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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Native societies wrought by European exploration and colonization (Comaroff 1985; Comaroff and Comaroff 1992; Roseberry 1988; Sahlins 1985, 1992; Stahl 1994; Trigger 1985; Wolf 1982). If non-Western societies changed as they articulated with the world system, anthropologists must be wary of projecting historically recorded “traditional” behaviors into a more distant past (Stahl 1994; Trigger 1985). This has significant ramifications for prehistoric investigations. The preeminent Iroquois ethnohistorian William N. Fenton applied a form of the direct historical approach to write Iroquois history (Fenton 1949, 1952, 1962). Fenton’s method of “upstreaming” pivoted on the assumption that “major patterns of culture tend to be stable over long periods” (Fenton 1949:236). This stress on the immutable nature of structure is implicit in most traditional applications of the direct historical approach (but see Stahl 1994). Because this analogic form focuses on the historical connection, historic patterns are often uncritically projected onto the archaeological past (Stahl 1993). By conflating historic patterns with the earliest portion of the Late Prehistoric period, we have shaped our perceptions of the period in two fundamental ways: First, the beginning of the Late Prehistoric period is marked by the rapid appearance of a fully developed horticultural economy; and second, once the practice of horticulture appeared, subsistence economies remained essentially static for more than half a millennium. Rather than assume that Late Prehistoric subsistence and settlement is unchanging, we must treat this as a research question. This is precisely the theme the editors of this volume challenge archaeologists to address. Specifically, the problem posed is how did subsistence-settlement strategies change (or remain stable) in the Northeast during A.D. 700-1300? Change can be usefully defined as a relational difference between states. Change, therefore, implies variability; with the absence of variability between states, there is no change. Hence, a focus on change first requires explicit attention to outlining variation. The most commonly used sense of change in archaeology implies a temporal difference between states. For example, an interesting research problem for the Northeast is how and why over time, people changed their subsistence strategy from an exclusive focus on hunting, gathering, and collecting to the incorporation of gardening activities and ultimately a heavy reliance on agriculture. However, temporal change is only one source of variability in the archaeological record; other relational differences may embody cultural, functional, and/or spatial variation. Given the diverse factors structuring archaeological variability, it is critical that we focus on variation and explore the potentially multidimensional factors underlying this diversity. By recognizing a more dynamic Late Prehistoric period animated by spatial and temporal variability we will ultimately be better able to model the important transition from food collector-hunter-gatherer to food producer. Therefore, to gain a more variegated picture of Late Prehistoric subsistence and settlement, we must begin collecting appropriate data from a number of sites from different temporal and regional contexts. In this vein, I explore Late Prehistoric variability by comparing subsistence-settlement systems for two sites located in different Upper Susquehanna River tributary valleys (Figure 9.1). Thomas/Luckey, a Late Prehistoric village on the Chemung River floodplain, contains at least two longhouses and over 150 pit features (Knapp 1996; Miroff 2000). Broome Tech, a lower Chenango Valley multicomponent site, contains an artifact-rich early Late Prehistoric midden and associated features, which, based on field impressions, was provisionally identified as the remains of a seasonally reoccupied camp (Knapp 1998). The selection of these two sites for an initial comparison of Late Prehistoric variability grew largely out of fortuitous circumstances presented by two separate data recovery excavations that I directed for the Public Archaeology Facility (PAF) at Binghamton. Although the differences between these sites may appear to be evident, this was not really the case. From the onset, it was clear that Thomas/Luckey, with its multiple longhouses, indicated the presence of either a village or hamlet. The picture was murkier for Broome Tech, where the presence of post molds, a relatively large number of features, and an artifact-laden midden seemed to preclude interpreting this site as a camp. At the same time, the lack of structures, the presence of a single large storage pit, and the site’s relatively small size seemed incompatible with a hamlet or village. This chapter, therefore, grew largely from my attempts to understand and explain the differences between these two sites. At first blush, the differences between these two sites may lead some to question the utility of a comparison of a hamlet or village (Thomas/Luckey) with a site that somewhat resembles a large seasonally reoccupied site (Broome Tech). Why compare two sites that already appear to differ? Isn’t this comparing apples and oranges? What can be gained from such an exercise? Yes, these sites are different. However, I believe that a detailed comparison of these two Upper Susquehanna Valley sites is a productive and necessary endeavor. We must begin to explore the variation manifested in the 168 Knapp
Thomas/Luckey Broome Tech N 0 0 50 mi 80 km J. Skiba Figure 9.1. Location of Thomas/Luckey and Broome Tech. Late Prehistoric period, whether it be temporal, cultural, functional, or spatial, before we can address change over time. Elucidating this variation requires archaeologists to compare a number of sites. By contrasting Thomas/Luckey and Broome Tech, I will highlight the underlying structure of some of these differences that should shed light on how and why these two sites differ. For this study I analyze three primary data sets to explore this variation: features, botanical remains, and spatial organization. Having highlighted variation in these data sets, I will provide possible explanations as to why Thomas/Luckey and Broome Tech differ, but more definitive conclusions will ultimately require a larger number of detailed comparisons in order to sort out whether or not this variability relates to subregional, temporal, or functional differences. What I hope to accomplish is to add to the database on Late Prehistoric subsistence-settlement variation, for it is this variation that will ultimately serve as the building blocks for addressing temporal change. THE THOMAS/LUCKEY SITE Thomas/Luckey (SUBi-888) is a Late Prehistoric village located on the north bank of the Chemung River in the Town of Ashland, Chemung County, New York (Figure 9.2). The Chemung River drains a portion of the glaciated Appalachian Plateau, a physiographic region dominated by high flat-topped divides separated by steep-sided U-shaped valleys (Fairchild 1925:13; Fenneman 1938:312). Thomas/Luckey lies approximately 24 km upstream from the Chemung’s Chapter 9 Pits, Plants, and Place: Recognizing Late Prehistoric Subsistence and Settlement Diversity in the Upper Susquehanna Drainage 169
Page 1 and 2:
Northeast Subsistence-Settlement Ch
Page 3 and 4:
Northeast Subsistence-Settlement Ch
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures L
Page 7 and 8:
LIST OF FIGURES 2.1 Map of the cent
Page 9 and 10:
9.3 Topographic map of Broome Tech.
Page 11 and 12:
11.1 Upper Susquehanna Site Types (
Page 13 and 14:
PREFACE The New York State Museum h
Page 15 and 16:
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Christina B.
Page 17 and 18:
domesticates and the occupation of
Page 19 and 20:
and Rieth highlight the important c
Page 21 and 22:
Dunnell, R. C. (1971). Systematics
Page 23 and 24:
Anthropology, University of Massach
Page 25 and 26:
CHAPTER 2 CENTRAL OHIO VALLEY DURIN
Page 27 and 28:
L a k e E r i e PENNSYLVANIA INDIAN
Page 29 and 30:
L a k e E r i e INDIANA R i v e r G
Page 31 and 32:
Olentangy River and other minor tri
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 2.6. Comparison of Late Wood
Page 35 and 36:
support the notion of resource stre
Page 37 and 38:
F4 F7 F5 F6 F3 F2 F9 F10 F12 F13 F1
Page 39 and 40:
B B M F42 F43 F41 F44 S5 S4 S1 F30
Page 41 and 42:
Table 2.3. continued Temporal Age A
Page 43 and 44:
Table 2.3. continued Temporal Age A
Page 45 and 46:
L a k e E r i e INDIANA o i O h Sal
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 2.13. Map of the Late Prehis
Page 49 and 50:
Figure 2.15. Map of households with
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 2.17. Sample of Late Prehist
Page 53 and 54:
Barkes, B. M. (1982). An Analysis o
Page 55 and 56:
Fort Ancient Tradition, edited by J
Page 57 and 58:
CHAPTER 3 “ . . . to reconstruct
Page 59 and 60:
IT TAKES A VILLAGE Figure 3.2. Arti
Page 61 and 62:
social organizations is drawn prima
Page 63 and 64:
elements of the village, the spaces
Page 65 and 66:
Diametric, concentric, and circumfe
Page 67 and 68:
egion, including Reckner (Augustine
Page 69 and 70:
Chapter 3 Modeling Village Communit
Page 71 and 72:
Figure 3.9. Architectural and nonar
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 3.11. Measuring distances in
Page 75 and 76:
Table 3.2. Descriptive Statistics f
Page 77 and 78:
DISCUSSION Table 3.3. Descriptive S
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 3.14. Box-and-whisker plot o
Page 81 and 82:
Augustine, E. A. (1938d). Important
Page 83 and 84:
Among Some Amazon Tribes. Privately
Page 85 and 86:
on Black Mesa, Arizona. The Univers
Page 87 and 88:
CHAPTER 4 THE EARLY LATE WOODLAND I
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 4.3. Gibraltar Cordmarked ce
Page 91 and 92:
Figure 4.5. Ceramics of the Gibralt
Page 93 and 94:
points and notched Chesser or Lowe
Page 95 and 96:
dated to A.D. 890 (1025) 1230 (DIC-
Page 97 and 98:
Table 4.3. Available Stable Carbon
Page 99 and 100:
where fishing and farming may have
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 4.10. Ceramic of the Sandusk
Page 103 and 104:
singular Mixter Stamped vessels typ
Page 105 and 106:
urial with the dead, broadcasted a
Page 107 and 108:
during the early Late Woodland time
Page 109 and 110:
Valley. North American Archaeologis
Page 111 and 112:
CHAPTER 5 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TH
Page 113 and 114:
interest in exchange of service or
Page 115 and 116:
CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS In view of t
Page 117 and 118:
710 Area C 700 B-75084 TO-4556 TO-4
Page 119 and 120:
Table 5.1. Summary of Artifacts fro
Page 121 and 122:
e Bull's Point C o o t e s P a r a
Page 123 and 124:
classification system has been appl
Page 125 and 126:
(Crawford et al. 1997a). The same i
Page 127 and 128:
in Ontario was Middle Woodland-deri
Page 129 and 130:
207-212. Smithsonian Institution, W
Page 131 and 132: CHAPTER 6 EARLY LATE WOODLAND IN SO
Page 133 and 134: Figure 6.2. Lower Grand River Valle
Page 135 and 136: Table 6.1. Radiocarbon Dates from t
Page 137 and 138: segment of the terrace that effecti
Page 139 and 140: Figure 6.7. Meyer site terrace, vie
Page 141 and 142: Figure 6.10. Forster site reconstru
Page 143 and 144: Figure 6.12. Middle Thames River 20
Page 145 and 146: Figure 6.13. Site situation: a comp
Page 147 and 148: Dieterman, F. (2001). Princess Poin
Page 149 and 150: CHAPTER 7 EARLY LATE PREHISTORIC SE
Page 151 and 152: ticultural hamlets, small and large
Page 153 and 154: that Clemson Island was greatly inf
Page 155 and 156: local deposits. Alternately, Stimme
Page 157 and 158: Table 7.1. Radiocarbon Dates from S
Page 159 and 160: Pennsylvania continued to practice
Page 161 and 162: level) overlaps with the West Branc
Page 163 and 164: Under a population metaphysic, the
Page 165 and 166: Hatch, J. W., and Koontz, K. L. (19
Page 167 and 168: CHAPTER 8 NEW DATES FOR OWASCO POTS
Page 169 and 170: Table 8.1. Key Components of the Th
Page 171 and 172: Figure 8.1. Location of the Kipp Is
Page 173 and 174: Table 8.4. Carpenter Brook Phase Ho
Page 175 and 176: Table 8.5. Physical Characteristics
Page 177 and 178: Table 8.6. AMS Dates and Calibrated
Page 179 and 180: REFERENCES CITED Ammerman, A. J., a
Page 181: CHAPTER 9 PITS, PLANTS, AND PLACE:
Page 185 and 186: confluence with the Susquehanna Riv
Page 187 and 188: Figure 9.3. Topographic map of Broo
Page 189 and 190: Table 9.2. Feature Types at Thomas/
Page 191 and 192: Figure 9.4. Histogram of feature de
Page 193 and 194: Table 9.4. Plant Remains from Thoma
Page 195 and 196: Figure 9.7. Sample composition of n
Page 197 and 198: Figure 9.9. Seed composition (exclu
Page 199 and 200: suggests that the gathering of wild
Page 201 and 202: of posts may mark remnants of tempo
Page 203 and 204: for allowing me repeated and unteth
Page 205 and 206: History Press, Garden City, New Yor
Page 207 and 208: CHAPTER 10 UPLAND LAND USE PATTERNS
Page 209 and 210: LOCAL LEVEL ANALYSIS Local level an
Page 211 and 212: N104 E101 Unit 19A Unit 7A Unit 12A
Page 213 and 214: Table 10.2. Park Creek II Feature A
Page 215 and 216: Fea. 2 Fea. 5 0 1 2 N Figure 10.4.
Page 217 and 218: encounterlike hunting/butchering st
Page 219 and 220: END NOTES 1. A village is defined a
Page 221 and 222: Perrelli, D. J. (1994). Gender, Mob
Page 223 and 224: CHAPTER 11 EARLY LATE PREHISTORIC S
Page 225 and 226: Table 11.1. Upper Susquehanna Site
Page 227 and 228: Table 11.2. Summary of Late Middle
Page 229 and 230: Table 11.3. Settlement Features of
Page 231 and 232: approximately 1,000 sq. ft, there i
Page 233 and 234:
Table 11.5. Summary of Seed Identif
Page 235 and 236:
importance of hunting and hunting-r
Page 237 and 238:
portion of the Susquehanna Valley,
Page 239 and 240:
Herrick, J. W., and Snow, D. R. (19
Page 241 and 242:
CHAPTER 12 WOODLAND PERIOD SETTLEME
Page 243 and 244:
oundaries were given. According to
Page 245 and 246:
Table 12.1: Selected Radiocarbon an
Page 247 and 248:
shads and herrings of the family Cl
Page 249 and 250:
consists of large concentrations of
Page 251 and 252:
(1990) survey of recorded sites in
Page 253 and 254:
York State 92:1-8. Busby, M. (1966)
Page 255 and 256:
CHAPTER 13 PALEOETHNOBOTANICAL INDI
Page 257 and 258:
Figure 13.1. Forest regions of the
Page 259 and 260:
Table 13.1. Distribution of Nut Tre
Page 261 and 262:
ation in feature contents. For mult
Page 263 and 264:
Figure 13.4. Nutshell density (gray
Page 265 and 266:
Figure 13.5. Seed density and maize
Page 267 and 268:
Table 13.3. Seed Indicators-Maine S
Page 269 and 270:
Table 13.4. Broome Tech Site: Selec
Page 271 and 272:
6, and it occurred in 58 percent of
Page 273 and 274:
Table 13.6. Continued Site Uncalibr
Page 275 and 276:
Acknowledgments I thank John Hart f
Page 277 and 278:
y K. J. Gremillion, pp. 161-178. Th
Page 279 and 280:
CHAPTER 14 FROM HUNTER-GATHERER CAM
Page 281 and 282:
Figure 14.1. Distribution of select
Page 283 and 284:
available to Ceci were simply too l
Page 285 and 286:
the AMS date of A.D. 1185 (A.D. 127
Page 287 and 288:
Table 14.1. Continued Site Lab C14
Page 289 and 290:
within single settlements remains e
Page 291 and 292:
noncoastal residential sites certai
Page 293 and 294:
Figure 14.3. Two stratigraphic prof
Page 295 and 296:
to the Maritime Provinces on the Gu
Page 297 and 298:
other related questions yet, and so
Page 299 and 300:
Northeast Historical Archaeology 21
Page 301 and 302:
Thomas, P. A. (1976). Contrastive s
Page 303 and 304:
CHAPTER 15 “towns they have none
Page 305 and 306:
Table 15.1. Key to Figure 15.1: Arc
Page 307 and 308:
Maize will normally not preserve fo
Page 309 and 310:
artifacts. Cowie (2000) suggests th
Page 311 and 312:
creativity to resolve, but is also
Page 313 and 314:
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of A
Page 315 and 316:
CHAPTER 16 OUT OF THE BLUE AND INTO
Page 317 and 318:
Figure 16.2. Map of the Bliss Islan
Page 319 and 320:
shell-bearing sites located on the
Page 321 and 322:
site. Middle Maritime Woodland occu
Page 323 and 324:
(e.g., Black 1992:190) limit and co
Page 325 and 326:
Table 16.3. Faunal Remains Associat
Page 327 and 328:
and often poor vertebrate faunal pr
Page 329 and 330:
the Maine/Maritimes area have argue
Page 331 and 332:
SE: warm season (Rojo 1987:221); sp
Page 333 and 334:
Ethnohistory 36:257-284. Bourque, B
Page 335 and 336:
CHAPTER 17 ABORIGINAL LAND AND RESO
Page 337 and 338:
Table 17.1. Chronological and Ceram
Page 339 and 340:
Among the food plants listed above,
Page 341 and 342:
species, the American eel (Anguilla
Page 343 and 344:
the Early Woodland period. Tools ma
Page 345 and 346:
Copper Resources Throughout the Lat
Page 347 and 348:
midden deposits were located along
Page 349 and 350:
a model with two distinct populatio
Page 351 and 352:
Table 17.2. Summary of Landscape an
Page 353 and 354:
File Report 93-1, Fredericton. Alle
Page 355 and 356:
Anthropology, Temple University, Ph
Page 357 and 358:
stone age found at Maquapit Lake. N
Page 359 and 360:
CHAPTER 18 MAIZE AND VILLAGES: A Su
Page 361 and 362:
use of the term “small village”
Page 363 and 364:
1325 [1425] 1460) (Boyd et al. 1998
Page 365 and 366:
several centuries after its first a
Page 367 and 368:
from excavations at village sites h
Page 369 and 370:
133-156. New York State Museum Bull
Page 371 and 372:
longhouses. American Antiquity 55:4
Page 373 and 374:
CONTRIBUTORS Timothy J. Abel. Carth
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?