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

Under a population metaphysic, the discontinuities
between culture-historic types and composition can be
viewed with less skepticism given the absence of stringent
boundaries between taxa allowing for the coexistence
of several different local populations within a
limited geographic area. In northcentral Pennsylvania,
evidence of the coexistence of different populations can
be seen in the recovery of locally produced Owasco
sherds from the same features as Clemson Island
sherds. Under a population metaphysic, the work of
Graybill (1989) has some utility in explaining the discontinuity
between culture-historic types and ceramic
composition. In his analysis of the later Shenks Ferry
tradition, Graybill (1989) points out that the early Late
Prehistoric occupants of Pennsylvania were culturally
similar (and produced artifacts similar) to those of others
in the adjacent Appalachian Highland zones. More
specifically, Graybill (1989) argues that the early Late
Prehistoric occupants of northcentral Pennsylvania
and New York, as well as the Lower Susquehanna and
Potomac drainage, probably derived from a rather
“uniform Middle/Late Woodland base” along the eastern
and northern fringes of the Alleghany Plateau
between A.D. 850 and 1250. Under this scheme,
Graybill (1989) emphasizes the importance of the
“Middle/Late Woodland base” (or population) as the
important unit of analysis, suggesting that variation
between groups in southern Pennsylvania, along the
West Branch of the Susquehanna, and in northcentral
Pennsylvania exists and may represent an attempt by
these local populations to adapt to the surrounding
ecological niche.
When viewed as a single “population” and not as
smaller culture groups, the results of this project make
sense, eliminating the need to justify temporal and spatial
concerns as to why the Clemson Island and
Owasco groups came to occupy the same ecological
niche. When treated as part of a population, the potters
of northcentral Pennsylvania might expect to have
made choices as to how to design and decorate pots.
While some of these choices(e.g., cordmarking, oblique
motifs, etc.), may represent characteristics associated
with the larger population, other choices (e.g., punctates)
may reflect the local population’s interest in distinguishing
itself from its neighbors (Pretola 2000). As
Pretola (2000:30-31) points out, it is these individual
choices and their variation between local groups that
make it difficult to use the same culture-historic types
to compare groups residing in different parts of the
same region.
CONCLUSION
Changes in ceramic typology are often used to document
spatial and temporal changes in early Late
Prehistoric settlement patterns. In northcentral
Pennsylvania, these changes center around two ceramic
traditions: Clemson Island and Owasco. Despite
efforts to do so, the high degree of stylistic similarity
between these traditions makes it difficult to distinguish
between types, thus limiting their usefulness in
prehistoric settlement studies.
In this study, trace element analysis was employed
to determine if compositional profiles of four ceramic
assemblages correspond with identified stylistic types.
The results of this study suggest that there does not
appear to be a clear distinction between ceramic types
and the clay deposits exploited by the early Late
Prehistoric occupants of central Pennsylvania. Most of
the Clemson Island and Owasco ceramics were manufactured
from similar local clay deposits. Four sherds
grouped in the Otsego group and probably represent
nonlocally manufactured containers.
When viewed under a population metaphysic, differences
in ceramic paste and the selection of one
resource over another probably reflect the range of
materials that were available within a particular
resource collection zone around the village or camp. In
the future, additional studies are needed to determine
the diverse array of materials used in the construction
of these pots and how the choices made by these potters
reflect the settlement characteristics of these local
communities.
Acknowledgments
The ceramic sherds used in this study are curated at the
Pennsylvania State Museum and Historical
Commission in Harrisburg. Conversations with
Juliann Van Nest helped to clarify my thinking about
the formation and distribution of clays in the Eastern
Woodlands. William Lanford provided access to the x-
ray fluorescence apparatus at the University at Albany,
SUNY, Accelerator Laboratory. The ceramic drawings
were completed by Anne Chojacki. I am grateful to C.
J. Smith, Ellen Cesarski, John Hart, and two anonymous
reviewers who provided comments on an earlier
version of this paper. All errors are the responsibility of
the author.
Chapter 7 Early Late Prehistoric Settlement: A View from Northcentral Pennsylvania 149