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

Rive r
40
3
MAINE
Hudson
N E W Y O R K
VERMONT
1
Connecticut
N E W
4
H A M P S H I R E
5
2
38
6
Pine Hill
7
M A S S A C H U S E T T S
8
37
River
39
28
29 30
9
10
12
13
14
Burnham-
Shepard
18
Morgan
C O N N E C T I C U T
19
20
33
21
26
27
31
RHODE
ISLAND
36
22 35
25
A l a n
34 15
t i c
N
23
24
O c e a n
17
16
11
32
0
0
50 mi
80 km
J. Skiba
Figure 15.1. Map of southern New England, showing the location of archaeological sites with
prehistoric cultigens and key sites referred to in the text.
not a central feature of the coastal economy” (Bernstein
1999; see also Bendremer et al. 1991; Ceci 1979-1980;
McBride and Dewar 1987). That is not to say that maize
is less often recovered from Late Woodland coastal
sites (Figure 15.1; Table 15.1). My own recent work at
the Lucy Vincent Beach site on Martha’s Vineyard indicates
a diverse diet for Late Woodland peoples on the
coast (Chilton and Doucette 2001): soil flotation and
subsequent analysis of remains by Tonya Largy from
numerous trash pits and other features indicates a diet
that included a variety of maritime resources (e.g.,
hard- and soft-shell clam, scallop, whelk, large quantities
of goosefish, scup), as well as terrestrial resources
(deer, turtle, hickory nuts, and a small quantity of
maize). While there is much work to be done in sorting
out the complexity of Late Woodland coastal
economies, it is clear that the diet and supporting subsistence-settlement
system was quite diverse (Bridges
1994; Little and Schoeninger 1995).
While there is general agreement that maize was
more of a dietary supplement than a staple on the New
England coast, interpretations for the interior are far
more contentious. Several researchers argue for intensive
horticulture during the Late Woodland period. For
example, Bendremer and Dewar (1994) suggest that
the presence of more than one type of cultigen at inland
290 Chilton