Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-72crv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T11:26:35.978Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Purpose at Welling: Additional Considerations Regarding Interpretation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2021

Mark F. Seeman Open the ORCID record for Mark F. Seeman [Opens in a new window] ,
Larry Morris  and
Garry L. Summers
Mark F. Seeman*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA
Larry Morris
Affiliation:
Independent Scholar, East Canton, OH, USA
Garry L. Summers
Affiliation:
Independent Scholar, OH, USA
*
(mseeman@kent.edu, corresponding author)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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.

Diez-Martin y colaboradores (2021) reducen experimentalmente cuatro puntos bifaciales y discuten que las lascas resultantes son más pequeñas y menos uniformes que las encontradas en el sitio de Welling (33Co2). Welling es un sitio Paleo-Indio (Clovis) excavado por Olaf Prufer hace más de 50 años. Con base en el experimento, los autores concluyen que el sitio era un campamento base tipo “coleccionista” y que nuestra interpretación anterior debe ser equivocada. Aquí discutimos que Diez-Martin y sus colegas han mal caracterizado nuestro resumen en respeto a la función del sitio, y pueden haber abordado de manera insuficiente los datos que restan valor de su nueva interpretación.

Keywords

Clovisquarrysettlementlithic supplyla cultura Clovisyacimientotipos de asentimientossuministro de material lítico

Information

Type
Comment
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 86 , Issue 4 , October 2021 , pp. 864 - 866
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for American Archaeology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References Cited

Binford, Lewis R. 1978 Dimensional Analysis of Behavior and Site Structure: Learning from an Eskimo Hunting Stand. American Antiquity 43:330–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binford, Lewis R. 1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter–Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blank, John E. 1970 The Archaic Component of the Welling Site, 33 Co-3, Coshocton Co., Ohio. Ohio Archaeologist 20:269–281.Google Scholar
Diez-Martin, Fernando, Buchanan, Briggs, Norris, James D., and Eren, Metin J. 2021 Was Welling, Ohio (33-Co-2) a Clovis Basecamp or Lithic Workshop? Employing Experimental Models to Interpret Old Collections. American Antiquity 86:183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habu, Junko 2002 Jomon Collectors and Foragers: Regional Interactions and Long-Term Changes in Settlement Systems among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers in Japan. In Beyond Foraging and Collecting: Evolutionary Change in Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems, edited by Fitzhugh, Ben and Habu, Junko, pp. 53–72. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prufer, Olaf H., and Wright, Norman L. 1970 The Welling Site (33Co-2): A Fluted Point Workshop in Coshocton County, Ohio. Ohio Archaeologist 20:259–268.Google Scholar
Seeman, Mark F., Summers, Garry, Dowd, Elaine, and Morris, Larry 1994 Fluted Point Characteristics at Three Large Sites: The Implications for Modeling Early Paleoindian Settlement Patterns in Ohio. In The First Discovery of America: Archaeological Evidence of the Early Inhabitants of the Ohio Area, edited by Dancey, William S., pp. 77–93. Ohio Archaeological Council, Columbus.Google Scholar
Seeman, Mark F., Summers, Garry L., Nilsson, Nils E., and Barans, Paul J. 2019 A Description of Fluted Points from Nobles Pond (33ST357), a Paleoindian Site in Northeastern Ohio. In In the Eastern Fluted Point Tradition, Vol. II, edited by Gingerich, Joseph A. M., pp. 379–405. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Stafford, C. Russell 2021 Early Archaic Dating, Chert Use, and Settlement Mobility in the Falls Region. In Falls of the Ohio River: Archaeology of Native American Settlement, edited by Pollack, David, Bader, Anne T., and Carlson, Justin N., pp. 21–43. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tankersley, Kenneth B. 1989 Late Pleistocene Lithic Exploitation and Human Settlement in the Midwestern United States. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar