GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

The Soil-Artifact Context Model: A

Geoarchaeological Approach to
Paleoshoreline Site Dating in the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan, USA
John B. Anderton
Department of Geography, 300 Clifford Hall, University of North Dakota,
Grand Forks, North Dakota 58202-902

Archaeological investigations in the central Upper Peninsula of Michigan have revealed nu-
merous sites associated with Mid- and Late-Holocene paleoshorelines of the ancestral Great
Lakes. The sites typically contain stone flakes and fire-cracked rock, with no preserved floral
or faunal material and rarely any diagnostic artifacts or dateable carbon. Because of the
association with dated shorelines, many workers have assumed the sites are Archaic occu-
pations (ca. 5000– 2000 B.P.). However, the actual ages of the sites is often unclear, as later
Woodland cultures (2000– 500 B.P.) may have also used the abandoned shorelines. Based on
expected pedological and archaeological characteristics, a soil-artifact context model was
used at eight paleoshoreline sites to provide a preliminary means of relative dating. Sites that
were correlative with shoreline development (i.e., Archaic) have artifacts that are deeper
within the soil profile, soil horizon boundaries that cut across midden concentrations, and
some artifacts that are iron-stained from Spodic horizon development. In contrast, sites that
are not correlative with the time of shoreline development (i.e., Woodland) have artifacts that
are at or very near the ground surface and archaeological features, if present, will cut across
soil horizons, and artifacts tend not to be iron-stained. 䉷 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, several cultural resource surveys (Anderton et al., 1991; Goltz,
1992) and site testing investigations (Franzen, 1987; Rutter, 1988; Robinson et al.,
1991; Anderton et al., 1991; Anderton, 1993; Clark, 1993), and one formal excavation
(Benchley et al., 1988) have focused on identifying and investigating archaeological
sites associated with former Holocene shorelines in the central part of Michigan’s
Upper Peninsula (Figure 1). Numerous prehistoric occupations have been located
on ancient coastal landforms created during the Nipissing and post-Nipissing
phases of the ancestral Great Lakes from both the Lake Superior and Lake Michigan
basins (Table I). Since the sites are associated with paleolandforms from the Mid-
to Late Holocene, most workers have assumed they represent Archaic-age sites
(ca. 5000 – 2000 B.P.) (Franzen, 1987; Rutter, 1988; Benchley et al., 1988; Robinson
et al, 1991; Anderton et al., 1991; Goltz, 1992; Anderton, 1993, 1995). However,
owing to problems of site preservation, soil conditions, and the nature of the ar- short
chaeological record, the actual ages of the sites are often unknown. standard

Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, 265– 288 (1999)

䉷 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0883-6353/99/030265-24
GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Figure 1. Study area, West Unit of Hiawatha National Forest, central Upper Peninsula, Michigan.

Pedologic studies were undertaken at several paleoshoreline sites as part of a

larger interdisciplinary investigation of the archaeology and paleogeography of for-
mer coastal environments in the northern Great Lakes during 1991 and 1992 (An-
derton, 1995). The goals of the pedologic studies were to use soil geomorphic short
interpretations of landscape age to confirm geomorphic interpretations, to deter- standard

266 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

Table I. Northern Great Lakes cultural chronology (after Cleland, 1992) and associated lake phases
(after Farrand and Drexler, 1985; Larsen, 1985b).
Years B.P. Culture or Complex Lake Phase
500 to present Protohistoric, Contact, Historic
Small fluctuations related to minor climatic
1000– 500 Late Woodland, Protohistoric
changes
2000– 1000 Initial (Middle) Woodland
5000– 2000 Terminal Archaic, Late Archaic Nipissing I, Nipissing II, and Algoma, and post-
Algoma highs (lake basins contiguous)
7500– 5000 Middle Archaic Rising Nipissing Levels (Superior, Michigan and
Huron Basins)
9000– 7500 Early Archaic Houghton Low (Superior Basin), Rising Nipis-
sing (Michigan and Huron Basins)
10,000– 9000 Late Paleoindian Chippewa Low (Michigan and Huron Basins),
Minong (Superior Basins)

mine the degree and processes of site disturbance, and to provide temporal context
for the sites. To this end, soil geomorphic studies were done in conjunction with
carefully controlled archaeological testing (Anderton, 1993, 1995) at eight prehis-
toric archaeological sites (Table II) associated with former Holocene coastal land-
forms from both the Lake Superior and Lake Michigan basins.

METHODS
Archaeological investigations were done as part of limited Phase II test exca-
vations at each of the paleoshoreline sites (Anderton, 1993, 1995). Total excavated
area at each site varied from as little as 2 m2 (Shelter Bay site) to as much as 10
m2 (Popper Site), with most sites averaging 6 m2 of excavation. Excavation was
done in 1 m2 units, using arbitrary 10 cm levels. All excavated matrix was passed
through 6.3 mm (1/4 in.) mesh screen. Flotation samples were collected from all
levels with cultural material, and samples of various sizes were taken from cultural
features. Flotation samples were later processed using a 1.5 mm (1/16 in.) mesh
water screen to recover small scale cultural debris. Samples for radiocarbon dating
were taken where possible from archaeological features having undisturbed con-
text. A representative soil-artifact profile graphic, field profile data table, and ac-
companying description was done for each site. Densities of flaked stone by percent
in each excavation level of the particular unit profiled were used as an indication
of the approximate depth of artifact concentrations.
Soil profiles observed in the walls of archaeological excavation units were in-
spected, described, and interpreted in the field. Representative wall profiles were
further exposed. Often, the water table was encountered between 1 and 2 m below
ground surface, which hampered excavation of soil profiles. However, in all cases,
the C horizon or parent material was reached, allowing documentation of all extant
horizons. Soil profiles were described using standard techniques of profile graphing, short
description, and terminology (Birkeland, 1984; Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993). standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 267

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Table II. Paleoshoreline sites from this study, with U.S. Forest Service site number designation, ele-
vation above mean sea level, and associated landform and shoreline phase.
Number
USFS Site Elevation Associated Shoreline of m2
Site Name No. (mamsl) Landform Phase Excavated
Thumping Tracks 09-10-02-419 189 Mid-bay barrier Nipissing 4
Yellow Feather 09-10-01-292 182 Spit Algoma 6
Moss Lake II 09-10-02-217 189 Bay barrier Nipissing 10
Marz-Smith 09-10-01-306 184 Wave-cut bluff Algoma 4
Falling Tree 09-10-03-759 188 Cuspate barrier Nipissing 8
Popper 09-10-03-825 192 Cuspate spit Nipissing 8
Shelter Bay 09-10-03-896 192 Bay barrier Nipissing 2
Big Bear 09-10-03-724 192 Spit Nipissing 7

Field texture, color, thickness, and boundary characteristics are shown in Table
III.
The POD Index (Schaetzl and Mokma, 1988) was used as a measure of weath-
ering time and in the classification of soils for each profile. A numerical index of
soil development especially designed for Spodosols, the POD Index is useful for
demonstrating the connection between soil characteristics and geomorphic surface
age. The Index uses observable field characteristics, primarily the color contrast
between E and B and the number of horizons, to determine a POD number. Assum-
ing that time is the dependent variable, POD numbers allow estimates of soil de-
velopment time as well as classification of Spodosol types (Schaetzl and Mokma,
1988). Owing to the high level of knowledge concerning the mapped soils in the
study area (Berndt, 1977) and the classification abilities of the POD Index, no lab-
oratory analyses were done. As investigations proceeded, it became apparent that
most soil profiles varied little in terms of parent material texture and landscape
setting. Therefore, it was concluded that laboratory data would contribute no sig-
nificant information beyond further characterization of the soils and sediments.

STUDY AREA
The West Unit of the Hiawatha National Forest (Figure 1), located in the central
Upper Peninsula of Michigan, is the study area considered in this article. The United
States Department of Agriculture-Forest Service owns and manages most of the
land primarily for timber, recreation, and wildlife. The study area is bounded on
the north by Lake Superior and on the south by Lake Michigan. The east and west
boundaries are completely arbitrary, marking the extent of federal jurisdiction.
Topographically, the West Unit ranges from hilly to flat. The town of Munising is
located at the northern end, while the towns of Escanaba and Manistique are lo-
cated at the southwest and southeast corners, respectively.
A blanket of Quaternary glacial, lacustrine, and fluvial sediments covers much
of the study area. The regional bedrock geology consists of Paleozoic formations short
which represent the northwestern edge of the Michigan structural basin. The rocks standard

268 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

Table III. Field soil profile descriptions from paleoshoreline sites.a

Depth
Soil Horizon (cm) Munsell Color Hand Texture Boundary Comments
Thumping Tracks
(02-419)
O 1– 0 — — — —
A 0– 5 7.5YR 5/2 brown f, m sand a, c Disturbed
E 5– 40 5YR 7/2 pinkish gray f, m sand a, w Mottled
Bs 40– 100 7.5YR 5/6 strong brown m sand g, w Ortstein
C 100– 140⫹ 7.5YR 7/3 pink m-c sand — —
Yellow Feather
(01-292)
O 3– 0 — — — —
A 0– 10 7.5YR 5/2 brown f sand a, w Feature #1
E 10– 35 7.5YR 7/2 pinkish gray f sand g, i C14 1100 B.P.
Bs1 35– 50 7.5YR 6/6 reddish yellow f, m sand c, w Ortstein
Bs2 50– 95 7.5YR 5/6 strong brown f, m sand g, w Lake beds
C 95– 120⫹ 7.5YR pink f, m sand — Lake beds
Moss Lake II
(02-217)
O 4– 0 — — — —
A 0– 8 7.5YR 5/2 brown f, m sand c, w —
E 8– 35 10YR 6/3 pale brown f, m sand g, w —
Bs1 35– 100 7.5YR 5/8 strong brown f, m sand d, w Mottled
Bs2 100– 130 7.5YR 5/6 strong brown f, m sand g, w Lake beds
C 130– 200⫹ 10YR 7/4 light gray c sand — Lake beds
Marz-Smith
(01-306)
O 5– 0 — — — —
E1 0– 3 7.5YR 6/2 pinkish gray f sand a, s —
E2 3– 5 7.5YR 6/3 light brown f sand c, w Disturbed
B1 5– 50 7.5YR brown f sand d, w Truncated
B2 50– 90 7.5YR 5/6 strong brown f, m sand a, c Broken
C 90– 125⫹ 7.5YR pink f, m sand — —
Falling Tree
(03-759)
Oi/Oe 3– 0 — — — —
A 0– 3 10YR 3/1 very dark m sand a, s —
brown
A/C 3– 10 10YR 5/3 brown m sand g, w Very rooty
C1 (E?) 10– 50 10YR 7/3 very pale m, c sand g, w Root casts
brown
C2 (E?) 50– 110 10YR 7/3 very pale c sand — Lake beds
brown
C3 (Bw?) 110– 140 10YR 4/4 dark yellowish c sand — —
brown
(Continued)

short
standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 269

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Table III. (Continued)

Depth
Soil Horizon (cm) Munsell Color Hand Texture Boundary Comments
Popper (03-825)
O 5– 0 — — — —
A 0– 10 7.5YR 4/0 dark gray m sand c, s Very rooty
E 10– 80 7.5YR 7/4 pink m sand g, I Very thick
Bs 80– 170 7.5YR 7/6 reddish yellow m, c sand g, w Some ortstein
Bhs 170– 210 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown c sand a, s Lake beds
C 210– 230 10YR 6/6 brownish yel- c sand — Cobbles
low
Shelter Bay
(03-896)
O/A 0– 5 7.5YR 2/0 black f sand a, c —
E 5– 30 7.5YR 7/2 pink f sand g, w Rooty
Bs 30– 45 7.5YR 5/4 brown f, m sand g, w —
Bhs1 45– 65 7.5YR 5/6 strong brown m sand g, w Ortstein
Bs2 65– 90 7.5YR 5/6 string brown m sand g, w Mottled
Bhs3 90– 98 7.5YR dark brown m sand a, c Magnetite
C 98– 110⫹ 7.5YR 5/3 brown m sand — Homogeneous
Big Bear
(03-724)
O 11– 0 — — — root duff
A 0– 5 7.5YR 3/0 very dark gray f sand c, s rooty
E 5– 30 7.5YR 7/2 pinkish gray f, m sand g, w roots
Bhs 30– 40 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown f, m sand g, w ortstein
Bs 40– 85 7.5YR 4/3 brown f, m sand d, w some ortstein
C 85– 110 7.5YR 6/3 light brown m, c sand c, s magnetite
2C 110 120⫹ 7.5YR 6/4 light brown c sand — pebbles
a In the hand texture column, f ⫽ fine, m ⫽ medium, c ⫽ coarse, and in the boundary column, a ⫽

abrupt, c ⫽ clear, w ⫽ wavy, g ⫽ gradual, i ⫽ irregular, d ⫽ diffuse, s ⫽ smooth, b ⫽ broken.

range in age from Cambrian to Silurian and dip to the southeast under Lake Mich-
igan. Variations in erosional resistance of the rock units has created a system of
lowlands and cuestas trending southwest – northeast across the area, forming the
northernmost rim of the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands Physiographic Province
(Paull and Paull, 1977).
The West Unit of the Hiawatha National Forest is within the Canadian biotic
province (Dice, 1943), an area of ecological transition consisting of a mixed conif-
erous and deciduous forest. Original vegetation, prior to historic logging, consisted
of extensive tracts of virgin white pine, hardwoods, and wetlands (Vankat, 1977).
The study area is characterized by a cool, humid continental climate with long
snowy winters and short, cool summers (Eichenlaub, 1979).

Soil Landscape Setting and Spodosol Development

Various Spodosols, Histosols, and Entisols occur within the study area (Berndt, short
1977). A typical catena consists of Typic Haplorthods on glaciated uplands ranging standard

270 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

to Entic Haplorthods on younger, Holocene surfaces such as beach ridges and river
terraces. Borohemists and Borosaprists are common in poorly drained settings,
and Psammaquents and Quartzsipsamments are typically found developed in very
young, dune and beach deposits (based on Berndt, 1977).
In most upland settings, soil formation began immediately after deglaciation as
large amounts of sediment stabilized and began to weather. Thus, most upland
landscapes in the northern Great Lakes, including paleoshorelines, experienced
relative stability and weathering, resulting in soil profile development. Although
buried soils are known from the Grand Sable Dunes in the Pictured Rocks National
Lakeshore (Anderton and Loope, 1995), generally, soil stratigraphy within the re-
gion consists of surface soils, which vary in type across the landscape depending
on parent material, environmental conditions, and development time.
Spodosols, soils with subsurface accumulations of humus and sesquioxides
(Franzmeir and Whiteside, 1963a, 1963b; Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993; Rourke
et al., 1988), are the most common soil order found at paleoshoreline sites in the
Upper Peninsula. Spodosols usually form in areas having a combination of humid
climatic conditions, coarse-textured parent material (sand, loamy sand, sandy
loam), under acidic, needleleaf vegetation (pines, hemlock, mixed forest) that can
supply mobile and sesquioxide-mobilizing organic compounds (Franzmeir and Whi-
teside, 1963a, 1963b; Rourke et al., 1988; Buol et al., 1997).
Podzolization is the dominant pedogenic process in the development of Spodo-
sols (Franzmeir and Whiteside, 1963a, 1963b; Rourke et al., 1988; Buol et al., 1997).
Consequently, Spodosols are primarily sandy and coarse loamy soils that typically
have a horizon or horizons of organic accumulation at or near the ground surface
(O and/or A), overlying a leached, usually light gray, eluvial (E) horizon, above a
darker, sesquioxide and humus-rich (Bs, Bhs, Bh) horizon, overlying relatively un-
altered parent materials (C).
Soil mixing, or pedoturbation, is a natural process for Spodosols (Wood and
Johnson, 1978; Schaetzl, 1986; Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993; Buol et al., 1997).
Faunalturbation, cryoturbation, and floralturbation are the dominant types of soil
mixing active in the region (Wood and Johnson, 1978; Schaetzl, 1986; Buol et al.,
1997). Although faunalturbation has not been extensively studied in the region,
burrowing animals, insects, or earthworms are probably the main agents in the
study area (Wood and Johnson, 1978; Johnson and Watson-Stegner, 1990; Stein,
1983; Bocek, 1986; Pierce, 1992).
Cryoturbation occurs in the study area’s soils due to seasonally frozen ground
(Wood and Johnson, 1978). Maximum frost penetration reaches a depth between
50 and 60 in. in the local area (Wood and Johnson, 1978:336, Figure 9.9). As soil
becomes frozen, a freezing plane moves downward causing the soil to expand
upward due to ice lensing and capillary water movement (Wood and Johnson, 1978:
337). This often results in a “heaved” soil. However, if soil moisture is low, the
profile will often freeze solid with little frost heave.
Finally, tree uprooting, soil agitation by tree swing, root channels, and root short
growth are thought to be the major forms of floralturbation occurring in the region standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 271

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

(Johnson and Watson-Stegner, 1990:554). In particular, tree fall, or tree tipping, is

most common form of floralturbation in the Great lakes region, which may result
in complete soil profile inversions (Schaetzl, 1986; Schaetzl et al., 1989).
Despite the influence of soil mixing, Spodosols have proven very useful for land-
scape dating (Franzmeir and Whiteside, 1963a, 1963b; Schaetzl and Mokma, 1988;
Barrett and Schaetzl, 1992, 1993). As Spodosols develop, their E horizons are
thought to become lighter in color, while their B horizons are thought to darken
and/or become brighter red (Franzmeir and Whiteside, 1963a, 1963b; Schaetzl and
Mokma, 1988; Barrett and Schaetzl, 1992, 1993). Recent studies of Spodic horizon
development on surfaces of known geomorphic ages, suggest it takes about 3000 –
4000 years for a Spodosol to form in the Great Lakes region (Schaetzl and Mokma,
1988; Barrett and Schaetzl, 1992, 1993).

Lake-Levels and Coastal Paleogeomorphology

The portion of Great Lakes lake-level history most relevant to this study began
about 8000 years ago (Table I). Both the Lake Michigan-Huron and Superior basins
were experiencing extremely low lake levels under the influence of the isostatically
depressed North Bay outlet. However, by about 7500 B.P., the North Bay outlet had
sufficiently rebounded to allow the waters of the Michigan-Huron and Superior
basin to become confluent at single common level, initiating the Nipissing Great
Lakes, which reached its maximum elevation (Nipissing I) between 4700 and 4000
B.P. (Farrand and Drexler, 1985; Hansel et al., 1985). The Nipissing II phase, mark-
ing a slight drop in levels, was attained about 4000 years B.P. as continued isostatic
uplift raised the North Bay outlet above the altitude of the two southern outlets
(Hansel et al., 1985; Larsen, 1985b).
As shown in Figure 2, all major tributary river valleys and low-lying coastal areas
on the Lake Michigan and Lake Superior sides of the study area were inundated
during the Nipissing phase (Anderton, 1993, 1995). Coastal action during the Nip-
issing maximum formed a prominent set of ancient landforms which is traceable
across both the northern and south portions of the study area (Hobbs, 1911; Lev-
erett and Taylor, 1915; Leverett, 1929; Bergquist, 1936; Drexler, 1981; Anderton,
1993, 1995, 1997). Typically, the shoreline from the Nipissing maximum marks a
sharp break in topography, separating older, more dissected, usually glaciated to-
pography from younger, wave-modified, relatively flatter terrain. Detailed mapping
of paleoshorelines in the study area (Anderton, 1993, 1995, 1997) revealed a series
of former coastal landforms along the Nipissing shoreline. These coastal landforms
include depositional features, such as beaches, deltas, spits, bay barriers, and cus-
pate barriers. Erosional landforms consist of wave-cut bluffs and small cliffs, caves,
stacks, and arches. Several former Nipissing embayments with mid-bay or bay-
mouth barriers and associated lagoons are also present. In most cases, the former
embayments and lagoons are now extensive wetlands, covered by swamp conifers,
and located, in many cases, several kilometers inland from the modern shores of short
the Great Lakes (Anderton, 1993, 1995, 1997). standard

272 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

short
Figure 2. Archaeological site locations, West Unit of Hiawatha National Forest, central Upper Peninsula, standard
Michigan.

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 273

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Following the Nipissing II phase, lake levels began to fall as down cutting pro-
gressively lowered the Port Huron outlet and water volumes fluctuated in the ba-
sins. A short peak in lake levels at about 3200 B.P. resulted in the Algoma phase.
By about 2200 B.P., however, lake levels in the Lake Michigan-Huron basin had
fallen below the elevation of the rebounding sill at the Sault, separating the Superior
basin from the lower Great Lakes and initiating the Sault level (Farrand, 1960).
Modern lake levels in both the Lake Superior and Lake Michigan-Huron basins were
finally attained by about 2000 years ago.
Larsen (1985a,b), working in the southern portions of the Lake Michigan-Huron
basin, proposed an alternative model of Holocene lake-level fluctuations, which
suggests a complex record of climate-related changes that lasted between 200 and
300 years each and fluctuated with an amplitude of 1 – 2 m above the apparent
mean lake level. In the last 7000 years at least eight episodes of high water periods
separated by intervening low water periods are recognized (Larsen, 1985a, 1985b).
Based on radiometrically dated sequences of eolian activity and soil development
in the Grand Sable Dunes, Larsen’s model also generally applies to the Lake Su-
perior basin (Anderton and Loope, 1995).
Following the Nipissing phase, the receding lakes formed a series of depositional
coastal landforms within the study area (Hobbs, 1911; Leverett and Taylor, 1915;
Leverett, 1929; Bergquist, 1936; Drexler, 1981; Larsen, 1994; Anderton, 1993, 1995,
1997). Typically, the Late Holocene shorelines consist of extensive complexes of
beach ridges, which occupy former Nipissing embayments (Anderton, 1993, 1995).
A number of smaller post-Nipissing spits and at least one tombolo have also been
identified in the study area (Anderton, 1993, 1995).

PALEOSHORELINE SITES AND DATING

Beyond the direct association with paleocoastal landforms, most of the archae-
ological sites are poorly dated, and only a few have been dated with diagnostic and
radiometric methods (Benchley et al., 1988; Anderton et al., 1991; Clark, 1993). For
the most part, paleoshoreline sites are typical of most other prehistoric sites from
the northern Great Lakes, consisting of small (usually less than 100 m2 in area),
shallow subsurface, nonstratified concentrations of cultural material. Chipped
stone material, fire-cracked rock, and other related cultural material including cop-
per tools and fragments are most commonly found at the paleoshoreline sites.
However, ceramics are usually not found. Typically, the sites have high densities
of stone debitage, including chipped stone flakes and fire-cracked rock. In most
cases, especially on the Lake Superior basin, high percentages of quartzite raw
material often dominate assemblages, to the exclusion of other stone types (Fran-
zen, 1987; Benchley et al., 1988; Robinson et al., 1991; Anderton et al., 1991). Despite
flotation sampling during site testing by several different investigators (Franzen,
1987; Benchley et al., 1988; Robinson et al., 1991; Anderton et al., 1991) no faunal
or floral material have been reported for the paleoshoreline sites. short
Paleoshoreline sites, like most prehistoric occupations in the region, have rarely standard

274 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

yielded diagnostic artifacts or organic carbon suitable for radiocarbon analysis.

Thus, their temporal placement within the cultural chronology of the region is very
tenuous at best. In an effort to determine at least a relative chronological placement
for the sites, archaeologists have traditionally attempted to date them by reference
to the lake phase which created the associated landform. However, the association
of a site with a former coastal landform serves only as a measure of the potential
maximum age of the site. The site cannot predate the age of the shoreline it is
found upon. It may postdate it, however, representing a later human reoccupation
of an abandoned coastal landform. An obvious concern is the possibility that the
paleoshoreline sites actually represent later re-occupations of abandoned land-
forms by post-Archaic human groups who used the landscape thousands of years
after the high lake levels receded. In particular, Woodland cultures may have found
such places attractive as interior hunting locations. Woodland people may also have
used the paleoshorelines as trail routes through otherwise poorly drained wetlands,
as suggested by Hinsdale’s (1931) atlas of historic Native American foot trails
throughout the state of Michigan. Thus, the possibility of later reoccupations of
abandoned beaches is of great concern for workers in the region (John Franzen,
personal communication, 1991; Anderton, 1993, 1995).

SOIL-ARTIFACT CONTEXT MODEL

Assuming that the timing of archaeological occupation relative to sedimentation
and soil development determines the burial depth of the artifacts and features in a
site, and their position relative to soil horizons, a basic dichotomy was devised of
expected relationships between the archaeological deposits and the soil horizon-
ation, hereafter referred to as “soil-artifact context.” In theory, the older soil-artifact
context of presumably Archaic-age archaeological sites (correlative) should differ
from those of younger, presumably Woodland-age sites (noncorrelative). Thus, the
dichotomy is based on the presumption that paleoshoreline sites could either be
correlative or noncorrelative with the associated coastal landform (see Figure 3).
Theoretically, for correlative sites, the archaeological occupation occurred
shortly after or during the time the parent material (beach sand) was deposited.
However, the majority of the soil development occurred after the site had been
abandoned by prehistoric people. Therefore, the bulk of the artifacts should be
below the surface and affected by pedoturbation. The distribution of cultural ma-
terial would be expected to have spread out somewhat vertically. Moreover, soil
horizons would be expected to cut across artifact concentrations. Artifacts may
also be iron-stained due to the Spodic horizon development. In addition, owing to
the possibility of eolian additions and pedoturbation, artifacts would also be ex-
pected to be generally somewhat deeper in the profile than artifacts from a non-
correlative site.
Noncorrelative paleoshoreline sites represent postdepositional occupations on
relatively well-developed soils. Site occupations, in this case, may have potentially short
occurred several thousands of years after deposition of the soil’s parent material. standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 275

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Figure 3. Soil-artifact context model in correlative and noncorrelative paleoshoreline sites, central
Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

Consequently, younger paleoshoreline sites, not correlative with coastal landform

development, are expected to show signs of soil modification by the human oc-
cupants. Artifact concentrations, features, and/or midden deposits will cut across
soil horizons, artifacts are expected to generally be at shallower depths in the
profile, and there would be no iron-staining of artifacts.
The soil-artifact context model provides a relative dating method for paleoshore-
line sites in the region. If cultural material has been a part of a soil profile having
had at least 3000 – 4000 years of soil development (the minimum time for regional
Spodosol development according to Franzmeir and Whiteside, 1963a, 1963b; short
Schaetzl and Mokma, 1988; Barrett and Schaetzl, 1992, 1993), then the site’s soil- standard

276 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

artifact context should generally indicate a relatively greater site age. The sites that
are correlative date to the age of the associated shoreline. However, if a shoreline
was occupied after the surface soil had at least 3000 – 4000 years of development,
the soil-artifact context should indicate relative youth, or a noncorrelative situation.
The sites that are noncorrelative would most likely be Woodland-age.

RESULTS
Thumping Tracks Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-02-419
At the Thumping Tracks site, a soil with O/A/E/Bs/C horizon development formed
in fine and medium sands (Table III). The soil is an Entic Haplorthod of the Croswell
series (after Berndt, 1977). The soil has a POD Index of 4, indicating at least 5500
years of soil development. This POD value confirms earlier interpretations of the
site’s associated landform as a Nipissing I barrier (Anderton, 1993, 1995, 1997).
Artifact densities per level (Figure 4) indicate most cultural material occurred
within 10 – 20 cm below surface, with lesser amounts at 20 – 30 cm below surface.
These materials are within the soil’s E horizon. The depth of the E/Bs horizon
boundary was variable and, in places, the artifacts were well within the spodic
horizon (Bs). Moreover, some artifacts showed signs of iron-staining (Anderton
1993, 1995). Therefore, artifact concentrations are stratigraphically within the E
and, in places, Bs horizons of the surface soil, indicating that cultural material
predates the soil morphology. Occupation of the site is undoubtedly correlative to
the time of shoreline formation during the Nipissing phases of the ancestral Great
Lakes.

Yellow Feather Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-01-292

The soils observed at the Yellow Feather Site exhibit O/A/E/Bs1/Bs2(Bsh2?)/C
horizonation (Table III). The soil is developed in fine and medium sands. These
sands overlay thinly laminated beds of fine and medium sand dipping slightly to
the south (lakeward) at an average angle of about 2⬚. This basal unit was interpreted
as foreshore sand deposits. These beds were observed within the Bs2 horizon and
only faintly within the C horizon. Thin lenses of ortstein within the Bs2 appear be
developing along more prominent bedding planes of the foreshore deposits, re-
sulting in an alternating pattern of ortstein (h) and spodic (s) sand layers.
Gross soil morphology indicates an Entic Haplorthod consistent with the Cro-
swell series mapped by Berndt (1977). A POD Index of 3 for the soil, suggests about
4500 years of soil development. This age estimate is slightly older than geomorphic
interpretations, which suggest the site is associated with a ca. 3200 B.P. Algoma
spit (Anderton, 1993, 1995). However, the relatively high POD number is the result
of the unique ortstein concentrations within the Bs2 horizon, which led to an over-
estimation of the amount of time of soil development.
Nearly all cultural materials occur within the A horizon or upper 10 cm of the
surface soil (Figure 4). This distribution would indicate a later date of occupation short
for the site. A possible hearth or refuse pit was observed cutting across the E standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 277

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Figure 4. Soil profiles and artifact concentrations at eight paleoshoreline archaeological sites from
northern Michigan. Artifact concentrations are based on densities of flaked stone by percent in each
excavation level.

horizon. Carbon from this feature was radiometrically dated at 1100 ⫹ 200 B.P.
(WI-2244), which further indicates that the prehistoric occupation occurred after
the E horizon had formed. Thus, the soil-artifact context indicates that the Yellow
Feather Site is quite likely a later (ca. 1100 B.P.) occupation of an older coastal
landform (ca. 3200 B.P. or older).

Moss Lake II Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-02-217

An O/A/E/Bs1/Bs2/C horizon sequence was observed in soils at the Moss Lake II
site (Table III). The soil is developed in fine and medium sand that appears to have
been wave-deposited. Foreshore sand deposits, dipping to the south at angles rang-
ing from 7⬚ to 16⬚, were observed within the Bs2 and C horizons. The deposits
consist of finely laminated beds of quartz and magnetite sand. Bedding is best
preserved within the C horizon. A deep trench excavated on the southern edge of short
the site revealed foreshore beds to a depth over 3 m below the surface. Berndt standard

278 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

Figure 4. See caption on preceding page.

(1977) maps the site area as Rubicon series, an Entic Haplorthod. A POD Index of
4 for the profile indicates 5500 years of soil development. This correlates well with
geomorphic interpretations of the associated landform as a Nipissing I barrier (An-
derton, 1993, 1995).
Most artifacts were found within 10 – 20 cm below surface, with the remainder
between 20 and 40 cm below surface. When compared to soil horizons, most cul-
tural material is located within the E horizon and possibly the upper limit of the
Bs horizon of the soil profile (Figure 4). Such an occurrence suggests that the
cultural materials predate the soil morphology, indicating that the Moss lake II site
is probably an older, correlative site.

Marz-Smith Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-01-306

A soil profile observed at the Marz-Smith Site exhibited an O/E1/E2/B1/B2/C ho-
rizon sequence (Table III). The profile is developed into fine and medium sands
which show no signs of stratification. Soils in the surrounding area are mapped as short
Croswell series (Berndt, 1977), an Entic Haplorthod. The soil observed at the site standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 279

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

is consistent with this interpretation. A POD Index of 2 for the soil indicates about
3500 years of soil development. This seems a plausible estimate of landscape age
given the geomorphic interpretations of the site, which suggest it is located on an
Algoma phase wave-cut bluff (Anderton 1993, 1995).
The soil observed at the Marz-Smith Site has been disturbed. Soil horizons, es-
pecially the B1 and B2 horizons, are commonly broken or truncated, and, in some
cases, profiles are inverted, such that B horizons are stratigraphically higher than
E horizons. Such evidence typically indicates tree throw activity in the northern
Great Lakes region (Schaetzl, 1986). In fact, living trees, mostly eastern hemlocks
(Tsuga canadensis), were observed being uprooted (thrown) at the site. Tree
throw disturbance has also affected the archaeological context (Figure 4). Most
artifacts occurred in the upper 10 cm, and to lesser amounts between 10 and 20
cm below the surface. However, some artifacts were found throughout the profile
to a depth of 60 cm, suggesting considerable vertical mixing. Owing to the distur-
bance at the Marz-Smith site, interpretations of site age were not possible.

Falling Tree Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-03-759

An Oi/Oe/A/AC/C1(E?)/C2(E?)/C3(Bw?) horizon sequence was observed at the
Falling Tree Site on Grand Island (Table III). The soil is developed in medium and
coarse sands, which are of lacustrine origin. Foreshore sand deposits, consisting
of parallel, flat, less than 1 cm thick laminae dipping to the south-southeast (lake-
ward) at angles between 6⬚ and 9⬚, were observed within the C2 horizon. The site
area is tentatively mapped as Rubicon series (Eunice Padley, personal communi-
cation, 1992), the soil profile at this site is unexpectedly devoid of marked E and
B horizon developments, unlike the ubiquitous Spodosol morphology common to
most of the region’s better-drained areas. Instead, the C1 and C2 horizons may be
a weakly developed, extremely deep, two-part E horizon. The C3 shows signs of
iron-enrichment, suggesting that it may be an incipient Bw horizon. Definite B
horizons may be present at greater depths, but wall slumping precluded investi-
gations below 140 cm. A POD Index of 3, generated using the alternative horizons,
indicates 4500 years of soil development. This confirms geomorphic interpretations
of the associated landform as a Nipissing cuspate barrier (Anderton, 1993, 1995).
Most cultural material is between 10 and 30 cm below the surface (Figure 4).
However, relatively lesser amounts were observed in the upper 10 cm, between 30
and 40 cm, and, in very small amounts, between 40 and 80 cm. Uprooted trees were
observed in the surrounding area as well as on the site proper, suggesting tree
throw may have been a disturbance factor. However, the soil-artifact context at
least tentatively suggests that the age of the Falling Tree Site is correlative with
shoreline development.

Popper Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-03-825

The Popper site, which covers several hectares, was the most extensive occu- short
pation investigated during this study. The profile observed at the site during 1991 standard

280 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

exhibited an O/A/E/Bs/Bhs/C horizon sequence (Table III). Sandy foreshore depos-

its, or tilted lake beds, were found within the Bhs and C horizons. Interbedded sand
and magnetite layers were found to be extremely well cemented by ortstein within
the Bhs horizon. Soils at the site have been tentatively designated as Rubicon series,
an Entic Haplorthod (Eunice Padley, personal communication, 1992). A POD index
of 4 for the profile, indicates about 5500 years of soil development. This confirms
geomorphic interpretations of the site setting as a Nipissing I spit or barrier spit
(Anderton, 1993, 1995).
Nearly all artifacts were observed within the upper 10 cm of the profile in the O
and A horizons, with lesser amounts in the 10 – 20 and 30 – 40 cm below surface
range (Figure 4). No artifacts were recovered from the 20 – 30 cm range. Addition-
ally, a prehistoric storage or refuse pit (feature 1) radiocarbon-dated at 1230 ⫾
350 (WISC-2242) was found inset into the lower portions of the E horizon (Ander-
ton, 1993, 1995), indicating that human occupation occurred after the soil horizons
had formed.
Based on the 1991/1992 investigations, the soil-artifact context indicates that
human occupation of the associated landscape surface occurred relatively late. In
sum, the soil-artifact context seen at the Popper Site indicates a later occupation,
not correlative with the associated coastal landform. More recent investigations in
other areas of the site (Dunham et al., 1995), however, have revealed a large hearth
containing massive amounts of fire-cracked rock and charcoal. Although it is not
apparent that the feature had been overprinted by soil horizon development, char-
coal samples from the hearth feature yielded radiocarbon ages of 4180 ⫾ 60 (BETA-
79516) and 4260 ⫾ 50 (BETA-79515) (Dunham et al, 1995). Thus, the Popper site
is likely a multiple component site, that was at first correlative and, later, not cor-
relative with the time of paleoshoreline formation.

Shelter Bay Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-03-896

Excavations at the Shelter Bay site were limited to only 2 m2. Soils observed at
the Shelter Bay site exhibited an O/A/E/Bs/Bhs1/Bs2/Bhs3/C horizon sequence (Ta-
ble III). The soil is developed into lacustrine sands. Foreshore deposits were ob-
served in the Bhs1, Bs2, and Bhs3 horizons. Homogeneous coarse sands, seen in
the C horizon are interpreted as nearshore sands. The Bhs3 horizon appears to
consist primarily of quartz and magnetite sand laminae, with ortstein developed on
bedding planes, resulting in a firm, iron- and sesquioxide-rich zone. The develop-
ment of this horizon appears to be the result of iron oxides perching above/at the
water table, rather than true pedogenesis. It should be noted that the surface soils
have been locally disturbed by a dirt road, which runs through the site. Along the
road, soil profiles are truncated as deeply as the upper boundary of Bs horizon,
suggesting that the road bed may have been scraped and then filled. The disturbed
portion of the soil profile consists of about 20 – 30 cm of black, cinderlike road fill
with large cobbles. This overlies Bs/Bhs1/Bs2/Bhs3/C horizons of the undisturbed, short
natural soil. standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 281

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

The soil observed at the site is a Typic Haplorthod. However, the area is mapped
as Croswell series, an Entic Haplorthod (Berndt, 1977). The profile has a POD Index
of 10, which indicates 8500 years of soil development. However, if the Bhs3 horizon
is left out of the calculations, the POD number drops to 6, indicating about 6500
years of weathering. Both age estimates are high given the geomorphic interpre-
tations of the associated landform as a Nipissing I spit or bay mouth barrier (An-
derton, 1993, 1995).
Most artifacts at the Shelter Bay site occur within 10 cm of the ground surface,
with lesser amounts between 30 and 40 cm (Figure 4). This suggests a relatively
young age for the site. However, this interpretation is at best tentative given the
extremely limited extent of investigations carried out at the site.

Big Bear Site, USFS Site No. 09-10-03-724

The soil observed at the Big Bear site exhibits O/A/E/Bhs/Bs/2C horizonation
(Table III). The soil is a Haplorthod. Berndt (1977) maps the site area as Kalkaska
series, a Typic Haplorthod. The profile has a POD Index of 7, indicating about 7000
years of soil development. This age estimate is somewhat older than the geomor-
phic interpretations of the site area as a Nipissing I spit (Anderton, 1993, 1995,
1997). The soil is developed in fine to coarse sands, and, at depth, imbricated coarse
sand and pebble beds in the 2C horizon. The pebbles beds, interpreted as a high
energy foreshore deposit, appear to be a beach facies.
Most artifacts are occurring between 10 and 20 cm below the surface, within the
upper portions of the E horizon (Figure 4). Tree-throw mounds are common on
the site proper and the surrounding area. However, soil profiles did not appear to
be heavily disturbed, suggesting that tree-throw disturbance is very localized. The
soil-artifact context indicates the Big Bear Site is an older, correlative occupation
of an ancient beach.

DISCUSSION: SOIL-ARTIFACT CONTEXT DIFFERENCES

According to Wood and Johnson (1978), the distribution of artifacts within an
archaeological site is the result of human activity and other processes such as soil
formation. The archaeological sites investigated for this study are associated with
landform surfaces that have been geomorphologically stable since formation, in
some cases, up to 5000 years ago. Among the sites, there are subtle differences in
the vertical distribution of artifacts. Artifacts from correlative paleoshoreline sites
are observed deeper below the ground surface and are commonly overprinted by
soil horizon development. Noncorrelative sites, in contrast, have artifacts at shal-
lower depths, and show signs of disturbance by soil formation. The exact mecha-
nisms that produced this pattern are not entirely clear. A number of explanations
are possible, however, including eolian burial, developmental upbuilding of cu-
mulic soil horizons, and soil mixing.
While none of the sites showed any eolian bedding structures, wind-related dep- short
osition may have aided in the initial artifact burial process at correlative sites while standard

282 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

the shoreline was still active. However, subsequent soil mixing (pedoturbation)
may have destroyed any stratification that was originally present, making the use
of eolian deposition a very tenuous explanation for the differences between sites.
Developmental upbuilding of soil horizons (cumulic, overthickening of surface ho-
rizons) is also not a satisfactory explanation, as it is not considered a major pe-
dogenic process for the region’s soils (Franzmeir and Whiteside, 1963a, 1963b;
Schaetzl and Mokma, 1988; Barrett and Schaetzl, 1992, 1993; Buol et al., 1997).
Horizon development obviously did affect the archaeological context as evidenced
by iron-stained artifacts at several sites. However, the direction of development
has been downward and not upward as one would expect with horizon upbuilding.
Soil mixing, or pedoturbation, is the other most recognizable process that has
affected the soil-artifact context at the archaeological sites. It is considered the
most likely reason for the soil artifact context differences between correlative and
noncorrelative paleoshoreline sites. Three types of pedoturbation, faunalturbation,
cryoturbation, and floralturbation are the dominant types of soil mixing active in
the region (Wood and Johnson, 1978; Schaetzl, 1986; Buol et al., 1997).
Although no clear evidence of faunalturbation was observed, on several occa-
sions very small tubular features were noted within soil profiles at the sites. These
tubes average less than 5.0 mm in diameter and were often lined with an unknown
organic substance that gave them a black, furlike appearance in cross-section. The
tubes are not the work of earthworms, which are rare in the well-drained, highly
acidic soils of the paleoshorelines. Instead, ants are the likely culprits, as they were
observed actively using the tubes as transportation corridors at the Moss Lake II
site (09-10-02-217). Wood and Johnson (1978:328) indicate that faunalturbation can,
over a long period of time, concentrate artifacts, originally left on a ground surface,
into an artificial subsurface layer in which vertical stratification is all but erased.
Given this suggestion, faunalturbation may be responsible for the greater average
depth of artifact concentrations at the coeval paleoshoreline sites.
Cryoturbation, or soil disturbance by freeze-thaw processes, must also be con-
sidered as a possible explanations for the discrepancy between sites of different
ages. Frost heaving can act to move artifacts either up or down within the soil
profile, depending on their thermal conductivity (Wood and Johnson, 1978). Stone
artifacts, such as those recovered at the paleoshoreline sites, obviously have a
higher thermal conductivity than the surrounding soil. Thus, they would tend to be
pushed upward. According to Wood and Johnson (1978:339), the amount of move-
ment an artifact experiences is due in part to soil texture, frequency and rate of
frost penetration, soil moisture, overburden pressure, and artifact size and geom-
etry.
Although the study area experiences seasonally frozen ground, due to the low
soil moisture of the paleoshoreline sites (Berndt, 1977), solid freezing is probably
most common. With solid freezing some amount of frost heaving still occurs as the
freezing front still moves down progressively and thawing takes place during the
spring. This process could conceivably move artifacts over several hundreds or short
thousands of years. Frozen soil profiles, noted during late season (November) ex- standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 283

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

cavations, had no visible signs of heaving, ice lensing, or soil displacement. Fur-
thermore, the vertical artifact distributions at the sites commonly presented a rel-
atively abrupt upper limit, and were not encountered above a depth of at least 10 –
20 cm at many of the paleoshoreline sites. Although frost heaving may have taken
place at some time or times in the past, such a distinct upper limit of vertical artifact
distribution would not be expected if upward movement of artifacts due to frost
heaving was a significant process.
The most clear evidence of soil mixing at the paleoshoreline sites is that of
floralturbation. Many types of floralturbation were observed during the excavation
of the paleoshoreline sites, including tree fall (uprooting) and root penetration. Soil
agitation due to tree swing was not observed. Evidence of active tree falls was most
pronounced at the Marz-Smith site (09-10-01-306) near the modern shore of Lake
Michigan. However, most of the sites are generally well inland and protected from
high winds. Hence, tree fall does not seem to have been a major factor acting at
the other paleoshoreline occupations. Furthermore, aside from the Marz-Smith site,
soil profile inversion, which commonly occurs with tree falls in the region (Schaetzl,
1986), was not observed at the sites.
Root penetration is the most widespread and obvious process of floralturbation.
Several of the sites contained dense root mats between the ground surface and a
depth of approximately 25 cm. Root casts occasionally penetrated the entire soil
profile to depths well within the C horizons. The root mats consisted of interwoven
roots, which commonly penetrated archaeological deposits. Root penetration, as
reflected by root casts and root mats, has moved artifacts and affected the archae-
ological context at the sites.

CONCLUSIONS
Paleoshoreline sites may be prehistoric human occupations that were correlative
with the developing shorelines. They may also be non-correlative occupations that
occurred at some unknown time after the associated shorelines were abandoned.
Owing to the highly leached, acidic soil conditions common to the northern Great
Lakes, paleoshoreline sites rarely have preserved organic materials for radiocarbon
dating. The association of a site with a paleocoastal landform serves only as a
measure of the potential maximum age of the site. Occupation of the site cannot
predate the age of the shoreline it is found upon. The site may postdate it though,
representing a later occupation of an relict coastal landform. Sites that are correl-
ative with the paleoshorelines, date to the time period when the coastal landforms
were created. In the case of the study area, this would be the Nipissing and post-
Nipissing, pre-modern phases of the ancestral Great Lakes, ranging between 5000
and 2000 years B.P. Hence, sites correlative with paleoshorelines are considered
Archaic occupations.
A preliminary model of expected soil-artifact relationships is useful in making
the distinction between human occupations that may be correlative or not correl- short
ative with paleoshorelines. The soil-artifact context differences between these two standard

284 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

types of sites probably relates to the amount of time available for soil formation
and pedoturbation. The longer artifacts have been contained within the soil profile,
the more pedoturbation they may have experienced. In particular, floralturbation
(root penetration) and faunalturbation (perhaps due to ant tunneling) has likely
altered the archaeological context of the correlative paleoshoreline sites.
Cultural material from correlative paleoshoreline sites is generally observed at
a greater depth within the soil profile. Usually, most artifacts are well within the E
horizon and in some cases the B horizon. Depth of material often exceeds 20 – 30
cm below the ground surface. The Thumping Tracks, Moss Lake II, Falling Tree,
and Big Bear sites demonstrate many of the soil-artifact contextual characteristics
expected of human occupations correlative with paleoshoreline development.
Hence, they are probably Archaic-age sites. Preliminary interpretations suggest that
the Shelter Bay site was likely a correlative occupation of the Nipissing shoreline,
while the Marz-Smith site may represent a terminal Archaic occupation of the Al-
goma shoreline.
The possibility of later Woodland cultural groups using relict shorelines is con-
firmed by the soil-artifact context observed at the Yellow Feather site and the
Popper site. At both sites, archaeological features cut across preexisting soil ho-
rizons and cultural material is close to the ground surface. At the Yellow Feather
site, in particular, a single radiocarbon age of 1100 ⫾ 200 B.P. (WISC-2244) from a
shallow, trough-shape, pit feature strengthens interpretation of the site as a Wood-
land occupation of a paleoshoreline. The Popper site, however, may be a multiple
occupation ranging from Archaic through Woodland. A single radiocarbon age of
1230 ⫾ 350 B.P. (WISC-2242) from a possible storage pit provides confirmation of
at least one Woodland component. However, recent radiocarbon ages of 4180 ⫾
60 B.P. (BETA-79516) and 4260 ⫾ 50 B.P. (BETA-79515) from charcoal taken from
a large hearth feature at the site (Dunham et al., 1995) indicate that at least part of
the Popper site contains an Archaic component.
In sum, the soil-artifact context model provides an approximate chronological
placement for prehistoric sites that cannot be dated using diagnostic artifacts or
radiocarbon. The soil-artifact context of correlative paleoshoreline sites indicates
that the sites were created by human groups residing on landscape surfaces having
very little soil development. These sites are probably Archaic occupations. In con-
trast, noncorrelative, presumably Woodland sites, typically have concentrations of
cultural material within the upper portions of the surface soil. Usually, artifacts are
just below the surface, suggesting that the cultural material was not part of the
original parent material of the soil, but was deposited later after the surface soils
had formed. Thus, noncorrelative paleoshoreline sites associated coastal landforms
are recognizable by their soil-artifact context, which indicates soil modification.

I would like to thank the USDA-Forest Service for the Challenge Cost-Share Grant which funded much
of this research; my wife Laura (Department of Geography, University of North Dakota) for assistance
in the field and in original preparation of maps; John Franzen (Forest Archaeologist, Hiawatha National short
Forest) for encouragement and employment while working on this project; V.T. Holliday (Department standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 285

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

of Geography, University of Wisconsin-Madison) for his challenging discussions about soils and ar-
chaeology and for his role in reviewing and commenting on earlier versions of this work as my disser-
tation advisor; Doug Ottke (Graduate Student, Department of Geography, University of North Dakota)
for final map production; and William Farrand and an anonymous reviewer for critical comments and
suggestions that greatly improved this article.

REFERENCES
Anderton, J.B. (1993). Paleoshoreline geoarchaeology in the Northern Great Lakes, Hiawatha National
Forest, Hiawatha National Forest Heritage Program Monograph No. 1. Escanaba, Michigan: USDA-
Forest Service.
Anderton, J.B. (1995). Paleoshoreline geoarchaeology in the Northern Great Lakes: An interdisciplinary
approach to prehistoric coastal settlement. Ph.D. Dissertation, Madison: University of Wisconsin-
Madison.
Anderton, J.B. (1997). Paleogeographic reconstructions and prehistoric settlement on Great Lakes
coastal environments. 93rd Annual Meeting, Association of American Geographers, Fort Worth,
Texas.
Anderton, J.B., & Loope, W.L. (1995). Buried soils in a perched dunefield as indicators of Late Holocene
lake-level change in the Lake Superior basin. Quaternary Research, 44, 190– 199.
Anderton, J.B., Custer, M., Martin, T., Holman, M.B., & Jeakle, M.L (1991). 1990 Cultural Resource
Survey, Hiawatha National Forest. Commonwealth Cultural Resources Group. Report No. R-0082,
Jackson, Michigan: USDA Forest Service.
Barrett, L.R., & Schaetzl, R.J. (1992). An examination of podzolization near Lake Michigan using chron-
ofunctions. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 72, 527– 541.
Barrett, L.R., & Schaetzl, R.J. (1993). Soil development and spatial variability on geomorphic surfaces
of different ages. Physical Geography, 14, 39– 55.
Benchley, E.D., Marcucci, D.J., Yuen, C., & Griffin, K.L. (1988). Final Report of Archaeological Investi-
gations and Data Recovery at the Trout Point 1 Site Alger County, Michigan. Archaeological Research
Laboratory, Report of Investigations No. 89, Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin.
Bergquist, S.G. (1936). The Pleistocene history of the Tahquamenon and Manistique Drainage Region of
the Northern Peninsula of Michigan. Occasional Papers of the Geology of Michigan, Publication 40,
Geological Series 34, State of Michigan, Department of Conservation, Geological Survey Division.
Berndt, L.W. (1977). Soil survey of Delta County and Hiawatha National Forest of Alger and Schoolcraft
Counties, Michigan. USDA, SCS, USFS in cooperation with the Michigan Agricultural Experiment
Station. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Birkeland, P.W. (1984). Soils and geomorphology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bocek, B. (1986). Rodent ecology and burrowing behavior: Predicted effects on archaeological site
formation. American Antiquity, 51, 589– 603.
Buol, S.W., Hole, F.D., & McCracken, R.J. (1997). Soil genesis and classification (4th ed.). Ames: Iowa
State University Press.
Clark, C. (1993). Archaeological survey and site testing at Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger
County, Michigan 1991. Technical Report No. 23, Lincoln, Nebraska: National Park Service, Midwest
Archaeological Center.
Cleland, C.E. (1992). Rites of conquest, the history and culture of Michigan’s Native Americans. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Dice, L.R. (1943). The biotic provinces of North America. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Drexler, C.W. (1981). Outlet channels for the Post-Duluth Lakes in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.
Unpublished Dissertation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan (Geology).
Dunhan, S., Branstner, M., & Anderton, J.B. (1995). Phase II Cultural Resource Investigations, Hiawatha
National Forest. Report submitted to the USDA-Forest Service. Williamston, Michigan: Great Lakes
Research Associates (GLRA).
Eichenlaub, V. (1979). Weather and climate of the Great Lakes Region. Notre Dame, Indiana: University short
of Notre Dame Press. standard

286 VOL. 14, NO. 3

GEA(Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

PALEOSHORELINE DATING IN THE UPPER PENINSULA OF MICHIGAN

Farrand, W.R. (1960). Former shorelines in western and northern Lake Superior Basin. Ph.D. Disserta-
tion. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Farrand, W.R., & Drexler, C.W. (1985). Late Wisconsinan and Holocene history of the Lake Superior
Basin. In P. F. Karrow & P.E. Calkin (Eds.), Quaternary evolution of the Great Lakes (pp.17– 32).
Special Paper 30, Geological Association of Canada.
Franzen, J. (1987). Test Excavation and Locational Analysis of Prehistoric Sites in the Hiawatha National
Forest, Michigan. CRM Report No. 5. Escanaba, Michigan: USDA Forest Service, Hiawatha National
Forest, Supervisor’s Office.
Franzmeir, D.P., & Whiteside, E.P. (1963a). A chronosequence of podzols in northern Michigan, I. Ecol-
ogy and description of pedons. Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station. Quarterly
Bulletin, 46, 2– 20.
Franzmeir, D.P., & Whiteside, E.P. (1963b). A chronosequence of podzols in northern Michigan, II Phys-
ical and chemical properties. Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station. Quarterly
Bulletin, 46, 21– 36.
Goltz, G.E. (1992). 1991 Cultural Resource Survey— Manistique, Munising, Rapid River Ranger Districts-
Hiawatha National Forest. Report submitted to USDA-Forest Service. Leech Lake, Report No. 008,
Cass Lake, Minnesota: Tribal Council Heritage Sites Program.
Hansel, A.K., Mickelson, D.M., Schneider, A.F., & Larson, C.E. (1985). Late Wisconsinan and Holocene
history of the Lake Michigan Basin. In P.F. Karrow & P.E. Calkin (Eds.), Quaternary evolution of
the Great Lakes (pp. 39– 53). Special Paper 30, Geological Association of Canada.
Hinsdale, W.B. (1931). Archaeological atlas of Michigan, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Hobbs, W.H. (1911). The Late Glacial and Post Glacial uplift of the Michigan Basin. Michigan Geological
and Biological Survey, Publication 5, Geological Series 3, 11– 68.
Johnson, D.J., & Watson-Stegner, D. (1990). The soil evolution model as a framework for evaluating
pedoturbation in archaeological site formation. In N.P. Lasca & J. Donahue (Eds.), Archaeological
geology of North America (pp. 541– 560). Centennial Special Volume 4, Geological Society of Amer-
ica.
Larsen, C.E. (1985a). Geoarchaeological interpretations of Great Lakes coastal environments. In J.K.
Stein & W.R. Farrand (Eds.), Archaeological sediments in context (pp. 91– 110). Peopling of the
Americas Vol. 1, Orono: Center for the Study of Early Man, Institute for Quaternary Studies, Uni-
versity of Maine.
Larsen, C.E. (1985b). Lake level, uplift, and outlet incision: Nipissing and Algoma Great Lakes. In P.F.
Karrow & P.E. Calkin (Eds.), Quaternary evolution of the Great Lakes (pp. 63– 77). Special Paper
30, Geological Association of Canada.
Larsen, C.E. (1994). Beach ridges as monitors of isostatic uplift of the Upper Great Lakes. Journal of
Great Lakes Research, 20, 108– 134.
Leverett, F. (1929). Moraines and shorelines of the Lake Superior Basin, USGS Professional Paper 154-
A, Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey.
Leverett, F., & Taylor, F.B. (1915). The Pleistocene of Indiana and Michigan and the history of the Great
Lakes, USGS Monograph 53, Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey.
Paull, R.K., & Paull, R.A. (1977). Geology of Wisconsin and Upper Michigan including parts of adjacent
states, Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
Pierce, C. (1992). Effects of pocket gopher burrowing on archaeological deposits: A simulation ap-
proach. Geoarchaeology, 7, 185– 208.
Robinson, G.G., Hambacher, M.J., Holman, M.B., Smith, B.A., DeRoo, B., & Jeakle, M.L (1991). 1990
Cultural Resource Survey of parcels on Grand Island, Hiawatha National Forest. Report submitted
to USDA-Forest Service , Report No. R-0077. Jackson, Michigan: Commonwealth Cultural Resources
Group.
Rourke, R.V., Brasher, B.R., Yeck, R.D., & Miller, F.T. (1988). Characteristic morphology of U.S. spo-
dosols. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 52, 445– 449.
Rutter, W. (1988). 1987 Cultural Resource Survey, Hiawatha National Forest. Report R-2938, submitted short
to USDA-Forest Service, Milwaukee. Jackson, Michigan: Gilbert/Commonwealth, Inc. standard

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 287

GEA(Wiley) LEFT BATCH

ANDERTON

Schaetzl, R. (1986). Complete soil profile inversion by tree uprooting. Physical Geography, 7, 181– 189.
Schaetzl, R.J., & Isard, S.A. (1991). The distribution of spodosol soils in southern Michigan: A climatic
interpretation. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 81, 425– 442.
Schaetzl, R., & Mokma, D.L. (1988). A numerical index of podzol and podzolic soildevelopment. Physical
Geography, 9, 232– 246.
Schaetzl, R.J., Burns, S.F., Johnson, D.L., & Small, T.W. (1989). Tree uprooting: review of impacts on
forest ecology. Vegetatio, 79, 165– 176.
Soil Survey Division Staff (1993). Soil survey manual, USDA Handbook No. 18, Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture.
Stein, J.K. (1983). Earthworm activity: A source of potential disturbance of archaeological sediments.
American Antiquity, 48, 277– 289.
Vankat, J.L. (1977). The natural vegetation of North America, an introduction. New York: Wiley.
Wood, W.R., & Johnson, D.L. (1978) A survey of disturbance processes in archaeological site formation.
Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 1, 315– 381.
Yuen, C. (1988). Post-Glacial geology. In Final report of archaeological investigations and data recovery
at the Trout Point 1 Site Alger County, Michigan (Chapter V, pp. 28– 38). Report of Investigations
No. 89, Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Archaeological Research Laboratory.

Received August 17, 1997

Accepted for publication October 9, 1998

short
standard

288 VOL. 14, NO. 3