Big Eddy 2005
Region Research and the Archaic Record at the Big Eddy Site (23CE426), Southwest Missouri
Center for Archaeological Research
(2005)
edited by
Neal H. Lopinot, Jack H. Ray, and Michael D. Conner
With Contributions by
Richard G. Baker
E. Arthur Bettis III
Edwin R. Hajic
Jacob Letts
Neal H. Lopinot
Patrick Moss
Gina S. Powell
Jack H. Ray
Lori Wozniak
This report presents the results of geoarchaeological, paleoecological, and archaeological
research undertaken in the lower Sac River valley and in Archaic deposits at the Big
Eddy site.
A model of regional landform development is presented based on field investigations,
22 radiocarbon dates, and studies of detailed topographic maps, high-altitude color-infrared
aerial photographs, digital orthophotoquadrangles, historical black-and-white aerial
photographs, and soil survey maps. Thirteen landforms have been delineated for the
lower Sac River valley. They consist of multiple relatively high, undifferentiated
terraces; two low terraces and associated paleochannels; two floodplain levels and
associated paleochannels; alluvial fans; undifferentiated channel belts of tributary
creeks; tributary-creek channels; and the Sac River. Initial impressions of the associated
sediment assemblages, depositional environments, geochronology, and known locations
of prehistoric cultural deposits at multiple sites along the lower Sac River channel,
combined with geomorphological analyses at the Big Eddy site, indicate that a large
percentage of the prehistoric record occurs in paleolandscape positions that are now
shallowly to deeply buried.
The pollen, macroplant, and stable carbon isotope ratios provide proxy records of
Holocene vegetation and climate change in the lower Sac River valley. Although anthropogenic
affects on &Mac182;13C values need to be considered when reconstructing paleoenvironmental
conditions, the carbon isotope results from the Big Eddy site are consistent with
an overall increase in regional aridity and/or an increase in the seasonality of precipitation
during the Younger Dryas between about 13,210 and 11,940 B.P. Studies of pollen and
macroplant deposits indicate increases in nonarboreal vegetation and the appearance
of prairie species from at least 8090 B.P. to 7520 B.P., followed by increases in
forest vegetation between at least 6300 B.P. and 4500 B.P. The pollen and macroplant
data indicate that the lower Sac River valley may have been relatively buffered from
the effects of the Hypsithermal during the middle Holocene, with more stable vegetation
patterns than elsewhere to the north and west. Significantly higher sedimentation
rates and increased &Mac182;13C values in the Sac River valley during the late Holocene
suggest an increase in large floods and mean annual precipitation that resulted in
the expansion of forests (C3 vegetation) on the floodplain.
A survey was undertaken for a 49-km (30.4 mi) section of the Sac River from Stockton
Dam to the U.S. 54 bridge over the Sac River, through portions of Cedar and St. Clair
counties. This cutbank survey resulted in revisits of 35 previously identified sites
and the identification of 11 new sites. In addition to conducting a canoe survey of
the entire corridor, many of the sites were revisited on more than one occasion. The
study benefited greatly from a wealth of information provided by artifact collectors,
some of whom kept records of in situ finds. The cutbank survey has demonstrated the
richness of the Sac River valley, particularly with respect to sites having buried
Paleoindian and Archaic components. Including the Montgomery site (23CE261), which
was not within the survey area, 18 sites exhibit Paleoindian components. Thirty-three
sites are multicomponent, and 28 have three to as many as 12 separate components.
The survey results have required a re-evaluation of the NRHP status of all previously
identified sites. The cutbank survey also indicates the necessity for a flexible management
plan involving in part periodic monitoring of sites and/ or cutbanks in the lower
Sac River valley. This should be undertaken at a considerably more consistent and
frequent basis than has been performed heretofore. When undertaken in concert with
additional coring and testing of those portions of sites within sloughing easements,
but away from cutbanks, preemptive archaeology can be undertaken when sites are being
threatened but before erosion causes the destruction of significant deposits.
The findings of excavations undertaken principally in 2001 and 2002 at the Big Eddy
site are described in this volume. These pertain to excavations in six block areas
(Blocks F-K) within: (1) Late Archaic deposits in the thick late Rodgers Shelter submember;
(2) Late Archaic, Middle Archaic, and Early Archaic deposits in the thick middle Rodgers
Shelter submember; and (3) Middle Archaic and Early Archaic deposits in the thin middle
Rodgers Shelter submember. Within the thick late submember deposits, a stratified
sequence of Smith-Etley (ca. 4500-3600 B.P., but primarily 4200-3800 B.P.), Williams
(ca. 4100-3900 B.P.), Stealth (ca. 3600-3400 B.P.), Kings (ca. 3800-3000 B.P.), and
Afton (ca. 3000-2700 B.P.) components were defined beneath a relatively thin veneer
of mixed Woodland and Mississippian deposits at and near the surface. Two Late Archaic
phases, the Smetley and Sac phases, have been defined.
Big Eddy apparently contains relatively little evidence for Middle Archaic occupation,
but the site was used periodically by a host of Early Archaic groups. From earliest
to latest, excavations within the thin Middle Rodgers Shelter submember resulted in
the definition of eight Early Archaic components following Dalton/San Patrice (ca.
10,500- 9800 B.P.): Breckenridge (ca. 9800-9700 B.P.), Scottsbluff (ca. 9600-9500
B.P.), Indeterminate Early Archaic (ca. 9500-9000 B.P.), Cache River (ca. 9000- 8700
B.P.), Graham Cave (ca. 8600-8200 B.P.), Rice Lobed (ca. 8200-8000 B.P.), Hidden Valley
(ca. 7900- 7200 B.P.), and Searcy (ca. 7800-7100 B.P.). For the most part, the evidence
from Big Eddy suggests that individual styles of Early Archaic projectile points are
representative of different cultural groups. The same conclusion generally applies
to Late Archaic projectile points.
Patterns of lithic raw-material selection and use characterizing the early part of
the Early Archaic period were first established during the Late Paleoindian period.
Beginning with the Graham Cave occupations, however, there was a shift toward the
use of Burlington chert and away from a preference for Jefferson City chert. This
pattern continued with varying degrees of intensity through the end of the Late Archaic
period. Intentional heat treatment of chert appears during late Early Archaic times,
being well manifested first in the Hidden Valley and Searcy components at Big Eddy.
Although varying in intensity, the practice of heat treating chert continued throughout
the remainder of prehistory.
The Big Eddy site was used throughout most of the Archaic stage, but it was sometimes
used for very specialized tasks on a very brief and intermittent basis and at other
times as a residential locus occupied on a seasonal or multiseasonal (perhaps even
year-round) basis. Although bone preservation is exceedingly poor, archaeobotanical
evidence indicates that hickory nuts, walnuts, and perhaps acorns and fleshy fruits
were important plant food resources throughout Archaic and Woodland times. The record
at Big Eddy also points to an emphasis on chenopod harvesting beginning around 4500-
4300 B.P. This is clearly manifested during the Smetley and Sac phases, or from about
4200-3600 B.P. The evidence is suggestive of the cultivation of this starchy seed,
or at least the manipulation of the habitats favoring chenopod. Given the presence
of squash at Big Eddy during at least the latter part of the Smetley phase, some form
of cultivation of chenopod would seem to be likely. Pericarp thicknesses lend support
to this contention, suggesting that chenopod was then undergoing the process of domestication.