MAX. DEPTH 

 POND WATER 



BLACK PEAT 

 (SAWGRASS PEAT) 



RED BROWN PEAT 

 (UPPER ZONE) 



RED BROWN PEAT 



(LOWER 70NF1 



■RliBBIR" PEAT 



TAN-BLACK PEAT 

 (WATER-LILY PEAT) 



Analysis of 8000-year-old brai n tissue from t he Wind ov er si te • 61 



RADIOCARBON DATES 



4790 ± 100 B. P. 



5800 -t 80 B. P. 



7360 ± 70 B. P. 



tinman 

 bone conccniralion 



7950 ± 140 B.P 



10, 160 •: 120 B.P 



Table L Cu lturally relevant radiocarbon dates 



Dat^ Sample Laboratory 



number 



6980 ±90 Wooden stake Beta- 19316 



7050 ±80 Peat near highest bone Beta-14132 



6990 ± 70 Human bone (AMS) TO-207 



7100 ±100 Wooden stake Beta-19315 



7210 ±80 Human bone Beta-7186 



7290 ± 120 Bottle gourd Beta-20450 



7300 ±70 Wooden stake Beta- 19722 



7330 ± 100 Human bone Beta-5803 



7360±70 Peat beneath crania Beta-11381 



7410 ±80 Peat from brain surface Bela-11383 



7830 + 80 Human bone (AMS) TO-518 



7930 + 80 Wooden stake Beta- 18295 



8120 ± 70 Human bone (AMS) TO-241 



8430 + 100 Peat at base of Beta- 13909 

 red-brown strata 



a. Date in radiocarbon years B.P. 



GREY SAND 



maximum depth of grey sand not determined 



Figure 2. Stratigraphic profile, peat types, and uncorrected 

 radiocarbon dates on peat from the Windover site, 8BR246. 

 Radiocarbon dating either by Isotrace Laboratory, University 

 of Toronto, Canada, or by Beta Analytical, Coral Gables, 

 Florida. Sample numbers indicated in text (e.g.. Beta 

 10763). Dates in years b.p. Correction factor of +800 yrB. p. 

 should be added to dates between 7000 and 10,000 yr b.p. 

 (Klein et al. 1982). MAMASL. meters above mean annual sea 

 level. Vertical scale units, 20 cm. 



containing no freshwater mollusks or human bone. This stra- 

 tum has been described as water-lily peat (W. Spackman, Jr. . 

 and S. Stout, pers. comm. 1986) and radiocarbon dated at 

 over 10,000 years. Underlying the entire deposit was a gray 

 Pleistocene sand. 



The chronometric placement of Windover skeletal mate- 

 rial is based on a series of radiocarbon dates (Table 1 ). These 

 dates were obtained directly from human bone, from the top 

 and bottom of vertical burial stakes, peat above, within, and 

 beneath human bone, and from multiple locations within the 

 pond. Recent radiocarbon corrections (Beukens 1986) indi- 

 cate the dates would cluster the human activities at Windover 

 at approximately 7450 b.p. The radicKarbon dates place the 

 utilization of Windover in a chronological period that is usu- 

 ally considered Early Archaic in the southeastern United 

 States (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). 



CULTURAL MATERIALS 



The Windover burials were accompanied by a diverse cultur- 

 al inventory. Artifacts fabricated from animal teeth, antler, 

 bone, seed, wood, shell and stone were found. Bone awls 

 and pins were the most commonly recovered artifact catego- 

 ry and were manufactured from upland game including deer, 

 canids, and felids. Drilled antler and manatee ribs and atlatl 

 cups were also found. A bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceniria) 

 accompanying a burial provides early evidence of curcurbits 

 north of Mexico; it predates other Lagenaria and virtually all 

 other known Curcurbitacae north of Mexico (Conrad et al. 

 1984; Kay et al. 1980; Prentice 1986). The status and mor- 

 phology of the specimen is being carefully evaluated particu- 

 larly in light of its early context (Newsom 1987). 



Additionally, textile materials were recovered from 37 of 

 the burials. Seven twining/weaving variants have been iden- 

 tified which include fine-balanced, plain-weave inner gar- 

 ments, more durable complex-twined materials possibly rep- 

 resenting blanketlike items, twined globular bags, open- 

 twined items and matting (Andrews and Adovasio 1988). 

 Macroscopic and microscopic thin sections of plant fibers in 

 the fabrics have been unsuccessful in identifying the plant 

 species utilized. Morphological features that would normally 

 prove taxonomic criterion were apparently removed during 

 the original processing of plant fibers or simply have not been 

 preserved for 8(X)0 years (Andrews and Adovasio 1988; 

 Newsom 1987). Phytolith studies also failed to provide infor- 

 mation for the identification of plant fibers (Pipemo 1987). 



Zagreb Paleopathology Symp 1988 



