Archaeological collections are foundational to the discipline. Yet, researchers who study curated assemblages can face challenges. Here, we show how experimental archaeology can play a vital role in the interpretation of old archaeological collections. The Welling site, in Coshocton County, Ohio, is a multicomponent, stratified site with a substantial Clovis component in its lower levels. Using experimental flaked stone replication, we create an analog model of a “pure” Clovis bifacial debitage assemblage, as might be found at a lithic workshop. We predicted that if the Welling Clovis debitage assemblage was representative of a lithic workshop, then it would be similar to the experimental model. If the debitage assemblage was representative of a base camp, however, then it would be significantly different from the model because Clovis people would have been using, transporting, resharpening, rejuvenating, and recycling the debitage—all activities that would modify a “pure” Clovis bifacial debitage assemblage. Our statistical analyses supported the latter prediction. Overall, our study illustrates how productive the integration of experimental and archaeological data can be, and it emphasizes how important the curation and accessibility of both archaeological and experimental collections are to the discipline.

The neutral model of stone procurement developed by Brantingham (2003, 2006) provides a formal means to investigate the formation of lithic discard patterning under changing forager mobility conditions. This study modifies Brantingham's (2006) Lévy walk model to examine the influence of discard probability on the spatial distribution of raw material abundance. The model outcome shows that forager movement and tool discard probability have similar effects on the simulated patterns of raw material transport, so it is difficult—if not impossible—to differentiate the respective influence of the two factors from distance to source distributions alone. This finding of equifinality complicates the task of interpretating hominin mobility from archaeological distance to source data, particularly in settings such as the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition, which is marked by an important reorganization in hominin lithic technology that may have affected stone tool discard probability.

This report focuses on the morphometric and elemental analysis of glass beads collected from an adobe structure (CA-SCR-217H-T) at Mission Santa Cruz, which operated between 1791 and the 1830s in the colonial province of Alta (upper) California. Previous chemical research established a chronological framework for opacified beads collected from sites in Canada, the Great Lakes region, and the southeastern United States. Testing the viability of this chronological framework for California, we analyzed 100 white glass beads using a conventional typology and laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS)—the first application of LA-ICP-MS to a California mission. We present the results of the LA-ICP-MS study and then briefly comment on the potential for LA-ICP-MS to refine chronologies associated with colonial missions and other postcontact sites.

There is growing evidence for human use of geophytes long before the advent of agriculture. Rich in carbohydrates, geophytes were important in many coastal areas where protein-rich marine foods are abundant. On California's Channel Islands, scholars have long questioned how maritime peoples sustained themselves for millennia with limited plant resources. Recent research demonstrates that geophytes were heavily used on the islands for 10,000 years, and here we describe geophyte and other archaeobotanical remains from an approximately 11,500-year-old site on Santa Rosa Island. Currently the earliest evidence for geophyte consumption in North America, our data extend geophyte use on the Channel Islands by roughly 1,500 years and document a diverse and balanced economy for early Paleocoastal peoples. Experimental return rates for a key island geophyte support archaeological evidence that the corms of blue dicks (Dipterostemon capitatus) were a high-ranked staple resource throughout the Holocene.

White and colleagues (2020) have argued that after Cahokia's AD 1400 decline, the native population in the Horseshoe Lake Watershed rebounded beginning in AD 1500 and peaked around 1650, and that the native groups populating the area were members of the Illinois Confederation. These arguments are based on a population reconstruction obtained from fecal stanol concentrations from Horseshoe Lake sediment cores and regional historical, archaeological, and environmental data. We argue that their interpretations are problematic because they discount extensive regional archaeological and historical datasets and do not consider alternative hypotheses that could explain high levels of fecal stanol concentrations in lake sediments.

Diez-Martin and colleagues (2021) experimentally reduce four bifaces and argue that the resultant flakes are smaller and less uniform than those found at the Welling site (33Co2). Welling is an early Paleoindian (Clovis) site excavated by Olaf Prufer over 50 years ago. Based on the experiment, the authors conclude that the site was a “collector-like” base camp and that our previous interpretation must be incorrect. Here, we argue that Diez-Martin and colleagues have mischaracterized our conclusion regarding the purpose of the site, and may have insufficiently addressed data that detract from their new interpretation.

Emerson and colleagues (2020) provide new isotopic evidence on directly dated human bone from the Greater Cahokia region. They conclude that maize was not adopted in the region prior to AD 900. Placing this result within the larger context of maize histories in northeastern North America, they suggest that evidence from the lower Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River valley for earlier maize is “enigmatic” and “perplexing.” Here, we review that evidence, accumulated over the course of several decades, and question why Emerson and colleagues felt the need to offer opinions on that evidence without providing any new contradictory empirical evidence for the region.

In a recent article, Kunz and Mills (2021) report 10 drawn, a speo finished, turquoise blue, IIa40 beads manufactured in Venice and recovered from three late precontact sites in the Alaskan Arctic. They argue that these beads date to the fifteenth century, predating Columbus's arrival in the Americas. This conclusion is certainly in error because beads of this type were not manufactured prior to approximately AD 1560. The historical and archaeological evidence for this dating is substantial. Additionally, the elemental and radiocarbon evidence presented by Kunz and Mills (2021) supports a late sixteenth- to early seventeenth-century date for these beads.

Seeman, Morris, and Summers misrepresent or misunderstand the arguments we have made, as well as their own previous work. Here, we correct these inaccuracies. We also reiterate our support for hypothesis-driven and evidence-based research.

Blair provides a thorough review of data he claims stands in opposition to our narrative concerning the origins of IIa40/Early Blue glass trade beads and their presence in arctic Alaska prior to Columbus’ initial voyage. He employs three lines of evidence: historical and archaeological data, Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis, and radiocarbon dating. Our reply addresses his application of these data sets, clarifying his use of our data to arrive at his conclusions. While we continue to disagree with Blair, we do wish to acknowledge his time spent on debating the issue thereby furthering all of our understanding on this topic.

In the following response to Hart and colleagues (2021) we clarify our interpretations of the archaeological record for maize use from western Illinois. The robust archaeological record, newly obtained AMS dates, and evaluations of enamel apatite combine to support a late date for maize cultivation in this region. We reiterate that maize histories in the Eastern Woodlands may vary among different regions.

Skousen and Aiuvalasit critique our article on the post-Mississippian occupation of the Horseshoe Lake watershed (White et al. 2020) along two lines: (1) that our findings are not supported due to a lack of archaeological evidence, and (2) that we do not consider alternative hypotheses in explaining the lake's fecal stanol record. We first respond to the matter of fecal stanol deposition in Horseshoe Lake and then address the larger issue, the primacy of archaeological data in interpreting the past.