[NYSAA (1986)] He notes that “inland rockshelters and open camps invariably fail to produce such items as plummets, ground slate points, and ulus. Only two shelters have contained gouges” (1976: 245). Funk observes that “of the classic non-projectile point Laurentian traits, only the ulu is moderately numerous in the lower Hudson Valley, and this is due to its remarkably high incidence on the Bannerman site. The gouge is unreported south of the Hudson-Catskill area, to the writer’s knowledge. Plummets are absent from collections south of the latitude of Newburgh. Ground slate points or knives are unknown south of Coxsakie” (1976: 244). In view of Case’s report of a slate knife, gouge, and plummet found at the Ossining Rockshelter, the known distribution of these Laurentian traits must now be extended southward. Funk reconstructs the subsistence-settlement pattern of the Sylvan Lake (Narrow-Stemmed) complex as essentially the same as that of the preceding Vosburg complex. Campsites on lakes, tributaries, and on the banks of the Hudson were “warm-weather hunting, fishing, and plant-collecting stations … In the fall, Sylvan Lake groups began to disperse to back-country locations where they concentrated their skills on tracking and killing deer. During the cold months some hunters – accompanying their families – took refuge in rockshelters or caves and small open camps, but others, occasionally perhaps in parties of band size, seem to have lived on bluff sites, or inland streams” (Funk 1976: 252). If we assume, as seems reasonable, that most of the food debris from the Ossining Rockshelter, like the great majority of the lithic artifacts, is of Late Archaic age, this material suggests a more complicated situation than that outlined by Funk. Apart from the numerous deer bone fragments, remains of turtles, snakes, oysters, fish, and small birds were also found at the rockshelter. A probably net weight was also found, which offers further evidence that the site’s inhabitants were doing fishing, in a stream, that was not yet frozen. The remains of animals that would have been most readily taken during the spring, summer, or early fall imply that the Late Archaic occupation of the rockshelter was not limited only to the winter months. As suggested above, the proximity of the Hanotak Rockshelter must be taken into account in seeking to explain the role of the Ossining site in the Late Archaic settlement-subsistence pattern. There are strong similarities between the narrow stemmed points found at the two shelters, as one would expect to find at sites that are so close to one another. These points are numerically predominant at both sites, which argues against the possibility of alternating use during successive prehistoric periods. However, we obviously do not have fine enough chronological control to rule out the possibility that a single family may have camped at the Ossining Rockshelter one year, and at the Hanotak site the next. Indeed, this seems to be the most likely explanation of the situation. Otherwise, groups occupying these sites contemporaneously would have been exploiting virtually the same catchment area, which would have been a big-risk strategy during seasons when resources were no abundant. The diversity of activities represented by the finds from the Ossining site – hunting (points), butchering (knives), hide or wood-working (scrapers, drills, bone awls), stonechipping, and cooking and consumption of food – refutes the idea that the site might have been used only by specialized task groups, such as hunting parties. However, the possibility remains that the shelter may have served, at different times of the year, as a base camp, transient camp, or hunting camp. Binford (1982) has observed such multiple use of sites among the Nunamiut Eskimo. The significant finds that resulted from excavation of the Ossining Rockshelter show that re- 44 THE BULLETIN investigation of previously excavated sites may be a very rewarding endeavor. Early diggers were often careless; when Harrington (1909) sifted his own backdirt pile at Finch's Rock House, he recovered no fewer than 95 projectile points, in addition to other artifacts. Fortunately, most of Harrington's finds from rockshelters in the Armonk region are still stored at the American Museum of Natural History, unlike Case's finds from the Ossining Rockshelter, which have disappeared. Re-examination of the extant collections, and new excavations of rockshelters, may yield further insights into the problems of chronology and cultural reconstruction that have been raised here. FAUNAL REMAINS White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus): 175 identifiable pieces, 4425 small fragments Turtles (probably Chelydra serpentina (snapping) and Chrysemys picta (painted)) 329 pieces (303 carapace or plastron fragments, 6 claws, 4 beaks, 16 bones) Birds (species?): 286 larger pieces, 1617 small fragments Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo): 11 pieces Least shrew (Cryptotis parva): 3 pieces Chipmunk (Tamias striatus): 3 pieces Raccoon (Procyon lotor): 3 pieces (1 mandible, 2 teeth) Small mammals, non-ID: 140 pieces (135 limb bones, phalanges, scapulas, and 5 teeth) Snake (species?):