English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

i i i Acknowledgments  v Introduction  1 The Site and Its Environs  5 Archeological Background  11 Testing Procedures  15 Features 17 Burned-Rock Middens  17 Hearths 21 Artifacts  31 Utilized Flakes  33 Modified Flakes  33 Nondiagnostic Bifaces  34 Projectile Points  37 Miscellaneous Artifacts  45 Cores  47 Interpretations and Conclusions  51 References Cited  55 Figure 1 . Location of FM 3480 project and Site 41KM3 in Kimble County  2 Figure 2 . East end of project showing rights-of-way, backhoe trenches, and test units  3 Figure 2A. West section of 41KM3  4 Figure 2B. East section of 41KM3  4 Figure 3 . Site environs . A, Red Creek, looking upstream; B, waterfall south of Site 41KM3  7 Figure 4 . Testing near terrace edge . A, east excavation area, looking south ;B, looking west  8 Figure 5 . Profile of west wall of Backhoe Trench 4  9 Figure 6 . Profile of west wall of Backhoe Trench 2  10 Figure 7 . Feature 3 . A, surface plotting of Feature 3 before testing; B, crew exposing Feature 3  18 Figure 8 . Feature 3 as exposed in test unit . A, photograph of top of feature; B, plan view  19 Figure 9 . Feature 4, looking east  20 Figure 10 . Feature 5  21 Figure 11 . Feature 6 . A, photo of exposed feature, looking north; B. plan drawing 23 Figure 12 . Feature 7 . A, Photo of exposed feature; B. plan drawing  25 Figure 13 . Feature 7 . A,photo of west half of Feature 7 at Level 1; B. drawing in cross section  26 Figure 14 . Feature 8, looking north  27 Figure 15 . Feature 9, looking west  28 Figure 16 . Feature 10 . A, photo of exposed southern portion ;B, plan drawing of exposed portion . 30 Figure 17 . Small, thin utilized flakes  33 Figure 18 . Large, chunky utilized flakes  34 Figure 19 . Modified flakes  36 Figure 20 . Modified flake  37 Figure 21 . Large bifaces  38 Figure 22 . Biface "blanks."  39 Figure 23 . Finished bifaces  41 Figure 24 . Projectile points  43 . . Figure 25 . Pedernales projectile points 45 Figure 26 . Projectile points  48 Figure 27 . Miscellaneous artifacts  50 Figure 28 . Cores  50 Table 1 . Provenience of lithic debitage  32 Table 2 . Provenience of utilized flakes  35 Table 3 . Provenience of modified flakes  35 Table 4 . Provenience of bifaces  40 Table 5 . Pedernales projectile points  46 Table 6 . Contracting-Stemmed projectile points  46 Table 7 . Provenience of miscellaneous dart-point fragments  49 Table 8 . Provenience of cores  49 Table 9 . Synopsis of diagnostic artifacts  53 Archeological Testing of the Red Creek Site 1 In the fall of 1987 a proposal was initiated by the then State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (SDHPT) to upgrade a gravel-surfaced county road in Kimble County into a paved state Farm-to-Market road. The road, County Road 1635, which was to become FM 3480, was located about 6.5 miles south of the town of London and extended westward from RM 385 approximately 1.8 miles to US 377 (Fig. 1). About 0.2 mile from the east end of the project the road made a lowwater crossing at Red Creek (Fig. 2); this crossing was located approximately 0.25 mile above the creek's confluence with the Llano River. Initial plans called for the developed roadway to be contained within the existing county right-of-way except at the east end of the project, where an alignment correction would have required approximately 4 acres of new right-of-way. This new right-of-way would have extended eastward to RM 385 from the western approach to Red Creek and would have been located north of the existing county road. In this general area-east of the Red Creek crossing but along both sides of the existing county road-archeological site 41KM3, the Red Creek Site, was present. The main body of the site was located on the north side of the county road. Reconnaissance and consultation between archeologists and engineers from the SDHPT and representatives from the Texas Antiquities Committee (TAC) proved beneficial in that it was possible to redesign the planned roadway to bypass the most significant portions of the site. A revised alignment was drawn up in which the new roadway in the vicinity of the Red Creek Site was moved as far south as possible to avoid major impact to archeological deposits on the north side of the county road. The revised plans called for containing the developed highway as much as possible within the existing right-ofway and, where necessary, acquiring most of the additional right-of-way from south of the county road-an area where archeological deposits were peripheral to the main body of the site. In this way, a narrow strip of new right-of-way avera

Archeological Testing of 41KM3 The Red Creek Site A Burned-Rock Midden Site Kimble County, Texas