Northeast Subsistence-Settlement Change: A.D. 700 –1300

Figure 6.13. Site situation: a comparison of the Thames River and Grand River Valley early Late
Woodland.
Reasons for the importance of river bar locations to
Princess Point groups and the subsequent shift away
from them may be linked to any number of factors. In
the Ohio Valley, Muller (1987) has argued that a shift
from upland locations to lowland locations during
Mississippian times is possibly linked to a combination
of climatic, social, and cultural material changes. These
factors, particularly the advent of agriculture and the
introduction of the bow and arrow, are hypothesized to
have lessened requirements for interdependence during
the Middle Woodland. He also suggests that continued
competition between groups occupying these
lowlands led to more or less permanent occupation of
these locales. Settlement locations along the Grand
River do not shift from the uplands to the lowland after
Princess Point. Nevertheless, a shift in site location
preference occurs, generally from the floodplains to
higher terraces and inland (Dieterman 2001). The evidence
for the introduction of the bow and arrow during
Princess Point is equivocal; technological changes
in the stone tools is similar to changes seen elsewhere
in the world at the onset of food production (Shen
2001). This correlation should not be taken to mean the
technological changes have a causal effect. With the
shift to a mixed economy that included corn, we share
Muller’s view that social factors (e.g., increased competition
and more complex political factors) were at
play and were set in a context of environmental
change. The environmental changes in the Grand River
Valley are evidenced by a destabilization of the river
bars that were among the preferred locales for Princess
Point habitation.
Excavations at terrace sites have elaborated our
knowledge of these locales and have also strengthened
our view of their importance in the Princess Point settlement
system. Our previous work at Young 1 suggested
that terrace locales were both small in size and
short-term in duration of occupation. Research at Bell
Terrace and Meyer, however, indicates the pattern for
terrace sites is more complex than originally proposed.
Artifact density and their extent, combined with the
recovery of settlement patterns attest to a longer and
perhaps repeated occupation of terrace sites such as
Meyer.
The research conducted in southwestern Ontario in
2000 raises a number of significant questions. First, it
suggests that the database available to researchers
prior to 2000 was unrepresentative. By surveying
Chapter 6 Early Late Woodland in Southern Ontario: An Update (1996–2000) 131