-based survey. Nonsite survey located a higher number and diversity of formal tools, potentially indicative of a wider range of cultural activities. Importantly, post-field analyses of the nonsite survey data utilized two tools in ArcMap GIS software to identify artifact clustering at varying spatial scales. These clusters were not identified by the site-based approach. Enhancing our understanding of artifact patterning and spatial associations using a nonsite approach may better inform us of past behavior at a landscape or regional level, rather than specific sites. However, significant differences in coincident artifact detection demonstrate that archaeological survey methods are a sample of the archaeological record, and no survey can be expected to locate all artifacts or features.

Checksum

f6bb7f428b63ae07f8ab051f654ee325

Download

Included in

Anthropology Commons

Share

COinS

Copyright for this work is retained by the student. If you have any questions regarding the inclusion of this work in the Digital Commons, please email us at .