Colluvial deposition of anthropogenic soils at the Ripley site,Ripley,New York

Abstract

The Ripley site is a Late Woodland through Historic period Iroquoian site located on a bluff overlooking the southern shore of Lake Erie in Western New York in the town of Ripley. Numerous authors have mentioned the presence of a midden along the eastern slope of the site, where prehistoric inhabitants cast refuse down the slope toward Young’s Run. The primary focus of this research is to examine the soils along the eastern slope to determine the origins of those deposits. This research will further reconstruct the depositional processes along the backslope, footslope, and toeslope of the eastern bluff, as well as determine if cultural refuse disposal from the prehistoric occupation of the Ripley site occurred along the eastern slope.

Keywords

Archaeology Ripley Dewey’s Knoll NYSM 2490 anthropogenic soil colluvium Iroquois Seneca geochemistry geochemical soil science geoarchaeology New York Archaeology Late Woodland grain size analysis

Introduction

The Ripley or Dewey’s Knoll site (NYSM 2490) is a Late Woodland through Historic period Iroquoian site located on a roughly 1.8-ha bluff along the south shore of Lake Erie (Figure 1). The site was first identified in the early 1800 s with intermittent excavation and collection of the site since. The site is recognized as multicomponent and associated with Erie, Huron, Neutral, Monongahela, Whittlesey, Fort Ancient, Seneca, Ontario Iroquoian, and Niagara Frontier groups (Drooker, 2012; Green and Sullivan, 1997). Radiocarbon samples have been collected from eleven feature locations in the main portion of the site. These samples with two-sigma calibrated ranges include three dates associated with a fourteenth-century occupation, and eight ranging from AD 1620–1950 (Drooker, 2012: 126; Harding, 2014: 53).

Figure 1.

Location of the Ripley site on ESRI World Topographic Map (NAD 1983 State Plane New York West FIPS 3103 [meters]).

Several researchers have noted the presence of a midden or refuse dump along the eastern slope of the site. Parker (1907: 477) noted the presence of refuse dumps at the base of the eastern slope along the southern bank of the bluff. Excavations from 1988–1992 by the New York State Museum, Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP), and the State University of New York College Fredonia (SUNY Fredonia) also suggest the presence of a midden along the base of the eastern bank of the bluff (Sullivan, et al., 1996: 33). The presence of a midden at the base of the eastern bank suggests the disposal of artefactual and food waste over the eastern bank of the site by prehistoric inhabitants. Many researchers have noted increases in organic content, phosphates, calcium, zinc, copper, sulfur, potassium, magnesium, bulk density, and artifacts in middens and other culturally related soils (Crowther, 1997; Entwistle et al., 1998; Garrison, 2003; Holliday and Gartner, 2007; Matthiesen, 2004; Parnell et al., 2002; Pîrnău, 2009; Schuldenrein and Vento, 1994; Selby, 2007; Weide, 1966; Wilson et al., 2008). Evidence of such actions is hypothesized to show up as a thickened A horizon with increased organic content, phosphates, calcium, zinc, copper, sulfur, potassium, magnesium, bulk density, and artifacts. This research attempts to (1) determine the origin of the deposits along the base of the eastern slope of the Ripley Site; (2) reconstruct depositional processes of the backslope, footslope, and toeslope of the eastern bluff at the Ripley site; and (3) determine if cultural refuse disposal from the prehistoric occupation of the Ripley site occurred along the eastern slope. The results of this study will aid in the interpretation of a possible midden at the toeslope of the eastern bank of the Ripley site as well as provide a geomorphic interpretation of depositional processes affecting the site.

Environmental setting

The Ripley site is located in the western portion of New York State in the Erie Lowland/Lake Plain physiographic region of Chautauqua County. In Chautauqua County, the Erie Lowland begins at the edge of Lake Erie and is bordered to the south by the Portage escarpment at an elevation of 174 m above sea level (masl) to ∼250 masl (Tomikel and Shepps, 1967: 7). The surface of the Erie Lowland is predominantly flat with highly visible steps in elevation paralleling the lake shore. These steps are Illinoian/Wisconsin aged lake deposits of former stages of Lake Erie (Calkin, 1970; Calkin et al., 1985; Shepps et al., 1959). As the Laurentian ice sheet retreated, a huge weight was lifted off the region, allowing for the gradual rise or rebound of land. As base level remained the same, streams gradually downcut into the slowly rising land. The site is located on a bluff, roughly 40 ft above the current surface of Lake Erie. Small creeks bound the site to the east and west with a downward slope to the south as well. Outcrops of the Northeast shale can be observed along the creek beds to the east and west of the site.

Cultural setting

Previous research identified the Ripley site as multicomponent with occupations from the fourteenth century through at least AD 1620 (Asch Sidell, 2006; Drooker, 2012; Green and Sullivan, 1997; Harding, 2014; Neusius et al., 1998). This time frame appears to be the most active occupation of the Ripley site encompassing the Late Woodland period (A.D. 1000–1300) through the early historic period (A.D. 1300–1700) (Engelbrecht and Sullivan, 1996; Ritchie, 1980; Snow, 1996). Throughout the Late Woodland and into European contact, a multitude of Native American groups and cultures existed in the Eastern Woodlands and along the southern shore of Lake Erie (Brose, 2006; Engelbrecht and Sullivan, 1996). These groups are referred to as the Northern Iroquois. The Northern Iroquois include the St. Lawrence (Laurentian) Iroquois, Huron (Wendat), Five Nations (Seneca, Cayga, Onondago, Oneida, and Mohawk), Susquehannock (Andaste), Neutral (Atiwendaron), Wenro (Wenrohronon), Erie (Eriehronon), and Petun (Tionontati) (Brose, 2006: 62; Byrnes et al., 2014: 1). In addition to these groups, it is almost certain other groups inhabited this region that were extinguished and/or incorporated into neighboring groups.

History of research

Archaeological investigations have taken place at the Ripley site since the 1820 s (Sullivan et al., 1996). The earliest documentation of the Ripley site is George Morse’s description of a large earthen ring eroding into Lake Erie. Morse describes a large number of Native American artifacts found at the site including stone tools and ceramics. Morse also describes his father leveling the earthen ring in 1826 (Parker, 1907: 519). The first recorded archaeological excavation of the site occurred in 1904 by Mark R. Harrington of the Peabody Museum at Harvard University, which identified 70 pit features including 31 burials (Sullivan et al., 1996: 28). In 1906, Arthur C. Parker conducted the first well documented excavation of the Ripley site. Parker’s excavation focused on burials, grave goods, and speculating on the location and purpose of the earthen ring described by Morse (Parker, 1907). Using the direct historical approach, Parker reviewed Jesuit accounts and maps of the region, identifying the inhabitants of the site as Eries. Parker noted a distinct village and burial section to the site as well as a “dump” or midden along the eastern margin of the site (Parker, 1907, 1922). Nearly half a century later in 1952, Alfred Guthe of the Rochester Museum of Arts and Sciences conducted a small excavation focused on five trenches in the central portion of the site. These excavations revealed roughly 20 post molds and four pit features (Sullivan et al., 1996: 31). Several other small excavations were conducted over the years by professionals and amateurs alike.

Ripley was revisited from 1988–1992 by a cooperative field school operated by the New York State Museum, IUP, and SUNY Fredonia to assess the site for potentially intact areas where modern excavation techniques could be utilized. A thorough background review was produced in Reanalyzing the Ripley Site: Earthworks and Late Prehistory on the Lake Erie Plain, edited by Lynne P. Sullivan (1996) as well as several papers and thesis (Asch Sidell, 2006; Drooker, 2012; Green and Sullivan, 1997; Harding, 2014; Neusius et al., 1998).

During the spring, summer, and fall of 2013 through 2014, Mercyhurst University reexamined the Ripley site. Faculty and students led by Allen Quinn conducted extensive surface collection and mapped each artifact encountered in the northern portion of the site. Several shovel test probes as well as a 2 m x 2 m excavation unit were dug in the sites northern and western boundaries. This research focused on spatial distribution of artifacts throughout the site in an attempt to locate specific use areas (Byrnes et al., 2014).

Research methodology

Twenty shovel test probes roughly 60 cm in diameter were dug at 5 m intervals on a north-south grid along the foot and toeslope of the eastern cut bank of the Ripley site (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Shovel Test Probe locations along the eastern slope with samples sent for geochemical analysis highlighted in black on 2014 ESRI Aerial Imagery with 0.5 m contour lines.

Soil descriptions were recorded for each shovel test probe in the field including horizons, depth, boundary distinction, texture, structure grade and shape, consistency, root abundance, and stoniness. Aspect, slope gradient (%), and landscape position were recorded for the surface of each shovel test probe. A 27 cm³ steel soil core cutter was used to collect soil samples at 5 cm intervals vertically down each shovel probe for analysis of gravimetric water content, bulk density, and percent organic carbon.

In the lab, bulk density and percent organic carbon were determined for each sample. Samples were weighed (We) and dried at 105° C for two hours and reweighed (Wf). Roughly 5 g of each dried sample were ground to a powder (W₁₀₅) and baked at 400° C for four hours and reweighed (W₄₀₀). Bulk density was determined using the following formula (Skopp, 2000; U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA], 2004).

D b = W f / V e

Db = Bulk density (g/cm³)

Wf = Mass of dry soil <2 mm (g)

Ve = Volume of wet sample <2 mm (cm³)

Percent Organic matter was determined using the following formula (Garrison, 2003; Schumacher, 2002).

%OM = [(W₁₀₅–W₄₀₀) × 100]/W₁₀₅

%OM = Percent Organic Matter

W₁₀₅ = Mass of soil dried at 105°C

W₄₀₀ = Mass of soil dried at 400°C

Soil particle size analysis was conducted using a Beckman Coulter LS 13 320 Laser Diffraction Particle Size Analyzer and standard operating procedures (Blott et al., 2004; Coulter, 2007). Before sampling, soil was screened through a 2 mm stainless steel sieve to remove particles too large for the instrument. On average <1% by weight of all samples were 2 mm or greater in size. Percent sand, silt, and clay were determined for each sample following standard USDA grain size to determine soil texture using the USDA soil texture ternary diagram (Schaetzl and Anderson, 2005: 10–12). Percent sand, silt, and clay with depth were graphed individually for each shovel test probe.

Graphs depicting number of artifacts per 10 cm arbitrary level from ground surface to shovel test probe maximum depth were constructed. In addition, graphs depicting artifact count, soil horizons, bulk density, gravimetric water content, percent organic matter, and soil grain size were constructed comparing each factor with depth per shovel test probe.

Soil samples collected from shovel test probes N480 E602, N480 E597, N480 E592, and N480 E587 (53 total samples) were sent to the Agricultural Analytical Services Laboratory at The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania for multiple geochemical analysis. Soil pH was determined using a 1:1 soil and water solution using a pH meter with soil suspended in water. Phosphorus (P), potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), and sulfur (S) concentrations were determined using standard Mehlich 3 inductively coupled plasma (ICP) procedure (Wolf and Beegle, 1995). All of these chemical elements are reported in parts per million (ppm).

One charcoal sample from shovel test probe N485 E597 from a depth of 45 cm below surface was collected for AMS dating through Beta Analytic. The collected sample was obtained along the contact between the C and 2 C horizons and could be seen as a thin lens of small charcoal fragments at this contact.

Results

A total of 248 soil samples were collected from 20 shovel test probes and analyzed for grain size, bulk density, and percent organic matter. A selected 53 samples from four shovel test probes cross cutting the study area on an east-west axis were additionally analyzed for pH, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, zinc, copper, sulfur, and calcium (Figures 3 and 4). All soils examined in the study area showed a minimum clay content of 6% and maximum of 30%. Mean clay content was 19% with a standard deviation of 5.68%. Minimum silt content for the study area was 27% with a maximum of 75%. Mean silt content was 58% with a standard deviation of 9.92%. Minimum sand content for the study area was 0% with a maximum of 65%. Mean sand content was 23% with a standard deviation of 14.16%. Individual summaries of sand silt and clay content for each sample can be found in Online Appendix D. Minimum bulk density for all soils was 0.71 g/cm³ with a maximum of 1.82 g/cm³. Mean bulk density for all soils was 1.26 g/cm³ with a standard deviation of 0.20 g/cm³. Minimum percent organic matter via loss on ignition for the study area was 0.71% and a maximum of 21.92%. Mean percent organic matter was 4.03% with a standard deviation of 3.23%. Mean pH values for the 53 samples was 5.0 with a standard deviation of 0.9. Minimum pH was 3.9 with a maximum of 6.8. Mean phosphorus was 82 ppm with a standard deviation of 56.5 ppm. Minimum phosphorus was 4 ppm with a maximum of 229 ppm. Mean potassium was 59 ppm with a standard deviation of 38.3 ppm. Minimum potassium was 22 ppm with a maximum of 220 ppm. Mean magnesium was 77 ppm with a standard deviation of 48.0 ppm. Minimum magnesium was 28 ppm with a maximum of 183 ppm. Mean zinc was 1.9 ppm with a standard deviation of 1.4 ppm. Minimum zinc was 0.7 ppm with a maximum of 7.6 ppm. Mean copper was 1.9 ppm with a standard deviation of 0.6 ppm.

Figure 3.

Location and summary of data from shovel test probes N480 E592 and N480 E587.

Figure 4.

Location and summary of data from shovel test probes N480 E597 and N480 E602.

Minimum copper was 0.8 ppm with a maximum of 3.3 ppm. Mean sulfur was 14.5 ppm with a standard deviation of 7.5 ppm. Minimum sulfur was 3.9 ppm with a maximum of 30.7 ppm. Mean calcium was 532 ppm with a standard deviation of 469.1 ppm. Minimum calcium was 97 ppm with a maximum of 2000 ppm.

The charcoal sample submitted to Beta Analytic provided a radiocarbon age of 300 ± 30 B.P. (Beta-405623; wood charcoal; ¹³C/¹²C = −24.7 o/oo). Calibrated results reveal a 2σ age of Cal B.P. 460–295. Calibrated 1σ gives two possible calibrated age ranges, cal B.P. 430–375 and cal B.P. 320–305 (Calibrated with the program INTCAL13 [Talma and Vogel, 1993; Reimer et al., 2013]).

Artifacts

A total of 1,055 artifacts were recovered from the 20 excavated shovel test probes. Of the 1,055 artifacts recovered, 46 historic artifacts were found throughout the A (n = 38) and C (n = 8) horizons. Of the 46 historic artifacts, 21 were found in the first 10 cm in the A horizon, 8 were found from 10–20 cm in the C horizon, and 13 were found from 20–30 cm in the A horizon. The oldest historic artifacts recovered were 11 cut nails. While historic artifacts only make up 4.36% of total artifacts recovered, they play a very important role in the interpretation of soil horizon formation.

The remaining artifacts recovered from the study area include 1,009 prehistoric artifacts; 396 lithic artifacts (37.54%), 4 groundstone artifacts (0.38%), 599 ceramic vessel sherds, and 10 animal bone fragments (0.95%). The A horizon contained the majority of prehistoric artifacts (54.41%), with 18.63% in the Bw horizon, 16.75% in the C horizon, 1.09% in the C2 horizon, 0.79% in the C3 horizon, 1.88% in the 2 C horizon, and 6.44% in the Ab horizon. Further discussion of the prehistoric artifact assemblage can be found in Byrnes et al. (2015).

Soil horizon trends

Data collected from 20 shovel test probes were examined with depths ranging from 30–100 cm. Each shovel test probe contained two to five distinct horizons. Soil horizons observed include A, Bw, C, C2, C3, 2C, and Ab. A horizons ranged 6–50 cm in depth and have a bulk density from 0.71–1.82 g/cm3 with a mean of 1.09 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 0.71%–21.92% with a mean of 5.91%. Clay content ranged 6%–29% with a mean of 14%. Silt content ranged 29%–74% with a mean of 55%. Sand content ranged 7%–65% with a mean of 31%.

Bw horizons were weakly developed, sometimes trending towards C horizons in characteristics. Bulk density ranged 0.71–1.82 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.26 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 1.01%–21.92% with a mean of 4.03%. Clay content ranged 6.29%–29.65% with a mean of 18.61%. Silt content ranged 27.39%–74.73% with a mean of 58.21%. Sand content ranged 0.04%–64.70% with a mean of 23.18%.

C horizons were observed throughout the site, trending into C2 and C3 horizon along increasing slopes. Bulk density ranged 0.91–1.78 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.37 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 1.04%–4.00% with a mean of 2.26%. Clay content ranged 10.20%–28.34% with a mean of 19.39%. Silt content ranged 36.82%–74.73% with a mean of 57.99%. Sand content ranged 0.40%–50.07% with a mean of 22.60%.

C2 horizons were observed in six STP’s predominantly on the western slope between 21–54%. Bulk density ranged 1.25–1.63 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.45 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 1.35%–3.04% with a mean of 1.91%. Clay content ranged 18.19%–27.14% with an average of 24.39%. Silt content ranged 45.55%–74.06% with a mean of 65.05%. Sand content ranged 0%–36.26% with a mean of 10.55%.

One C3 horizons was observed at STP N480E592. This horizon was located along the footslope and is interpreted as a buried C horizon, contemporaneous with the C2 found in shovel tests further downslope. Bulk density ranged 1.52–1.59 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.56 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 1.10–1.28 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.21 g/cm³. Clay content ranged 22.89%–27.59% with a mean of 25.38%. Silt content ranged 47.19%–57.54% with a mean of 52.26%. Sand content ranged 16.17%–29.47% with a mean of 22.36%.

2C horizons were only observed along the toeslope of the study area. Bulk density ranged 0.92–1.62 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.25 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 1.01%–6.87% with a mean of 2.22%. Clay content ranged 11.28%–29.54% with a mean of 18.42%. Silt content ranged 27.39%–74.40% with a mean of 54.97%. Sand content ranged 5.04%–61.32% with a mean of 26.62%.

An Ab horizon was encountered in two shovel test probes, both at roughly 188 masl along the footslope. Bulk density ranged 1.11–1.41 g/cm³ with a mean of 1.32 g/cm³. Percent organic matter ranged 2.74%–5.78% with a mean of 3.51%. Clay content ranged 21.52%–24.58% with a mean of 23.05%. Silt content ranged 62.00%–69.91% with a mean of 64.67%. Sand content ranged 5.52%–15.00% with a mean of 12.28%.

Discussion

Typical for the Lake Erie Plain, results of these analyses show soil characteristics typical of Inceptisols. Soils show A horizons 6–50 cm deep underlain by weakly developed Bw horizons underlain by C horizons composed of glacio-colluvial deposits. C horizons exhibited a distinct decrease in organic matter to < 4%. C horizons also exhibited a general increase in bulk density 0.91–1.78 g/cm³. Once on the toeslope of the study area, 2C horizons show an increase in sand content and contain large amounts of small to medium sized flat, rounded rocks, typical of alluvial overbank deposits.

Thin A horizon and occasional weak B horizons are present along the A1–A2 transect (Figure 5). These deposits are underlain by a colluvial C horizon which is further underlain by an alluvial C horizon, distinct as being a loam with a large number of small to medium sized flat rounded rocks and increased sand content (Figure 6). Moving closer to the slope along the B1 to B2 line of probes (Figure 5), a similar profile is seen. The major difference between these two profiles is a thickening of the A horizon and increased occurrence and thickening of a weak Bw horizon. In the N465 E597 shovel test probe, a buried A horizon can be seen before excavations were stopped at a depth of one meter. The buried A horizon is interpreted as an intact surface dating to roughly the same time as the deposition of the alluvial 2 C horizon (Figure 6).

Figure 5.

DEM with 0.5 m contour lines showing location of cross sections.

Figure 6.

Profile and cross-sections of A1 to A2 (top) and B1 to B2 (bottom) in Figure 5.

The downslope profile along the C1–C2 line of probes (Figure 5) show four localized depositional events (Figure 7). The first event is an alluvial deposition most likely contemporaneous with colluvial deposits upslope (Figure 8). The downslope alluvial deposition associated with Event 1 is interpreted as a previous channel of Young’s Run located farther to the west of its current location. Events 2 and 3 are interpreted as separate colluvial deposits of silt loam with very low organic content, presumably caused by instability of the slope associated with land clearing during historic times. Event 4 is hypothesized to date to recent historic events, containing mixed, highly organic colluvium and leaf litter.

Figure 7.

Depositional episodes along the eastern slope of the Ripley site.

Figure 8.

Profile and cross-section from C1 to C2 in Figure 5.

A single radiocarbon sample was collected from shovel test probe N485 E597 at the contact between the colluvial C and alluvial 2 C horizon. This sample is interpreted as being deposited during the migration of the channel identified as Event 1. An age of 300 ± 30 B.P. (Beta-405623; wood charcoal; ¹³C/¹²C = −24.7 o/oo) or calibrated age of A.D. 1490–1655 using a 2 sigma calibration, shows the stream migration to have occurred during the latter half of the occupation of the site as shown from features dated by Neusius et al. (1998) on the main portion of the site. Based on a steady rate of accumulation, the C horizons would have been deposited over a 100-year period along the slope, ending at roughly 200 B.P. The uppermost A horizon then represents soil development and accumulation over the last 200 years. While this scenario is ideal, sedimentation rates for colluvium are not always steady even rates. Based on minimal horizonation and variability of grain size, organic matter, bulk density, pH, and other geochemical indicators in each horizon it is likely that the timing of deposition was closely spaced. With no evidence of a buried A horizon between colluvial C horizons, it is interpreted these events were closely timed slope failures, most likely caused by land clearing during historic times.

Addressing the second research question of this study, an analysis of artifacts in relation to deposition was conducted to determine if cultural refuse disposal of prehistoric occupants occurred along the eastern slope. To address this question, historic artifact distribution was looked at along the study area to determine any possible historic disturbance of soils (Figure 9). The majority of historic artifacts found in the study area were dated to within the last 200 years, or within the historic use of the property. Artifacts consisted of predominantly square cut nails and wire nails, though no historic buildings have ever been documented in the vicinity. When looking at the spatial distribution of these artifacts, there appear to be two historic trash dumping episodes in the study area. One high density location of historic artifacts is believed to be a single isolated trash dump. The second high density area of historic artifact accumulation appear to be a historic trash dump over the eastern slope, with higher concentrations of artifacts towards the top of the slope, lessening as one moves down slope. Historic artifacts were found exclusively in the A and C horizons in association with high quantities of prehistoric artifacts in the same levels (Figure 10). Because of the inconsistency of geochemical indicators throughout the A horizon as well as the presence of both prehistoric and historic artifacts together, evidence supports that the A horizon developed historically as the slope and field were cleared. Land clearing would have destabilized the portions of the slope not covered in vegetation, allowing for soils associated with the prehistoric occupation of the site to move down slope. Artifacts in these soils would have been further mixed due to pedoturbation, evident in the majority of soil profiles. Personal communications (2015) with the landowner confirmed the study area was once used for the grazing of sheep and cattle with a cow path leading up the northern portion of the study area. This historic use of the study area most definitely had a major impact on the stability of the slope as well as mixing of upper horizons from the continued presence of livestock in the area.

Figure 9.

Historic artifact kernel density along the eastern slope of the Ripley site.

Figure 10.

Historic artifact counts by STP and soil horizon.

The highest concentration of artifacts throughout the site occurs in the A horizon, with artifact densities decreasing in underlying deposits, with the exception of the Ab horizon, where a marked increase is observed (Table 1). While statistically, there is no relationship between artifact density and slope, some regions of the study area do show increased density of artifacts as one moves closer towards the base of the slope. This area also contains the thickest C horizon deposits, indicating accumulation of sediment from downslope movement. There is no statistically significant difference in artifact assemblage between the village above and the current study area when examining lithic tools (Byrnes et al., 2015). This indicates the study area may not have been used as a specialized midden or refuse disposal location.

Table 1.

Distribution of artifacts by type and horizon throughout the examined shovel test probes.

	A total	Bw total	C Total	C2 total	C3 total	2C total	Ab total	Total	%
Bone	6	1	1	0	0	0	2	10	0.95
Lithic	243	65	53	6	3	5	21	396	37.54
Ceramic	298	121	114	5	5	14	42	599	56.78
Groundstone	2	1	1	0	0	0	0	4	0.38
Prehistoric total	549	188	169	11	8	19	65	1009	95.64
Historic	38	0	8	0	0	0	0	46	4.36
Total	587	189	177	11	8	19	65	1055	100.00
% Total	54.41	18.63	16.75	1.09	0.79	1.88	6.44	100	100.00

Looking at geochemical and grainsize data, no statistically significant results were seen in relation to artifact accumulation. Some general trends could be seen concerning soil formation for the study area. Using averages of each horizon, a general increase in clay with depth was observed. This clay accumulation can be attributed to eluviation, or the downward movement of dissolved or suspended material via water. A decrease in clays occurred in the 2C or alluvial horizon, concurrent with an increase in sand. Bulk density mirrored clay accumulation, increasing with increased clay concentrations. Organic matter was shown to be greatest in the A horizon, decreasing with depth. The decrease in organic matter is caused by the decay and minimal mixing with depth of organics with a slight increase in both the 2C and Ab horizons. This is interpreted to be from the accumulation of less dense organic material on top of each alluvial episode in the 2C horizon, and the stable surface of the Ab horizon formation.

No statistically significant trends were seen in the geochemical data from the four shovel test probes examined. A slight increase in pH is observed with depth, making the soils mildly acidic. Measured soil pH also shows conditions for preservation of bone and other organic material in the study area should not have been impeded by soil acidity. This indicates any discard of faunal remains over the side of the eastern slope would have been preserved in the soils, which was not observed. Sulfur concentrations show a decrease with depth, consistent with other studies showing total soil sulfur decreases with clearing and cultivation of land, while rising during periods of accumulation or habitation (Solomon et al., 2009).

Finally, a slight decrease in Zn occurs with depth. Previous studies have shown a retention of Zn in soils due to the presence of bone, charcoal, craft production, food preparation, or pigment production (Entwistle et al., 1998; Parnell et al., 2002). This decrease in zinc within the study area shows these or other anthropogenic uses of the land were not associated with lower horizons. Due to the lack of correlation between any increases in phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, copper, or calcium with prehistoric artifact concentrations, none of these soils are believed to have been culturally stable surfaces or refuse middens.

Conclusions

The Ripley site has been studied for over a century by both professional and amateur researchers. An assumption made by several researchers was the existence of a midden along the eastern slope of the site. Excavations along the base of the eastern slope tell a different story through the artifacts and soil geochemistry. Accumulation of historic artifacts in context with prehistoric artifacts suggest a mixed context for the majority of artifacts along the eastern slope. These artifacts coupled with inconsistent soil geochemical analysis suggest a colluvial origin for most, if not all, of the artifacts in the study area. These artifacts were washed downslope from the terrace above during historic times. This data then suggest a functionally unique midden does not exist along the eastern slope, but rather an abundance of secondarily transported sediment and artifacts eroded from the terrace above. These sediments do, however, show typical eluvial processes associated with physical and chemical weathering of sediment over the last 300 radiocarbon years.

While the majority of artifacts came from mixed context, an intact buried A horizon exists along the footslope in isolated areas. With the large amount of excavations which have occurred at the Ripley site over the last 100 years, these are prime locations for future research. The intact buried A horizon may contain features or further clues to answering questions of daily life during the prehistoric habitation of the site. Being along the outskirts of what is classified as the village area of the Ripley site, excavations here may offer a glimpse into life along the fringe of the village.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-naa-10.1177_0197693120963244 - Supplemental material for Colluvial deposition of anthropogenic soils at the Ripley site, Ripley, New York

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-naa-10.1177_0197693120963244 for Colluvial deposition of anthropogenic soils at the Ripley site, Ripley, New York by Curtis McCoy: for the CARRA registry investigators in North American Archaeologist

Footnotes

Author's Note

Curtis McCoy is now affiliated with Dovetail Cultural Resource Group, Wilmington, DE, USA.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biography

Curtis McCoy earned his MS in Geoarchaeology from Mercyhurst University in 2016. He is currently the GIS Manager and a Staff Archaeologist at Dovetail Cultural Resource Group. His research interests include geoarchaeology, predictive modeling, spatial statistics, and prehistory of eastern North America.

References

Asch Sidell

(2006) Ripley Site (NYSM 2490) Floral Remains. Prepared for the New York State Museum, New York, NY, USA.

Blott

Croft

Pye

, et al. (2004) Particle size analysis by laser diffraction. In: Pye

Croft

(eds) Forensic Geoscience: Principles, Techniques and Applications. Special Publications, 232. London: The Geological Society of London, pp. 63–73.

Brose

(2006) Penumbral protohistory on lake Erie’s South shore. In: Brose

(ed.) Societies in Eclipse: Archaeology of the Eastern Woodlands Indians A.D. 1400-1700 (2nd ed.). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, pp. 49–65.

Byrnes

Quinn

Pedler

, et al. (2015). The Ripley Site Midden: Iroquoian Refuse Disposal in Chautauqua County, Western New York. In: Paper presented at the 80th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Byrnes

Quinn

Pedler

(2014) A spatial analysis of surface artifacts from the Ripley site: An Iroquoian Manifestation on Lake Erie. In: Paper presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Austin, TX, USA.

Calkin

(1970) Lines and chronology of the glacial great Lakes in northwestern New York. Ohio Journal of Science 70(2): 78–96.

Calkin

Bern

and Feenstra (1985) Evolution of the Erie-Basin great Lakes. In: PF

Karrow

Calkin

(eds) Quaternary Evolution of the Great Lakes. St. John’s: Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 30, pp. 149–170.

Coulter

(2007) LS 13 320 Laser Diffraction Particle Size Analyzer Instrument Manual. Brea: Beckman Coulter, Inc.

Crowther

(1997) Soil phosphate surveys: Critical approaches to sampling. Archaeological Prospection 4(2): 93–102.

10.

Drooker

(2012) European trade goods at the Ripley site: Implications for interaction networks and chronology. Northeast Anthropology 77: 89–138.

11.

Engelbrecht

Sullivan

(1996) Cultural context. In: Sullivan

(ed.) Reanalyzing the Ripley Site: Earthworks and Late Prehistory on the Lake Erie Plain. Albany: The University of the State of New York, The State Education Department, pp. 14–27.

12.

Entwistle

Abrahams

Dodgshon

(1998) Multi-Element analysis of soils from Scottish historical sites. Interpreting land-use history through the physical and geochemical analysis of soil. Journal of Archaeological Science 25(1): 53–68.

13.

Garrison

(2003) Techniques in Archaeological Geology. Berlin: Springer Publishing.

14.

Green

Sullivan

(1997) Pits and pitfalls: An analysis of pit features at the Ripley site. Northeast Anthropology 53: 1–22.

15.

Harding

(2014) A Spatial Analysis of the Ripley Site. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA.

16.

Holliday

Gartner

(2007) Methods of soil P analysis in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science 34(2): 301–333.

17.

Matthiesen

(2004) In situ measurement of soil pH. Journal of Archaeological Science 31(10): 1373–1381.

18.

Neusius

Sullivan

Neusius

, et al. (1998) Fortified village or mortuary site? Exploring the use of the Ripley site. In: Mainfort

Jr. and Sullivan

(eds) Ancient Earthen Enclosures of the Eastern Woodlands. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, pp. 202–230.

19.

Parker

(1907) Excavations in an Erie Indian Village and Burial Site at Ripley, Chautauqua Co., N.Y. New York State Education Department Bulletin 117: 459–554.

20.

Parker

(1922) The Archaeological History of New York. Bulletins 235, 236, New York State Museum, Albany, NY, USA.

21.

Parnell

Terry

Nelson

(2002) Soil chemical analysis applied as an interpretive tool for ancient human activities in Piedras Negras, Guatemala. Journal of Archaeological Science 29(4): 379–404.

22.

Pîrnău

(2009) results concerning pedological studies in archaeological site from Slava Rusă. Soil Forming Factors and Processes From the Temperate Zone 8(1): 71–84.

23.

Reimer

Bard

Bayliss

, et al. (2013) IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0–50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55(4): 1869–1887.

24.

Ritchie

(1980) The Archaeology of New York State. Harrison: Harbor Hill Books.

25.

Schaetzl

Anderson

(2005) Soils: Genesis and Geomorphology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

26.

Schuldenrein

Vento

(1994) Geoarchaeological Investigations at the Memorial Park Site (36CN164), Pennsylvania. Baltimore: R. Christopher Goodwin & Associates, Inc. Submitted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, Contract No. DACW31-89-D-0059.

27.

Schumacher

(2002) Methods for the Determination of Total Organic Carbon (TOC) in Soils and Sediments. Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency, NCEA-C-1282 EMASC-001.

28.

Selby

(2007) The Geoarchaeology of the Upper Susquehanna River: Anthropological Approaches to Archaic and Woodland Period Landscapes and Settlement Systems in New York State. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, New York University, USA.

29.

Shepps

White

Droste

, et al. (1959) The Glacial Geology of Northwestern Pennsylvania. PA. PA. Geol. Survey, 4th Ser., Bulletin G 32, pp. 1–59.

30.

Skopp

(2000) Physical properties of primary particles. In: Summer

(ed.) Handbook of Soil Science. Boca Raton: CRC Press, pp. A1–A17.

31.

Snow

(1996) The Iroquois. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

32.

Solomon

Lehmann

Kinyangi

, et al. (2009) Anthropogenic and climate influences on biogeochemical dynamics and molecular-level speciation of soil sulfur. Ecological Applications 19(4): 989–1002.

33.

Sullivan

Eleazer

Hunt

, et al. (1996) History of investigations. In: Sullivan

(ed.) Reanalyzing the Ripley Site: Earthworks and Late Prehistory on the Lake Erie Plain. Albany: The University of the State of New York, The State Education Department, pp. 28–52.

34.

Talma

Vogel

(1993) A simplified approach to calibrating C14 dates. Radiocarbon 35(2): 317–322.

35.

Tomikel

Shepps

(1967) The Geography and Geology of Erie County, Pennsylvania. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Fourth Series.

36.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2004) Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Soil Survey Center, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey Investigations Report 42, Version 4.0.

37.

Weide

(1966) Soil pH as a guide to archaeological investigation. University of California (Los Angeles) Archaeological Survey Annual Report 8: 155–163.

38.

Wilson

Davidson

Cresser

(2008) Multi-element soil analysis: An assessment of its potential as an aid to archaeological interpretation. Journal of Archaeological Science 35(2): 412–424.

39.

Wolf

Beegle

(1995) Recommended soil tests for macro and micronutrients. In: Thomas Sims

Wolf

(eds.) Recommended Soil Testing Procedures for the Northeastern United States, Northeast Regional Bulletin #493. Newark: Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Delaware, pp. 39–47.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.24 MB