IX. A BASKET MAKER'S WORK KIT FROM LOVELOCK CAVE, NEVADA Richard D. Ambro In September, 1968, a University of California, Berkeley, archaeologi- cal field party under the direction of Professor Robert F. Heizer and Lewis K. Napton conducted limited excavations in Lovelock Cave, Nevada (NV-Ch-18). In the course of work in the hitherto unexcavated "west alcove" area, which is an extension of the outer rockshelter of the cave, an unusual bundle or parcel was found in grid unit S15/W100 at a depth of 36 inches in the dust and sand against the overhanging back wall of the alcove. The bundle consisted of two main elements; an outer cover made of bird- skin, and an inner folded pouch of animal skin. Upon examination in the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, the bird pelt (UCLMA 045092) was identified as the breast of a Canada goose (Branta canadensis)(Ned Johnson, personal communication, 1969). It was folded, forming a pouch which contained a smaller bundle made of an animal pelt (UCLMA 045093) identified as Vulpes regalis (Charles L. Douglas, personal communication, 1969). The fox pelt contained a most interesting assortment of artifacts, including two bone awls, an awl blank, a coil of willow splints, and a small flake of chert. These artifacts are the work-kit of a Lovelock Cave basketmaker. The contents of the kit are described as follows. One of the awls (UCLMA 045094) is 13.5 cm. long, 1.4 cm. wide, and was manufactured from the shaft and distal end of what may be an antelope or deer metapodial. The bone had been split by deepening the natural groove in the shaft, and the intercondylar fossa provides good purchase for wedging the bone apart. The rounded condyle provides an excellent butt end for the awl, which seats comfortably in the palm of the hand. The lateral edges of the awl still bear the striations produced in cutting the groove, as well as faint longitudinal striations perhaps resulting from the defleshing of bone prior to modification. The last 2.1 cm. of the tip of this awl is tapered to a point and finished by means of grinding on a stone surface. The butt was also ground to remove the sharp and irregular portions of the articular end. The tip and the butt, and, to a lesser degree, the shaft of the awl, exhibit a smooth surface and high polish from the final finishing of the piece and wear resulting from long and intensive use. The extreme apex of the awl bears faint, but unmistakable circumferential striations which resulted from rotating the awl tip to enlarge the aperture in manufacturing a coiled basket. This wear, imparted during use, has obliterated the grind- ing striations on this portion of the awl's tip. -73- Awls of split mammal bone enjoy a long and widespread popularity in the Humboldt Valley area and the Great Basin in general, into historic times (Heizer and Krieger 1956:18, pl. 10 i-l; Jennings 1957: 199-200, fig. 181 g, 193-194, fig 176 f; Loud and Harrington 1929:36, 149, p1. 66a-c, e-g; Steward 1941:288; Stewart 1941:382-83, 1942:264). The second awl (UCLMA 045095) and the awl blank (UCLMA 045096) are of unusual interest, in that they are part of the same bone. They were made from a portion of the shaft and distal end of the bone of a pelican (Pelecanus cf. erythrorhynchos) (0. Brunetti, personal communication, 1969). The bone was split by means of an irregular longitudinal groove. The flake employed in making the groove apparently slipped frequently as the lateral edges bear scores of erratic and intersecting scratches. Both the awl and the awl blank are 16.0 cm. long, 1.4 cm. wide and their irregular edges fit perfectly. Although the bone was apparently cleaned before modification, the articular ends of both pieces preserve dry strips of adhering tendon. Spots of greasy dirt also occur on both pieces. By means of a set of intersecting fractures at the tip, each of the two halves were made to taper abruptly. No further modification is apparent on the blank, whereas the awl was completed by grind- ing the tip to a narrow point on a stone surface. In addition to the circum- ferential striations, a slight shoulder is present at the tip as a result of long use in making coiled basketry. This considerable wear obliterated the grinding striations and eventually so weakened the tip that the final l-2.mm. of the tip snapped off. The butt end of the awl exhibits a high polish and the piece in general displays more signs of handling than does the unfinished blank. Generally speaking, this awl appears to have been intended for finer coiling than the other awl in the kit. The birdbone awl and blank are especially interesting in light of their rarity in archaeological contexts and their apparent absence in the ethno- graphic literature (Steward 1942:265; Stewart 1941:288; 1942:382-83). Loud and Harrington report none from Lovelock Cave while Grosscup mentions one example without association (Grosscup 1960:21; Loud and Harrington 1929:37-38). An undated example was recovered from the nearby Humboldt Lakebed site (NV-Ch-15) in 1969 by a University of California field party. Two were re- covered from Humboldt cave, one of which is of split birdbone and comes from a depth of 36-42" (Heizer and Krieger 1956:19, pl. lOh). Five other awls described as being made of whole bird or rodent bone come from D-V of Danger Cave (Jennings 1957:200). As the awl from the Lovelock cave kit and the other examples do not have points any finer than many mammal bone awls, their rarity must reflect a preference for stronger and more durable awls of mammal bone. Why any were made at all and why two examples would occur in a single instance, in the case of the basketry kit in question, is a mystery. The flake, or more properly the blade (UCLMA 045097), which accompanied the awls is varigated tan and reddish chert, triangular in transverse section and measures 3.5 cm. in length and 2.0 cm. in width. The maximum thickness -74- is 1.0 cm. The proximal end of the blade displays a large bulb of per- cussion and retains the striking platform. The dorsal surface bears two intersecting flake or blade scars indicating the controlled striking of several such blades from the core. The distal end bears a very steep scraping edge, and one lateral edge of the blade exhibits traces of use. It is probable that the flake was employed in preparing basketry material like the bundle of splints found in the kit and was therefore kept with the other basketry implements. The basketry kit included a bundle of prepared splints or coiling wefts (UCLMA 045098). This material consists of approximately fifty elements coiled together to produce an oval bundle measuring 13.0 X 9.5 cm. The splints range ca. 45.0-55.0 cm. in length. Each has been split, scraped, and trimmed so that most are approximately 1.5-1.8 mm. in width. Although they have been well scraped, occasional remnants of the bark and their general appearance indicates that they were derived from the shoots or roots of the willow (Salix sp.). (Wheat [1969] provides an excellent series of photographs illustrating the preparation of willow construction materials used in making baskets.) Their short length and their association with awls indicate their intended use in coiled basketry. Coiled basketry has a long tradition in the Humboldt Valley and elsewhere in the Great Basin and willow is a basic material (Heizer and Krieger 1956:45; Loud and Harrington 1929:65; Roust 1966:62-65; Stewart 1941:386). Aboriginal life everywhere necessitated the occasional caching of possessions and raw materials in caves. There is abundant evidence of such practices in Lovelock Cave, Humboldt Cave, and numerous other sites in the Great Basin. Caches were often made in carefully prepared basketry-lined pits dr in special containers such as skin bags or rush wallets. Bundles made of tule mats, animal skin, cloth, or burlap were also employed (see Heizer and Krieger 1956:91-101; Loud and Harrington 1929:9-11; Tuohy 1967: 4-5). Among the contents of such caches there are bundles of raw materials (feathers, for example) but most of these materials were probably not used in basketry (see Heizer and Krieger 1956:91, 94, 96, 96, pl. 6b and d, pl. 7a; Loud and Harrington 1929: pl. 21 e, h. f; 43 q). Cache pit No. 29 in Humboldt Cave (NV-Ch-35) contained a mass of willow coiling splints. A bundle of peeled willow twigs was also recovered from the cave (Heizer and Krieger 1956:53). The closest parallel to the Lovelock Cavebasketry kit was found in Death Valley (Wallace 1954:216-221). This cache, which dates to the historic period, was stored in a box, and contained six bundles of prepared splints which were coiled and tied like the bundle from Lovelock Cave. Also included in the cache was a piece of cowhide and a cup for soaking the materials prior to use. Wallace (ibid:219) suggests that the cowhide probably provided a -75- clean work surface. Perhaps the pelt and birdskin wrapping of the Lovelock kit served this purpose as well. The lack of stratigraphic and artifactual association makes it difficult to date the Lovelock Cave basketry kit. It must be older than the seeds found in the upper layers of west alcove unit SIO/W95 at a depth of seven inches, which gave a radiocarbon date of A.D. 1430 + 95 (I-4672)(Buckley, personal communication to L. Napton, 1970). Mammal bone awls are far too common and birdbone awls much to rare to permit dating the kit by comparative means (see Grosscup 1960:21). However, the fact that neither of the pelts containing the kit have suffered significant insect damage, the effects of which are clearly visible on many similar items found in the cave, suggests that the kit may be of a late date. Of interest is the fine preparation and width of the splints in the bundle, when they are compared to the vast majority of coiled basketry frag- ments recovered from the Humboldt Valley caves. Their dimensions and uniform appearance approach those of splints employed in a small number of extremely fine basket fragments that are believed to have been acquired as trade items from the Washo Indians located to the west of the Humboldt Valley (Baumhoff and Heizer 1958). It is a pity that a sample of basketry employing some of the splints from the kit was not included by the basketmaker, for much of the identi- fication of outland traded basketry depends on details of technique and decor- ation (ibid:53-56). The Lovelock Cave basketry kit suggests that some fine basketry was made in the Humboldt Valley. Perhaps centuries of trade might have occasionally stimulated a particularly skilled basketmaker to attempt to approach the standards of the costly trade pieces (ibid:31; Roust 1966:65). We are in need of a thorough restudy of the cave basketry fragments and ex- amples of the basketry of the Washo and their neighbors, focusing on techno- logical and decorative features, in order to distinguish between trade pieces and the locally-made copies that chey apparently inspired. -76- Explanation of Illustrations 1-a Photograph of basketry bundle from Lovelock Cave with birdskin pelt removed. 1-b Photgraph of open bundle with contents laid out. Fox pelt with bundle of coiling elements to left. At right is the unmodified bone fragment; the bird bone awl; mammal bone awl; and chert flake. 1-c Close up of bundle of prepared coiling elements and the tip of the mammal bone awl. l-d Close up of chert flake and tip of bird bone awl. -77- C Plt 1-,X df e:.,0 L ..............ZSR:'":::::::: ::::::: ......... : :::::: jS w :S..............................78-........... :.: ::::. j2o BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbreviations Used UCAS-R University of California Archaeological Survey - Report UCPAAE University of California Publications in Archaeology and Ethnology Baumhoff, M. A. and R. F. Heizer 1958 Outland coiled basketry from the caves of west central Nevada. UCAS-R 42:49-59. Grosscup, Gordon L. 1960 The culture history of Lovelock Cave, Nevada. UCAS-R 52. Heizer, Robert F. and Alex D. Krieger 1956 The archaeology of Humboldt Cave, Churchill County, Nevada. UCPAAE Vol. 47, No. 1. Jennings, Jesse D. 1957 Danger Cave. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 14. Loud, L. L. and M. R. Harrington 1929 Lovelock Cave. UCPAAE Vol. 25, No. 1. Roust, Norman L. 1966 Archaeology of Granite Point, Pershing County, Nevada. UCAS-R 66:37-72. Steward, Julian H. 1941 Culture element distributions: XIII Nevada Shoshone. UC, Anthropological Records Vol. 4, No. 2. Stewart, Omer C. 1941 Culture element distributions: XIV-The Northern Paiute. UC, Anthropological Records Vol. 4, No. 3. 1942 Culture element distributions: XVII-Ute-Southern Paiute. UC, Anthropological Records Vol. 6, No. 4. Wallace, William T. 1954 A basket-weaver's kit from Death Valley. The Masterkey Vol. XXVIII, No. 6:216-221. Wheat, Margaret- 196 9 Survival arts of the primitive Paiutes. University of Nevada Press. Reno, Nevada. -79-