Laserfiche WebLink
62 <br />• <br />remains, house floors, and subsurface features associated with the <br />Fremont occupation have been reported at several sites in Dinosaur <br />National Monument (Breternitz 1970:11-80). Southwest of the study <br />area, in the Piceance Basin, C. H. Jennings (1915:6-8) reports <br />wickiup structures made of cedar logs. Aboriginal architecture then <br />is not unknown in northwestern Colorado, even though it is apparently <br />not present in the study area. Members of survey crews were cognizant <br />of the possibility of locating such features and surveyed accordingly. <br />Several points regarding the artifact collections and the methods <br />i• <br />of analysis are necessary here. first, the materials collected from <br />each site were extremely limited. Since most of the prehistoric sites <br />were defined on the basis of debitage and a minimal collection of tools, <br />and since the number of sites is quite small, only a small sample of tools <br />is available to work with. Thus the typology is strictly intuitive in <br />that it is based on obvious morphological characteristics rather than on <br />statistically defined attribute clusters. <br />Secondly, with such a small sample, it is extremely difficult to <br />determine the range of variation within a given type. The categories <br />are necessarily broadly defined, but at times individual artifacts must <br />be used to define a type if no similar items exist in the collection. <br />Because of this, it may appear that the classification has been done on <br />a splitting rather than lumping basis. This is evident in the projectile <br />point class as there are quite a number of types, each with a few members. <br />The condition of many of the items is quite poor, an additional problem <br />which complicates the sorting. P1any items consist only of small fragments <br /> <br />