UID:
almahu_9949465283702882
Format:
1 online resource (196 pages)
Edition:
1st ed.
ISBN:
9781623499235
Series Statement:
Peopling of the Americas Publications
Note:
Intro -- Contents -- List of Illustrations -- Figure 2.1. The Sayarim Kite -- Figure 2.2. Aerial view of the Pitam Kite, looking west. -- Figure 2.3. Funnel- shaped game drives in Tibet -- Figure 2.4. Hunting blind in Tibetan antelope wintering grounds -- Figure 2.5. Locations of dzaekha traps -- Figure 2.6. Ancient remains of a trap for chaccu -- Figure 2.7. Apparent drive structures in Chile -- Figure 2.8. Start of the Gran Chaccu -- Figure 2.9. Guide map of the Gran Chaccu -- Figure 2.10. The Kutoyis Complex, Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana -- Figure 2.11. Pronghorn hunting architecture sites labeled north of Matlin, Box Elder County, Utah -- Figure 2.12. Aerial view of the Barnett pronghorn hunting site in Canada -- Figure 2.13. Oblique aerial view of the Barnett pronghorn hunting site, -- Figure 2.14. Oblique aerial view of the Barnett pronghorn hunting site looking northeast -- Figure 2.15. Drive lane and hunting blind at the Olson site -- Figure 2.16. Deer trap on Rum in Scotland -- Figure 2.17. Deer trap on Rum with the surrounding landscape -- Figure 2.18. Schematic of caribou drive lane features -- Figure 2.19. Rock art depiction of reindeer hunting corral near Alta, Norway -- Figure 2.20. Engraving of Rangifer hunting architecture on walrus tusk pipe, Kotzebue Sound, Alaska -- Figure 2.21. Map of Tulugak Lake, Alaska, showing the microregional layout of Nunamiut settlements, caribou hunting architecture, and caribou migration trails (Binford 1978b:206 -- Binford 2012: 206). -- Figure 2.22a- d. Rock art depicting camelids in a drive lane and corral hunting structure in Peru (Hostnig 2011, figs. 8-9, 10b, 11). -- Figure 2.23. Rock art depicting bighorn sheep trap. Photograph taken by Dell Crandall of Moab, Utah. Used by permission of Peter Faris and https:// rockartblog.blogspot.com.
,
Figure 3.1. Barren- ground (left) and woodland (right) caribou antlers to scale (scale bar is 20 cm). Zoological specimens 63246 and 124573 from the University of Michigan, Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor (see also Lemke 2015b:280, fig. 4). -- Figure 3.2. Ethnographic groups listed in table 3.3. -- Figure 3.3. A communal caribou drive at an artificial crossing, drawn by Inuit artist Talirurnilik (Saladin D'Anglure and Vézinet 1977). -- Figure 3.4. Primary North American Paleoindian caribou hunting sites mentioned in the text. -- Figure 4.1. The Lake Stanley stage and the AAR. Blue areas indicate ancient water levels -- white areas are dry land -- solid lines indicate the modern outlines of the state of Michigan and Lakes Michigan (to the west) and Huron (to the east). The line with two arrows indicates the AAR. -- Figure 4.2. Lake Algonquin. -- Figure 4.3. Paleovegetation in Michigan at ~11,300 cal yr BP (9,900 14C yr BP), post- Lake Algonquin, early Lake Stanley (adapted from Kapp 1999, fig. 2.6). -- Figure 4.4. Lake Stanley. -- Figure 4.5. Lake Huron basin bathymetry. All orange and yellow areas would have been dry land during the Lake Stanley stage. -- Figure 4.6. Lake Nipissing. -- Figure 4.7. Submerged tree stump in Lake Huron. Image courtesy of Luke Clyburn. -- Figure 4.8. Primary sites in the Great Lakes basin discussed in the text. 1. Hiscock. Gainey Phase Sites: 2. Gainey -- 3. Udora -- 4. Sandy Ridge -- 5. Halstead -- 6. Nobles Pond. Parkhill Phase Sites: 7. Leavitt -- 8. Barnes -- 9. Thedford II -- 10. Parkhill -- 11. Dixon -- 12. McLeod -- 13. Fisher -- 14. Crowfield -- 15. Holcombe -- 16. Hi- Lo -- 17. Cummins -- 18. Sheguiandah. -- Figure 4.9. Gainey projectile points. Image courtesy of the Michigan Archaeological Society. Artifact contributors: Dan Wymer, Don Simons, and George Davis. Photographs by Tim Bennett and Don Simons.
,
Figure 4.10. Barnes projectile points. Image courtesy of the Michigan Archaeological Society. Artifact contributors: Chippewa Nature Center, Don Simons, Doyle Smith, Bernie Spencer, Dan Wymer, and George Davis. Photographs by Tim Bennett and Don Simons. -- Figure 4.11. Hi- Lo projectile points. Image courtesy of the Michigan Archaeological Society. Artifact contributors: Doyle Smith, Bernie Spencer, Dan Wymer, and Tim Bennett. Photograph by Tim Bennett. -- Figure 4.12. Early Archaic Kirk Corner notched projectile points, 9,500-8,000 cal yr BP. Image courtesy of the Michigan Archaeological Society. Artifact contributor Dan Wymer. Photograph by Tim Bennett. -- Figure 4.13. Early Archaic bifurcate projectile points, 9,000-7,800 cal yr BP. Image courtesy of the Michigan Archaeological Society. Artifact contributors: Dan Wymer, Tim Bennett, Doyle Smith, and Bernie Spencer. Photograph by Tim Bennett. -- Figure 5.1. Schematic diagram of the research design for investigating the Alpena- Amberley Ridge. The research design is nested and recursive-dashed lines reflect new information that is fed back into the computer simulation (O'Shea et al. 2013b, fig. 2). -- Figure 5.2. Research areas on the AAR. -- Figure 5.3. Area 1 side- scan mosaic. Survey was conducted with a digital Imagenex side- scan sonar towfish at a frequency of 330 kHz at depths between 20 and 30 meters. Each swath is 200 meters wide. Dark areas on the mosaic indicate areas of sand. -- Figure 5.4. Area 2 side- scan mosaic. Survey was conducted with a digital Imagenex side- scan sonar towfish at a frequency of 330 kHz at depths between ~30 and 40 meters. Each swath is 150 meters wide. Dark areas on the mosaic indicate areas of sand.
,
Figure 5.5. Area 3 side- scan mosaic. Survey was conducted with a digital Imagenex side- scan sonar towfish at a frequency of 330 kHz at depths between 20 and 30 meters. Each swath is 200 meters wide. Dark areas on the mosaic indicate areas of sand. -- Figure 5.6. Area 1 multibeam mosaic, 115 km2. Survey was conducted with a digital hull- mounted RS Sonic 2024 multibeam echosounder with an F180 vessel attitude and position unit. -- Figure 5.7. Freighter near buoy marking an archaeological site. -- Figure 5.8a- b. Remotely operated vehicle used on the AAR project, an Outland 1000 ROV "Jake" with a depth rating of 1,000 feet (a) on the boat, (b) in the water with sample marker. -- Figure 5.9. Scanning sonar used on the AAR project, a Kongsberg MS 1000 unit (model 1171) with dual frequency. -- Figure 5.10. The AAR and associated paleolakes. Note that in the Lake Huron basin at this time, Lake Stanley is composed of three hydrologically distinct lakes, two on either side of the AAR and Lake Hough, ~11,500-8,300 cal yr BP (9,900-7,500 14C yr BP). -- Figure 5.11. In situ rooted spruce tree as seen through the ROV. Labels in this image include the name of the research area (upper left), the time and date the video was collected (upper right), the depth in feet (lower right), and the compass heading (i.e., the direction the ROV was facing) (bottom center). -- Figure 5.12. Backscatter imagery of Area 1. Lighter areas indicate sand. -- Figure 5.13. Area 1 side- scan mosaic with major waterways colored in, and areas of marsh indicated by thin dashes. -- Figure 5.14. ROV image of sand ripples and the ancient lakeshore with preserved wood across the boundary. -- Figure 5.15a- b. Scuba divers measuring (a) and sampling (b) sand ripples. -- Figure 5.16a- b. Wood in situ.
,
Figure 5.17. Paleogeographic reconstruction of Areas 1 and 3 indicating primary microenvironments (adapted from Sonnenburg 2015: 160, fig. 12.8). Note: large gray area indicated as "High Ground/ Outcrop" in Area 3 has received limited sampling, and areas of bare outcrop are likely overrepresented in this diagram. -- Figure 5.18. Dated Rangifer remains from the Great Lakes basin and ancient water levels. Curved line represents generalized high- water and low- water stands across the entire basin. The absence of dated remains during Lake Stanley indicates that a portion of archaeological and paleontological records from this period are underwater (Lemke 2015b:279, fig. 3). -- Figure 5.19. Geographic distribution of Rangifer remains by county in Michigan (Lemke 2015b:277, fig. 1). -- Figure 5.20. Screenshot of the AAR virtual world with simulated environment. -- Figure 5.21a- b. Caribou migration routes across the central portion of the AAR as predicted by the computer simulation. North is up, contour interval is 5 meters, and colored/ grayscale areas represent larger research areas that have been mapped using side- scan and multibeam sonars. (a) Fall migration routes -- (b) spring migration routes. -- Figure 5.22. Dragon Drive Lane and hunting blind on side- scan sonar with schematic. -- Figure 5.23. Wall ring hunting blind facing caribou trails (adapted from Stewart 2015: 91, fig. 8.9). -- Figure 5.24. Hunting blind facing a river crossing (adapted from Stewart 2015: 94, fig. 8.11). -- Figure 5.25. The Dragon Locality in Area 1 with hunting architecture sites indicated. The distribution of structures is overlaid on the multibeam sonar mosaic of depth. The contour interval is 5 meters, reported in depth below the surface. The location labeled "complex line" is the Funnel site.
,
Figure 5.26. The Overlook Locality in Area 3 with hunting architecture sites indicated. The distribution of structures is overlaid on the side- scan sonar mosaic. The contour interval is 5 meters, reported in depth below the surface.
Additional Edition:
Print version: Lemke, Ashley The Architecture of Hunting Brunswick : Texas A&M University Press,c2022 ISBN 9781623499228
Language:
English
Keywords:
Electronic books.
Bookmarklink
