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

Figure 2.6. Comparison of Late Woodland and Transitional Late Prehistoric feature
morphology.
(Reidhead 1981). Overall, Wymer (1992) notes that the
central Ohio Valley late Late Woodland native crop
portfolio comes to be dominated by fewer species,
with the eventual loss of all but Chenopodium and sunflower,
which continue into the Late Prehistoric
Period (see Wagner 1987).
Hunting strategies during the late Late Woodland
tended to emphasize the exploitation of fewer faunal
resources as dietary staples, especially those that were
resilient (Church 1997; Murphy 1977, 1984; Oetelaar
1990; Reidhead 1981). While birds; mammals such as
black bear and raccoon; fish; and mussels were
exploited, their numbers and presence varied considerably
from site to site. None of these resources
appears to have played an important role as dietary
staples compared to white-tailed deer, wild turkey,
and turtles. Shott and Jefferies (citing Oetelaar’s 1990
data) also propose that the faunal record from central
Ohio Woodland and Late Prehistoric sites could
reflect a decrease in the mean live weight of deer.
Should this pattern be replicated at other sites, Shott
and Jefferies (1992) suggest the trend could be due to
increasing predation on faunal staples.
As previously mentioned, the dispersed communities
of the late Late Woodland period stand in contrast
to the nucleated pattern described for the early Late
Woodland sites in Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky.
What prompted this change in settlement pattern is
still unclear. Perhaps the benefits afforded by nucleation
(see Dancey 1992) and the dependence upon the
major faunal staples and native cultigens within a site
catchment could no longer sustain such population
aggregates because of the need to continually expand
garden plots. For instance, Johannessen (1993:68)
points out that the cultivation of small grain plants
would favor monocropping rather than mixed
gardens because of the difficulty of sowing and harvesting.
With population growth and continued
nucleation, more labor and land would be needed to
obtain the same amount of edible resource (see
Netting 1974). Likewise, data on white-tailed deer
exploitation presented by Shott and Jeffreies (1992)
Chapter 2 Central Ohio Valley During the Late Prehistoric Period: Subsistance-Settlement Systems’ Responses to Risk 19