European Origins and Native Destinations: Historical Artifacts from the Native Alaskan Village and Fort Ross Beach Sites STEPHEN W. SILLIMAN HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS1 recovered from the excavation of the Fort Ross Beach Site (FRBS) and the Native Alaskan Village Site (NAVS) provide the potential to address a multitude of questions concerning Native Alaskan and Native Californian lives during the Russian occupation of Colony Ross. These artifacts- ceramics, glass, beads, and metal-supply the informa- tion needed to trace intrasite distributions of material available to native people only through direct or indirect contact with Russians or other Europeans. The relations of these arfifacts to ones recovered from other areas of the Fort Ross locale can be probed. Thus, historical artifacts not only allow a glimpse of Native Alaskan and probable Native Californian life outside of the Fort Ross Stockade, but also a depiction of their lives in compari- son with Russian and Creole occupants of the Stockade and Russian Village. Since the historical materials date by their nature to post-contact situations, the assemblage allows an analysis of native life after European contact with minimal presence of pre-contact material culture. In this chapter the only exceptions covered are shell beads. Lithic or faunal materials associated with the historical artifacts are more difficult to place in the pre- versus post-contact continuum, though their association and presence can provide invaluable information (see Schiff, chapter 9; Wake, chapters 11, 12). In many ways, the isolation of "historical artifacts" from other aspects of native material culture is arbitrary, but a number of factors make the division acceptable. These include the temporal resolution offered by historical artifacts, the novelty of the items to at least Native Californians who traditionally dealt only with goods that were not industri- ally mass-produced, and the synthesis of all materials provided by Lightfoot and others at the end of the volume. The presentation of historical materials from the 1988-92 excavations in this chapter takes place in three sections: description and methodology, quantities and distribution, and interpretation. The first section contains descriptions of artifacts by the categories of historical ceramics, glass, worked glass, glass beads, shell beads, and metal. Distinctions made within these categories are outlined as they pertain to later discussion of distribution and interpretation. Next, the amount and distribution of the materials are discussed and presented for both NAVS and FRBS based on area, unit, and stratigraphic layer. This section is necessarily dense and replete with quantification. Finally, interpretations of the materials and context are provided, allowing the relations existing in and among the "historical" materials to be examined as a step toward more synthetic interpretations. DESCRIPTION AND METHODOLOGY CFERAMICS The historical ceramics recovered from the Fort Ross Archaeological Project excavations are categorized into a hierarchical framework of class, group, and type. Class. The ceramics are divided into general classes based on body, or paste, characteristics. Classes are arranged in order of increasing vitrification and include earthenware, stoneware, and porcelain. The distinction between the three was based on differences in the ceramic body resulting from chemical composition and condition of fEirng, especially temperature. The earthen- ware class is ubiquitously refined earthenware. Recogni- tion of earthenware is facilitated by crazing in the glaze from water absorption by the ceramic body, relative softness of paste, and tendency to absorb moisture (Deetz 1977; M. Praetzellis 1980). A small number of sherds appear to be more vitrified, thus less porous, than the Historical Artifacts 137 average refined earthenware, but for purposes here they are considered refined earthenware and often include ironstone. In this chapter, ironstone, though a refined earthenware, is considered in a separate category from general earthenware for tabulation purposes. As a highly refined earthenware, ironstone occurs in very small numbers in the collection. These sherds are, however, the later forms of ironstone (ca. 1850s) rather than the forms first manufactured in the 1810s and 1820s. Stoneware is classified based on its higher vitrification, higher density, and non-porous paste as compared to earthenware. Porcelain, the most vitrified of all ceramic classes, is easily recognizable by its hardness and density (A. Praetzellis 1981). In addition, the shiny, granular appearance of the body in cross section makes assignment of fragments to the category relatively straightforward. Although there is debate on the distinction between Chinese porcelains and some highly vitrified stonewares with suggestions to refer to them all as "porcelaineous stoneware" (see A. Praetzellis 1981:9), I have chosen not to use the term to refer to this more inclusive group.2 Group. The sequential division of class into groups is made on the basis of color of the ceramic body, color of the glaze, or both (O'Connor 1984; M. Praetzellis 1980). In the case of porcelain, subdivision is into white and non-white. White is considered European, American, or less likely Russian manufactured, and non-white is associated with Chinese export3 (Barclay & Olivares n.d.: 15; cf. M. Praetzellis 1980). In these assemblages, stoneware is either salt-glazed grey with a brown or clear glaze, or a red-bodied ware with mottled black glaze. Jackfield is present as well and is assigned based on its black body and surface, shiny glaze, and incised and sprigged decorative style from machine-turning (Godden 1965:xiv; Noel Hume 1970:123-24). Though the traditional classification of earthenware during the early to mid-1800s established on ware types has been criticized (Majewski & O'Brien 1987), I subdivide sherds into ware groups of white, pearl, cream, and yellow. I do not venture into the suggestion of using nonvitreous, semi-vitreous, and vitreous white-bodied wares, which are grounded in the technological develop- ment of material production in the ceramnic industry (see Majewski & O'Brien 1987), but such an approach appears to warrant attention in future studies. For purposes here, such refinement is unnecessary. Creamware refers predominantly to a generally undecorated cream-colored refined earthenware (Miller 1991), but it is not the classic "CC Ware" (Majewsld & O'Brien 1987:117). Though a distinction exists histori- cally and physically between whitewares and pearlwares (Noel Hume 1970; Majewski & O'Brien 1987; Miller 1980, 1991; Sussman 1977), I find it particularly difficult to identify in the assemblage under analysis (see O'Connor 1984:35). This is attributable to the physical as the classic bluish glaze of pearlware (1780-1830) to whiteware with reduced cobalt as a result of growing popularity of white porcelains (ca. 1820) to the return of a whiteware with a bluish tinge (ca. 1840) (Miller 1980, 1991; Towner 1957). The problem is especially acute since pearlwares became indistinguishable from whitewares after the cobalt blue was removed from the glaze (Sussman 1977:111). Placement of whiteware under short-wave ultraviolet light, however, greatly assists in its identification since it reflects a dull to bright white rather than the grey of pearlware or mustard yellow of creamware (Laurie Wilkie, personal communication 1995). As such, I used this technique to make the identifications. Noel Hume (1970) claims that the predominance of whiteware around 1820 serves a rough chronological marker, but its applicability is restricted in cases of high vessel fragmentation as found in the assemblage under analysis. The best chronological marker for this category is the introduction of different transferprint colors (Majewski & O'Brien 1987:119; Miller 1991). Discussion in this chapter often relates to refined earthenware as an analytical category including all whiteware, pearlware, and creamware; yellowware, though a refined earthenware, is excluded. Yellowware is easily recognizable by the buff-colored paste which gives the ceramic a mustard color beneath a transparent glaze, and it dates from approximately 1830 to the beginning to mid-20th Century (Hughes & Hughes 1968:113; Noel Hume 1970:131; M. Praetzellis 1980:7-8). In addition, delftware is identified in the collection based on the reddish tan paste, bluish tin glaze, ease of glaze chipping, and soft body. Its manufacturing date falls somewhere between 1600 and 1802 (Noel Hume 1971:105-111) Type. Finally, groups are further subdivided into types based on the method and kind of decoration. Unfortunately, undecorated forns are difficult to monitor because they may represent the undecorated sections of decorated ceramic vessels, but no other choice is avail- able. For non-white porcelain, types include overglaze polychrome enameled, underglaze blue painted, and undecorated. In order to expedite analysis, underglaze blue painted is referred to generically as "Chinese Porcelain"4 without further refinement to differentiate Canton, Nanking, and Fitzhugh motifs (see Noel Hume 1970:262-63; O'Connor 1984). This is done because the designs are not significant temporally, since all three occur from approximately 1800-30, nor behaviorally, since the highly fragmented nature of the ceramic assemblage makes assignment difficult. White porcelain includes undecorated and overglaze enameled forms. Refined earthenware receives type designation based on categories of edge decoration, handpainted blue, flow blue, handpainted polychrome, transferprint, annular, mocha, and undecorated. Edge decoration is subdivided well as temporal continuum involving the change from into colors of blue and green and into disfinctions of 138 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood textured (shell-edged) or non-iextured. Handpainted blue typically consists of floral pattems, while flow blue has the classic appearance of transferprint blue ink having diffused into a blurred effect. Handpainted polychromes entail primarily earthen tones of brownish green, tan, earthen orange, and yellow, all of which are characteristic of early 1800s earthenware (Lofstrom et al. 1982:6). A few possess blue in the polychrome suite, and bright orange and red hues, which complete the pattern often referred to as "Gaudy Dutch" and which date from 1810 to 1830 (see Boger 1971:126). Transferprint ceramics, formed by the application of engraved designs by way of a paper transfer, are classi- fied by the colors of blue, black, purple, red, and brown. Significant dates for transferprint colors and flow blue are as follows: transferprint blue peaked in the 1820s (Miller 1991:9); transferprint black, red, brown, and purple were produced from 1829 to the late 1840s, predominantly on whitewares (Godden 1963:115; Lofstrom et al. 1982:9; Majewsld & O'Brien 1987:119; Shaw 1968 cited in Miller 1991); and flow blue made its appearance in the 1840s (Miller 1974:201, 1991:9; Price 1979:22). Annular fonns are characterized by concentric bands of colored slip and occur frequently on yellowware, which is often considered to be a simple kitchen or household ware and tends to postdate 1840 when displaying horizontal bands of white, brown, or blue slip (see p. 137). Mocha, one of the most common forms of annular ware, is identified by the dendritic brown pattern produced by "a secret mixture ... said to consist of tobacco juice, turpentine, manganese, and urine" (Lewis 1969:165); the design is usually bounded by colored bands. It is characterized in the literature as an inexpensive, utilitarian ware (Godden 1974:222; Noel Hume 1970:131). The stoneware has no decorative styles to speak of save the sprigged and incised designs found on Jackfield wares. Interior grooves and other features on some stoneware sherds assisted vessel identification, but no decorations are presenL The other stonewares are European grey-bodied or brown salt-glazed grey-bodied mineral water/ale bottles and an unidentifiable red-bodied stoneware. Neither of the grey stonewares appear to be fragments of Chinese overseas wares noted from the Stockade by O'Connor (1984:29). In fact, the brown glazed forn is probably an English salt-glazed stoneware bottle because of the mottled surface and presence of spiral scarring left by a jiggering tool on the interior surface (see A. Praetzellis 1981:8). Both were manufac- tured from the 1820s throughout the 19th century (Noel Hume 1970:78-79). The unidentified stoneware pos- sesses a red paste with a coarse temper, a fairly thick mottled black and tan glaze, and ribbed features on the probable exterior of the vessel. It may represent an unknown Spanish ceramic form traded into the Ross area Russian manufacturing center. Pipe stems and bowl fragments, manufactured from mold-pressed kaolin clay, are given a separate category and are discussed in the ceramic section. In addition, the presence of intentionally modified ceramic sherds warrants future discussion. They are initially separated according to their characteristic material condition of paste, color, and decoration for tabulations. I deal with them fully in later sections of the chapter. Vessel forms were determined through a series of analytical steps. First, only pieces diagnostic of a vessel type are included in the sample; these include fEragments of rims, footrings, or textured features and handles. No pieces are included without these features even if the sherd might be placed in a general category of vessel based on wall size or general shape. This method provides an accurate classification of vessel forms by relying on specific feature recognition and not on approxi- mations based simply on wall thickness. In addition, the sampling procedure is not expected to bias the sample from the overall population because there is no reason to posit, for example, more rims from teacups than from bowls being present due to breakage patterns or post- depositional disturbance. Second, rim and footring sherds were compared to the relatively contemporaneous Cooper-Molera archaeological collection at the State Parks Archaeology Laboratory in Sacramento, California (see Felton & Schultz 1983), to visually reconstruct aperture or base diameters, respectively, and to associate shape, thickness, and diameter with vessel form. Third, handles and textured features were compared to the above-noted collection in order to isolate vessel type for the sherd. Fourth, double-sided decoration was used to verify assignment to a hollowware category. Finally, as discussed below, the only crossmending and refit successes are between three pairs of sherds from FRBS and ftree pairs and one triad from NAVS. Though no other crossmends were discovered, undoubtedly due to high fragmentation of the assemblage, further analysis might allow an estimated Minimum Number of Vessels based on slight color variations, different decorative forms, surface scars, etc. This procedure is not included here, however. GLASS In this analysis, glass is separated into three groups: window glass, vessel glass, and lamp/globe glass. High fragmentation prevents unequivocal assignment of glass potentially derived from lamp chimney globes, but where pieces are extremely thin with substantial curvature, I feel reasonably confident in assigning them to the category. It should be noted here that totals reflect the addition of worked glass for absolute counts and densities since the same is done for worked ceramics. My distinction serves to isolate the architectural from the non-architectural from the missions, or it may derive from an unrecognized glass, a difference allowing an investigation into the Historical Artifacts 139 potential locations of past structures at NAVS. Vessel glass is further divided by colors of green (both "black" or dark green and light green), brown, colorless, blue, red, purple, and other. As a note on methodology, vessel and architectural glass pieces are analyzed only as absolute numbers and densities even though simple counts cannot adequately account for varying stages of fragmentation. In other words, more smaller pieces may be equivalent to fewer pieces of larger size. I considered weighing the pieces to accommodate variable breakage, but the highly frag- mented nature of the overall assemblage (except for a very small number of large specimens) obviates the need for such refinement. Nonetheless, window glass is often more fragmented than vessel glass, and the comparison between the two glass categories should be undertaken with caution. Some intergroup comparison is done in this chapter, and later corrections for weight might reveal variations in the patterns suggested here. As with the ceramics, some glass vessels are identifiable, but there is no sampling of the assemblage as with the ceramics. Glass vessels are identified based on diagnostic characteristics such as necks and bases when possible. However, the fragmented nature of the assem- blage makes this almost impossible, additionally preclud- ing the use of the standard Minimum Number of Vessels. Window glass is not extensively considered in this report since Allison Cohen (1992) expanded on it in detail in her senior honors thesis at the University of California at Berkeley. Her results are incorporated in the description and interpretation as necessary, but readers are referred to it for a detailed description of the majority of flat glass recovered from FRBS and NAVS prior to the 1992 excavations. In her thesis, she discusses aspects of the excavated window glass, including color (colorless, light blue, light green, light blue-green, and yellow), surface textures, and imperfections, especially those related to the process of crizzeling which appears as linear cracks with often characteristic branching patterns (Cohen 1992:28-29). She aptly demonstrates the potential of window glass for chronology, sourcing, and evaluation of subsurface archaeological chemical context by virtue of chemical deterioration. WORKED GLASS Worked glass is designated in the same manner as non-worked glass in terns of material (i.e., vessel or window glass), and it is included in the glass category for summation. It receives separate treatment as a category for re-counting and analyzing, however. I consider only the glass artifacts possessing relatively unambiguous features of intentional modification in this category. Though more of the artifacts included in the "Glass" category may actually be modified, the difficulty of differentiating those features from pre- and post-deposi- Glass" category. A modest number from the glass database (as catalogued in appendices 7.1 & 7.2) are classified and interpreted here as modified. Description of the worked glass follows the manner in which lithic tools and debitage are characterized (see Schiff, chapter 9). For example, I use descriptive categories such as flake, interior flake, cortical flake, core, shatter, projectile point, unifacially and bifacially worked, and edge- modified. Determination of cortical flakes on bottle glass is difficult, however, since the exterior of the fragments from which flakes were detached may not show any "cortex," manifest on vessel glass as patination. As such, very few cortical flakes (those possessing flake scars through patina) are noted in the collection even though they may actually represent the same stage of reduction on non-weathered glass. SHELL AND BONE BEADS Lester Ross fully describes and analyzes the glass trade beads and the single ceramic bead recovered from NAVS and FRBS in chapter 8. Other beads are divided into the two categories of shell and bone beads. The latter is represented by only three specimens, and the former consists of clamshell disk beads, spire-lopped Olivella, and miscellaneous forms. These materials are the only equivocal "historical" ones recovered in the excavations, but their occasional association with historical materials in sealed contexts, such as the bone beds described in other sections of this volume, suggests that at least some are not intrusive from an earlier time in coastal California prehistory. Measurements of maxi- mum diameter and maximum height of the clamshell disk beads are provided to monitor size variability. METAL Metal artifacts recovered from the NAVS/FRBS excavations run the range from well-defined items to unidentifiable masses of melted or heavily oxidized iron or slag. Therefore, description of materials focuses exclusively on identifiable forms, which include items such as nails, thimbles, lead shot, copper and iron wire, brass buttons, copper and lead foil, ranch wire, spikes, and hooks. Nails and spikes are differentiated by size, and both are separated by composition as either iron or brass. Though "brass" is used to refer to the material of some nails, actual composition may be of varying copper alloys. Throughout the quantification in this chapter, the category of nail refers to not only whole or almost complete nails, but also to stock, tip, and head fragments. Unless portions are determined likely to refit with nearby pieces, this procedure serves as a kind of Number of Individual Specimens Present No attempt is made to refine the categorization to include "tacks," though one iron artifact is referred to as a tack because of its large head relative to small stock body. In appendices 7.5 and tional factors keeps counts conservative in the "Worked 7.6, additional analyses on nail forms (i.e., head or stock 140 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood shape; some measurements) are provided, but in this chapter, I do not extensively use those characteristics. Although the introduction of cut nails into a wrought nail world may be temporally significant (Nelson 1968), no attempt is made to quantify these differences given the highly corroded and broken state of the metal materials in the NAVS/FRBS collection. When such a distinction could be made, however, it was noted in the appendices. In a general sense, most of the iron nails appear to be wrought, many brass ones are cast nails, and no modem "wire-cur" nails are present. Although many heads and tips are missing from the oxidizing nail fragments, the tendency for the nails to be disintegrating by longitudinal sheets hints that their manufacturing tye is probably wrought. In contrast to most cut or cast nails, wrought nails have iron fibers trending along the long axis of the nail (Nelson 1968). QUANTITIES AND DISTRIBuTIONS Quantities and distributions of materials found at NAVS and FRBS are described in this section. Descrip- tion proceeds by excavation area, by unit within areas of multiple units, and by stratigraphic layer. Densities are provided in artifacts per cubic meter, even though this artificially inflates the number of recovered items since stratigraphic layers were often less than 1 m3. Density figures are calculated by taking the total number of artifacts collected per unit, trench, or stratum and dividing this number by the total volume of sediment in the entity considered. It should be noted here as well that the densities for pit fill deposits may be problematic since these features are not always contained in all units of a trench nor in superposition to other "natural" layers such as dark sandy loam. Density estimates are designed only to standardize artifact numbers by excavated sediment volume and are not meant to predict the number of artifacts expected from a full one cubic meter excavation. Also, extensive bioturbation, primarily by gophers, across the site may have rendered vertical stratigraphy uncertain. Therefore, though I include divisions based on stratigraphic layers, discussion often refers to the units or trenches as a whole. More detailed information on all artifacts is located in appendices 7.1-7.6 NAVS is divided into the South Central Test Unit (lIOS, 11W), the three-unit West Central Trench (75S, 16W; 75S, 18W; 75S, 20W), the five-unit East Cental Trench (75S, 04E), and the South Trench (125S, 18- 24W) with 7 contiguous units. Two 3 x 0.5 m extension trenches placed perpendicularly to the East Central and South trenches are analyzed as well, and these include the three 1 x 0.5 m units of the East Central Extension Trench (74S, 3E; 73S, 3E; 72S, 3E) and the three 1 x 0.5 m units of the South Extension Trench (124S, 24W; 123S, 24W; 122S, 24W) excavated in 1992. These extension trenches are not considered in density estimates for the East Central or South trenches as a whole, but their assemblages are represented in total counts and percentages for analysis of the two main trenches. Care must be exercised, though, because the extension trenches did not have one-quarter of the materials screened through the 1/16" control screen as in the main trenches. Two features referred to as bone beds are also located within the East Central Trench (East Central Bone Bed) and South Trench (South Bone Bed), and they are discussed as important depositional units. FRBS is divided into five sections: East Bench (ON, 12W), East Profile (P1-9), Middle Profile (P 1-18), West Profile (P20-30), and Southwest Bench (Units 7S, 17- 19W; 8S, 17-19W). No densities are calculated for these units given the highly variable sediment densities in the scarp profile units and the different screen sizes used. CERAMICS AT NAVS SOUTH CFvTRAL TEST UNIT For this unit, 101 ceramic sherds were excavated with a total density for the unit of 202 sherds/m3. More specifically, density of ceramics in the dark sandy loam was 375/m3, which is more than twice the density of 170/ m3 recovered in the overlying topsoil (table 7.1). In addition, refined earthenware predominates in the assemblage with percentages of 70-87% (not considering the one from the clay layer), while porcelains and other ceramics occur with frequencies of 11-25% and 3-6%, respectively (table 7.1). Ceramic types for refined earthenware are primarily, in descending order, undeco- rated, handpainted blue, transferprint blue, flow blue, and handpainted polychrome forms (figure 7.1)5. The undecorated condition occurs predominantly on Table 7.1 South Central Test Unit - Ceramics Stratigraphic Layer # of Sherds Density of Artifacts % REa % PORb % Other Topsoil 17 170/M3 70.6 23.5 5.9 Dark Sandy Loam 75 375/m3 86.7 10.7 2.7 Rock Rubble 8 80/m3 75.0 25.0 0.0 Clay 1 10/m3 100.0 0.0 0.0 Total 101 202/m3 83.2 3.0 3.0 a RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage Historical Artifacts 141 creamware and whiteware while most handpainted blues and polychromes are found on pearlware. Underglaze transferprint brown and flow blue indicate whiteware. A single specimen each of Jackfield ware and yellowware were recovered from the dark sandy loam making up 2.7% of the layer's total sherd count. In reference to porcelain, sample size is too small (n=15) to unequivo- cally show a significant pattern, but it appears that most (80%) are non-white with the underglaze Chinese blue design (53% of non-white). In the dark sandy loam, three refitting transferprint blue pearlware sherds were recov- ered. WEST CENTRAL TRENCH Located in the central portion of NAVS, the West Central Trench provides a total of 94 sherds from the three 1 m x 1 m units with all but 1 ceramic deriving from the dark sandy loam layer (table 7.2). Ceramic density for the trench as a whole is 85 sherds/m3 with unit values ranging from 73 to 93 sherds/m3 (table 7.2). Considering dark sandy loam alone as the zone from which all but one sherd derived, the ceramic artifact density for the three differs from that obtained in the test unit in that all three units have a density of 93-113/m3, with a total trench density of 102/n3 (table 7.2). Density values reflect an apparently non-differentiated subsurface distribution of historical ceramics in terms of absolute numbers and relative densities. These figures are, however, approximately one-third the density of that derived from the same stratum of the South Central Test Unit. Nonetheless, relative frequencies of refmed earthen- ware, porcelains, and other ceramics reproduce the pattern unearthed in the Test Unit; refined earthenware has a total frequency across the three units of 81.5%, porcelains have 16.3%, and the "other" category rests at 2.2% (table 7.2). The last category includes both a Jackfield ware and a pipe fragment. In addition, though the range of ceramic decorative types (n=6) is less than that in the South Central Test Unit (n=8), the distribution of types show a similar pattern to the Test Unit (figure 7.2). That is, undecorated forms are the most numerous followed by handpainted blue, transferprint blue, and handpainted polychrome. Porcelains (n=15) are prima- rily (73.3%) non-white with 81.8% (9/11) of those as underglaze Chinese blue. EAST CENTRAL TRENCH AND EXTENSION TRENCH Two hundred and twenty-eight sherds were exca- vated from the five units of the East Central Trench and three units of the Extension Trench. They are distibuted vertically with 22 (9.6%) sherds in the topsoil, 161 (70.1%) in the dark sandy loam, 36 (15.8%) in the pit fill, and 10 (4.4%) in the silty loam. Density for the main five-unit trench (75S, 0-4E) is 49 ceramics/m3 throughout unit range from 37 to 62 sherds/m3 (table 7.3)6. It should be noted here that this is one of the only areas of NAVS to have refit successes-one pair of refined earthenware in the dark sandy loam of both 75S, OE and 72S, 3E. In the topsoil of the main five-unit trench, artifact density hovers around 55 per cubic meter (table 7.4). In the dark sandy loam, artifact density for the main trench fluctuates from 53 to 110 sherds/m3 with a total trench/ stratum density of 80/m3 (table 7.5); in the pit fill of the main trench, sherd densities remain at or below 60/m3 (table 7.6). No densities are calculated for the silty loam layer because of the small sample size. However, nine of the ten ceramics are refined earthenware, and the tenth piece is a non-white porcelain. Ceramic density in the topsoil of the East Central Trench is considerably lower than that of the topsoil in the South Central Test Unit, and the dark sandy loam density in the East Central Trench is significantly lower than the same layer's density at the Test Unit and only slightly lower than the West Central Trench, especially in unit 75S, IE. Given the substantial sample in the dark sandy loam, there appears to be a difference in ceramics per volume of sediment in the units, especially between 75S, 3E and 75S, IE. Though samples are small in the topsoil and pit fill layer, ceramics seem to be roughly uniform in density across the units. In terms of relative proportions of refined earthen- ware, porcelain, and other ceramics, the topsoil of the East Central Trench and the Extension Trench has unit frequencies of refined earthenware ranging from 67-80% (trench total, 68.1%), with associated porcelains being 17-29% (trench total, 22.7%) of the entire assemblage (table 7.4). The large sample size of the dark sandy loam in the East Central Trench and the extension trench seems to have a more varied pattern as refined earthenware fluctuates from 57-85% with a trench total of 74.9%, while porcelain maintains percentages of 10-43%, having a trench total of 21.99% (table 7.5). The "Other" category holds 3% and contains three yellowware sherds, the one and only delftware sherd, the only evidence of the red-bodied stoneware, and several pipestem and bowl fragments. As for the pit fill, refined earthenware and porcelain both range from 0-100%, but the small sample makes comparison problematic (table 7.6). The range of decorative types varies across the units of the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, but predominant forms are handpainted blue, transferprint blue, and undecorated (figure 7.3). In addition, types vary vertically in the East Central Trench. The topsoil in this trench possesses only handpainted blue and undeco- rated forms for refined earthenware; the forner occurs only on identified pearlware while the latter appears on creamware, whiteware, and pearlware. Of the five porcelain pieces, only one is white porcelain witli overglaze enameling; the rest are undecorated and the entire vertical section, and individual densities per underglaze Chinese porcelain. In the dark sandy loam of 142 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Figure 7.1 Counts of Refined Earthenware Types per Stratigraphic Layerfor the South Central Test Unit Undecorated Annular Mocha Transferprint Brown Flow Blue Transferprint Blue Handpainted Polychrome Handpainted Blue O Rock Rubble 0 Dark Sandy Loam * Topsoil 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Total Ceramics Figure 7.2 Counts of Refined Earthenware Types per Unit in the West Central Trench Transferprizn Red; Transferprint Brown E Transferprint Blue [m Handpamnted Polychrome 1E Handpainted Blue : 1? | . I ~I I I I I 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ] 75S, 2OW N 75S, 18W D 75S, 16W Total Ceramics 40 26 'U- I.. u vi 0. U ;bl ._ L Historical Artifacts 143 Table 7.2 West Central Trench - Ceramics Excavation Unit # of Sherds Density of Artifacts Density of Artifacts' % REc % PoRd % Other 75S, 16W 37 93/m3 93/m3 77.7 16.7 5.6 75S, 18W 22 110/rm3 73/m3 77.2 22.7 0 75S, 20W 34 113/m3 85/m3 88.2 13.3 0 All Units 94 102/M3 85/m3 81.5 16.3 2.2 a Dark Sandy Loam c RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage bTotal Trench dPOR = Porcelain, relative percentage Table 7.3 East Central Trench and Extension - Ceramics Excavation # of Artifact Artifact % REc % PORI % Other Unit Sherds Densitya Densityb 75S, OE 38 54.3/m3 63/m3 81.6 15.8 2.6 75S, 1E 26 37.1/m3 37/m3 80.8 15.4 3.8 75S, 2E 37 61.7/3 62/m3 73.0 21.6 5.4 75S, 3E 35 43.8/m3 44/m3 77.1 20.0 2.9 75S, 4E 29 41.4/r3 58/m3 72.4 24.1 3.4 Subtotal 165 48.5/m3 52/3 77.0 19.4 3.6 74S, 3E 24 - 75.0 25.0 0.0 73S, 3E 21 - 85.7 9.5 4.8 72S, 3E 19 52.6 42.1 5.3 Totale 228 75.4 24.1 3.5 a Density combines the entire stratigraphic section, regardless of the presence of ceramics. b Density is only for the strata bearing historical materials. c RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage d POR = Porcelain, relative percentage " The extension trench (74-72S, 3E) counts are summed with the East Central Trench counts to give the "Total" counts and relative percentages. Table 7.4 East Central Trench - Ceramics: Topsoil Excavation # of Artifact % REa % PORb % Other Unit Sherds Density 75S, OE 0 O/r3 0.0 0.0 0.0 75S, IE 5 50/m3 80.0 20.0 0.0 75S, 2E 6 60/m3 66.7 16.7 16.7 75S, 3E 7 70/m3 71.4 28.6 0.0 75S, 4E 4 40/m3 75.0 25.0 0.0 Total 22 55/m3 68.1 22.7 9.2 Note: no ceramics recorded for the topsoil of the extension trench. a RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage the East Central Trench and the Extension Trench, refined earthenware decorative types include handpainted blue and polychrome, transferprint blue, annular, blue shell-edged, and undecorated forms in quantities similar to other previously discussed units. Only 1 of the 25 sherds with handpainted blue, handpainted polychrome, and transferprint blue is not pearlware. The annular type (n=5) occurs primarily on creamware and yellowware, and the blue shell-edged design occurs on pearlware. Moreover, the majority of undecorated refined earthen- ware belongs to the creamware and whiteware group. In addition, porcelains (n=28) are predominantly Chinese (67.9%), though undecorated porcelains of both groups exist, and one overglaze painted type appears on non- white porcelain. In reference to the pit fill of both the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, all refined earthenware is either handpainted blue, handpainted polychrome, 144 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood transferprint blue, or undecorated. Undecorated and handpainted blue dominate the assemblage again. In addition, all porcelain sherds (n=4) are non-white and underglaze painted Chinese porcelains. As for the silty loam of the East Central Trench (n=10), refmed earthen- ware consists of 3 handpainted blue pearlwares, 1 handpainted polychrome pearlware, 1 mocha, and 4 undecorated creamwares. The one porcelain sherd is non-white and overgLued painted. As a subcomponent of the East Central Trench, the East Central Bone Bed contains 34 ceramics with a total density of 68 sherds/m3, which is close to the average density for the entire East Central Trench. Relative frequencies of refmed earthenware are slightly below the site and trench total at 73.5%, with porcelain occupying the other 26.5%. Of the 25 refined earthenware sherds, pearlware and creamware categories hold 12 apiece, and one is buned beyond further recognition. All creamware are undecorated, while the pearlware has 50% handpainted blue, 25% transferprint blue, and 25% undecorated. Nine porcelains were recovered, all of which are non-white, with underglaze blue fonns predominating (88.9%). SOUTH TRENCH AND ExTENSIoN TRENCH A total of 617 sherds was recovered from the 10 units of the South Trench (seven units) and Extension Trench (three units), with 98 (15.9%) from the topsoil, 489 (79.3%) from the dark sandy loam, and 30 (4.9%) from the pit fill. Total density for the South Trench (n=477), regardless of unit or stratum, is 145 sherds/m3; densities for the entire vertical section of the individual units of 125S, 18-24W have values from 106-228 sherds/ m3 (table 7.7). In the topsoil of the seven-unit South Trench, ceramic sherd densities vary in those units containing historical artifacts from 120/m3 to 270/m3 with an average of 196/m3 (table 7.8). In the dark sandy loam of the South Trench, densities approximate those of the overlying strum with a range of 130 to 240 sherds per cubic meter, with a total trench density of 184/m3 (table 7.9). In addition, density of the pit fill deposits is consistently below 80 sherds per cubic meter in the three units containing pit fill material (table 7.10). In the South Trench, only one refittable pair was recovered in the dark sandy loam of 125S, 18W. Ceramic density for the topsoil in the South Trench closely resembles that found in the South Central Test Unit, but it is significantly higher than densities in the East Centrl Trench. Comparing dark sandy loam, density in the South Trench is significantly lower than in the Test Unit, and slightly higher than in either the West Central or East Central Trenches. Finally, in terms of pit fill, density in the South Trench is almost identical to that recovered from the East Central Trench. In terms of ceramic groups, units in both tfie South Trench and Extension Trench range from 75%-88% refined earthenware, 10-25% porcelain, and 2-6% other ceramics (table 7.7). In the topsoil of the South Trench, percentages range from 70-100% for refined earthen- ware, 0-30% for porcelain, and 0-17% for other ceramics with respective total percentages of 85.9%, 12.1%, and 2.0% (table 7.8). The latter category here refers to pipe fragments. Dark sandy loam in the South Trench and Extension Trench has refined earthenware consistently higher with ranges of 75-92% with a total trench percent- age of 80.6%, porcelain with slightly higher proportions of 4-25% with a total of 17.6%, and "others" with a range of 0-8% around a total percentage of 1.8% (table 7.9). "Other" contains 1 Jackfield ware sherd, 3 yellowware pieces, and 4 pipestems. As for the pit fill stratum, the three units with historical ceramics have a range of 74- 100% refined earthenware and 0-26% porcelain, totaling Table 7.5 East Central Trench and Extension - Ceramics: Dark Sandy Loam Excavation # of Artifact % REa % PORb % Other Unit Sherds Density 75S, OE 33 83/m3 81.3 15.6 3.1 75S, 1E 16 53/m3 81.3 18.7 0.0 75S, 2E 18 90/m3 68.8 24.9 6.3 75S, 3E 22 11O/m3 72.7 22.7 4.5 75S, 4E 15 75/m3 57.1 42.9 0 Subtotal 104 80/m3 73.8 23.2 3.0 74S, 3E 18 66.7 33.3 0 73S, 3E 20 85.0 10.0 5.0 72S, 3E 18 - 77.8 16.7 5.6 Totalc 161 74.9 21.9 3.2 a RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage c The 'Total " counts and percentages include both the East Central Trench and extension units. Historical Artifacts 145 Table 7.6 East Central Trench and Extension - Ceramics: Pit Fill Excavation # of Artifact % RE" % PORb % Other Unit Sherds Density 75S, OE 5 25/m3 80.0 20.0 0.0 75S, 1E 3 30/m3 100.0 0.0 0.0 75S, 2E 12 60/m3 91.7 83 0.0 75S, 3E 6 20/m3 100.0 0.0 0.0 75S, 4E 5 50/m3 80.0 0.0 20.0 Subtotal 31 40/r3 90.0 6.5 3.2 74S, 3E 4 75.0 25.0 0.0 73S, 3E 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 72S, 3E 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 36 - 86.1 11.1 2.8 a RE = Refmed Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage Table 7.7 South Trench and Extension - Ceramics Excavation #of Artifact Artifact % REC % PORd % Other Unit Sherds Densitya Densityb 125S, 18W 114 228/3 228/r3 78.9 19.3 1.8 125S, 19W 59 196/r3 196/m3 88.1 10.2 1.7 125S, 20W 53 133/m3 177/m3 75.5 24.5 0.0 125S, 21W 47 118/m3 157/m3 87.2 12.8 2.1 125S, 22W 72 144/r3 240/m3 81.9 18.1 2.7 125S, 23W 53 106/m3 133/m3 75.5 18.9 5.7 125S, 24W 79 113/r3 132/m3 85.5 13.9 2.5 Total 477 145/r3 191/m3 80.7 17.0 2.3 Totale 617 - 80.7 17.2 2.1 a Density is for the entire vertical section, regardless of the presence of ceramic materials. b Density is comprised of ceramic-bearing stratigraphic layers only. c RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage d POR = Porcelain, relative percentage e Total here includes the extension trench's (74S-72S, 3E) ceramics from the dark sandy loam. Table 7.8 South Trench - Ceramics: Topsoil Excavation # of Artifact % REa % PORb % Other Unit Sherds Density 125S, 18W 27 270/m3 77.7 18.5 3.7 125S, 19W 0 0/m3 0.0 0.0 0.0 125S, 20W 23 230/m3 69.6 30.4 0.0 125S, 21W 15 150/m3 100.0 0.0 0.0 125S, 22W 0 0/m3 0.0 0.0 0.0 125S, 23W 12 120/m3 75.0 8.8 16.7 125S 24W 21 210/m3 85.7 9.5 4.8 Total 98 196/m3 85.9 12.1 2.0 Note: notopsoil ramics recorded fortheextensiontrench. a RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage 146 The Natve Alaskan Neighborhood Table 7.9 South Trench and Extension - Ceramics: Dark Sandy Loam Excavation # of Artifact % RE" % PORb % Other Unit Sherds Density 125S, 18W 87 218/m3 79.3 19.5 1.1 125S, 19W 55 183/M3 87.3 10.9 1.8 125S, 20W 30 155/m3 80.0 20.0 0 125S, 21W 13 130/m3 84.6 7.7 7.7 125S, 22W 72 240/m3 79.1 18.1 2.8 125S, 23W 41 137/m3 75.6 22.0 2.4 125S, 24W 51 170/m3 82.3 15.7 2.0 Subtotal 349 184/m3 80.5 17.5 2.0 124S, 24W 55 81.8 16.4 1.8 123S, 24W 59 74.6 25.4 0 122S, 24W 26 92.3 3.8 3.8 Totalc 489 80.6 17.6 1.8 a RE = Refmed Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage c Includes the South Trench and extension units. Table 7.10 South Trench -Ceramics: Pit Fill Excavation # of Artifact % RE" % PORb % Other Unit Sherds Dnsity 125S, 18W 0 0/m3 0 0 0 125S, 19W 4 80/n3 100.0 0 0 125S, 20W 0 0/m3 0 0 0 125S, 21W 19 63/M3 73.7 26.3 0 125S, 22W 0 0/m3 0 0 0 125S, 23W 0 0/m3 0 0 0 125S, 24W 7 35/m3 85.7 14.3 0 Total 30 54/m3 80.0 20.0 0 Question marksdenotethedifficultyin projecting pit fill densities (see text). a RE = Refimed Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage 80% and 20%, respectively, for the entire South Trench and Extension Trench assemblage (table 7.10). Compar- ing the relative proportions between the South Trench and Extension Trench and other units previously dis- cussed, it becomes obvious that ratios of refined earthen- ware to porcelain consistently approach or exceed 3:1, regardless of the layer. Decorative types again vary across the units, though predominant again are handpainted blues, transferprint blues, handpainted polychromes, and undecorated forms (figure 7.4). For the topsoil of the South Trench, decora- tive types are widely varying with the primary ones being handpainted blue and undecorated, though handpainted polychrome and mocha fonns are present. Porcelains (n=15) are predominately non-white (67%) with undeco- rated (1/10) or underglaze Chinese blue decorations (9/ 10). In the dark sandy loam of the South Trench and Extension Trench, decorative types have an even larger range than the overlying topsoil, but the main categones remain handpainted blue and polychrome, transferprint blue, and undecorated forms. With porcelains (n=86), the predominance is again non-white forms (58.0%), but fonns range in non-white (NWP) and white (WP) groups with undecorated (31/50 or 61.7% of NWP, 26/36 or 73.3% of WP), overglaze enameled (5/50 or 10.6% of NWP, 10/36 or 26.5% of WP), and underglaze painted types (14/50 or 27.7% of NWP). Finally, the pit fill stratum of the South Trench contains only handpainted blue; transferprint blue, brown, and black; and undeco- rated tpes of refined earthenware. The South Bone Bed contained within the South Trench is similar to the East Central Bone Bed with a density of 70 sherds per cubic meter (n=35), but relative frequency of ceramic classes is different with refined earthenware lower at 68.5%, porcelain at 28.6%, and others at 2.9%. This density is half as much as the South Historical Artifacts 147 Trench as a whole or most of the other individual units. The 24 refmed earthenware ceramics involve 9 pearlware sherds, 8 creamware ones, 5 whiteware sherds, and 2 unidentifiable ones. All creamware are undecorated, while pearlware is either handpainted blue (66.7%) or transferprint blue (33.3%). Whiteware is composed of 3 undecorated sherds and 2 handpainted blue sherds. Ten pieces of porcelain were excavated as six non-white and four white sherds. Two sherds of each are undecorated, but four of the non-white porcelains are underglaze blue while two of the white porcelain are overglaze enameled. In addition, one sherd of stoneware was recovered. FURTHER NAVS CRAMIC CONSIDERATIONS To facilitate comparison, ceramic densities calcu- lated for all main trenches and units, excluding extension trenches, are displayed in figure 7.5. These densities are for the entire vertical excavation volume, regardless of whether historical materials are present in each strati- graphic layer. As mentioned in the previous discussion, highest densities occur in the South Central Test Unit and the South Trench. The East Central Trench, in contrast, has the lowest density of any excavation area or approxi- mately one-third the density of either the South Trench or the South Central Test Unit. Vessel form analysis for all NAVS excavations provides a glimpse of the potential ceramic vessels available to residents of the Native Alaskan Village. In general, predominant vessel forms for all units irrespec- tive of layer are plates, teacups, saucers, and bowls (figure 7.6). As discussed previously, dark sandy loam contains the most vessels by absolute number, but an area by area discussion may prove useful. Teacups and saucers predominate in the South Central Test Unit; saucers, especially, and plates and bowls far outnumber teacups in the West Central Trench; teacups, saucers, and plates surpass bowls, with teacups in slightly lower proportions, in the East Central Trench and Extension Trench; and teacups and plates are comparable in presence in the South Trench and Extension Trench, but saucers outnumber them and all outnumber bowls. Sample size is small across all units in the topsoil sample, but vessels do tend to occur in the same fonns as in the dark sandy loam underlying it The same trend holds for the pit fill, though there may be a slight preference for teacups, saucers, and plates, in that order. Other vessels include pitchers, mugs, platters, chamber pots, and teapots; the latter occur exclusively in the context of the South Trench and the South Central Test Unit. In addition, pipe stems (n=7) occur in all excava- tion areas except the Test Unit-though this unit contains one pipe bowl fragment-but only as one specimen each in the West Cental and East Central trenches. In the bone beds, teacups, plates, and saucers are the primary forms. The East Central Bone Bed has 5 plate fragments, comparison, the South Bone Bed has 3 identifiable plate fragments, 4 teacup sherds, 4 saucer sherds, and 1 pipe bowl fragmentL Another area of information concerns burned or highly eroded ceramics at NAVS. Of the total 1,040 sherds excavated across the site, 66 sherds (6.3%) are heavily waterwom and 35 (3.4%) are burned. Refmed earthenware as a whole shows the most erosion (93.4%) and buming (85.7%). Within this ceramic group, whiteware occupies over half (59.7%) of the total waterworn refmed earthenwares, while pearlware displays the most burning (50%). Though not quantified, it appears that most burning is post-breakage since charring and discoloration exist on both the face and the paste cross section of sherds. The units with the most waterworn ceramics are 125S, 18W (n=14) and 75S, 20W (n=9) both in absolute numbers and in densities. In terms of waterwom and burned, the South Central Test Unit has 6/101 and 1/101, the West Central Trench has 12/94 and 1/94, the East Central Trench and Extension Trench have 101228 and 61228, and the South Trench and Extension Trench have 38/617 and 27/617, respectively. Compared to earthenware, porcelain and other ceramics demonstrate few highly worn or bumed features, though the low proportion of "other ceramics" in the collection may indicate a higher relative percentage of bumed stoneware. Finally, a number of historical ceramics require individual description due to their uniqueness in the collection and/or their importance to later interpretation. While elaboration on each piece is found in table 7.11, I want to point out briefly the significance of these ceramics. Particularly important are utilized or modified ceramics. Note that "utilized" refers not to a ceramic vessel's original function but to the use of the ceramic as raw material. First, out of the 12 worked ceramics, slightly more are refined earthenware (58.3%) than porcelain (41.6%). Interestingly, the total percentage of refined earthenware and porcelain in the entire assem- blage is 79.6% and 18.3%, indicating that though refined earthenware dominates the worked ceramics, a slight preference seems to exist for porcelains. Considering all worked ceramics except for the one derived from surface collection, the percentage of worked ceramics in the total collection is 1.1%. Second, creamware is the dominant modified earthenware, and non-white porcelain is the only modified porcelain recovered from NAVS excava- tions. Third, though some sherds appear to be shaped into specific forms, such as a possible projectile point preform (figure 7.7a) or a bead blank (figure 7.7b), most are fragments either with utilized edges or evidence of notching or thinning (figure 7.7c-f). The " bead blank" may, in fact, represent a gaming piece, as suggested by White (1977). Both the preform and bead blank derive from the South Trench dark sandy loam, while the rest 1 teacup sherd, 1 bowl fragment, and 3 saucer pieces. In derive from all other excavation areas, except the West 148 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Figure 73 Counts of Refined Earthenware Types per Unit in the East Central Trench Undecorated Mocha Blue Shell-Edged Annular U Transferprint Blue M Handpainted Polychrome Handpainted Blue 0 20 40 60 Total Counts 80 100 120 Figure 7.4 Counts of Refi ned Earthenware Types per Unit for the South Trench Undecorated Flow Blue Green Shell-Edged Blue Shell-Edged Mocha Ammla Transferprint Purple Transfprint Black Tranferprint Brown Transferprint Blue Handpainted Polychrome Handpainted Blue 0 50 100 150 Total Counts 200 250 300 cJ ._ 2 I-4 E 72S, 3E * 73S, 3E j 74S, 3E E 75S, 4E la 75S, 3E Q 75S, 2E DII 75S, 1E M 75S, OE tA 40 06 00.6 E" u -.0 s ix so v u S 122S,24W El 123S, 24W 3 124S,24W * 125S,24W OJ 125S,23W a 125S,22W 0 125S,21W O 125S, 20W El 125S, 19W * 125S, 18W I ------------ ------------- lim iii I -l-*?--I-.-l---- iiirgii - . manses a a a a a 9 a a--- --- ------ - i i i i i i I iiiiFs mmmmms k lll? ? ...... Sol ....... m To mill I Historical Artifacts 149 Figure 7.5 Ceramic Density for Excavation Units and Trenches at the Native Alaskan Village Site 125S, 24W 125S,23W 125S, 22W 125S,21W 125S, 20W 125S, 19W 125S, 18W South Trench 75S, 4E 75S, 3E 75S, 2E 75S, lE 75S, OE East Cental Trench 75S, 20W 75S, 18W 75S,16W West Central Trench South Central Test Unit 0 0. --m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0II 50 100 150 200 250 Density (#/ml) Figure 7.6 Vessel Counts per Excavation Area at the Native Alaskan Village Site Piperment chamber Pot m Platter Tea Pot Mugt Saucer I Bowl Tea Cup * ' Pitcher Plate U 7 7/ . . . * * . * .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 South Trench & Extension Trench [] East Central Trench & Extension Trench [E West Central Trench E South Central Test Unit 90 Total Counts 0A 0 ?W WI 0 0 I I - -?M I p. Xp I I WWWW, j 10 , e? ? ? I 150 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Central Trench, in varying stratigraphic contexts. Most modified sherds, however, were recovered from dark sandy loam and topsoil. Fourth, one of the few ceramic specimens recovered with a distinct maker's mark appears in 123S, 24W (figure 7.7g). It is a fragment of a Clews Waranted Staffordshire "often found on good quality blue printed earthenwares," thus having a manu- facture date circa 1818-1834 (Godden 1964:152). Before departing from the ceramics from NAVS, it is useful to consider those sherds recovered from the 1989 surface collection. Provenience is not noted here (except for one specimen), because it is provided in appendices 7.3 and 7.4. First, the surface collection resulted in finding two of the few unequivocal ironstone wares in the classic form of paneled cups (see Majewski & O'Brien 1987:121 for discussion). Non-ironstone vessels col- lected are represented by fragments-in descending order of proportion-of saucers, tea cups, plates, bowls, pipe stems, teapots, and mugs. Second, the surface collection also produced one of the few stoneware mineral bottle fragments. Third, another sherd modified into a quasi- circular shape as a possible bead blank or gaming piece was discovered about 28 m south of the South Trench. Unlike the previously described piece, this particular example is whiteware and ground on the edges to highlight the transferprint black floral-like design on the face (see table 7.11; figure 7.7h). Fourth, Jackfield ware was again recovered in forms reminiscent of the sherds excavated from the subsurface. Fifth, a wing portion of a white porcelain figurine was located on the ground surface. Finally, a sherd of Russian refined earthenware (figure 7.7i) bearing the Cyrillic mark of the Poskochin Factory operating in the village of Morye in the St. Petersburg Province from 181742 (see Bubnova 1973:74) was collected on the surface of 125S, 23W. CERAMICS AT FRBS Similar to the NAVS material and patterns described above, FRBS ceramics consist primarily of refined earthenware with the predominant decorative types being handpainted blue and undecorated. In addition, some transfeIprint and annular as well as infrequent shell- edged or flow blue specimens do occur. Densities are not calculated for the reasons given above. EAST BENCH In the East Bench, 20 sherds in all were excavated from the three general soil levels of topsoil (n=5), midden (n=9), and mottled brown clay (n=6). In each level, refined earthenware is consistently at or above 80% of the total, leaving porcelain, which is only non-white, at less than 20% (table 7.12). Other than undecorated forms, refined earthenware decoration is primarily handpainted blue (figure 7.8). Porcelain is all undeco- rated save one underglaze blue Chinese non-white porcelain. EAST PROFILE In the East Profile, refined earthenware is 78.6% of the total 14 sherds recovered, and non-white porcelain holds only 21.4% (table 7.12). Five of the sherds are from the midden layer, one from the topsoil, and the other eight are unprovenienced from wall cleaning. Undeco- rated and handpainted blue sherds are the prominent decorative type, and one piece each of annular and transferprint brown is present (figure 7.8). Porcelain is all underglaze Chinese blue forms. MIDDLE PROFILE In the Middle Profile, a slightly wider range of ceramic materials was recovered, even though the sum is still low with 38 sherds. Interestingly, 47.2% of the total non-surface collected material derives from the midden of P15 and 25.0% from P13, and only one sherd, a transferprint blue pearlware, was recovered from the clay layer. Other than four sherds, the rest derive from the midden. Nine sherds are porcelain, mostly non-white with both undecorated and underglaze Chinese blue designs. Stoneware appears as a single piece of a waterworn mineral bottle (table 7.12). The range of refined earthenware decorative types include undeco- rated, handpainted blue and polychrome, transferprint blue and brown, annular, and flow blue (figure 7.8). As such, the type diversity of the Middle Profile is much higher than the East and West profiles, but this may be a function of increased sample size. Other than five non- white underglaze blue porcelain sherds, all porcelain is undecorated. WEST PROFILE In the West Profile with 11 recovered ceramics, refined earthenware is undecorated save 1 handpainted blue sherd (figure 7.8). Porcelain, which is again non- white, has both undecorated and underglaze Chinese forms (table 7.12). No ceramics were recovered from the lowest lying layer of beach gravel, and other than two excavated from the fill, all are from the mottled brown clay. SOUTHWESTBEVNCH The Southwest Bench is represented by slightly more ceramics as a whole, but per unit and soil, the amount is not much higher (table 7.13). One hundred and thirty sherds were excavated from this area, and all units have almost the entire ceramic assemblage residing in the mottled brown clay layer. Of the total, 88.4% are refined earthenware, 8.5% are porcelain, and 3.1% are yellowware. Undecorated forms predominate among refined earthenware but handpainted blue ceramics are very widespread (figure 7.8). Handpainted polychrome, transferprint blue, and annular occur in approximately equal numbers across the area, and transferprint brown, tmnsferprint red, and blue shell-edge decoration make Historical Artifacts 151 Table 7.11 Sherdsfrom NAVS Exhibiting Intentional Modification, Utilization, or Distinctive Historical Attributes Field Ware/ Unit Stratum Description Specimena Decoration 7/3/92-49-HC RE PWITBE 123S, 24W DSL Maker's mark embossed with portions of Clews Stafford shire Warranted seal (Godden 1964:152), ca. 1818-1834 6/29/89-19-HC-2 RE ??//UND 125S, 23W SUR Earthenware (Russian faience) with part of Cyrillic trademark, identified for the Poskochin Factory manufacturing between 1817 and 1842 (Bubnova 1973:74) 6/26/89-17-HC WP/UND SUR Portion of angel? wing of porcelain figurine Worked Sherds 6/15/89-1-HC-1 RE WW[tBL 28m S of ST' SUR Sherd ground into circular shape, emphasizing floral black design on one face, probable bead blank or gaming piece 7/13/92-33-HC RE PW/HPB? 125S, 23W DSL Triangular sherd with flaking to fonn projectile point?; unifacial thinning flakes on one side, bifacial thinning on base 7/25/91-1-HC-1 NWPAJCE llOS, 11W A Sherd with utilized edge (small chipped flake scars) 7/25/91-1-HC-2 NWP/UCE 11OS, 11W A Sherd with utilized edge (small chipped flake scars) 7/31/91-2-HC-1 RE CW/UND 75S, 20W DSL Semi-triangular sherd with slight notching near one apex, probable grinding striations 7/31/91-2-HC-2 RE CWIUND 75S, 20W DSL Semi-triangular sherd with two rounded comers, possible grinding striations 8/1/91-7-HC-1 RE CW/UND 75S, 4E DSL Bowl fragment with small chipped flakes removed from one side, probably through its use as chopping or scraping tool 8/6/91-10-HC RE CW/UND 125S, 22W DSL Small, relatively shallow grooves on convex edge, probably from grinding or from notching with small metal (?) tool 8/6/91-72-HC RE PW/UND 125S, 22W DSL Pitcher handle fragment with grinding incision on both sides of handle, slightly offset in relative placement 8/7/91-3-HC NWP/UCE 125S, 24W DSL Bowl rim sherd with utilized edge (chipping on exterior swface) 8/12/91-88-HC NWP/UCE 125S, 23W SUR Semi-triangular sherd with utilized edge (slight chipping) and possible flaking on opposite face 8/13191-3-HC NWP/IJCE 125S, 21W DSL Cut into polygonal circle; 1.1 cm maximum diameter x 0.19 cm maximum height; probable bead blank or gamepiece a The specimen numbers are preceded by a NAVS prefix in the catalog system and succeeded by radicals based on subgroupings of ceramnics. b ST = South Trench Stratigraphic codes are as follows: DSL = Dark Sandy Loam; SUR = Surface; and A = Topsoil. Ceramic codes are as follows: RE = Refimed Earthenware; PW = pearlware; CW = Creamware; WW = Whiteware; WP = White Porcelain; NWP = Non-white Porcelain; TBE = Transferprint Blue; UND = Undecorated; TBL = Transferprint Black; UCE = Underglaze Blue Chinese Export. Table 7.12 Profile and East Bench - Ceramics Excavation # of % REa % PORb % Other Unit Sherds East Bench 20 85.0 15.0 0.0 East Profile 14 78.6 21.4 0.0 MiddleProfile 38 73.7 23.7 2.6 West Profile 11 81.8 18.2 0.0 Total 83 78.3 20.5 1.2 a RE = Refmed earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage 152 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Figure 7.7 Historic Ceramics *E5 0 b a c '4. I". f i i fix k 0 a. Projectile point attempt, NAVS-7/13/92-33-HC-1. b. Worked porcelain, NAVS-8/13/91-3-HC-1. c. Grooved refined earthenware, NAVS-8/6/91-10-HC-1. d. Refined earthenware with scraping edge, NAVS-8/1/91-7-HC-1. e. Refmed earthenware with possible grinding striations, NAVS-7/31/91-2-HC-2. f. Refined earthenware sherd with notching, NAVS-7/31/91-2-HC-1. g. Clews Staffordshire refined earthenware, NAVS-7/3/92-49-HC-1. h. Ground whiteware, NAVS-6/15/89-1-HC-1. i. Russian-manufactured ceramic, NAVS-6/29/89-19-HC-2. j. Refined earthenware cover fragment, FRBS-6/9/89-9-HC-1. k. Mug basal sherd (?), FRBS-6/14/89-19-HC-6. 1. Notched pipestem fragment, NAVS-8/13/91-48-HC-1. (Illustrations by Judith Ogden) h 5cm 1 i I i I I in ---i ,? 1; d Historical Artifacts 153 token appearances on whitewares and pearlwares (figure 7.8). Moreover, yellowware shows up in the mottled brown clay in four of the seven units, and a fair amount of unclassified (because of buming) earthenware occurs in the same contexts except for 7S, 17W. Non-white porcelain (n=8) is 75% underglaze blue Chinese and 25% undecorated, while white porcelain appears as undeco- rated sherds (n=3). FURTHER FRBS CERAMIC CONSIDERATIONS Of the FRBS ceramics, 61 vessel-specific, though non-refittable, fragments are identifiable across the multiple excavation areas. The total includes 32.8% saucers, 24.6% tea cups, 18.0% plates, 18.0% bowls, 3.1% pitchers, and only one specimen each of pipestem and teapot (1.8% each). The pipestem and teapot occur in the East Bench, and the profiles contain only saucers, teacups, plates, and bowls. In the Southwest Bench, vessel representation is similar to the profiles except for the three pitcher fragments. In the Southwest Bench, percentages vary with 38% of all vessels recovered in the six units deriving from the mottled brown clay of 7S, 19W. For the entire FRBS collection it appears that saucers and teacups occur in relatively similar proportion, though saucers may slightly exceed tea cups in some units, and that plates and bowls, when they occur, do so in similar yet usually lower percentages than either saucers or tea cups. Other significant pattems, as well as several indi- vidual ceramics, are worti considering here. All but two of the recognizably burned (n=16) and all waterwom (n=3) ceramics were recovered from the Southwest Bench. In addition, the only recognized crossmends are between two creamwares and two pearlwares in the mottled brown clay stratum of 7S, 17W and between two pearlwares in the same layer of 7S, 19W. Also, a frag- ment of a pearlware teapot or other elaborate serving container was recovered in the mottled brown clay of 7S, 19W, and it is the most complete ceramic recovered anywhere in FRBS or NAVS (figure 7.7j). Finally, a particularly odd ceramic item was recovered from the mottled brown clay of 7S, 18W (figure 7.7k). It is heavily waterwom and probably represents a basal sherd with a remnant footring. However, the variegated brown, white, and black (overglaze?) painted decoration con- tained in a distinct oval on one face is unlike anything recovered from these or other Fort Ross excavations. Its character suggests that the ceramic form may have been a mug with a coiled texture on the exterior, providing indentations in which the decoration was able to survive erosion. GLASS AT NAVS7 SOUTH CENTRAL TEST UNrT At the South Central Test Unit, 183 glass artifacts topsoil, 140 (76.5%) from the dark sandy loam, 12 (6.6%) from the rock rubble, and 1 (0.5%) from the clay layer (table 7.14). Density for the test unit as a whole is 366 pieces/m3, and window and vessel glass have relative frequencies of 70.5% and 28.5%, respectively (table 7.14). Variation around this total is minor as all levels generally have a predominant window glass component. The dark sandy loam with 700 artifacts/m3 has over two times the density of glass as the topsoil (300/m3) and over five times that of the rock rubble stratum (120/mr3) (table 7.14). For the Test Unit, 75.0% of the vessel glass is green with 69.2% of the green glass as the dark green, "black" glass. A small percentage of colorless (21.2%) and two pieces of blue bottle glass occur only in the dark sandy loam of the Test Unit. In addition, one piece of lamp globe glass was recovered from the dark sandy loam/rock rubble strata. WEST CENTRAL TRENCH The West Central Trench produces a slightly different glass assemblage of 214 glass fragments with an overall density of 195 fragments/m3 and unit densities ranging from 153 to 230 pieces/M3 (table 7.15). Most of the glass (n=203) derives from the dark sandy loam. All three units consist of similar absolute numbers of glass, but dark sandy loam densities vary from 153/m3 to 345/ m3 (table 7.15). Relative frequencies of window versus bottle glass produce a tight range by unit with total percentages of 66.8% window and 32.2% bottle, differing little from the range derived from the South Central Test Unit. Two lamp globe fragments were recovered from units 75S, 16W and 75S, 20W. The only glass artifacts recovered from the topsoil are from 75S, 20W and include six window pieces and five vessel fragments. As in the Test Unit, vessel glass (n=69) from this excavation trench is predominantly green (82.6%) with dark green ."black" glass occupying 56.1% of the total green. One piece of blue and of brown do appear in the dark sandy loam, and 10 colorless pieces (14.5%) are present. EAST C TRAL TRENCH AND ExTENsIoN TRENCH Units in the East Central Trench and Extension Trench provide another range of glass materials that do not directly mimic those of other areas. Total count for both the East Central Trench and Extension Trench is 410 artifacts, and trench density of glass for only the five-unit East Central Trench is 93 pieces/m3 for the 324 pieces recovered. The individual units of 75S, OE-4E contain total densities of 110,86,98,96, and 73 fragments/m3. In the topsoil of the East Central Trench (n=63 glass fragments), the densities of artifacts range primarily from 90-210 artifacts per cubic meter, except for the lack of glass in 75S, OE (table 7.16). Relative frequency of window versus bottle glass for the East Central Trench and Extension Trench show a reverse trend from that were recovered. Of the total, 30 (16.4%) derive from the seen in the above two excavation areas with window 154 The Naiive Alaskan Neighborhood Table 7.13 Southwest Bench - Ceramics Excavation # of % REa % PORb % Other Unit Sherds 17S, 17W 14 92.9 0.0 7.1 17S, 18W 19 84.2 10.5 5.3 17S, 19W 36 91.7 8.3 0.0 18S, 17W 11 90.9 9.1 0.0 18S, 18W 21 85.7 9.5 4.8 18S, 19W 29 86.2 10.3 3.4 Total 130 88.5 8.4 3.1 a RE = Refined Earthenware, relative percentage b POR = Porcelain, relative percentage Table 7.14 South Central Test Unit - Glass Stratum # of Density Window % Vessel So Lamp % Artifacts A 30 300/mr3 70.0 30.0 0.0 DSL 140 700/m3 70.7 28.6 0.7 RR 12 120/n3 66.7 25.0 8.3 CL 1 10/m3 100.0 0.0 0.0 Total 183 366/m3 70.5 28.5 0.1 Stratigraphic codes are as follows: A = Topsoil; DSL = Dark sandy loam; RR = Rock Rubble; and CL = Clay. Table 7.15 West Central Trench - Glass Excavation # of Densitya Densityb Window % Vessel % Lamp % Unit Artifacts 75S, 16W 61 153/mr3 153/m3 72.1 26.2 1.6 75S, 18W 69 345/m3 230/r3 70.6 30.4 0.0 75S, 20W 84 280/m3c 210/m3 60.7 38.1 1.2 All units 214 290/M3d 195/m3 66.8 32.2 1.0 A total of 6 window and 5 vessel sherds were recovered frorn the topsoil of 75S, 20W; see text for details. a Density of glass in the dark sandy loam b Density of glass in entire stratigraphic column c Includes only 73 sherds from the dark sandy loam since the other 11 derive from the topsoil d Includes only 203 sherds from the dark sandy loam since the other 11 derive from the topsoil Table 7.16 East Central Trench - Glass: Topsoil Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Unit Artifacts 75S, OE 0 O/m3 0.0 0.0 75S, IE 20 200/m3 45.0 55.0 75S, 2E 13 130/m3 46.2 53.8 75S, 3E 21 210/m3 42.9 57.1 75S, 4E 9 90/m3 44.4 55.6 Total 63 155/m3 44.4 55.6 Historical Artifacts 155 percentages averaging approximately 44% and bottle glass, 56%. Once again, however, the predominant form of vessel glass is the green variety (74.3%) with 56% of the total green being dark "black" glass, and colorless forms are present in small quantities (25.7%o). In the dark sandy loam of the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, glass artifacts total 259, and densities range across the five East Central Trench units from 103 to 170 pieces/m3, giving an average of 136/m3 (table 7.17). In contrast to the layer stratigraphically above, the dark sandy loam layer of both East Cental and Extension trenches has a higher average relative percentage of window glass (64%) than vessel glass (36%). One lamp globe fragment does appear in 75S, OE. Green vessel glass again dominates the collection (83.7%) with 62.3% of the green as "black glass." Colorless occupies 15.2% and brown occurs as only one piece (1.1%). As for the pit fill, 68 artifacts in all were excavated across the units from the East Central and Extension trenches. East Central Trench unit densities fluctuate from 40-100 artifacts per cubic meter, providing a total of 73/m3, and relative frequencies are extremely varied in their presence (table 7.18). Average frequencies place window glass (59%) higher than vessel glass (409%o), but the proportion of vessel glass exceeds that of window glass in several units (table 7.18). The primary reason for this fluctuation may relate to small sample size and vagaries of chance. Moreover, another lamp globe piece was uncovered, this time in 75S, 3E. Green holds 88.8% of the vessel glass, leaving colorless with 11.1%; black glass is 41.7% of the green glass. Since small sample size characterizes the glass recovered from the silty loam of the East Central and Extension trenches, a table is not necessary. Suffice it to say that in all 20 sherds were recovered from the East Central Trench in densities of less than 90 glass artifacts per cubic meter. Only 6 (30.0%) of the fragments are vessel glass, while the other 14 (70.0%) derive from architectural material. All six bottle glass fragments are green with 67% of those as dark "black" glass. The Extension Trench has only two window glass fragments. Lastly, the East Central Bone Bed contains 45 glass artifacts, of which 57.8% are window and 42.2% are vessel. Density for the bone bed is 90 artifacts per cubic meter. Of the 19 glass vessel artifacts, colors include 89.5% green (64.7% of which is "black" glass), 5.3% brown, and 5.3% colorless. SOUTH TRENcH AND EXTEzVsIoN TRENCH Finally, the units excavated in the South Trench and Extension Trench provide yet another picture of glass deposition at NAVS. The total count of glass artifacts recovered from both the South and Extension trenches equals 1,011 pieces. Density for the South Trench recovery of 831 glass artifacts is 252 pieces per cubic artifacts/m3 (table 7.19). In units of the South Trench with topsoil recorded, glass density varies from 220-470 pieces/m3 with a total trench density of 374 pieces/M3 (table 7.20). In these units, relative frequencies between window and vessel glass hover at an average of 78.7% and 20.9%, respectively, with a moderate variation around the total density. As in the topsoil of the South Central Test Unit but not in the East Central Trench, window glass percentages greatly exceed those of vessel glass. Vessel glass color varies slightly more than in previous units-green glass makes up 41% (43.8% of this is black glass); brown, 2.6%; colorless, 51.3%, and purple, 5.1%. Of significance is the lower relative percentage of green bottle glass compared to the topsoil in previous units. The dark sandy loam of the South Trench has a slightly lower density than the above topsoil with a range between 170-353 pieces per cubic meter and a total density of 302/m3 for the 573 artifacts excavated from the main trench (table 7.21). Even though densities vary, average relative percentages of window and vessel glass in both the South Trench and Extension Trench (n=753) almost perfectly mirror those above in the topsoil with 78.0% and 21.6%, respectively. The exception is that ranges are slightly higher with a span of 64.7-91.3% for window glass and one of 8.7-29.4% for vessel glass. These percentages are close to all other excavation areas in general range, but slightly higher. Furthermore, lamp globe glass only appears as three pieces (0.4%) of the total. Of vessel glass, green forms occur as 63.2% (47.6% of green is dark green), colorless as 33.1%, purple as 1.8%, blue as 0.6%, brown as 0.6%, and other as 0.6%. Though actual soil volumes are difficult to calculate for the pit fill layer in the South Trench, I estimate that densities are lower (total of 140/m3) than in the dark sandy loam or topsoil (table 7.22). Nonetheless, relative percentages of window (85.9%) and vessel (14.1%) are similar, if not slightly higher, than those above it stratigraphically and those in the pit fill of the East Central Trench. Green holds 70% of the bottle glass with only 28.6% of that total as black glass, colorless has 20%, and 10% belongs to other. In the South Bone Bed, 65 glass artifacts were excavated from a total of 0.5 cubic meters of sediment and artifact context, giving a density of 130 items/m3. Window and vessel glass relative percentages are 89.2% and 10.8%, respectively. Colors of the seven bottle glass fragments are green (71.4%), colorless (14.3%), and other (14.3%). Black glass is not a component of the green glass in this depositional context. FURTHER NAVS GLASS CONSIDERATIONS For comparative purposes, densities of glass for all units and trench totals are provided in figure 7.9. Densi- meter with specific units ranging from 182 to 413 ties of the South Trench and East Central Trench are only 156 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Table 1.17 East Central Trench and Extension - Glass: Dark Sandy Loam Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Lamp % Unit Artifacts 75S, OE 56 140/m3 53.6 44.6 1.8 75S, 1E 31 103/m3 58.1 41.9 0.0 75S, 2E 28 140/m3 60.7 39.3 0.0 75S, 3E 34 170/m3 61.8 38.2 0.0 75S, 4E 34 170/m3 68.6 29A 0.0 Subtotal 183 136/m3 59.6 39.8 0.6 74S, 3E 14 - 78.6 21A 0.0 73S, 3E 36 72.2 27.8 0.0 73S, 2E 26 73.1 26A 0.0 Total 259 - 64.1 35.5 0.4 Total includes East Central trenches and extension. Table 7.18 East Central Trench and Extension - Glass: Pit Fill Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Lamp % Unit Artifacts 75S, OE 20 100/m3 60.0 40.0 0.0 75S, 1E 4 40/m3 25.0 75.0 0.0 75S, 2E 15 75/m3 66.7 33.3 0.0 75S, 3E 13 65?/Mn3 30.7 61.5 7.7 75S, 4E 6 60/m3 67.7 333 0.0 Subtotal 58 73/m3 53.4 44.9 1.7 74S, 3E 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 73S, 3E 6 100.0 0.0 0.0 72S, 3E 1 - 0.0 100.0 0.0 Total 68 - 58.8 39.7 1.5 Total includes East Central Trench and extension. Table 7.19 South Trench and Extension - Glass Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Lamp % Unit Artifacts 125S, 18W 165 413/m3 71.8 27.6 0.6 125S, 19W 122 406/m3 76.2 23.8 0.0 125S, 20W 89 223/n3 82.0 18.0 0.0 125S, 21W 108 270/m3 78.7 20.4 0.9 125S, 22W 107 208/m3 83.2 15.9 0.9 125S, 23W 92 182/m3 77.2 22.8 0.0 125S, 24W 148 211/m3 77.7 21.6 0.7 Subtotal 831 252/m3 77.4 22.1 0.5 124S, 23W 73 - 76.7 23.2 0.0 123S, 23W 84 84.5 15.5 0.0 122S, 23W 23 91.3 8.7 0.0 Total 1011 78.2 21.4 0.4 Total includes South Trench and extension counts and relative frequencies. Historical Artifacts 157 Table 7.20 South Trench - Glass: Topsoil Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Lamp % Unit Artifacts 125S, 18W 44 440/m3 72.7 25.0 2.3 125S, 19W 0 0/m3 0.0 0.0 0.0 125S, 20W 40 400/m3 82.5 17.5 0.0 125S, 21W 47 470/m3 76.6 23.4 0.0 125S, 22W 0 0/m3 0.0 0.0 0.0 125S, 23W 22 220/m3 72.7 27.3 0.0 125S, 24W 34 340/m3 85.3 14.7 0.0 Total 187 374/m3 78.7 20.9 0.5 No glass was recorded for the topsoil of the extension trench. Table 7.21 South Trench and Extension - Glass: Dark Sandy Loam Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Lamp % Unit Artifacts 125S, 18W 121 303/m3 72.7 27.3 0.0 125S, 19W 106 353/m3 73.6 26.4 0.0 125S, 20W 49 245/m3 81.6 18.4 0.0 125S, 21W 17 170/m3 64.7 29.4 5.9 125S, 22W 106 353/m3 84.0 15.1 0.9 125S, 23W 69 230/m3 78.2 21.7 0.0 125S, 24W 105 350/m3 75.2 23.8 1.0 Subtotal 573 302/m3 76.6 22.9 0.5 124S, 24W 73 76.7 23.2 0.0 123S, 24W 84 84.5 15.5 0.0 122S, 24W 23 - 91.3 8.7 0.0 Total 753 78.0 21.6 0.4 The total includes the South Trench and extension for the counts and relative frequencies. Table 7.22 South Trench - Glass: Pit Fill Excavation # of Density Window % Vessel % Unit Sherds 125S, 18W 0 0/m3 0.0 0.0 125S, 19W 16 160/m3 93.8 6.2 125S, 20W 0 0/m3 0.0 0.0 125S, 21W 44 220/m3 86.4 13.6 125S, 22W 1 10/m3 0.0 100.0 125S, 23W 1 10/m3 100.0 0.0 125S, 24W 9 50/rm3 77.8 22.2 Total 71 140/m3 85.9 14.1 158 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Figure 7.8 Counts of Refined Earthenware Typesfor the East Bench, East Profile, Middle Profile, West Profile, and Southwest Bench at the Fort Ross Beach Site Undecorated Blue Shell-Edge Anmilar Flow Blue Transferpuint Rod Transferprint Brown Tranferpint Blue Handpainted Polydchme I Handpainted Blue i I I I 0 10 20 M Southwest Bench 0 West Profile [O Middle Profile E East Profile * East Bench 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Total Counts Figure 7.9 Glass Density for Excavation Units and Trenches at the Native Alaskan Village Site 125S, 24W 125S, 23W 125S, 22w 125S, 21W 125S, 20W 125S, 19W 125S, 18W South Trench 75S,4E 75S, 3E 75S, 2E 75S, lE 75S, OE East Central Trench 75S, 20W 75S, 18W 75S, 16W West Cenal Trenh South Central Test Unit * Lamp/Globe Glass E? Vessel Glass * Window Glass 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Density (#/m ) 0 ;1 co 8. 0 .C I- 0 0 I, 0 %Ve.-.%-. I I -v -------------- ------------ ------------- .................. I VA I Historical Artifacts 159 from the main trenches (i.e. no extension trenches), and the density values of all units and trenches reflect the entire sediment volume excavated. As with ceramics, densities in the South Trench and the South Central Test Unit are comparable; they are also higher than the other two excavation areas. In addition, the more westerly units of the South Trench compare generally with the West Centl Trench. The East Centrl Trench has the lowest glass densities of all. Yet, it is here that vessel and window glass percentages are relatively equal, problems with intergroup comparison aside. Identifi'cation of glass vessels was attempted, but often in vain. The assemblage is too fragmented to be productively or even possibly identified. Two identifica- tions and several observations can be provided, however. One neck fragment (NAVS-8/6/91-28-G-2) from the South Trench in the dark sandy loam matches a form inferred to be manufactured in the 1820s and 1830s based on rounded lip and string rim shapes (Jones 1986:figure 53). A second bottle neck fragment (NAVS-8/5/91-21-G- 2) from the surface of the East Central Trench is from a bottle manufactured between 1819 and 1840 with down- tooled lip and string rim shapes (Jones 1986:figure 50). Though visual matches are extremely close, the only published comparisons are English vessels, whereas bottles in the NAVS may have been manufactured elsewhere. In addition, the only vessel "discovered" in the low quantity of fragmentary glass from the surface collection of NAVS is a two-piece mold mustard botde neck fragment (flgure 7.1Oa). The bottle type is known to occur from the middle to late 19th centuy (Peter Schulz, personal communication, 1995). Its lack of chemical alteration or weathering hint at a relatively recent date compared to heavily decomposing glass otherwise generally recovered. Several additional observations may shed light on the vessel issue. Most"black glass" fragments, though no specific bottles are identifiable, are probably pieces of case-transported bottles, especially the examples that have remnant planar faces (e.g., NAVS-7/31/91-1-G-2) or concavebases(NAVS-7/31/91-11-G-2). Thesegenerally contained gin or other alcoholic beverages (Felton & Schulz 1983:47), although they may have been shipped empty (Glenn Farris, personal communication, 1995). Blown dark green glass "carboy" fragments also seem to be present, although only in a few instances. In addition, four clear glass tumbler fragments (NAVS-7/24/91-2-G- 2, NAVS-7/31/91-13-G-2, NAVS-8/5/91-1-G-2, NAVS-8/ 10/91-9-G-2), identified by the ribbed exterior curved faces (see Felton & Schulz 1983:figure 7.21e), were recovered from the upper 10 cm of the South Central Test Unit, the East Central Trench, and the South Trench (n=2). The actual date is unknown, but the glass table- ware may date to the mid- to late 19th century. GLASS AT FRBS The FRBS glass can best be described by stratum within general excavation areas, with specific units noted where necessary. Considering the site in its entirety, a total of 292 glass artifacts was recovered during excava- tion. Vessel glass composes 45.9% of that total, and window glass, the other 53.8%. Lamp/globe glass occurs as only one piece (0.3%). EAST BENCH In the East Bench, division between the total of 29 window and vessel glass artifacts is 37.9% and 62.1%, respectively. As for color representation, green is 55.6% with 40% of that fraction being "black" glass fragments, colorless is 16.7%, and brown is 27.8%. EAST PROFILE In the East Profile, window glass occupies 23.1% of the total 26 glass artifacts in the unit, and vessel glass makes up the other 76.9%. Consideration of glass in strict midden context produces almost identical results. MIDDLE PROFILE The Middle Profile had similar percentages of window and vessel glass (n=54): 35.2% and 64.8%, respectively. The clay layer in P11 has one piece of vessel glass, the topsoil in P12 and P13 has two pieces of window glass, and the mottled brown clay layer in P18 has two pieces of vessel glass. Otherwise all were recovered from the midden layer. WEST PROFILE The West Profile differs tremendously from the other two profile areas because of the higher proportion of window glass (77.3%) to vessel glass (22.7%) in the 22- specimen assemblage. All but one piece of both kinds of glass occur in the mottled brown clay. TOTAL PROFILE SECT7ON Colors of vessel glass are tabulated only for the entire profile (n=60), and they include 60% green, 15% colorless, 21.7% brown, and 3.3% blue. Of the 36 pieces of green glass, 38.9% are "black" glass fragments occurring only in the East and Middle profiles. SOvTHWESTBENCH As for the Southwest Bench with 161 glass artifacts, window and vessel glass are virtually identical in representation with 50.3% and 49.1%, respectively. Lamp globe glass, occurring in 7S, 19W in the mottled brown clay, occupies 0.6%. Viewing mottled brown clay as a stratigraphic entity, window glass drops slightly to 42.9% of the stratum total, thus augmenting vessel to 57.1%. Only one unit, 7S, 17W, has more than one glass 160 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood artifact in the topsoil, but the sample size of 36 makes the claim that window has 63.9% of the total a fairly realistic estimate. Units 7S, 17W and 7S, 19W contain 57.7% of the glass artifacts. For the total window and vessel glass from this excavation area, the color distribution is 8 1.0%, green; 10.1%, colorless; 3.8%, brown; 3.8%, blue; and 1.3%, purple. Of the green, 41.3% is dark green or "black" glass. FURTHER FRBS GLASS CoNsIDERATIoNs Vessel identifications are difficult here for similar reasons as in NAVS. No definite vessels are noted. Like the terrace above, FRBS appears to have a number of case-type "black glass" alcohol bottles present, but further specificity is not possible. One neck fragment of such a bottle was collected, but identification of the small piece is problematic. In addition, one embossed olive green glass fragment was recovered, but no identification was made (figure 7.100). WORKED GLASS AT NAVS The most efficient way to describe the range of modified vessel and window glass artifacts is in table form (table 7.23). The majority of modified glass artifacts are vessel, and as expected from the high relative frequencies of green vessel glass in the "Glass" category, most of the worked vessel glass artifacts are (dark) green. The three definite projectile points or point fragments are located only in the East Central Trench (figure 7.lOb-d). Several examples of worked window glass are provided in the same figure (figure 7.10e-i) as well as an anoma- lous flake with an apparently drilled hole (figure 7.1Oj). Comparison of the relative number of worked to non- worked glass artifacts provides additional information. The South Central Test Unit has 0.5% of the total glass assemblage as modified, with 0.7% modified in the dark sandy loam. Only 3.3% of the glass contained in the West Central Trench is modified, with 3A% of the total glass in the dark sandy loam. The East Cental Trench and Extension Trench have as modified 10.0% of the total glass (9.5% in the topsoil, 10.0% in dark sandy loam, 11.8% in pit fill, and 5.0% in silty loam). More- over, the South Trench and Extension Trench have 4.5% of the total glass as modified (1.6% in topsoil, 4.5% in dark sandy loam, 7.0% in pit fill). The surface collection in 1989 resulted in the discovery of six pieces of modified glass. They are not presented in a table because they are so few in number, but a brief description is provided here. All but one piece are green bottle glass, and all but one of the total worked glass are either unworked, interior, or edge-modified flakes. The anomaly is a possible base of a biface crafted from light green bottle glass. Also, two worked glass vessel fragments were recovered from the surface of the WORKED GLASS AT FRBS All but 1 of the 16 pieces of unambiguously modi- fied bottle and window glass are green vessel glass (table 7.24). By far, most of the worked material consists of flakes with and without edge modification or use, but the collection does contain 2 projectile point fragments made from green bottle glass (figure 7.10k, 1) and a bifacially- worked bottle rim, or finish (figure 7.1Om). With the exception of 3 flakes, all of the worked glass fragments occur in the Southwest Bench, and within that area, all but 2 of the artifacts derive from the mottled brown clay. Among the sample, most items (>60%) were excavated from units 8S, 17W and 8S, 18W, which are the units containing projectile point forms. Of the total FRBS glass collection, 5.2% is modified. In the Southwest Bench, 6.9% of the total glass recovered is worked, but only 2.9% of the glass from the profile area is worked. In addition, no unequivocal worked glass derives from the East Bench. One burin-like glass artifact was also recovered, but no provenience could be noted (figure 7.10n). GLASS BEADS AT NAVS AND FRBS The reader is referred to chapter 8 by Lester Ross for the complete bead analysis, but I briefly summarize some of his findings here. First, the 564 beads represent 79 varieties with 46 as drawn, 30 as wound, 1 as Prosser- molded (ceramic), and 2 as blown beads. Second, the predominant bead colors are white, green, red, and black with relatively few blue, purple, or yellow/yellowish- brown beads. This contrasts markedly with other Native Alaskan bead assemblages during times of Russian contact and may have reflected color preferences of Native Californians. Third, no Chinese manufactured beads are present, further accentuating the uniqueness of NAVS compared to other Russian American Company- affiliated Native Alaskan sites. The blue ceramic Prosser bead was recovered from the mottled brown clay of 8S, 18W at FRBS and undoubtedly represents post-Russian activity. However, it is the only bead to truly do so. Finally, the only large (23.5 mm maximum diameter x 17.4 mm height) glass bead is represented by a fragment, and this dark blue bead fragment derives from the dark sandy loam of the South Central Test Unit. In addition, glass beads removed from the bone beds require discussion. In the East Central Bone Bed, 13 glass beads were recovered at a density of 26 beads/m3. Of the total, 1 is drawn and cut, 1 is drawn and facetted, 10 are drawn and hot-tumbled, and 1 is wound and spheri- cal; all are undecorated. General color schemes are 38.5% (5) white, 23.1% (3) brownish-red on green or black, 15.4% (2) blue to bluish-green, 7.7% (1) purplish-red, 7.7% (1) purplish-blue, and 7.7% (1) yellowish. No black beads were recovered here. In the South Bone Bed, the glass South Trench prior to excavation. bead total reaches 23 for a density of 46 beads/ml. All Historical Artifacts 161 Table 7.23 Worked Glass at the Native Alaskan Village Site Field Spec. No 7t26/91-1-G-2 7/31/91-1-WG-1 7/31/91-204G-2 7/31/91-24G-2 7/31/91-144G-2 7131/91-16-WG-1 8/5/91-17-WG-1 8/7/91-84-WG-1 7/31/91-114-2 8/1/91-5-G-2 8/15/91-42-WG-l 8/6/91-1-WG-1 8/5/91-274G-2 8fl191-7-WG-1 8fl/91-9-WG-1 8/13/91-7-WG-1 7/31/91-29-WG-1 8/9/91-3-G-2 8/10/91-24G-2 8/5/91-304G-2 8/9/91-4-WG-1 8/9/91-28-WG-1 8/10/91-3-WG-1 8/10/91-16-WG-1 8/12/91-11-WG-1 8/1/91-7-G-2 8/13/91-38-WG-1 6/29/92-24-WG-1 6/30/92-12-WG-1 7/10/92-5-WG-1 7/15/92-37-WG-1 7/16/92-2-WG-1 7/3/92-34-WG-1 7/3/92-41-WG-1 7/3/92-47-WG-1 Unit lOS, 11W 75S, 18W 75S, 18W 75S, 20W 75S, 20W 75S, OE 75S,OE 75S, OE 75S, OE 75S, OE 75S, OE 75S, IE 75S, 1E 75S, lE 75S, 1E 75S, 1E 75S, 2E 75S, 2E 75S, 2E 75S, 3E 75S, 3E 75S, 3E 75S, 3E 75S, 3E 75S, 4E 75S, 4E 75S,4E 74S, 3E 74S, 3E 74S, 3E 74S,3E 74S, 3E 73S,3E 73S, 3E 73S, 3E soi DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL PF A A DSL DSL DSL DSL DSL PF A DSL PF PF PF DSL DSL SL DSL DSL DSL PF PF DSL DSL DSL Count 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 Description Light green interior flake (vessel) Unifacially edge-modified (window) Clear interior flake (vessel) Dark green interior flake (vessel) Dark green 2 interior flakes, light green interior flake, light green with chipped edge (vessel) Colorless with thinning flakes, removed (vessel) Dark green projectile point (vessel) Dark green secondary cortical flake (vessel) Dark green flaked base fragment (vessel) Light green interior flake (vessel) Dark green core with flake scars (vessel) Dark green interior flake w/bifacial thinning (vessel) Dark green large flaked fragment (vessel) Colorless core (vessel) Dark green edge-modified flake (vessel) Dark green secondary cortical flake (vessel) Bifacially edge-modified (window) Dark green interior thinning flake (vessel) Dark green interior flake, colorless, interior flake (vessel) Dark green shatter, 3 light green thinning flakes (vessel) Bifacially edge-modified (window) Bifacially edge-modified (window) Dark green projectile point tip (vessel) Dark green bifacially edge-modified (vessel) Projectile point fragment (window) Light green interior flake (vessel) Bifacially edge-modified (vessel) Dark green with edge modification and burned (vessel) Dark green: 1 interior flake, 2 shatter (vessel) Dark green interior thinning flake (vessel) Dark green heavily eroded flake (vessel) Dark green shatter (vessel) Dark green interior flake (vessel) Colorless, edge-modified (window?) Dark green: 2 interior flakes, 1 shatter (vessel) All field specimen numbers are preceded by the prefix "NAVS" in their actual catalog form. Stratigraphic codes are as follows: A = Topsoil; DSL = Dark Sandy Loam; PF = Pit Fill; SL = Silty Loam. beads are undecorated. One is a drawn and cut bead, 21 are drawn and hot-tumbled varieties, and 1 is a wound and ovoid bead. Color representation consists of 43.5% (10) white, 13.0% (3) blue to bluish-green, 13.0% (3) brownish-red on green, 13.0% (3) green, 8.7% (2) purple, and 8.7% (2) yellowish. Again, no black beads were recovered. NON-GLASS BEADS AT NAVS A total of 33 shell and 2 bone beads was recovered from excavations and surface collection at NAVS. In terms of spatial position, several aspects can be noted. Two clamshell disk beads derive from the South Central Test Unit from dark sandy loam. No non-glass beads were recovered in excavations of the West Central Trench. Fifteen clamshell disk beads come from the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, distributed as 1 on the surface, 4 in dark sandy loam, 7 in pit fill, and 3 in silty loam. Recovery was fairly equal (approximately 3 beads) for each excavated unit save 75S, 1E which holds no bone or shell beads. Four clamshell disk beads were retrieved from the East Central Extension Trench. In addition, only 1 clamshell disk bead was excavated from the East Central Bone Bed. Finally, the South Trench and Extension Trench produced 7 clamshell disk beads, 3 spire-lopped Olivella beads, 2 beads fashioned from unidentified mollusk, and 2 bone beads. All beads were recovered from dark sandy loam except for 1 Olivella in the topsoil and 2 clamshell disk beads in pit fill. In this area, 2 clamshell disk beads are associated with the South Bone Bed in units 125S, 21W and 125S, 23W. The unidentified mollusk beads are cylindrical and very fragile. As for bone beads, one was manufactured from a fish vertebrae with minimal - 162 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Figure 7.10 Glass and Worked Glass b a i m m I Q0 a. "Mustard bottle" neck, NAVS-6/15/89-2-G-1. b. PPF (vessel), NAVS-8/10/91-3-WG-l. c. PPF (vessel), NAVS-8/15/91-17-WG-1. d. PPF (window), NAVS-8/12/91-11-WG-1. e. BFW (vessel), NAVS-8/10/91-16-WG-1. f. Worked (vessel), NAVS-8/5/91-39-WG-1. g. BFW (window), NAVS-8/9/91-28-WG-1. h. BFW (window), NAVS-8/13/91-38-WG-1. i. BFW (window), 7/31/91-29-WG-1. j. Drilled flake (window?), NAVS-8/6/91-63-WG-1. k. PPF (vessel), FRBS-6/12/89-2-WG-1. 1. PPF (vessel), FRBS-6/14/89-22-WG-1. m. BFW fimish, FRBS-6/12/89-2-WG-1. n. Worked (vesscl), provenience unknown, FRBS-10/18/90-1-WG-1. o. Embossed vessel sherd, FRBS-6/9/89-10-G-3. PPF = projectile point fragment; BFW = bifacially worked (Illustrations by Judith Ogden) ,A'S0 c d e f g h 0 I5cI k n 0 I I aln:? . , : 12R - ( . I I AL-- = IF I I I % I. I Historical Artifacts 163 Table 7.24 Worked Glass at the Fort Ross Beach Site Item Code Unit Level Soil Description 7/16t88-WG-7 P 06 - Light green edge-modified (vessel) 6/23/88-WG-51 P 15 - M Dark green interior flake (vessel) 6t28/88-WG-27 P 15 - M Dark green shatter (vessel) 6/05/89-7-WG-1 - Dark green interior flake (vessel) 6/08/89-7-WG-1 8S, 17W 01 A Light green edge-modified flake (vessel) 6/12/89-2-WG-1 8S, 18W 01 MBC Dark green projectile point attempt, perhaps broken in manufacture (vessel) 6/12/89-2-WG-2 8S, 18W 01 MBC Light green shatter (vessel) 6/12/89-2-WG-3 8S, 18W 01 MBC Bifacially worked bottle rim (vessel) 6/14/89-22-WG-1 8S, 17W 02 MBC Dark green projectile point (vessel) 6/14/89-22-WG-2 8S, 17W 02 MBC Dark green edge-modified flake (vessel) 6/14/89-24-WG-1 8S, 19W 02 MBC Colorless edge-modified flake (window?) 6/14/89-25-WG-1 8S, 17W 02 MBC Dark green edge-modified flake (vessel) 6/19/89-22-WG-1 7S, 19W 04 MBC Light green interior flake (vessel) 6/19/89-22-WG-2 7S, 19W 04 MBC Light green interior flake (vessel) 6/20/89-13-WG-1 8S, 19W 04 MBC Light green shatter (vessel) 6/20/89-20-WG-1 7S, 17W 05 MBC Dark green edge-modified flake (vessel) Note: the prefix "FRBS" precedes all item codes in the actual catalog system, and "P" in the unit column refers to "profile unit." Stratigraphic codes are as follows: A = Topsoil; MBC = Mottled Brown Clay; and M = Midden. modification other than perforation of the original bone form while the other, probably mammalian, was manu- factured though grinding and smoothing of the bead's surface. Essentially, the latter was produced in a way reminiscent of clamshell disk bead manufacture with the center drilled out of a disk form. Interestingly, no unequivocal clamshell disk bead blaks are present. Clamshell disk beads are measured to provide information on size variability, but no measurements are taken on the small samples of spire-lopped Olivella and bone beads. The mean diameter of clamshell disk beads (n=20) derived from all units and trenches except for extension trenches is 6.72 mm (SD= 1.11) with a mean height of 2.07 mm (SD=0.54). There is no apparent association between bead size and provenience. Though a smaller sample size than previous assemblages, the extension trenches' clamshell disk beads (n=5) appear to be larger and more variable with a mean diameter of 9.52 mm (SD=2.23) and a mean height of 3.2 mm (SD=1.38). Due to the small number (n=2) of clamshell beads in the NAVS 1989 surface collection, no measurements are provided. NON-GLASS BEADS AT FRBS Since the collection of FRBS excavated non-glass beads is small (n=4), no measurements are taken. Suffice it to note that the beads are slightly larger than previous samples. Two clamshell disk beads, one bone bead, and one spire-lopped Olivella bead were recovered. METAL AT NAVS The metal artifacts include a number of items occurring in high frequencies (e.g., nails, wire, platy iron fragments) and many of relatively rare appearance (e.g., copper strips, lead foil, lead bullet sprues). Of the common metal artifacts recovered from excavation, nails are the most ubiquitous. Iron is the predominant nail material, but a number of brass forms are present. Densities of nails for the areas range from 9.0 nails/m3 in the South Central Test Unit to 12.7 in the West Central Trench and from 14.7 in the East Central Trench to 30.3 nails/m3 in the South Trench. SOUTH CENRAL TEST UNIT Here, nails are 26.3% (n=10) of the tabulated metal artifacts (n=38), with 8 manufactured from iron, 1 from brass, and another from an unidentified material. One each was recovered from the categories of iron spike and iron wire fragment. Two lead bullet sprues were discov- ered along with 3 pieces of lead shot. In addition, other copper (n=3) and iron (n=6) fragments were excavated. Ten platy iron pieces were recovered, as well as a thimble and an elongated iron piece with an eyelet. All but four pieces were recovered from the dark sandy loam. The four include a sprue and an iron nail from the topsoil and an iron nail and two lead shots from the rock rubble. WEST CENTRAL TRENCH In this trench, nails (n=14) again predominate in the metal artifacts as 58.3% of the 24 recovered items. The nails are evenly divided between iron and brass fonns. Questionable iron nail/wire fragments number 2 items, iron wire and platy fragments number 1 apiece, and unidentified iron fragments number 5. One copper sheet fragment was retrieved. A unique item is a heavy brass attachment screw with a sturdy eyelet opposite the 164 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood threaded point. All artifacts dernve from the dark sandy loam except an iron nail, an iron wire, and one iron fragment which were recovered from the topsoil. EAST CENTRAL TRENCH AND ExTNsvIoN TRENCH As for the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, only 35.8% of the 176 metal artifacts involve nails. However, iron nails occupy a full 77.8% of those nail fonns. Questionable iron nail/wire fragments appear as 18 items, iron wire as 11, and iron platy fragments as 28. Three iron spikes were also recovered. Three lead bullet sprues and 1 piece of lead shot were retrieved in addition to 3 brass/copper buttons. Finally, 13 pieces total of either copper strips, copper sheets, or lead foil were excavated. Unique single items here include possible brass/copper button hook, iron tack, copper bowl fragment (figure 7.11f), sturdy iron strap fragment (wooden barrel strap?), large iron possible post-hinge, large and heavy iron (pulley?) hook, and an iron wire barb. Two metal artifacts of further interest are the wooden dowel wrapped in copper or brass sheeting, possibly used as a punch tool (figure 7.11g), and a nail stock fragment inserted through three leather disks (figure 7.11h). In the pit fill of 75S, 4E, an iron nail was located adjacent to a redwood post fragment. The copper bowl frgment, copper sheet around the dowel, iron tack, and leather-punched nail stock all occur in pit fill deposits. Nine nails are from the topsoil, as are 8 iron pieces and 1 copper sheet. In the silty loam are 4 nails, 1 iron wire, and 4 unknown iron pieces. Every- thing else is from the dark sandy loam. In general, the number of metal artifacts increases per unit in the South Trench along an easterly direction, peaking in 75S, 3E. In the East Central Bone Bed, metal items include 5 iron nails, 2 brass nails, 1 piece of lead shot, 1 copper strip, 3 flat iron fragments, the possible copper/brass button hook, and 1 unidentifiable iron fragment. In addition, 1 iron wire was located in probable association with an abalone shell. Nail density in the bone bed is 14 artifacts/m3. SOUTH TRENCH AND EXTENSION TRENCH The South Trench and Extension Trench have a total of 238 metal artifacts. Here, nails occupy 44.5% of the total of which 77.4% are iron and 22.6% are brass. Questionable iron/wire fragments number 20 while undescribable iron fragments total 37. Iron wire appears as 4 items along with 3 iron spikes and 30 platy iron fragments. Lead bullet sprues number 4 while lead shot number 2 pieces. In addition, 4 brass/copper buttons were excavated. Copper sheet, wire, and strip fragments sum 17, while 1 piece of possible lead foil was found. Distinctly unique items include an iron probable door hinge plate, 2 rolled copper sheets, 1 decorative wish- bone-shaped brass/copper item (igure 7.1la), 1 pierced ball fragment, a possibly lead ring item, a copper rod with club-shaped head (figure 7.1 lb), a heavy iron U- shaped item, a broken lead tube or barrel (figure 7.1 1c), 2 iron tacks, 1 delicate engraved levering object (figure 7.1 ld), 2 iron hooks or bent nails, a brass linked-ball trim fragment (figure 7.1le), an iron fishhook, a possible piece of gold wire, a brass ring (non-finger), a brass rod with a catch, 2 iron strap fragments, an iron post-hinge plate, and a lead firearm artifact As with the South Central and West Central trenches, most of the metal artifacts from the East Cental Trench derive from the dark sandy loam. Exceptions are the brass trim, possible door-hinge, iron U-shaped object, and the iron rod in the topsoil, and from the pit fill the iron strap fragment and lead ring. The topsoil also contains 13 nails, 4 nail/wire fragments, 3 iron wire fragments, 13 unidentified iron pieces, 2 sprues, 4 copper artifacts, and 2 unidentifiable lead pieces. The pit fill contains 10 nails, 1 iron wire, 8 general iron artifacts, 1 button, and 1 copper sheet fragment Of all units 125S, 18W sports the highest number of nails at 23; the next highest is 125S, 24W with 17; and 125S, 19W and 22W tie with 14. The provenience for some unique items are: iron nail bent into hook, 125S, 21W; iron fishhook, 125S, 18W; iron hook, 125S, 22W; engraved object 125S, 23W; defective musket ball, 124S, 24W; wishbone-shaped ornamental piece, 123S, 24W; iron post-hinge plate, 122S, 24W; and lead sprues, 125S, 18W. In the bone bed deposits, 11 iron but no brass nails were excavated. General iron fragments number 6, while platy pieces total 2. One artifact each was recovered from the categories of iron strap fragment, iron hook/nail, brass button, and iron undifferentiated nail/wire. Nail density equals 22 artifacts per cubic meter. METAL AT FRBS The 71 metal artifacts recovered from FRBS are described here by area. In general, most metal artifacts derive from the mottled brown clay though seven of the nine from the Middle Profile are from the pit fill. No metal was found in the East Bench. EAST PROFILE Recovered here were 1 iron nail, 1 copper strip, 1 lead bullet, 1 .22 caliber shell casing, and 3 platy iron fragments. MIDDLE PROFILE These units produced 4 iron wire/nail possibilities, 2 iron nails, 1 iron spike, I piece of iron (?) foil, and 1 piece of miscellaneous, unidentifiable iron. WEST PROFILE Similar to other profile units, this area possesses 3 iron nails, 2 fragments of iron sheet-like material, 1 piece of iron thimble fragment, a defective musket ball, a lead musket slag, and I specimen each of brass nail and brass spike. E C. LO) 0 I 0 to I . -.7777-1..1 I Historical Artifacts 165 / V4) '.3 C) C, . 00 :4. 00 .5 802 00 0'%0 - - > -4 z'. la. C-. 04. o c *- - 0 C C ; *~ ' CO '00 I I i i i i i -0 ia?-? co 166 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood SOvrHWESTBENCH The more numerous and spatially extensive units in this excavation area produce a proportionately higher quantity of metal artifacts. Nails themselves number 24, with 87.5% as iron and 12.5% as brass. Four iron spikes, 4 platy iron fragments, 1 iron wire/nail, and 1 iron sheet- like fragment were excavated. Other iron items include 2 pieces of ore and slag, 1 heavy iron ring-like object, 1 iron wire bent into a squared U-shape, and 5 unidentifi- able pieces. In addition, 3 copper sheet fragments and another .22 caliber shell casing were located. INTERPRETATIONS OF MATERIALS AND DISTRIBUrIONS Interpretation of the historical archaeological materials derived from NAVS and FRBS can follow along a number of different lines. First, the materials allow an investigation into the general chronology of the site, or at least the historical context from which the materials such as ceramics and beads derived. Second, patterns in the distribution of ceramics, glass, metal, and beads across the two sites permit a discussion of potential site organization and use. Within this context, I investi- gate the historical assemblage as a raw material source for Native Alaskan and Native Californian implements. Third, issues of interethnic cohabitation and cultural change will be addressed. Finally, the historical materials provide a particularly large window through which to hypothesize about the participation of Native Alaskans or Californians in the wider world culture repertoires of the Russians and Europeans. This window is framed by comparing historical artifacts from NAVS and FRBS with other assemblages at Fort Ross. Though the discussions will inevitably interdigitate, I will try to treat them separately. CHRONOLOGY Though historical artifacts are excellent sources from which to document the behavior of the individuals residing at the Native Alaskan Village Site, it is still necessary to remember that intensive use of the Fort Ross area for more than a cenuiry after Russian abandonment of the Colony may have provided an influx of "contami- nating" artifacts. This problem is partially avoided by not excavating in the north area of NAVS where histori- cal records and the high density of metal artifacts on the surface attest to such intensive post-Russian use (see chapter 5 in this volume). Discussion here deals prima- rily with the artifact categories of ceramics, beads, and window glass since they allow more precise age estima- tions than do the fragmented vessel glass and metal artifacts as currently studied. Ceramics. The time-span suggested by the ceramic material equates well with the 1812-41 Russian occupa- tion of Fort Ross. South's ceramic date formula (1977:201-275; see Carlson 1983) might have proven useful, but the short duration of the Russian occupation and the nature of disagreement over the fornula's usage (see discussion in Majewski & O'Brien 1987:171-2) render it unnecessary. The predominance of transferprint and handpainted blues point to an early 19th century date (ca. 1820s and 1830s) of deposition as do the blue and green shell-edged types of pearlware flatwares. These pieces could be heirlooms introduced later than the Russian presence, but the ubiquity and relatively large quantity of the blue transferprint and handpainted sherds are part of a trend that cannot be explained by heirloom pieces alone. In addition, the predominant hues of "brown, mustard yellow, and olive green" present on the NAVS and FRBS handpainted polychromes suggest a date prior to the introduction of red, black, and lighter blues and green around the early 1830s (Lofstrom et al. 1982; Miller 1991:8). All later colors do occur but in small quantities. Furthermore, the one recovered maker's mark on earthenware of Clews Warranted Staffordshire from the dark sandy loam of the South Extension Trench indicates a definite Russian Period date of manufacture (1818-34, see above). Moreover, the Russian ceramic with the identified Cyrillic trademark also indicates deposition within the Russian Period. Underglaze printed ceramics that could suggest a later age of deposition, though probably still falling within the last decade of Russian occupation at Ross, are few in number. They include refined earthenware of flow blue and transferprint black, purple, red, and brown (see discussion above with Miller 1980,1991; Noel Hume 1970; Sussman 1977). It should also be noted that no sherds of polychrome transferprint, which post-date 1840 (Godden 1963:115), were recovered from excavations at either site, though they were recovered from excavations in the Stockade (Barclay & Olivares n.d.). Flow blue designs (1830+) occur unequivocally on only eight sherds in the entire collection, but the difficulty of assigning small sherds with a face of dark blue to either flow blue or handpainted blue may have resulted in slight underestimation of flow blue presence. In addition, transferprints of black, purple, red, and brown (post- 1829) occur as only 3, 2,5, and 17 sherds, respectively, in the collection. Black transferprints derive only from the South Trench and South Extension Trench of NAVS. Purple prints appear in both the South Trench and the East Central Trench of NAVS as 1 sherd apiece. Red occurs only at NAVS in the West Central Trench and South Trench; and brown occurs as only 2 specimens in the South Central Test Unit, 9 from the South Trench and South Extension Trench, and 6 from FRBS. Although the presence of these three decorative types may indicate a post-1841 date, their relatively small number more likely suggests a date of deposition during Russian residence. It might be hypothesized that the paucity of definite post-1829 ceramics in the excavations hints at a depositional context early in the Russian occupation. The presence of these transferprint ceramics Historical Artifacts 167 either in pit fill or (more often) dark sandy loam, how- ever, suggests that the constructed features and subsur- face loam denoted activity after circa 1830. As tabulated earlier, both bone beds contain only handpainted blue, transferprint blue, and undecorated refined earthenware; thus, they do not provide substantial evidence for either conclusion. Methodologically, the preceding speculation harbors some difficulties. The presence of an artifact with a known date of manufacture indicates the date terminus post quem (Noel Hume 1970:11). The absence of particular forms (such as polychrome transferprints or sponge decoration) may also indicate a terninus ante quem, a date before which an artifact became available, but interpretations based on absence cannot entirely account for the behavioral reasons that might weigh against its presence in a particular site. For example, it may be that the Russian counter at Ross did not receive many shipments of transferprint brown, red, black, and purple ceramics during the last decade of occupation. This is equivocal given that the Official's Quarters excavation in the Stockade produced 108 transferprint earthenware sherds expressing similar quantities as at NAVS/FRBS with 4 brown, 15 red, 1 black, and 2 purple (Barclay & Olivares n.d.:table 2a). Or, perhaps transferprint polychromes entered the market near the end of Russian occupation in California, but Ross inhabitants had no desire for the wares. This is fully contradicted in the Official's Quarters with 21 of 108 transferprint earthenwares as polychrome (Barclay & Olivares n.d.:table 2a), though these additions could be post-Russian. Therefore, a final option, that the deposi- tional context of those wares at NAVS/FRBS may yet be undiscovered, must await future excavations. In essence, before chronological conclusions based on absences can be accepted as highly plausible, evi- dence for the lack of behavioral explanations on the part of individual consumers or users must be presented. According to the evidence, the ceramic types and absences at NAVS and FRBS may arise from differential deposition rather than from the simple lack of such ceramics anywhere at Fort Ross. Thus, the lack of these items in the NAVS/FRBS deposits appears not to indicate a particular terminus. The differential deposition may ultimately relate to the lack of access, whether by choice or wealth, to these particular wares by Native Alaskans and Native Californians residing at or near Fort Ross. In addition to general ceramic date representation across the site, the pit fill and bone bed deposits exca- vated at NAVS in the East Central Trench and South Trench contain historical ceramics, and their decorative types may provide an estimate of their age of infilling. Fill deposits in the East Central Trench and Extension Trench contain handpainted blue, handpainted poly- chrome, transferprint blue, and undecorated forms of of later material is supplied. In the pit fill of the South Trench, decorative types are the same as the East Central Trench and Extension Trench except that handpainted polychromes are absent and a transferprint black refined earthenware was recovered. If bioturbation is not the source of the latter, transferprint black may suggest a later date for the filling of the South Pit Feature. In addition, the bone beds overlying the two different pit features display primarily handpainted blue and transferprint blue refined earthenware, and as such, do not necessarily indicate a later date of deposition for the probable trash dumping locales. However, stratigraphic position of the bone beds over pit features indicates that filling of the pit had to predate the construction of the bone beds. The presence of ware types, especially yellowware and ironstone, provides an additional entry point for discussion of chronology. Yellowware, postdating the late 1830s and 1840s (see above) is represented by only ten pieces in the entire assemblage, four of which occur in the mottled brown clay of the FRBS Southwest Bench. At NAVS, yellowware occurs only in dark sandy loam strata as three pieces each in the East Central and South trenches. The annular decoration present on almost all of the yellowware pieces may point to a date after 1840. Finally, the lack of more than a handful of mid-19th century ironstones, or "stone china," sherds suggests a solid Russian Period date (i.e., prior to American Period), especially given their presence in the Metini site, which contains American Period artifacts (Ballard 1995; Smith 1974)8. However, several recovered ironstone pieces appear to be early attempts at very refined earthenware- like vessels and thus may date from 1800-1820s (see discussion in Miller 1991:9-10). The two pieces of later ironstone paneled cups recovered from the surface of NAVS suggest a late 1840s date (Majewski & O'Brien 1987:114), but they are the only unambiguous fragments of the ware recovered from the excavations. Interestingly, the one sherd of delftware recovered in the dark sandy loam of the East Central Extension Trench has a terminating manufacture date at least 10 years and perhaps as many as 80-100 years before Russian occupa- tion of the Califomia coast. Whether this is an heirloom piece introduced by Russians, Creoles, or Native Alas- kans or whether it represents earlier trade contacts of Native Califomians with Europeans is unknown. The unidentifiable red-bodied stoneware described earlier may reflect such earlier trade. Therefore, the indication is still that the ceramics recovered from the NAVS and FRBS excavations are predominantly those of the 1812- 41 occupation of the Russian counter headquartered at Ross. Beads. Beads provide another source for chronol- ogy, and Lester Ross's chapter 8 supplies information needed to address this issue. Suffice it to note here that refined earthenware. As such, no unequivocal indication he concludes that the NAVS bead assemblage rests 168 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood comfortably within the 1812-41 date bracket. The recovery of a fragment of a ceramic blue "Prosser" bead (FRBS-6/15/89-7-BE) from the subsurface of 8S, 18W at FRBS, however, indicates an intrusive element as it postdates 1840. Glass. A third artifact category casting light on the generl dating of the NAVS and FRBS assemblages is window glass. As mentioned earlier, a study at UC- Berkeley has eludicated the potential of window glass as a chronological tool (Cohen 1992). Using Roenke's (1978) pilot study determining the relationship between window glass thickness and dates of manufacture, Cohen (1992) relies on the variable thickness of window glass recovered from NAVS, FRBS, and the Kuskov House (located within the Stockade walls) to demonstrate statistically the high probability that the window glass recovered from the Fort Ross excavations does indeed fall within the 1812-41 date range. Though only prelimi- nary, the study tends to confirm that the archaeological deposits from NAVS and FRBS are representative of the time in question with only minor occurrence of post- Russian materials. Finally, the only three botde neck fragments recov- ered from the excavations provide additional support. The two black glass necks from NAVS, as discussed in the preceding section, suggest a date of manufacture from 1820-40. The mustard bonle neck from the surface of NAVS, on the other hand, suggests a later time of manufacture. Summary. Three things are suggested for the chronology of the NAVS and FRBS deposits. First, very little post-1840 material was recovered from excavations, suggesting that at least a high percentage of the artifacts were deposited during Russian occupation. Second, most of the both possible and definite post-1840 materials were recovered either from the surface of NAVS (mid- 19th century ironstone, mustard bottle) or from FRBS (Prosser bead, yellowware). This appears to indicate that though some post-Russian material is undoubtedly present at both sites, the highest influx is probably at the Beach Site. Third, pit feature and bone bed deposits from the East Cental and South trenches at NAVS are equivo- cal in dating, though they may date before the last decade of Russian residence based on the presence of only one black transferprint ware and the absence of other "later' material. However, the black transferprint ware from the pit fill of the South Trench may indicate a component of a late dumping episode, if bioturbation is not a problem. SrrE ORGANIZATION AND USE Based on distribution of historical materials across the two sites, interpretations of site use and patterning can be suggested. Though this organization extends into the next section on native participation in European material culture, I Tfid it essential to highlight what is across the site. In the beginning, it is necessary to reiterate that density of ceramics in the South Trench indicates more intensive use or dumping than other excavation areas, while glass in the South Central Test Unit displays higher densities than the others (except unit 125S,18W). In either case, these two excavation areas have generated far more material per volume of sediment than the other two. Interestingly, the South Central Test Unit offers the highest density of historical material within the dark sandy loam, while the South Trench had its highest densities in the overlying topsoil. Perhaps this suggests a later use of the South Trench area during the occupation of NAVS, or perhaps more intense bioturbation. Evidence of Refuse Deposition. Evidence is compel- ling that a majority of the ceramic and glass artifacts recovered from NAVS represent discarded material as secondary trash deposition. Generally, the stratigraphic interpretations in chapters 3 and 16 suggest that dumping episodes are present in several areas of NAVS above a constructed substrate of pits and other features. In reference to ceramics, my inability to refit any but a handful of sherds (0.96%) across both sites intimates that the assemblage resides in a secondary context. The highest proportion is at FRBS with 2.8% (6/211), while NAVS only had 0.85% (9/1040). This may indicate that the former resided in a more primary trash context, or at least an undisturbed secondary one with downslope movement of ceramics causing their breakage. In a qualitative sense, the ceramic collection as an expression of complete vessels compares poorly with other historical archaeological collections in which whole vessels are usually located or reconstructible (see Felton & Schulz 1983; M. Praetzellis 1980). More specifically, highly complete or reconstructible vessels have been recovered from inside the Fort Ross Stockade (Barclay & Olivares n.d.; O'Connor 1984) and from Russian-American Company associated Native Alaskan sites in southwest- ern Alaska (Jackson 1991), the Kurile Islands (Jackson 1994), and Three Saints Harbor (Crowell 1994), though the latter ceramic assemblage is quite small. Although no quantitative measures are performed on the NAVS and FRBS ceramics to determine mean size of sherds, it is apparent through visual observation that fragmentation is very high. The situation with the glass artifacts is even more acute. The assemblage of both vessel and window glass is extremely fragmented, with only a few large pieces recovered. Most fragments are minute, and vessel identification is virtually impossible for the majority of the artifacts. Although high fragmentation is easily achieved for glass, ceramics are more resilient to exces- sive fragmentation without high stress loads. Merely dropping a plate on the ground will undoubtedly break it, but the act will probably not fragment the plate into a known and not known about the distribution of materials multitude of tiny sherds to the exclusion of any large Historical Artifacts 169 pieces. In addition, the presence of a number of bent nails (see below) may further relate to the presence of material discarded, perhaps by Russian and Creole inhabitants of the Stockade or Russian Village, as ineffective or no longer useful. Based on ceramics, the NAVS/FRBS collections can be compared to the previous excavations of the Stockade to ascertain context of deposition. As demonstrated in the descriptive section above, all four areas excavated at NAVS average approximately 80% refined earthenware, 16% porcelain, and 4% other ceramics. This trend may be important, even though individual units fluctuate widely at times. At FRBS, however, there are more than 90% refined earthenware in the Southwest Bench but only about 73% earthenware in the profiles. Nonetheless, all excavation areas covered in this chapter range from 70- 90% earthenware. The ceramic group percentages of NAVS alone closely resemble those recovered from the Metini site outside the northwest corner of the Stockade, the trash dump site located northeast of Metini and the Stockade, and the "Highway Area" excavation near Highway 1 (table 7.25; see O'Connor 1984:50). Unfortu- nately, the latter two are problematic and extend beyond the occupation of Ross by the Russians. Percentages are higher for earthenware in the NAVS assemblages than in any excavation conducted inside the Stockade, with the possible exception of 75% in the Kuskov House (table 7.25). The percentages of porcelain, however, are not considerably lower in NAVS than in the areas inside the Stockade walls, except perhaps for the Bam or Official's Quarters (table 7.25). Excavations within the Stockade have produced a number of grey, buff, and white stoneware and earthenware ceramics that are rare or completely absent in the NAVS and FRBS excavations (Barclay & Olivares n.d.; O'Connor 1984). As such, the diversity of ceramic materials is much lower in the NAVS/FRBS collection than that recovered from inside the Stockade. The presence of non-European artifacts-bone and shell beads, marine invertebrate remains, obsidian and chert lithics, modified glass and ceramic, worked bone-in discrete bone bed deposits and intermixed with less definable ones reflects a substantial contribution of Native American refuse. If this scenario depicts discard behavior at the Stockade and its occupied perimeter, the NAVS assemblage may generally reflect ceramics discarded from Native Alaskan and Native Californian and possibly Russian/Creole inhabitants. The Possibilities of Recycling. A different conclu- sion that could be drawn is that Native Californians and Native Alaskans were recycling the discarded materials of Russian residents and depositing them in their general residential area. Even though no complete or even reconstructible vessels were recovered from research described here, this does not preclude the possibility that residents of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood used complete ceramic vessels in their everyday lives. It may just be that appropriate residential areas have not yet been thoroughly excavated. Even if primary use of vessels led directly to intentional mnodification early in their use, some relatively complete vessels should have been reconstructible. Note that the only unequivocal refuse dumping areas are the bone bed features and the underlying pit features. Therefore, artifact distribution in the South Central Test Unit and the West Central Trench, due to the lack of bone bed deposits, may have to do more with intensity of residential use than with discrete trash dumping locations. The high density of materials in the South Central Test Unit may reflect a generalized deposition of secondary refuse materials (see Wilson 1994:44). Table 7.25 Ceramic Comparisorn Frequencies of Ceramic Types for Other Areas Inside and Outside the Fort Ross Stockade (compiled from O'Connor 1984:table 2) Site Total RE %a POR %D Other %C Inside Stockade Barns 488 63.3 25.8 10.9 SoutheastArea 184 67.4 17.9 14.7 KuskovHouse 647 75.0 17.2 8.3 Offcial's Quarters 4393 70.7 20.9 8.4 Chapel 51 64.7 17.6 17.6 North of Stockade Metinid 371 81.6 16.2 2.2 'Trash Dump" 215 81.0 11.6 7.4 HighwayArea 1459 80.2 19.7 0.1 a RE = Refined Earthenwares b POR = Porcelain c Other=all stonewares, yellowware, and pipe fragments (see text for details) d This site is called Mad-Shui-Nui in CYConnor's thesis, but Ballard (1995) has sincerefined archaeological interpreFations of thesiteand considers it an extension of the Metini site located slightly further to the north. 170 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood If Native Alaskans and/or Californians were truly recycling the Russian trash deposits, then the following conditions would be likely: 1) selectivity on the part of the collectors for raw material; 2) the presence of minimal to no complete vessels; 3) high fragmentation as a result of relocating the refuse to a secondary or even teriary deposit; and 4) modification of some recovered historical material. The first condition is equivocal in the NAVS/FRBS assemblage in that even though it has less diversity in the ceramic materials compared to excava- tions inside the Stockade, the relative frequency of particular classes of historic ceramics is fairly consistent with excavations outside the Stockade. In addition, there may be reason to suspect that a diversity of materials was being sought, rather than select items. Yet, selectivity is suggested in the differing percentages between the frequency of a particular class of material and the frequency of that same class in the category of worked artifacts. The strongest example is given in the earlier section of the chapter on worked ceramics. The criteria of minimal to no reconstructible vessels or refittable portions is easily upheld with the vessel glass and ceramic assemblages, though a secondary deposi- tional context alone could produce that pattem. Exces- sively high fragmentation, as seen in the ceramic and glass materials, does tend to support the notion that further repositioning of refuse increases chances of additional breakage. It may be that the NAVS terrace has received sedimentary compaction due to grazing sheep or agricultural activities, but if this were true, then more refittable sherds would be expected than the three pairs and one triad recovered from NAVS. In addition, the large number of worn and highly eroded sherds recovered from NAVS hints at the likelihood of recycling. These ceramics appear to be waterworn, and their presence on the NAVS terrace far upslope from the nearest moving water sources of Fort Ross Creek and the ocean shoreline suggests human transport of already broken vessels. Furthermore, the high incidence of breakage among the materials may relate to a process of modification by their new users. Though worked glass and ceramics are not in abundance, their presence indicates the importance of ceramic and glass items as raw material for Native Californian and Alaskan manufacturing techniques. To reiterate, worked glass is 0.5% of the 183 glass artifacts in the South Central Test Unit, 3.3% of the 212 glass artifacts in the West Central Trench, 10.0% of the 410 artifacts in the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, and 4.5% of the 1011 glass pieces in the South Trench and Extension Trench. In sum, a total of 5.2% of the total NAVS glass assemblage is worked. At FRBS, the same percentage of 5.2% of the total glass is modified, with all but three pieces in the Southwest Bench, which has 6.9% of its total glass assemblage as worked. Worked ceramics are 1.1% of the total 1040 excavated It can be hypothesized as well that high fragmenta- tion of both glass (primarily vessel) and ceramic artifacts derives from purposeful reduction of vessels and other sherds garnered from refuse deposits. With glass, this may relate to blank or preform creation; with ceramics, reduction may involve preparation of bead blanks (see Layton 1990:figure 4.13; Shangraw & Von der Porten 1981:71; Von der Porten 1972:5, figure 19), similar to the process by which abalone and clam shells are broken down into polygonal sections for later bead drilling. Of the Drake's Bay assemblage recovered in the Coast Miwok area of Pt. Reyes National Seashore, Von der Porten (1972:5) suggests that the highly fragmented porcelain assemblage may relate to an attempt to "release the spirit" of the previous European possessors or to reduce the size to facilitate bead and scraper manufacture. Although the first proposition is unknowable at this point, the latter may be manifested at NAVS and FRBS. Moreover, the presence of non-refitting pipestem fragments may reflect use of those stems as raw material for "preformed" bead sources, requiring only a detaching incision. This supposition is not unambiguously sup- ported given the lack of either pipestem beads or pipestem fragments with unequivocal traces of inten- tional cutting. One pipestem (figure 7.7-1) does show evidence of chopping on one of the exterior surfaces, but it could possibly be the marks of a user biting off the end of a saturated pipestem. Consideration of the bone beds, recognized as discrete dumping episodes on raised pit fill deposits, may shed light on the issue of recycling. The East Central Bone Bed contains 34 ceramics with a total density of 68 sherds/m3, which is very close to the average density for the East Central Trench as a whole. The South Bone Bed is similar with a density of 70 sherds per cubic meter (n=35). This density is half as much as the South Trench as a whole or most of the other units. Vessel and window glass occur in the two bone beds (East Central [n=45] and South [n=65]) as 90 pieces/m3 and 130 pieces/m3, respectively. Density of glass artifacts in the East Central Bone Bed is approximately the average for East Central Trench, although this density is lower than that in the stratum in which the bone bed generally occurs. In the South Trench, the density of glass in the South Bone Bed is about 50% less than the density in the entire South Trench, specific units therein, or the stratigraphic layer. Percentage of window glass in the East Central Bone Bed (57.8%) hovers between the percentages recovered for the trench as a whole (44%) and for the dark sandy loam (64%) from which most material is derived. The reverse trend in the topsoil and part of the pit fill may be significant. In the South Bone Bed, window glass is also higher than vessel glass in percentage (89.2% vs. 10.8%) but in a much more visible way. Window glass in the entire trench is 75.4%, though NAVS ceramics. some of the units containing the bone bed have percent- Historical Artifacts 171 ages approaching and sometimes exceeding 80% depend- ing on soil stratum. In addition, worked glass recovered from the bone beds includes a flake of window glass (South Bone Bed), a green projectile point, an edge- modified flake, and a flake (East Central Bone Bed). Though sample size is relatively small, three things might be interpreted. First, the higher percentage of porcelain found in the bone beds than found in any of the strata, units, or trenches may indicate a selectivity for porcelain within the trash dumping episode. This, in tun, may reflect a selectivity for porcelain as a raw material collected from other refuse deposits, though only a few porcelain worked pieces support this claim. Second, the lower density of ceramics in the South Bone Bed than in surrounding strata or units is intriguing. Since the bone beds appear to represent cooking refuse, the lack of ceramic sherds may indicate that few ceramics (as vessels) were actually being used for cooking purposes. Cooking refuse, however, may not contain elements of cooking technology if the implements were not broken or were baskets. Additionally, vessel frag- ments recovered (e.g., bowls, teacups) may relate to food consumption rather than processing. Third, the possibil- ity that window glass was obtained primarily for raw material is weakened by two facts. (1) Based on frequen- cies, more window glass was deposited in the South Trench and Extension Trench both within the bone bed specifically and in the area generally than in the East Central Bone Bed; and (2) the percentage of worked window glass within the worked glass is only 16% for both areas, indicating that the predominance of window glass in the South Trench, Extension Trench, and South Bone Bed does not reflect a preference for window glass as raw material in either depositional context. Rather than suggesting the recycling of glass, the pattern may point to the likelihood that more architectural structures were present near this southern area. Docu- mentary support exists with Payeras's (1995) record of the presence of "good glass" in windows of Native Alaskan residences south of the Fort. In addition, the presence of structures on NAVS is further suggested from the high to relatively equal percentages of window glass compared to vessel glass given that the percentage of window glass is extremely low at FRBS where no structures were noted or projected. In chapter 3, it is suggested that deposition of the South Bone Bed may relate to final abandonment of the site, and as such, this pattern may reflect dismantling of glass windowed structures in that area. (See discussion above about the ceramic-related chronology in bone bed contexts.) Though not in large enough numbers in the bone bed itself for lengthy discussion, density of nails in the South Trench (30.3/m3) far exceeds that of either the South Central Test Unit (9.0/M3), East Central Trench (14.7/m3), or the West Cental Trench (12.70/m3). Such a pattern vicinity of the South Trench, especially given that iron nails are 76% of the total iron and brass nails. Brass nails may actually reflect forms either for ship construction or for attaching metal siding or sheets to wood. Interestingly, however, the number of bent nails is only 8.3% of the South Trench and Extension Trench total nails while 15.9% of that recovered in the East Central Trench and Extension Trench. As such, I believe that this can indicate intentional bending of nails as they are reworked as raw material, or discarding of unusable nails in general trash dumping areas in which potentially related window glass was deposited, or accidental bending of nails as they are pulled from wooden sub- saes. A broken tip of a square-stock cast brass nail, recovered from the pit fill of the East Central Trench, seems as though it may have been a leather punching tool, given the presence of leather disks remaining on the item (see figure 7.1 1h). In addition, nails bent into hook- like shapes may have been done so intentionally to form usable hooks (NAVS-7/15/92-38-Me-1, NAVS-8/10/91- 15-Me-i, NAVS-8/14/91-178-Me-1, NAVS-8/7/91-47- Me-i). Whether these forns were ever hooks is ques- tionable, but one specimen (NAVS- 8/10/91-15-Me-i) is a brad type of nail with an L-shaped head, which could easily provide an anchor for line attachment. INTERETHN!C COHABITATION AND CULTURE CHANGE The extent and implications of cohabitation between Alaskan (mainly) men and Native Californian (mainly) women is of prime importance in this research. The historical materials, especially as secondary refuse, thus provide a way of entering the discourse on ethnicity (Wilson 1994:58). The presence of certain items of material culture may provide an inferential link to notions of identity, though simple artifact ratios are not sufficient (Lightfoot 1995; cf. South 1988:53). In fact, ambiguity existing at these boundaries is not at all unexpected given the individuality and contextuality surrounding cultural contact in a frontier situation (Lightfoot and Martinez 1995). At the same time, distinct boundaries reflected in material culture could have been actively maintained to transmit information (Wobst 1977). Given this ambigu- ity, I want to address traditional Native Alaskan and Native Californian practices and preferences that appear to be represented in the archaeological record at NAVS. As such, my search will be more for identity than for ethnicity, more for the presence of behaviors with a history rather than for personal histories themselves (see chapter 1). Statements made are preliminary and reliant on future archaeological work to verify or reject. An important line of evidence for a large amount of Californian influence derives from the bead assemblage. Lester Ross's analysis has demonstrated that the color preference at the site of white, red, green, and black beads is uncharacteristic of bead assemblages reported offers more evidence of structures with nails in the for other Russian-American Company affiliated Native 172 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Alaskans, especially the notable absence of large quanti- ties of blue beads or any Chinese beads. Historically, Cyrille LaPlace reported that a Native Califomian chief wore around his neck "several necklaces of small glass red or black beads" (Farris 1986:77-78). Thus, this may indicate a substantial Native Califomian presence at NAVS and FRBS, at least in terms of material culture. It is unclear based on the bead assemblage alone, however, whether the pattern represents 1) instances of cohabitation of Kashaya Pomo or Coast Miwok women with Native Alaskan men suggesting the beads represent "her" loss, 2) cases of Native Califomian men's or women's cultural preference altering the traditional bead color preferences of Native Alaskans, or 3) the fact that the presence of Pomo or Coast Miwok individuals, whether male or female, on the site has been underesti- mated in the ethnohistorical and historical literature. Distribution of colored beads across the site may help resolve the issue, but such analysis is not included here. Moreover, the presence of clamshell disk beads further points to a Native Californian presence, though it is unclear whether they truly entered the deposit during Russian occupation. Since no clamshell disk bead blanks were recovered from the NAVS or FRBS excavations, this may indicate that the beads were entering NAVS prefabricated, suggesting a definite Native Califomian origin. Worked vessel and window glass provide further areas for consideration. The transposition of traditional lithic technology onto a new raw material may reflect a strategy of Native Califomians. The presence of worked glass at presumably contemporaneous Kashaya Pomo sites tiroughout the Fort Ross survey area (Lightfoot et al. 1991) and on the first major coastal ridge overlooking the Fort and coastline (Martinez 1995), further suggests that this technology was at least a Native Californian practice. Moreover, Ballard's (1995) and Smith's (1974) research provides more examples of the Kashaya Pomo near Fort Ross using historic glass as a raw material for production of projectile points, scrapers, and utilized flakes. Examples south and north of Fort Ross in Coast Miwok (Slaymaker 1977:164) and Mitom Pomo (Layton 1990:184) sites, respectively, of modified bottle glass further strengthen the trend. On the other hand, Crowell (1994) discusses the working of manufactured glass, though in small quantities, in the early Russian-American Company affiliated Native Alaskan site at Three Saints Harbor. Other examples include the Tikchik site on the Nushugak River (VanStone 1968) and Kiaviak (Clark 1974). Nonetheless, overall quantities of worked glass from these three sites is small (n<6) with diversity of tools correspondingly low. Evidence for glass working and deposition appears to occur primarily in the East Central Trench and Extension Trench of NAVS and the Southwest Bench at and Extension Trench have 10.0% of the total glass as modified, while the South Trench and Extension Trench only have 4.5%. In the pit fill of the East Central Trench and Extension Trench and the South Trench and Exten- sion Trench, modified glass is 9.1% and 6.6%, respec- tively. If Native Californians were the primary glass flakers, then they may have been more concentrated in the east central area, though the south area has similar percentages in the pit fill. However, FRBS provides a different picture. The Southwest Bench at FRBS has 9.0% of the total glass as modified while the East Bench and profiles have only 2.1%. If higher percentage reflects more glass working and deposition on the relatively level exposure, were Native Californians spending time there? As a probable trash accumulation from downslope movement from NAVS, such a conclu- sion is highly speculative. In addition, the nature of modified ceramic sherds is reminiscent of the style of ceramic reduction noted on porcelains at Drake's Bay (Shangraw & Von der Porten 1981; Von der Porten 1972) and at the Metini site of Fort Ross (Ballard 1995; Smith 1974:figure 17; White 1977). The Coast Miwok at Fort Ross originated from the coast south of the Colony in the area of Drake's Bay. Thus, the two potential ceramic bead blanks (NAVS-8/13/91-3-HC, NAVS-6/15/89-1-HC), probable ceramic projectile point attempt (NAVS-7/13/92-33-HC), and several ceramic scraping implements (NAVS-8/1/91-7-HC-1, NAVS-8/1/ 91-7-HC-2, NAVS-8/7/91-3-HC) recovered from NAVS may reflect such a "tradition." In essence, this type of ceramic modification is not unlike the use and reduction of ceramic sherds in other Native Californian sites. The dates for that modification may be inferred only broadly, however, based on what is not worked, to fall during or immediately after Russian occupation (Ballard 1995:169). Though I believe that Native Californians may have been the primary users of ceramic refuse as raw material, there is no reason to suspect total absence of that behavior in Native Alaskans. Evidential lines leading to it are just less secure, espe- cially given that, to the best of my knowledge, only one worked ceramic has been located in a Native Alaskan site. As the last Russian-American Company outpost established, Kolmakovskiy Redoubt produced through excavation a circular, perhaps ground, piece of what appears to be a transferprint ware (see Oswalt 1980:plate 37s), but Oswalt does not note it as such. Interestingly, Jackson notes the potential for studying "lateral cycling" and recycling of vessels and sherds at Russian-American Company affiliated native sites in Southwestern Alaska (1991:261), but she does not indicate anything elsewhere, such as in the Kurile Islands, other than mending holes to maintain containers in usable form (see Jackson 1994). A final avenue for analysis is the frequency of teacup/saucer vessels in the ceramic collection. This is FRBS. As previously discussed, the East Central Trench important due to the significance of tea for Native Historical Artifacts 173 Alaskans at other Russian col6nies, though this pattem appears to manifest primarily in mid- to late 19th century Russian-American Company associated Native Alaskan settlements (Jackson 1991). In many ways, tea served as a status marker (Jackson 1991:203-204). Though sample size is small, the South Central Test Unit displays the only real NAVS prevalence of teacups and saucers over other frequent vessels such as plates and bowls. In other excavation areas across NAVS, frequency varies, but plates and saucers appear to dominate the assemblage though teacups are comparable to plates in the South Trench and Extension Trench and all are relatively equal in tfie West Central Trench. It may be that the presence of mainly tablewares without a predominance of teawares indicates a lack of importance of tea for Native Alaskans at Fort Ross. As discussed before, the pattems may actually reflect recycling and reuse instead. Additionally, the lack of refitting with teacups does not support their use in primary form, but it does not discount it either. Prevalence of teacups and saucers in the large excavation at FRBS, however, may indicate either a Native Alaskan use of those materials in the cove near their baidarkas. More appropriately, use of tea vessels may reflect a Native Alaskan pattern rather than ethnic attribute per se, perhaps followed by Native Californians. However, the FRBS deposits may be primarily the downhill slump of NAVS material, though the presence of three pairs of refitted (non-vessel specific) ceramic sherds in the Southwest Bench may indicate some primary deposition at FRBS. Though only alluded to above, gender relations may play an important role in the formation of the archaeo- logical record. Not only is cohabitation/marriage an interethnic mixing, but it is also undoubtedly a highly gendered interaction as the women were predominantly Native Califomian and the men almost exclusively Native Alaskan (see chapter 1). Given this context and the likelihood that Native Californian women were cultural mediators between their Alaskan husbands and their Native Californian families (Martinez 1994), it is critical to consider the role of women as agents of change at NAVS. I hinted at the possibility that beads may reflect gender relations at NAVS, but that remains an area for future research. In addition, if Alaskan men truly spent most of their time away from the settlement hunting sea otters (Khlebnikov 1976:101, 131; Golovnin 1979:162; Lightfoot et al. 1991:24), then a majority of the archaeological record at NAVS may be a result of female and non-hunter activities. Undoubtedly, men present during their brief respites and tool refurbishing would have produced their share of material remains, but whether or not actual episodes of filling and dumping are gendered is not clear. PARTICIPATION IN THE SYSTEM OF EUROPEAN GOODS pertaining to the question of acculturation or resistance by Native Alaskans and Californians living within the purview of the Fort Ross Stockade. Taking into consider- ation the data and interpretations thus far discussed, it is highly likely that Native Alaskans and Californians were participating in the system of European goods and services yet within their particular cultural frame of reference. If refuse deposits located across NAVS, particularly in the South Trench and Extension Trench and the East Central Trench and Extension Trench, truly reflect some of the dumping patterns of people living in the Native Alaskan Neighborhood, then those residents had access to commercial goods of porcelain, common refined earthenware, stoneware, yellowware, and basaltware ceramics; glass of both architectural and vessel nature, the latter coming primarily in green and colorless, though brown and blue forms occurred; glass trade beads in a variety of types and colors; and metal items such as iron and brass nails, buttons, and copper bowls. In a general way, these items reflect what has been located archaeologically in the Stockade and what is known historically to have entered the Colony (e.g., Khlebnikov 1990:70-74, see Appendix 6.1). Of course, it is still difficult to discern whether residents were obtaining the goods in primary or com- plete form, but the above discussion on the nature of the archaeological deposits suggests that they were primarily dealing with items secondarily deposited by others. This matches the statement in Volume 1 that ethnohistoric accounts suggest that Native Californians had little interest in obtaining European metal, glass, and ceramic goods (Lightfoot et al. 1991:142). In addition, it meshes with other early 19th century Russian-American Com- pany situations in which ceramics were not readily available to non-Russian workers because of their high costs and their potentially high value in other Russian endeavors, such as trading with European colonists (Jackson 1991:46). NAVS, however, is lacking a number of items recovered from or known to be shipped to the Stockade such as grey or buff earthenware and stoneware, saws, axes, adzes, shovels, razors, scissors, earrings, and other items (see Appendix 6.1). Many of these metal items have appeared in other Russian-American Company associated Native Alaskan sites (see review in Schiff 1995; Shubin 1990). The absence of these may indicate that the NAVS refuse deposits contain items of relatively short use-lives due to fragility and often single-use func- tions. Therefore, we may have recovered mainly ceram- ics and glass rather than more durable metal saws, axes, scissors, and other tools because the latter had much longer use-lives. Nails are an exception for metal, but these can be seen in relation to architectural structures on NAVS and to recycling by Native Alaskans and Califor- nians of items that are easily bent, especially when being pulled from wood, and discarded by the primary users. The historical artifacts provide valuable evidence 174 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood The NAVS/FRBS collecti6n produced two further patterns worth noting. First, the sherds of Jackfield ware are particularly intriguing in that this ware has not been recovered from any other Fort Ross excavation. The significance of the find is unknown at this point, how- ever, except that Jackfield is not a common find in historical sites in general. Second, a fragment of a blue transferprint pearlware vessel cover was recovered from the FRBS excavations which matched a pattern, though in smaller proportions, located on a pearlware vessel from the Officials' Quarters inside the Stockade9. This indicates that the two fragments derive from the same decorative set of dishes, though the actual relation between them is as of yet undiscerned. It may further indicate that the FRBS assemblage received only those ceramic items considered as refuse, since the cover sherd may have been broken and discarded by its user from the Stockade. Historical records document that Native Alaskan workers received small salaries (Khlebnikov 1990:133; Fedorova 1975:16-18) in the form of scrip that could be used in the Company store (Khlebnikov 1990:99, 186; Tikhmenev 1978:144) and that Native Californian workers generally received only payment in kind by beads, clothing, and food (Khlebnikov 1990:193-94; Kostromitinov 1974:9; Wrangell 1969:211). Therefore, the extent to which Native Alaskans or even Native Californians had the economic capability to purchase ceramic or glass goods in any quantity from the Com- pany store is questionable. Yet, it has been suggested that the majority of commercial commodities being shipped to the Russian-American Company colonies was destined for consumption by Native Alaskans and Califomians (Gibson 1976:172). How can this contradiction be resolved, for we must also entertain the notion that these people may have had no desire or necessity to acquire European goods? The presence of relatively complete ceramic or glass vessels might have suggested primary access, but such evidence does not exist for these excavations. Yet, the recovery of primarily fragmented ceramics and glass, bent nails, and defective metal items all point to refuse deposition. On the other hand, beads are likely to represent items intended for trade, especially as payment to Native Pomo and Coast Miwok workers. In the end, future excavations may produce household materials that speak more forcefully to this issue than does the assem- blage from the predominantly trash deposits covered in this chapter. CONCLUSIONS Although equivocal in a number of ways, the historical materials offer a glimpse into the lives of Native Alaskans and Native Californians residing at the Russian Colony Ross. First, the ceramic, bead, window deposition of NAVS material primarily during the Russian occupation from 1812-41. Date ranges overlap and some extend beyond the early 1840s, but the general appearance is of Russian era material. Second, the assemblages at NAVS and FRBS seem to point to historic items that are secondarily deposited. The pit features and bone bed historic deposits are highly indicative of such a situation, and the high fragmentation and general non- reconstructibility of the ceramic and glass artifacts further support the argument. Third, the historical materials may have served purposes similar to those for which they were designed-that is, as eating, serving, storage, or cooking vessels-but the high fragmentation and intentional modification of these by the inhabitants of NAVS suggest that this commonly assumed use of historical ceramics may be seriously questioned (see Farris, chapter 6). As is always the case with archaeological interpreta- tion, a multitude of unstudied aspects and unanswered questions remain for future researchers. In terms of the material itself, further analysis would be enlightening in the following areas. (1) Ceramic analyses could be conducted for use wear on the exterior and interior surfaces of the sherds to try to isolate whether the vessels had some manifestation of "typical" usage, though the users might still be unidentifiable. (2) With glass artifacts, chemical sourcing might be conducted to look at wider trade and supply issues at Fort Ross. (3) The glass flakes dominating the assemblage might be consid- ered from a "lithic" technology perspective to determine if more of the herein labeled "glass" artifacts might be a collection of debitage from bottle and window glass reduction into usable tools. (4) Finally, with future completion of the bead analysis from the Fort Ross Cemetery excavation conducted by Lynne Goldstein (1992, n.d.), the NAVS and FRBS bead collections may be compared to beads found in a primary decorative context in the individual graves. Such an attempt may isolate the ways that different kinds and colors of beads were used, at least by individuals interred in the presum- ably Russian Orthodox graveyard. In a wider context than NAVS/FRBS materials alone, further research is in order for the Fort Ross locale as a whole. For instance, since NAVS appears to bracket dates for Russian occupation, NAVS excavations provide a rough baseline for what is definitely present in the Fort Ross Counter during the early to mid 19th century. Native Alaskan and Californian consumption and use are not expected to mimic that of Russian or Creole individu- als, but artifacts recovered from the site at least attest to the types of material physically present. In other words, the FRBS and NAVS excavations may provide a limiting case. In addition, more detailed comparison of the NAVS/ FRBS historical assemblages to other excavations inside glass, and vessel glass collections appear to attest to a the Stockade may provide more thorough perspectives on Historical Artifacts 175 contrasts and similarities among and between the lifestyles of the interacting groups. Since boundaries between colonizers and indigenous peoples cannot be considered distinct nor impermeable with acculturation as the only direction of change from Russians/Creoles to Native Alaskans/Californians (see Lightfoot and Martinez 1995), such a comparison might prove fruitful to the question of cultural change in frontier situations. Finally, the artifact assemblage and spatial arrangement of the sites, especially NAVS, undoubtedly offer opportu- nities to consider social, political, and gender relations within and between the multiple ethnic identities repre- sented. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research for this chapter was partially supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship. A number of important people must be thanked for their contribution to the formation of this chapter. First, individuals at the Department of Parks and Recreation in Sacramento-Glenn Farris, Larry Felton, Lee Motz, and Peter Schulz-deserve recognition for their assistance in tracking down various items or their insights into ways to tackle this material. As an initial collaborator, Glenn Farris deserves many thanks for his input and thoughts on the material provided here and an early draft of this chapter. Also, discussions with Hannah Ballard, Antoinette Martinez, and Peter Mills helped to clarify issues and materials presented here. Technical assistance with cataloging and preparing the artifacts for analysis was provided by Lisa Holm and Erin Mulholland; their help is much appreciated and was essential to the cornpletion of this project. Lisa Holm and Ann Schiff are especially thanked for insights into the workings of PARADOX and excellent laboratory organization, respectively. Of course, thanks is extended to Kent Lightfoot and Ann Schiff for the opportunity to complete this analysis and for their thoughtful insights into its form and content. Finally, I thank Tracey Spoon for her patience and support while I finished the project, long though it was. In the end, any faulty logic, misperceptions, or mistakes remain my own. NoTEs 'Artifacts covered in this chapter are called "historical artifacts" only by convention. Materials presented here tend to cleave along traditional lines of designating European artifacts as markers of the "historic" period. Especially in the case of coastal California with the arrival of Russian merchants, the designation is appropriate. However, calling them historical artifacts and carrying the interpretive baggage of "European social life and use" is problematic. As I will demonstrate in later sections of the chapter, use of these materials is clearly non-European in many respects. Thus, "historical" means only derived from, though not necessarily used by, Europeans, 2 "Porcellaneous stoneware" was used in the first monograph to refer to these ceramic items (Lightfoot et al. 1991). Nonethe- less, such an analytical difference between this chapter and the first volume in the Fort Ross series will not negatively affect any interpretations. 3This strategy may in fact require reconsideration when considering wider trade networks between Fort Ross and Europe, Russia, and China. 4These non-white porcelains may include both Chinese and European porcelain, though I would suggest it is mostly the former. The underglaze blue could actually be either the Chinese or English variety from 1660-1800 or 1745-95, respectively (Noel Hume 1970:263, 137), or the Canton/ Nanking styles manufactured from 1800-30 (Noel Hume 1970:262-3). The latter is the most likely choice for the vast majority of ceramics recovered. Although not noted in the text, the Canton/Nanking styles are present on a number of sherds. Due to the fragmented nature of the decorated pieces, no attempt is made to address whether English "Willow Pattern" porcelains are present. The fonnal label "Chinese Export Porcelain" or Lowestoft (cf. Boger 1971:67; Savage & Newman 1974:64) is not used here for it would close debate on whether the porcelain assemblage is all Chinese in origin and whether some sherds could predate the early 19th century (see Noel Hume 1970:258-62). s Density-adjusted counts of decorative types were originally included to control absolute counts for varying sediment volume. After graphing them, however, I realized that they really did not convey any more information than did absolute counts. Of course, relative amounts per trench or per unit varied, depending on which area was being presented, but the differences from the count-based figures added little refimement. 6 Computations were also performed on the densities of historical artifacts per volume of sediment containing only historical materials. This was done to try and counter the problem of using the entire volume for the historical materials because the strata without historical materials may have been a pre-Russian use of the terrace and thus the density of historical materials would be diluted by using that larger value, especially in areas with intrusive cultural features. These adjusted values did not add considerable clarity to the interpretations, however, and have thus been excluded here to avoid confusion. 7T his section will deal specifically with the unmodified historic bottle and window glass, but the counts will include modified fragments such that a full representation of total glass is achieved. Modified glass artifacts are dealt with more fully in a subsequent section, and their composition relative to the entire glass assemblage will be noted there. 8 Actually, the site that I refer to as Metini has previously been known as Mad-Shui-Nui. Research into this site just north of the stockade (i.e. Ballard 1995; Glenn Farris, personal commu- nication, 1995) suggests that it is related to the site officially known as Metini (CA-Son-175) at Fort Ross. 9 This item is housed at the Archeology Laboratory, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, under lab number 211-A-246. REFERENCES Ballard, Hannah 1995 Searching for Metini: Synthesis and Analysis of Russians, or Chinese. Unreported Archaeological Collections from Fort Ross 176 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood State Historic Park, Califormia. Unpublished senior honors thesis, Departnent of Anthropology, University of Califomia, Berkeley. Barclay, Paulette, and Sylvia M. Olivares n.d. Ceramic Analysis from Fort Ross Officials' Quarters. Draft report on file at Archaeology Division, Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, Califomia. Boger, Louise A. 1971 The Dictionary of World Pottery and Porcelain. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. Bubnova, E. 1973 Old Russian Faience. Iskusstvo, Russia. Carlson, David 1983 Computer Analysis of Dated Ceramics: Estimating Dates and Occupational Ranges. Southeastern Archaeology 2:8- 20. Clark, D. W. 1974 Contributions to the Later Prehistory of Kodiak Island, Alaska. National Museum of Man Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada, Paper no. 20. Ottawa, Canada. Cohen, Allison 1992 Using Window Glass to Interpret Archaeological Contex. Unpublished senior honors thesis, Department of Anthro- pology, University of Califomia, Berkeley. Crowell, Aron 1994 World System Archaeology at Three Saints Harbor, An 18th Century Russian Fur Trade Site on Kodiak Island. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropol- ogy, University of Califomia, Berkeley. Deetz, James 1977 In Small Things Forgotten: The Archaeology of Early American Life. Anchor Books, New York. Farris, Glenn J. 1986 Description of a Visit to an Indian Village Adjacent to Fort Ross by Cyrille LaPlace, 1839. Appendix B in Cultural Resource Management Survey at the Fort Ross Campground, Sonoma County, Caiforia, by Glerm J. Farris, pp. 65-80. Report on file, Cultural Heritage Section, Archaeology Laboratory, Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, Califomia. Fedorova, Svetlana G. 1973 The Russian Population in Alaska and California Late 18th Century-1867. Translated by Richard A. Pierce and Alton S. Donnelly. Limestone Press, Kingston, Ontario. Felton, David L., and Peter D. Schulz 1983 The Diaz Collection: Material Culture and Social Change in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Monterey. Califomia Archeological Reports, no. 23. Cultural Resource Management Unit, California Department of Parks and Gibson, James 1976 Imperial Russia in Frontier America: The Changing Geography of Supply in Russian America, 1784-1867. Oxford University Press, New York. Godden, Geoffrey A. 1963 British Pottery and Porcelain 1780-1850. Baker, London. 1964 Encyclopedia of British Pottery and Porcelain Marks. Schiffer Publishing Ltd, Pennsylvania. 1965 British Pottery and Porcelain: An Illustrated Encyclope- dia of Marked Specimens. Bonanza Books, New York. 1974 British Pottery: An Illustrated Guide. Barrie and Jenkins, London. Goldstein, Lynne 1992 Spatial Organization and Frontier Cemeteries: An Example from a Russian Colonial Settlement. Paper presented at the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference on Historical and Underwater Archaeology, Kingston, Jamaica. n.d. Fort Ross Clothing: New Data from Old Sources. Manuscript on file with the author, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Golovnin, Vasilii M. 1979 Around the World on the Kamchatka 1817-1819. Translation of the original 1822 edition by Ella L. Wiswell. The Hawaiian Historical Society and The University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Hughes, G., and T. Hughes 1968 The Collector's Encyclopedia of English Ceramics. Abbey Library, London. Istomin, Alexei 1992 The Indians at the Ross Settlement, According to the Censuses by Kuskov in 1820 and 1821. Fort Ross Interpretive Association, Inc. Fort Ross State Historic Park, California. Jackson, Louise M. 1991 Nineteenth Century British Ceramics: A Key to Cultural Dynamics in Southwestern Alaska. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Califomia, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 1994 Ceramics in Russian America: Insights from the Kurile Islands-A Preliminary Investigation. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology, Vancouver, British Columbia. Jones, Olive R. 1986 Cylindrical English Wine and Beer Bottles 1735-1850. Studies in Archaeology, Architecture, and History. National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Environment Recreation, Sacramento. Canada - Parks, Ottawa, Canada. Historical Artifacts 177 Khlebnikov, Kirill 1976 Colonial RussianAmerica: Kyrill T. Khlebnikov's Reports, 1817-1832. Translating and editing of original 1861 publication by Basil Dmytryshyn and E. A. P. Crownhart-Vaughan. Oregon Historical Society, Portland. 1990 The Khlebnikov Archive. Unpublished Journal (1800- 1837) and Travel Notes (1820,1822, and 1824). Transla- ting and editing of original notes by Leonid Shur and John Bisk. University of Alaska Press, Fairbanks. Kostromitinov, Peter 1974 Notes on the Indians in Upper California. In Ethno- graphic Observations on the Coast Miwok and Pomo by Contre-Admiral F. P. Von Wrangell and P. Kostromitinov of the Russian Colony Ross, 1839, pp. 7-18. Translation of 1839 publication by Fred Stross and Robert Heizer. Archaeological Research Facility, University of Califomia, Berkeley. Layton, Thomas N. 1990 Western Pomo Prehistory: Excavations atAlbion Head, Nightbirds' Retreat, and Three Chop Vllage, Mendocino County, California. Institute of Archaeology, Monograph 32. University of California, Los Angeles. Lewis, Griselda 1969 A Collector's History of English Pottery. The Viking Press, New York. Lightfoot, Kent G. 1995 Culture Contact Studies in North American Archaeology. American Antiquity 60:199-217. Lightfoot, Kent G., and Antoinette Martinez 1995 Frontiers and Boundaries in Archaeological Perspective. AnnualReview of Anthropology, 24:471-492. Lightfoot, Kent G., Thomas A. Wake, and Ann M. Schiff 1991 The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Fort Ross, California: Vol 1, Introduction. Contributions of the Archaeological Research Facility no. 49, Berkeley. Lofstrom, E., Tordoff, J. P., and D. C. George 1982 A Seriation of Historic Earthenwares in the Midwest, 1780-1870. The Minnesota Archaeologist 41:3-29. Majewski, Teresita, and Michael J. O'Brien 1987 The Use and Misuse of Nineteenth-Century English and American Ceramics in Archaeological Analysis. In Advances inArchaeological Method and Theory, vol. 11, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 98-209. Academic Press, New York. Martinez, Antoinette 1994 Native Califomia Women as Cultural Mediators. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 7:4146. 1995 Blurred Boundaries of the Nineteenth Century Kashaya Pomo. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Meetings of the Society for California Archaeology, April 5-9, Eureka, Califomia. Miller, George L. 1974 Tenant Farmer's Tableware: Nineteenth-Century Ceramics from Tabb's Purchase. Maryland Historical Magazine 69:197-210. 1980 Classification and Economic Scaling of 19th Century Ceramics. HistoricalArchaeology 14:1-40. 1991 A Revised Set of CC Index Values for Classification and Economic Scaling of English Ceramics from 1787 to 1880. Historical Archaeology 25:4-25. Nelson, Lee H. 1968 Nail Chronology as an Aid to Dating Old Buildings. American Association for State and Local History Technical Leaflet 48, History News, volume 24, no. 11. Nashville, Tennessee. Noel Hume, Ivor 1970 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York. O'Connor, Denise Maureen 1984 Trade and Tableware: A Historical and Distributional Analysis of the Ceramics from Fort Ross, California. Unpublished M.A. thesis, California State University, Sacramento. Oswalt, Wendell H. 1980 Kolnakovskiy Redoubt: The Ethnoarchaeology of a Russian Fort in Alaska. Monumenta Archaeologica 8. Institute of Archaeology, University of Califomia, Los Angeles. Payeras, Mariano 1995 The Writings of Mariano Payeras. Edited and translated by Donald C. Cutter. Bellerophon Books, Santa Barbara, Califomia. Praetzellis, Adrian 1981 An Elementary Guide to Mid- and Late-i 9th Century Archaeological Ceramics. Manuscript on file, Department of Anthropology, University of Califomia, Berkeley. Praetzellis, Mary 1980 Ceramics. In Historical Archaeology at the Golden Eagle Site, edited by Mary Praetzellis, Adrian Praetzellis, and Marley R. Brown, m, pp. 7-1 to 7-84. Cultural Resources Facility, Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Ronhert Park. Price, C. R. 1979 19th Century Ceramics in the Eastern Ozark Border Region. Southwest Missouri State University, Center for Archaeological Research, Monograph Series, no. 1. Roenke, Karl G. 1978 Flat Glass: Its Use as a Dating Toolfor Nineteenth Century Archaeological Sites in the Pacific Northwest and 178 The Native Alaskan Neighborhood Elsewhere. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes, Memoir no. 4, vol. 12, part 2. Moscow, Idaho. Savage, George, and Harold Newman 1974 An Illustrated Dictionary of Ceramics. Thames and Hudson, London. Schiff, Ann M. 1995 Geographic Variation in Native Alaskan Ethnic Boundary Markers. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, April 6-9, Eureka, California. Shangraw, Clarence, and Edward P. Von der Porten 1981 The Drake and Cermefio Expeditions' Chinese Porcelains at Drake's Bay, California, 1579 and 1595. Santa Rosa Junior College and Drake Navigators Guild, Santa Rosa, Califormia. Shaw, Simeon 1968 History of the Staffordshire Potteries and the Rise and Progress of the Manufacture of Pottery and Porcelain. Reprint of the 1829 edition. Beatrice C. Weinstock, Great Neck, New York. Shubin, Valery 0. 1990 Russian Settlements in the Kurile Islands in the 18th and 19th Centuries. In Russia in North America: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Russian America, edited by Richard A. Pierce, pp. 425-50. Limestone Press, Kingston, Ontario. Slaymaker, Charles M. 1977 The Material Culture of Cotomkotca: A Coast Miwok Tribelet in Marin County, Califomia. MAPOM Paper #3. Miwok Archaeological Preserve of Mann, Califomia. Smidt, Janice C. 1974 Pomo nd Promyshlenniki: Tine and Trade Goods at Fort Ross. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Califomia, Los Angeles. South, Stanley 1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. 1988 Santa Elena: Threshold of Conquest. In The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, edited by M. P. Leone and P. B. Potter, Jr., pp. 27- 71. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Sussman, Lynne 1977 Changes in Pearlware Dinnerware, 1780-1830. Histori- cal Archaeology 11:105-111. Tikhmenev, P. A. 1978 A History of the Russian-American Company. Translating and editing of original 1861-63 publications by Richard A. Pierce and Alton S. Donnelly. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Towner, Donald 1957 English Cream Colored Earthenware. Faber and Faber, London. VanStone, James W. 1968 Tikchik Wllage, A Nineteenth Century Riverine Commu- nity in Southwestern Alaska. Fieldiana: Anthropology 56(3). Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. Von der Porten, Edward P. 1972 Drake and Cennefio in California: Sixteenth Century Chinese Ceramics. Historical Archaeology 6:1-22. White, John R. 1977 Aboriginal Artifacts on Non-Traditional Material: Six Specimens from Fort Ross, Califomia. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 11:240-47. Wilson, Douglas C. 1994 Identification and Assessment of Secondary Refuse Aggregates. Journal ofArchaeological Method and Theory 1:41-68. Wobst, Martin 1977 Stylistic Behavior and Infonnation Exchange. In Papers for the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin, edited by C. E. Cleland, pp. 317-42. Anthropo- logical Papers of the Museum of Anthropology, no. 61, Ann Arbor. Wrangel, F. P. von 1976 Some Remarks on the Savages on the Northwest Coast of America. The Indians of Upper Califomia. In Ethno- graphic Observations on the Coast Miwok and Pomo by Cntre-Admiral F. P. Von Wrangell and P. Kostromitinov of the Russian Colony Ross, 1839, pp. 1-6. Translation of 1839 publication by Fred Stross and Robert Heizer. Archaeological Research Facility, University of Califomia, Berkeley.