PROTO-IROQUOIAN DIVERGENCE IN THE LATE ARCHAIC–EARLY
WOODLAND PERIOD TRANSITION OF THE APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS
Thomas R. Whyte
Divergence of proto-Iroquoians, resulting in the linguistic
separation of Cherokee and Northern Iroquois, is estimated to
have begun almost 4,000 years ago. Linguistic and molecular
studies are consistent with a proto-Iroquoian homeland in the
Appalachian region. Archaeological and ecological evidence
support a hypothesis that proto-Iroquoia is represented by an
Appalachian mast forest adaptation in the Terminal Late
Archaic period. This adaptation was characterized by (1)
heavy dependence upon upland forest mast, (2) projectile point
type distributions trending along the Appalachian axis, (3)
evidence of significant participation of Appalachia in a wider
regional economy involving export of valuable and geographically restricted lithic and perhaps subsistence resources,
(4) the possibility of violent competition for control of these
resources (as evidenced by the introduction of the bow and
arrow), and (5) a preference for cremation of the dead. ProtoIroquoian divergence probably began with the shift from
a strictly hunting and gathering subsistence pattern of the
upland mast forest adaptation to a more sedentary adaptation
enhanced by the gradual adoption of horticulture and its
associated technology and sociocultural behaviors.
Iroquoian speakers, at the time of European contact,
resided in areas adjacent to Lakes Huron and Ontario
(Northern Iroquois Group), the southern Appalachians
(Cherokee Group), and eastern Virginia and North
Carolina (Tuscarora Group) (Figure 1). David Zeisberger, observing the adoption of a treaty between the
Cherokee and Six Nations Iroquois in 1768, was
possibly the first to recognize the similarity between
Cherokee and Northern Iroquois languages (Mithun
1979). In 1900 James Mooney, observing that the
Cherokee Indians of the Appalachian Summit region
speak an Iroquoian language, suggested that they must
at one time have occupied contiguous territories, and
that ‘‘tradition and historical evidence concur in
assigning the Cherokee as their early home the region
about the headwaters of the Ohio’’ (Mooney 1900:17).
Arthur Parker (1916) suggested that the original
territory of all Iroquois was the middle Mississippi
Valley. In part, because of the observed linguistic
relationship and geographic separation of the Cherokee
and Northern Iroquois, early archaeological research in
both the southern Appalachian Summit and the
Northeast focused on ethnic origins.
The question of Cherokee origins motivated the very
earliest archaeology of the southern Appalachian
region and persists in the present through the Cherokee
Project of the Research Labs of Archaeology at the
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (Ward and
Davis 1999). Many of the first archaeologists working in
the Southeast, favoring then-popular migration models, argued that the arrival of the Cherokee in the
southern Appalachian region was just prior to or
within the historic period (see Coe 1961 and Dickens
1979 for historical overviews of Cherokee origins
research). Most, it appears, were influenced by Mooney’s (1900) recorded oral tradition, citing midwestern
or Ohio Valley archaeological assemblages as ancestral
to historic Cherokee. Coe (1961:59), however, argued
that ‘‘it seems hardly necessary to look for any recent
migration of the Cherokee into their historic area. There
is sufficient archaeological data to suggest that they
were already occupying it by the close of the Archaic
Period.’’ Dickens (1979:28) reiterates: ‘‘This suggests, at
the least, that Cherokee culture was the end product of
a long, continuous, and multilinear development in the
South Appalachian region.’’
Dickens (1976, 1979, 1986), in support of Coe (1961),
argued for an in situ development of historic Cherokee
by recognizing a continuum of archaeological phases
from at least the Middle Woodland Connestee through
Mississippian Pisgah and into historic Qualla. More
recent investigations, however, suggest that this interpretation may be overly simplistic (Moore 1986;
Ward and Davis 1999; Whyte 2003). Riggs and Rodning
(2002) suggest that the Qualla phase, which is unquestionably Cherokee, developed out of the Savannah/Early Lamar of Northern Georgia in the fifteenth
century, not Pisgah.
Recognition of the late prehistoric representations of
Overhill Cherokee culture in the neighboring Ridge and
Valley province of eastern Tennessee has been troubled
by as much controversy (Schroedl 1986) and remains
a perplexity (Schroedl 2005; Sullivan 2005). Neither
replacement nor culture continuity models sufficiently
explain existing data. Schroedl (1986:132) proposes that
Mississippian cultural sequences in eastern Tennessee
are best explained by a cyclical culture collapse model
that ‘‘allows for culture reorganization.’’
In sum, studies of Cherokee origins have emphasized
late prehistoric archaeological evidence and focused on
immediate ancestry.
Northeastern archaeology has enjoyed no less than
an obsession for Iroquois origins research (e.g., Bamann
134
PROTO-IROQUOIAN DIVERGENCE IN THE LATE ARCHAIC–EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD TRANSITION
Figure 1. Historical distribution of Iroquoian speakers in
eastern North America.
et al. 1992; Byers 1959; Chapdelaine 1992; Crawford
and Smith 1996; Custer 1987a, 1987b; D’Annibale and
Ross 1994; Dincauze and Hasenstab 1989; Funk 1993;
Hart and Brumbach 2003; Hasenstab 1990; Lenig 2000;
MacNeish 1952; Richardson and Swauger 1996; Ritchie
1961, 1969; Ritchie and Funk 1973; Snow 1980, 1984,
1994, 1995a, 1995b, 1996; Starna and Funk 1994; Trigger
1970; Tuck 1977; Warrick 2000; Wright 1972, 1984).
Early origins hypotheses focused on late Iroquoian
migrations from the South (Byers 1959; Wright 1984).
MacNeish (1952) was probably the first to propose an
in situ development of Iroquois culture. William Ritchie
(1969), following MacNeish (1952), cites Laurentian
Archaic as the proto-Iroquoian base (Wright 1984).
Ritchie (1969) proposed the Point Penninsula-OwascoIroquois continuum in support of an in situ evolution of
Northern Iroquois.
Dean Snow (1977) countered with a revival of the
replacement hypothesis by observing that the earliest
evidence of Iroquoian migration from the South
appears in the Susquehanna tradition Frost Island
phase of the terminal Late Archaic period. Frost Island,
as defined by Ritchie (1969), is characterized by
Susquehanna type projectile points, soapstone vessels,
Vinette I pottery, and cremation burials. More recently,
Snow (1995a) argued for a later northward migration of
Iroquoians into the region based on the sudden
appearance of Owasco culture and maize horticulture
at A.D. 900, and then adjusted this estimate to A.D. 600
(Snow 1996) based on evidence provided by Crawford
and Smith (1996) from southern Ontario. He proffers
that the Clemson Island phase of central Pennsylvania
was the source of that migration. Hart and Brumbach
(2003) have since rejected Owasco as a viable taxonomic entity, suggesting that its employment as
a taxonomic unit invalidates origins studies in which
it is used. They conclude that ‘‘the search for the origin
of New York Iroquoians within a culture-historic
framework can no longer be considered a viable
research agenda’’ (Hart and Brumbach 2003:738).
Warrick (2000) observes continuity between Middle
and Late Woodland phases in southern Ontario,
suggesting that maize horticulture was gradually
introduced to long-resident Iroquoians. Chapdelaine
(1993) suggests that northern Iroquoian groups were in
place by the Middle Woodland period. Richardson and
Swauger (1996) cite petroglyph distributions in support
of long-term Iroquoian residency in the Northeast.
In sum, the search for continuities and discontinuities between taxonomic units defined by trait lists as
a way of inferring migration versus diffusion versus
stationary evolution (in situ development) among late
prehistoric societies in eastern North America has
proven to be, in the least, frustrating. Nevertheless,
the decades of research and debate have provided
a clearer picture of late prehistoric (Woodland and
Mississippian period) population dynamics. This debate over recent movements or nonmovements of
Iroquoian speakers will undoubtedly entertain generations of archaeologists to come. But a broader regional
investigation (phases and foci aside) of earlier, protoIroquoian roots is now seemingly opportune, especially
when recent molecular studies (e.g., Bolnick 2005;
Bolnick and Smith 2003; Malhi et al. 2001) are
considered in light of existing linguistic, archaeological,
and ecological data.
This study is not intended to propose and test
specific hypotheses about Iroquoian origins using
empirical data. Its goal is to ‘‘zoom out’’ for a broader
geographical, temporal, and methodological view of
Iroquoian origins. It is anticipated that a synthesis of
existing archaeological, ecological, linguistic, and biological data for the eastern uplands in the Late/
Transitional Archaic period will provide the foundation needed for framing specific and testable hypotheses to explain cultural, linguistic, or biological
variation within the region.
Linguistic Evidence
Floyd Lounsbury’s (1961, 1978) glottochronologic
estimates place the divergence of Cherokee and
135
SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 26(1) SUMMER 2007
Northern Iroquois from a common ancestral language
at about 3,500 to 3,800 years ago, or within what is now
known as the Terminal Late Archaic period. This
suggests that proto-Iroquoian speakers prior to 4000
B.P. (1) occupied a place somewhere along the
Appalachian chain within or between historically
occupied Iroquoia (they subsequently were divided
into at least two groups, including one which ultimately resided in the Northeast and one in the Southeast), or
(2) originated elsewhere, such as the Midwest or on the
Atlantic slope, divided into at least two groups, one of
which ultimately migrated to and resided in the
southern Appalachians and one in the Northeast. The
predecessors of the Tuscarora, Nottoway, and Meherrin, Iroquois speakers residing in eastern Virginia and
North Carolina at Contact, according to linguistic
comparisons, branched off from the northern group
more recently, between 1,900 and 2,400 years ago
(Lounsbury 1978; Mithun 1979).
Mithun (1984:263) suggests that ‘‘perhaps four
thousand years ago, the ancestors of the modern
Iroquoians separated into two groups. One group,
which became the Cherokees, migrated toward what is
now Tennessee and the Carolinas.’’ She identified
proto-Iroquoian lexical cognates for various plants,
animals, technologies, and behaviors. Most significantly, none exists for the entire semantic area of corn
cultivation, which likely, then, postdates proto-Iroquoian divergence (Mithun 1984). Snow (1995a, 1996), citing
Mithun (1984) and Wykoff (1989) suggests that lexical
cognates and historic distribution of Iroquoian languages points to a central Appalachian origin for protoIroquoian. Wykoff (1989:221) is encouraged that ‘‘it is
still quite possible that distributions of species represented in the proto vocabulary can provide the
additional information necessary for resolving controversies over the less remote geographical origin of
Iroquoian speakers.’’
Molecular Evidence
Mitochondrial DNA studies reveal a clear genetic
relationship between Cherokee and other Iroquois, and
haplogroup variation that distinguishes Iroquoian
speakers from contiguous Algonquian speakers (Malhi
et al. 2001). They also generally reveal parallels
between genetic and linguistic distances for eastern
North American groups. Molecular evidence supports
Snow’s argument, Owasco aside: ‘‘Genetic evidence is
consistent with archaeological evidence of a cultural
intrusion into the Northeast (from the South) by
Iroquoians’’ (Malhi et al. 2001:42). Furthermore, Y
chromosome comparisons tentatively support a southeastern origin for all Iroquois (Bolnick 2005).
Material Culture
Regardless of the original place of residence of protoIroquois speakers, Cherokee predecessors became remotely separated from other Iroquoian speakers
probably in the approach of 4,000 years ago. Furthermore, some of them became residents of the southern
Appalachian region sometime prior to A.D. 1450, prior
to the start of the Qualla phase, which is arguably
representative of the protohistoric and historic Cherokee (Riggs and Rodning 2002). And considering the
very deep oral history, ideology, ethnobiology, and so
on of the Middle, Valley, and Out Town Cherokee in
the southern Appalachians, it could be argued that
Cherokee culture has enjoyed several millennia of
development in the southern Appalachian region.
The precision of Lounsbury’s (1961, 1978) glottochronological estimate is not important. Furthermore,
proto-Iroquoian divergence may have graduated over
time in parallel with gradual changes in subsistence,
settlement, social organization, and so on, or it may
have been punctuated by abrupt, perhaps catastrophic
changes brought on by endemic or epidemic warfare.
Safely assuming that Lounsbury’s estimate is within
a thousand years of the mark, I focus on archaeological
and environmental evidence from between 4,800 and
2,500 years ago (the Late Archaic–Early Woodland
transition) for indications of culture change that might
identify and explain this divergence. Indeed, that this
divergence apparently occurred around the time of an
archaeologically delineated transition between time
periods–the Late Archaic and Early Woodland–is
a considerable coincidence. This transition is generally
recognized as one of increased sedentism and territorial circumscription in the eastern uplands. I begin with
an examination of the late Early Archaic period (ca.
8000 B.P.) of the Appalachians and adjacent physiographic regions to look for broad regional patterns of
human adaptation from which proto-Iroquoian culture
may have derived.
The Early Archaic period in the eastern United States
ends with the Bifurcate tradition (ca. 8000 B.P.), which
extended from southern Canada to northern Alabama
and the Atlantic Coastal Plain to the Mississippi River.
The widespread distribution and consistency of form in
the phases of the Bifurcate tradition points to the
existence of a network of sharing of at least adaptive
technology and undoubtedly other cultural traits prior
to 8000 B.P. Most important, this network extended east
and west of and throughout the Appalachians (Chapman 1975). This can be explained by regular interaction
among bands of wide-ranging migratory hunter-gatherers adapted to the eastern deciduous forests (Chapman 1975; Anderson 1996). While it is arguably
dangerous to equate artifact styles with languages, it
is possible that this adaptation loosely identifies the oft-
136
PROTO-IROQUOIAN DIVERGENCE IN THE LATE ARCHAIC–EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD TRANSITION
proposed macro-Siouan population (Campbell 1997).
Indeed, genetic studies provide evidence for the
existence of a ‘‘macro-Siouan population, ancestral to
Iroquoians, Siouans, and Caddoans, early in the
prehistory of eastern North America’’ (Malhi et al.
2001:43).
By 7000 B.P., the eastern deciduous forests were
home to a number of geographically restricted cultural
manifestations, as reflected in technology, subsistence,
settlement, and sociopolitical organization (Sassaman
2001). This diversification and, in most areas, an
increased reliance on endemic lithic resources, suggests
an increase in territorial circumscription and reduced
communication across the broader region. These, in
turn, may have provided the venue for the beginnings
of linguistic and cultural diversification in the eastern
deciduous forest region, and the need for alternative
means of exchange and alliance (see Jefferies 1996). It is
reasonable to suggest that it was in this time of
diversification and increased isolation that Caddoan,
Siouan, and Iroquoian language families began to
diverge out of a macro-Siouan base.
Cultural diversification became even more pronounced between 5000 and 4500 B.P., thus precluding
broad brushed generalizations about eastern deciduous
forest adaptations (contra Caldwell 1958) and consensus on beginning dates for the Late Archaic period
(Gardner 1987). On the threshold of the Late Archaic,
certain typological markers such as Brewerton and
‘‘Brewerton-like’’ points exhibit distributions that
appear, in part, to be structured by the northeast to
southwest trending Appalachian Chain. These sidenotched points and their associated technologies are
found from the Appalachian Summit to New England
and, at least in the South, appear to be more restricted
to the Appalachian Highlands (unfortunately, Brewerton-type points, because of their overall size, shape,
and frequent basal grinding, have likely been misidentified in the South as Early Archaic corner or sidenotched points).
In the latter half of the Late Archaic period, smaller
stemmed projectile points, such as the Lamoka type,
are found from New England to North Carolina (Snow
1980; also compare Ritchie 1971:Plate13 with Keel and
Egloff 1984:Figure 18). The trademark of these projectile points, like the contemporaneous Iddins type
defined by Chapman (1981), is an unfinished base often
exhibiting cortex or a striking platform of the original
flake blank. Fiedel (1988) discusses the remarkable
morphological variation exhibited by stemmed projectile points of the Late Archaic and subsequent
Woodland periods, noting that single component strata
and even caches containing stemmed points often
include distinct archaeological subtypes. The smaller
stemmed bifaces of the time, especially Lamokas–and
perhaps points of bone, antler, and wood–provided
tips for the projectiles. Lamoka points, using Bradbury’s (1997) formula, often morphometrically cluster
with known arrow points (Whyte 2005); the bow and
arrow would have conferred an advantage in warfare–
a likely outcome of increased competition for status,
territory, and localized resources in the Late Archaic.
That Lamoka points were employed in conflict is
confirmed by the insertion of one in a human rib from
the Frontenac Island site, New York (Ritchie 1969:Plate
34).
Within the transition from the Late Archaic to the
Early Woodland period of the Appalachians and
Piedmont, at approximately 3700 B.P., just after the
appearance of ceramic technology in the lower Southeast, emerged the soapstone vessel industry (Sassaman
1999, 2006). This was simultaneous throughout the
Appalachian and Piedmont regions or possibly slightly
earlier in the Southeast (Hoffman 1998), and persisted
well into the Early Woodland period (Sassaman 2006).
Soapstone outcrops are concentrated in the Blue Ridge
and western Piedmont physiographic provinces where
materials were quarried and vessels constructed for
local use and export (Hoffman 1998; Sassaman 1999;
Truncer 2004). Within the Appalachian region, which
includes many soapstone sources, soapstone vessels
may have been used primarily for the processing of
mast (Truncer 2004). Chestnuts and acorns were
particularly vital resources that may have been
processed in these vessels. Vessels may have served,
in essence, as prehistoric ‘‘bread machines’’ in which
shelled nuts were first boiled and mashed to make
a paste. Southeastern Indians, in historic times, made
from this nut paste a bread which served as a storable
and portable food. Henry D. Timberlake, in the 1750s,
observed among the Overhill Cherokee: ‘‘After making
a fire on the hearth-stone, about the size of a large dish,
they sweep the embers off; this they cover with a sort of
deep dish, and renew the fire upon the whole, under
which the bread bakes to as great perfection as in any
European oven’’ (Williams 1948: 57).
Although the Overhill Cherokees used ceramic
vessels, this glimpse of the process may explain the
frequent association of burned rock clusters or ‘‘fire
pits’’ with soapstone vessel fragments in the Late
Archaic at both high-elevation sites such as Stratton
Meadows in North Carolina (GAI Consultants 1986)
and lower elevation riparian sites such as Iddins in
Tennessee (Chapman 1981) and O’Neil in New York
(Ritchie 1969). Alternatively, a primary function of the
shallow pits filled with burnt cobbles, over 100 of
which were found at the Iddins site in eastern
Tennessee (Chapman 1981), may have been the parching of nuts, as suggested by Gardner (1997:174). At the
Iddins site, seven of these features also contained a very
large (over 30 cm diameter), flattened cobble reminis-
137
SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 26(1) SUMMER 2007
cent of the ‘‘hearth stone’’ mentioned above by
Timberlake.
As elucidated by Sassaman (1999, 2006), evidence of
symbolic value of soapstone vessels, especially in areas
remote from soapstone sources (e.g., Poverty Point and
peninsular Florida), is undeniable. Certainly, both the
value and symbolic significance of soapstone objects
increased with distance from source areas. A similar
pattern was noted by Gould (1980:143) for Kimberly
points in Australia: ‘‘The further these implements
traveled from their place of origin, the more exalted
their status became. What were purely profane objects
in the Durkheimian sense became increasingly sacred
when transported farther away into a situation where
they were scarce and where the social context was
different.’’ Likewise, McBryde (1984:278), investigating
the distribution of greenstone axes in southern Australia, notes:
Mt William greenstone may be serving social purposes as
a prestige good when it passes beyond Kulin boundaries (and)
Mt William Preforms display no significant reduction in size
over distance, consistent with curation as valued goods. From
Aboriginal Australia there is abundant documentation of the
value acquired by goods from distant territories in spite of the
distrust or fear of alien groups.
Furthermore, as noted by Sassaman (2006), soapstone
vessels were possibly only one of many alternatives,
including ceramic vessels, for processing mast. Nevertheless, they appear to have served primarily basic
domestic functions in much of the Appalachian
Highland Region, host to many soapstone quarries, as
indicated by exterior scorching, the frequency of
fragments in formerly surficial contexts, and their
common association with domestic facilities (fire pits)
and food refuse (Truncer 2004).
The Late Archaic also witnessed a greater dependence upon certain large-package lithic materials such
as rhyolite, metarhyolite, and quartzite for the making
of large stemmed knives. These ‘‘broadpoints’’ (Savannah River, Mack, Appalachian Stemmed, Lehigh,
Snook Kill, etc.) were probably the blades of multipurpose knives or daggers not unlike the roughly
contemporaneous one belonging to the famed ‘‘Otzi’’
recently found thawing in the Tyrolean Alps (Fowler
2001). Although classic examples of the Savannah River
type are found in the southern reaches of the
Appalachians and are usually made of quartzite, the
Appalachian Stemmed type (Kneberg 1957) is more
common, is usually made of rhyolite, and is indistinguishable from Ritchie’s (1971) Snook Kill type in the
northeast. Keel’s (1976) Otarre Stemmed points from
the Warren Wilson site in western North Carolina
would also be lost among Ritchie’s Snook Kill points
from the Weir site in the Hudson River Valley
(compare Ritchie 1971:Plate 27 with Keel 1976:Plate
39) and are, therefore, of questionable taxonomic
validity.
The functions of these tools have had a long history
of debate and remain elusive largely because their
compositions are seldom amenable to micro-trace
studies. They have often been identified with maritime
or fishing adaptations by researchers who fail to
recognize their regional variability and ubiquity in
the mountains (e.g., Cook 1976; Turnbaugh 1975). One
often overlooked function of these blades, however, is
that prior to completion they were bifacial cores–
sources of large, thin, polygonal flakes. Large ‘‘bifacialthinning flakes’’ of quartzite and metarhyolite frequently turn up in Late Archaic contexts lacking the
finished blades from which they originated and often
exhibit edge damage or retouch. In addition, large
‘‘preforms’’ of metarhyolite and quartzite are frequently found on Late Archaic sites far a field from quartzite
and metarhyolite sources. Similar technology has been
noted in association with mast-forest adaptations
elsewhere and interpreted as evidence of males
competing for prestige in big-game hunting as a response to increases in human population, emphasis on
high-cost subsistence resources (acorns), and the increasing importance of women’s roles in subsistence
(Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002).
Metarhyolites from the Blue Ridge in Maryland and
Pennsylvania (Stewart 1984) and rhyolite from the
Mount Roger’s area in Virginia (Barber and Barfield
1996) were heavily exploited in Late Archaic technologies (Gardner 1987; Purrington 1983). Like soapstone
vessels, bifaces of these materials were exchanged over
long distances, thus reinforcing the role of Appalachia
in economic and social interaction across the broader
region in the Late Archaic (Bondar 2001; Stewart 1984).
Also, like soapstone vessels, bifaces of metarhyolite
and quartzite may have transcended their mere
utilitarian roles with increasing distance from the
source.
Paleoecology and Subsistence
The roots of Iroquoia within the Appalachian Highlands are also supported by paleoecological and subsistence data. Arguably, Late Archaic societies whose
territories included portions of the Appalachian Region
and its diverse and abundant natural resources were
egalitarian hunter-gatherers. The specifics of Late
Archaic settlement and subsistence within and adjacent
to the Appalachians have been debated (Cowan 1985;
Gardner 1997; Gremillion 1996; Purrington 1983;
Stevens 1991; Turnbaugh 1975). In general, subsistence
and plant fossil data from the region reveal anthropogenic changes in biotic community compositions and
intensification of mast forest resource use. Archaeobo-
138
PROTO-IROQUOIAN DIVERGENCE IN THE LATE ARCHAIC–EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD TRANSITION
tanical data from several sites in the Appalachian
region, especially dry rockshelters, reveal an increase in
remains of mast in Late and Terminal Archaic deposits
(Delcourt et al. 1998; Gardner 1994; Gremillion 1996;
Scarry 2003; Yarnell and Black 1985). An increase of
carbonized nutshell in well-preserved contexts is
usually interpreted as evidence of increased consumption of mast over time. Increasing emphasis on mast,
especially acorns, over less costly (in terms of processing) resources in human diets is an indication of
food resource imbalances due to growing human
populations and consumer competition (Basgall 1987;
Gardner 1997; Hildebrandt and McGuire 2002). Snow
(1980:223), citing evidence of increased emphasis on
mast forest resources in the Late Archaic of the eastern
states identifies a ‘‘Mast Forest Archaic Adaptation’’ in
contrast to neighboring Lake Forest and Maritime
Adaptations. Truncer (2004) associates soapstone vessel
manufacture and use within the region with this
adaptation. Archaeological evidence of this upland
mast forest adaptation in the Late Archaic provided
much of the foundation for Caldwell’s (1958) concept of
Primary Forest Efficiency.
Recent studies of bog and pond sediment in the
Cumberland Plateau of eastern Kentucky indicate an
increase in the amount of ash and charcoal and
a dramatic increase in pollens of the fire-tolerant oaks
and American chestnut at approximately 3000 B.P.
(Delcourt et al. 1998). This burning is often attributed to
humans clearing the forest for seed horticulture
(Chapman et al. 1989; Delcourt et al. 1986; Delcourt et
al. 1998). Although the burning of alpine forests in the
Late Archaic may have benefited horticulture, the
arsons may have had other intentions as well. Fires
may have been set to encourage the growth (by
discouraging the competition) of fire-resistant mastproducers (Stevens 1991). Note, for example, that until
laws were passed to prevent them, the Cherokees
routinely burned the leaf litter of the mountainsides in
autumn, in part to scorch and collect the recently fallen
chestnuts (Mooney 1900:317): ‘‘When the Cherokee
went out in the fall, according to their custom, to burn
the leaves off from the mountains in order to get the
chestnuts on the ground, they were never safe, for the
old witch was always on the lookout, and as soon as
she saw the smoke rise she knew there were Indians
there and sneaked up to try to surprise one alone.’’
Many chestnut, hickory nut, and acorn hull fragments from Late Archaic sites on the Cumberland
Plateau exhibit evidence of carbonization only on the
exterior, indicating that they were charred prior to
storage or consumption (Ison 1987), and possibly
collection. Although remains of chestnuts, undoubtedly due to preservation bias (Ison 1987), are scarce in
archaeobotanical assemblages, chestnuts outrivaled all
other varieties in historic Cherokee subsistence (White
1980).
Increased reliance on the upland hardwood forest
mast in the Late/Terminal Archaic also is indicated by
the evident value of its associated processing technology (soapstone and pit hearths) and the first evidence
of subterranean storage in the region’s archaeological
record (Cowan 1985; Gremillion 2004). These components of the mast forest economy, together, may have
influenced the status of individuals or gender groups
with whom they were affiliated (Sanday 1973). It has
long been noted that the Cherokee and Iroquois
practiced matrilocal marriage residence. Matrilocality,
common to Iroquoian speakers but lacking among their
Siouan and Algonkian neighbors, may have resulted
from several centuries of coevolution with maize
horticulture as suggested by Hart (2001). However,
the economic roles of women in the mast forest
economies of the Late Archaic and Early Woodland
periods in the Appalachian uplands may have initiated
the process and facilitated the subsequent adoption of
maize and ceramics.
The importance of nut crops in Late Archaic
Appalachian region diet rivaled that of cultigens in
the succeeding Woodland period. Consequently, women’s roles in food production (nut gathering, storage,
and processing) and perhaps control of associated
technologies and economic commodities (soapstone
and ceramic vessels) may have substantiated women’s
status and conferred the reproductive fitness of
matrilocality in the Appalachian Late Archaic. This
idea is further supported by evidence of increased
warfare in the Late Archaic (Bradbury 1997; Smith
1997). As noted by Sanday (1973:1684): ‘‘In circumstances where a large proportion of male energy is
required for other activities, women also contribute
a great deal to subsistence activities. This can happen
during periods of prolonged warfare or when other
conditions result in male labor drains.’’ Increased
control over food production often leads to an increase
in the power of those in control. She also notes
(1973:1698) that, in certain circumstances, magicoreligious powers attributed to women may enhance
their political sway and influence residence patterns:
‘‘Among the Iroquois, for example, the female virtues
of food providing and the natural fertility and bounty
of nature are the qualities most respected and revered.
Only women’s activities are celebrated in the ceremonial cycle. There are no festivals to celebrate hunting or
war.’’
Fiedel (1988:73) observes that one way to explain the
unusual morphological variation in Late Archaic
stemmed projectile points found on single component
sites is through matrilocal residence-immigrant males
introducing ‘‘microtraditional mental templates and
techniques.’’ Hoffman (1998), however, observing the
139
SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 26(1) SUMMER 2007
importance of soapstone in Transitional Archaic trade
networks and its frequent association with cremation
burials in the Northeast, considers the possibility of
patrilocal residence in the Susquehanna tradition.
The question of proto-Iroquoian matrilocality could
be resolved by examining molecular variation within
suspected proto-Iroquoian skeletal populations. Bolnick (2005), for example, by observing greater mtDNA
variation in skeletal males than females, was able to
show that Illinois Hopewell groups practiced matrilocal residence (also see Oota et al. 2001).
Mortuary Behavior
A final trait of the Appalachian Late Archaic/Early
Woodland transition to consider is an apparent
exclusive preference for cremation of the dead (Chapman 1990; Snow 1980). Late and Terminal Archaic
cremations are found in the uplands from New
England (e.g., Hoffman 1998; Leveillee 1994; Ritchie
1969; Snow 1980) to Tennessee (Chapman 1990), while
in-flesh burials are evidently lacking, but common in
the lowlands, at least to the west. It is possible that only
calcined human remains from the Late Archaic period
have survived the ravages of time in the Appalachian
uplands (Whyte 2001). Chapman (1990), however,
notes that boneless graves that would indicate a preservation bias favoring cremations are also lacking. The
intent here is not to suggest, however, that cremation of
the dead identifies anything more (i.e., ethnicity) than
an additional element of an adaptive pattern. Cremation is a convenient way for highly mobile huntergatherers to dispose of the dead. Indeed, one could
argue that the Appalachian highlands were utilized
only seasonally by Late Archaic hunter-gatherers who
in other seasons foraged and resided in adjacent
lowlands of the Piedmont or Ridge and Valley
provinces. Deposition by cremation may have been
selected over other modes of burial during seasonal
transhumance through the uplands, while other modes
may have been preferred elsewhere by the same
societies. In the middle and northern Appalachian
region, however, on what are clearly long-term
residential bases of the Susquehanna Tradition, cremation appears to have been the exclusive way of disposal
(Snow 1980).
Summary and Conclusion
James A. Tuck (1977:33) pointed out that a ‘‘formative
Laurentian’’ Archaic base existed in ‘‘the Appalachian
uplands to suggest a continuous distribution northward from western North Carolina–eastern Tennessee
to New York and Canada.’’ Dean R. Snow (1980) has
labeled this entity the Mast Forest Archaic Adaptation.
In reference to its apparent distribution, Wright
(1984:292) observed that ‘‘should future research
validate the proposal of an early, generalized Archaic
lithic technology extending from North Carolina to
Canada from which Laurentian evolved as one regional
development, then the archaeological gap between the
northern and southern Iroquoian-speaking peoples
may have at least been partially bridged.’’ The present
study, while not necessarily espousing any particular
version of the Laurentian Archaic as proto-Iroquoian,
provides such a bridge by recognizing typological,
technological, mortuary, and ecological similarities
between northern and southern Appalachian archaeological evidence.
At the start of the Late Archaic (ca. 4500 B.P.), the
Appalachian chain supported a relatively homogeneous
mast forest adaptation from one end to the other. I
propose that it was primarily out of this adaptation that
the ancestors of the historic Cherokee and Northern
Iroquois evolved. Indeed, the mountains and competitive neighbors may have provided the geographic
insulation necessary for linguistic divergence of protoIroquoian from a macro-Siouan progenitor in the early
to mid-Holocene. At 3800 to 3500 B.P., the estimated
time of proto-Iroquoian divergence, the Appalachian
highlands were characterized by (1) heavy dependence
upon upland forest mast; (2) projectile point type
distributions trending along the Appalachian axis; (3)
evidence of significant participation of Appalachia in
a wider regional economy involving export of valuable
and geographically restricted lithic and perhaps subsistence resources; (4) the possibility of violent competition for control of these resources (as evidenced by the
introduction of the bow and arrow); and (5) preference
for cremation of the dead.
Furthermore, molecular comparisons of Cherokee
and Iroquoian populations provide evidence consistent
with proto-Iroquoian genesis in the southern or middle
Appalachian region and subsequent northward migration of northern Iroquoians.
While an adaptive pattern appears to unite much of
the Appalachian region in the Late/Terminal Archaic,
the common linguistic source of the Cherokee and
Northern Iroquois may have consisted of several allied
tribes restricted to a smaller subregion. Or protoIroquoians may have spanned a greater part of the
Appalachian chain and controlled and sometimes
distributed, by trade and otherwise, its lithic and other
resources. Perhaps they had resided in the Appalachian region well before the Late Archaic period or had
moved into the region during the Late Archaic to
control resources vital to the emerging regional
economy. Soapstone may have become integral to their
ethnic identity, as did ceramics to their contemporaries
in the adjacent lowlands. Perhaps intraregional in-
140
PROTO-IROQUOIAN DIVERGENCE IN THE LATE ARCHAIC–EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD TRANSITION
tertribal conflict over these Appalachian resources,
competition from outside, or simply the acquiescence
of soapstone technology and mast forest adaptation to
the ceramic and horticultural ‘‘waves of the future’’
brought on the ultimate fissioning and gradual
distancing of Cherokee ancestors from the rest of
Iroquoia. This may have begun at about 3700 B.P. as
estimated by linguistic distance. Or perhaps the divergence coincided with the breakup of the Late
Archaic Appalachian economy somewhat later. While
ceramics predate soapstone vessels in the lowland
Southeast and Northeast (Sassaman 2006), the importance of soapstone vessels diminished with the adoption of ceramic technology in Appalachian economies
after 3500 B.P. Societies occupying the uplands gradually gave in to a more sedentary life and an increasing
dependence upon horticulture, probably through interactions with lowland societies both east and west of the
mountains.
Evidence of continued but perhaps lesser interaction
within the Appalachians in the Woodland period,
however, is readily expressed in material culture
(compare, for example, Early Woodland Swannanoa
and Vinette I ceramics). Certainly, migrations, expansions, and displacements of people continued through
the remainder of eastern North American prehistory,
thus bringing Northern and Southern Iroquoian speakers to their observed historical ranges, separated by
more than 500 linear kilometers of mountain range and
innumerable groups of Algic and Siouan speakers.
Debates over migration versus in situ development
and which archaeological evidence is associated with
what language in the late prehistoric archaeological
record will undoubtedly continue in the Northeast and
the Southeast. At present, however, archaeological,
linguistic, molecular, and other evidence supports the
suggestion of Snow (1996) and others that protoIroquoian language and culture had its home in the
Appalachians and, as this study offers, began its
divergence into southern and northern forms sometime
around the Transitional Late Archaic period.
Notes
Acknowledgments. I am indebted to Deborah Bolnick, Jeff Boyer,
Cheryl Claassen, Steve Davis, Larry Kimball, Ripan Malhi,
David Moore, Carole Nash, Brett Riggs, Ken Sassaman, Gerald
Schroedl, Jim Truncer, Renee Walker, and Lauri Whyte for
information, criticisms, comments, or support. Three anonymous reviewers provided much-appreciated critique.
References Cited
Anderson, David G.
1996 Models of Paleoindian and Early Archaic Settlement in
the Lower Southeast. In The Paleoindian and Early Archaic
Southeast, edited by David G. Anderson and Kenneth E.
Sassaman, pp. 29–57. University of Alabama Press,
Tuscaloosa.
Bamann, Susan, Robert Kuhn, James Molnar, and Dean R.
Snow
1992 Iroquoian Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology
21:435–460.
Barber, Michael B., and Eugene B. Barfield
1996 The Fairwood Horse Camp Site (44GY18), Grayson
County, Virginia: A Middle Archaic Guilford Manifestation in the Blue Ridge. North American Archaeologist 17:
143–169.
Basgall, Mark E.
1987 Resource Intensification among Hunter-Gatherers:
Acorn Economies in Southern California. Research in
Economic Anthropology 9:21–52.
Bolnick, Deborah A.
2005 The Genetic Prehistory of Eastern North America:
Evidence from Ancient and Modern DNA. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Davis.
Bolnick, Deborah A., and David G. Smith
2003 Unexpected Patterns of Mitochondrial DNA Variation
Among Native Americans from the Southeastern United
States. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 122:
336–354.
Bondar, Gregory H.
2001 Metarhyolite Use during the Transitional Archaic in
Eastern North America. Paper presented at the 66th
Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans.
Bradbury, Andrew P.
1997 The Bow and Arrow in the Eastern Woodlands:
Evidence for an Archaic Origin. North American Archaeologist 18:207–233.
Byers, Douglas S.
1959 The Eastern Archaic: Some Problems and Hypotheses.
American Antiquity 24:233–256.
Caldwell, Joseph R.
1958 Trend and Tradition in the Prehistory of the Eastern United
States. American Anthropological Association Memoir 88.
Campbell, Lyle
1997 American Indian Languages: The Historical Linguistics of
Native America. Oxford University Press, New York.
Chapdelaine, Claude
1993 The Sedentarization of the Prehistoric Iroquoians: A
Slow or Rapid Transformation? Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology 12:173–209.
Chapman, Jefferson
1975 The Rose Island Site and the Bifurcate Point Tradition.
University of Tennessee, Department of Anthropology,
Report of Invetigations 14. Knoxville.
1981 The Bacon Bend and Iddins Sites: The Late Archaic Period
in the Lower Little Tennessee River Valley. University of
Tennessee, Department of Anthropology, Report of
Investigations 31. Knoxville.
1990 The Kimberly-Clark Site and Site 40LD207. Tennessee
Anthropological Association Miscellaneous Paper 14.
Chapman, Jefferson, Hazel R. Delcourt, and Paul A. Delcourt
1989 Strawberry Fields, Almost Forever. Natural History 9:
51–59.
141
SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 26(1) SUMMER 2007
Coe, Joffre L.
1961 Cherokee Archeology. In Symposium on Cherokee and
Iroquois Culture, edited by William N. Fenton and John
Gulick, pp. 53–60. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin
180. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
Cook, Thomas G.
1976 Broadpoint: Culture, Phase, Horizon, Tradition, or
Knife? Journal of Anthropological Research 32:337–357.
Cowan, C. Wesley
1985 From Foraging to Incipient Food Production: Subsistence Change and Continuity on the Cumberland
Plateau of Eastern Kentucky. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Crawford, Gary W., and David G. Smith
1996 Migration in Prehistory: Princess Point and the
Northern Iroquoian Case. American Antiquity 61:782–790.
Custer, Jay F.
1987a New Perspectives on the Delmarva Adena Complex.
Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 12:33–53.
1987b Late Woodland Ceramics and Social Boundaries in
Southeastern Pennsylvania and the Northern Delmarva
Peninsula. Archaeology of Eastern North America 15:13–27.
D’Annibale, Ceasare, and Brian D. Ross
1994 After Point Peninsula: Pickering vs. Owasco in the St.
Lawrence Valley. Bulletin of the New York Archaeological
Association 107:9–16.
Delcourt, Paul A., Hazel R. Delcourt, P. A. Cridlebaugh, and
Jefferson Chapman
1986 Holocene Ethnobotanical and Paleoecological Record
of Human Impact on Vegetation in the Little Tennessee
River Valley, Tennessee. Quaternary Research 25:330–349.
Delcourt, Paul A., Hazel R. Delcourt, Cecil R. Ison, William E.
Sharp, and Kristen J. Gremillion
1998 Prehistoric Human Use of Fire, the Eastern Agricultural Complex, and Appalachian Oak-Chestnut Forests:
Paleoecology of Cliff Palace Pond, Kentucky. American
Antiquity 63:263–278.
Dickens, Roy S., Jr.
1976 Cherokee Prehistory: The Pisgah Phase in the Appalachian
Summit Region. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
1979 The Origins and Development of Cherokee Culture. In
The Cherokee Indian Nation: A Troubled History, edited by
Duane H. King, pp. 3–32. University of Tennessee Press,
Knoxville.
1986 An Evolutionary-Ecological Interpretation of Cherokee
Cultural Development. In The Conference on Cherokee
Prehistory, edited by David G. Moore, pp. 81–94. Warren
Wilson College, Swannanoa, NC.
Dincauze, Dena F., and Robert J. Hasenstab
1989 Explaining the Iroquois: Tribalization on a Prehistoric
Periphery. In Centre and Periphery: Comparative Studies in
Archaeology, edited by T. C. Champion, pp. 67–87. Unwin
Hyman, London.
Fiedel, Stuart J.
1988 Stemmed Points: A Challenge for Archaeological
Theory. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 4:71–78.
Fowler, Brenda
2001 Iceman: Uncovering the Life and Times of a Prehistoric Man
Found in an Alpine Glacier. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
Funk, Robert E.
1993 Archaeological Investigations in the Upper Susquehanna
Valley, New York State. Persimmon Press Monographs in
Archaeology, Buffalo, NY.
Gardner, Paul S.
1994 Carbonized Plant Remains from Dust Cave. Journal of
Alabama Archaeology 40:192–211.
1997 The Ecological Structure and Behavioral Implications
of Mast Exploitation Strategies. In People, Plants, and
Landscapes: Studies in Paleoethnobotany, edited by K. J.
Gremillion, pp. 161–178. University of Alabama Press,
Tuscaloosa.
Gardner, William M.
1987 Some Observations on the Late Archaic. In Upland
Archeology in the East: A Third Symposium, edited by
Michael B. Barber, pp. 86–99. Cultural Resources Report
87-1. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern
Region.
GAI Consultants, Inc.
1986 Phase III Data Recovery Investigation at the Stratton
Meadows Site (31GH98) on the Tellico Plains–Robbinsville
Highway, Graham County, North Carolina and Monroe
County, Tennessee. Submitted to the Federal Highway
Administration, Arlington, VA.
Gould, Richard A.
1980 Living Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Gremillion, Kristen J.
1996 The Paleoethnobotanical Record for the Mid-Holocene
Southeast. In Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast,
edited by K. E. Sassaman and D. G. Anderson, pp. 99–114.
University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
2004 Seed Processing and the Origins of Food Production in
Eastern North America. American Antiquity 69:215–234.
Hart, John P.
2001 Maize, Matrilocality, Migration, and Northern Iroquoian Evolution. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 8:
151–182.
Hart, John P., and Hetty Jo Brumbach
2003 The Death of Owasco. American Antiquity 68:737–752.
Hasenstab, Robert J.
1990 Agriculture, Warfare, and Tribalization in the Iroquois
Homeland of New York: A GIS Analysis of Late
Woodland Settlement. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.
Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Hildebrandt, William R., and Kelly R. McGuire
2002 The Ascendance of Hunting during the California
Middle Archaic: An Evolutionary Perspective. American
Antiquity 67:231–256.
Hoffman, Curtiss
1998 Pottery and Steatite in the Northeast: A Reconsideration of Origins. Northeast Anthropology 56:43–68.
Ison, Cecil R.
1987 Man-Plant Relationships During the Terminal Archaic
Along the Cumberland Plateau. In Upland Archeology in
the East: A Third Symposium, edited by Michael B. Barber,
pp. 86–99. Cultural Resources Report No. 87-1. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern
Region.
142
PROTO-IROQUOIAN DIVERGENCE IN THE LATE ARCHAIC–EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD TRANSITION
Jefferies, Richard W.
1996 The Emergence of Long-Distance Exchange Networks
in the Southeastern United States. In Archaeology of the
Mid-Holocene Southeast, edited by K. E. Sassaman and D.
G. Anderson, pp. 222–234. University Press of Florida,
Gainesville.
Keel, Bennie C.
1976 Cherokee Archaeology: A Study of the Appalachian Summit.
University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Keel, Bennie C., and Brian J. Egloff
1984 The Cane Creek Site, Mitchell County, North Carolina.
Southern Indian Studies 13:3–44.
Kneberg, Madeline
1957 Chipped Stone Artifacts of the Tennessee Valley Area.
Tennessee Archaeologist 13(1):55–56.
Lenig, Wayne
2000 In Situ Thought in Eastern Iroquois Development: A
History. Bulletin, Journal of the New York State Archaeological Federation 116:58–70.
Leveillee, Alan
1994 A Program of Archaeological Data Recovery: The Millbury
III Cremation Complex, Millbury, Massachusetts. Public
Archaeology Laboratory Report 396. Submitted to New
England Power Service Company, Westborough, MA.
Lounsbury, Floyd G.
1961 Iroquois-Cherokee Linguistic Relations. In Symposium
on Cherokee and Iroquois Culture, edited by W. N. Fenton
and J. Gulick, pp. 9–17. Bureau of American Ethnology,
Bulletin 180. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
1978 Iroquoian Languages. In Handbook of North American
Indians, vol. 15, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 334–343.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
MacNeish, Richard S.
1952 Iroquois Pottery Types: A Technique for the Study of
Iroquois Prehistory. National Museum of Canada Anthropological Series 31, Bulletin 124, Ottowa.
Malhi, Ripan S., Beth A. Schultz, and David G. Smith
2001 Distribution of Mitochondrial DNA Lineages Among
Native American Tribes of Eastern North America.
Human Biology 73:17–55.
McBryde, Isabel
1984 Kulin Greenstone Quarries: The Social Contexts of
Production and Distribution for the Mt. William Site.
World Archaeology 16:267–285.
Mithun, Marianne
1979 Iroquoian. In The Languages of Native America: Historical
and Comparative Assessment, edited by Lyle Campbell and
Marianne Mithun, pp. 133–212. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
1984 The Proto-Iroquoians: Cultural Reconstruction from
Lexical Materials. In Extending the Rafters: Interdisciplinary
Approaches to Iroquoian Studies, edited by M. K. Foster, J.
Campisi, and Marianne Mithun, pp. 259–282. State
University of New York Press, Albany.
Mooney, James
1900 Myths of the Cherokee. 19th Annual Report of the Bureau
of Ethnology. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
Moore, David G.
1986 The Pisgah Phase: Cultural Continuity in the Appalachian Summit? In The Conference on Cherokee Prehistory,
edited by David G. Moore, pp. 73–80. Warren Wilson
College, Swannanoa, NC.
Oota, Hiroki, Wannapa Settheetham–Ishida, Danai Tiwawech, Takafumi Ishida, and Mark Stoneking.
2001 Human mtDNA and Y-chromosome Variation is
Correlated with Matrilocal versus Patrilocal Residence.
Nature Genetics 29:20–21.
Parker, Arthur C.
1916 The Origin of the Iroquois as Suggested by Their
Archeology. American Anthropologist 18:479–507.
Purrington, Burton L.
1983 Ancient Mountaineers: An Overview of the Prehistoric
Archaeology of North Carolina’s Western Mountain
Region. In The Prehistory of North Carolina: An Archaeological Symposium, edited by M. A. Mathis and J. J. Crow,
pp. 83–160. North Carolina Division of Archives and
History, Department of Cultural Resources, Raleigh.
Richardson, James B., III, and James L. Swauger
1996 The Petroglyphs Speak: Rock Art and Iroquois Origins.
Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 12:43–51.
Riggs, Brett H., and Christopher B. Rodning
2002 Cherokee Ceramic Traditions of Southwestern North
Carolina, ca. A.D. 1400–2002: A Preface to ‘‘The Last of
the Iroquois Potters.’’ North Carolina Archaeology 51:34–54.
Ritchie, William A.
1961 Iroquois Archaeology and Settlement Patterns. In
Symposium on Cherokee and Iroquois Culture, edited by W.
N. Fenton and J. Gulick, pp. 27–38. Bureau of American
Ethnology Bulletin 180. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
1969 The Archaeology of New York State. Rev. ed. Natural
History Press, Garden City, NY.
1971 New York Projectile Points: A Typology and Nomenclature.
New York State Museum Bulletin 384, Albany.
Ritchie, William A., and Robert E. Funk
1973 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in the Northeast. New
York State Museum and Science Service Memoir 20.
Albany, NY.
Sanday, Peggy R.
1973 Toward a Theory of the Status of Women American
Anthropologist 75:1682–1700.
Sassaman, Kenneth E.
1999 A Southeastern Perspective on Soapstone Vessel
Technology in the Northeast. In The Archaeological
Northeast, edited by M. A. Levine, K. E. Sassaman, and
M. S. Nassaney, pp. 75–95. Bergin & Garvey, Westport,
CT.
2001 Articulating Hidden Histories of the Mid-Holocene in
the Southern Appalachians. In Archaeology of the Appalachian Highlands, edited by Lynne P. Sullivan and Susan C.
Prezanno, pp. 103–120. University of Tennessee Press,
Knoxville.
2006 Dating and Explaining Soapstone Vessels: A Comment
on Truncer. American Antiquity 71:141–156.
Scarry, C. Margaret
2003 Patterns of Wild Plant Utilization in the Prehistoric
Eastern Woodlands. In People and Plants in Ancient Eastern
North America, edited by P. E. Minnis, pp. 50–104.
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
Schroedl, Gerald F.
1986 Toward an Explanation of Cherokee Origins in Eastern
143
SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 26(1) SUMMER 2007
Tennessee. In The Conference on Cherokee Prehistory, edited
by David G. Moore, pp. 122–138. Warren Wilson College,
Swannanoa, NC.
2005 Overhill Cherokee Ceramics. Paper presented at the
Qualla Ceramic Workshop, University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill.
Smith, Maria O.
1997 Osteological Indications of warfare in the Late Archaic
of the Western Tennessee Valley. In Troubled Times:
Osteological and Archaeological Evidence of Violence, edited
by D. W. Frayer and D. L. Martin. Gordon & Breach, New
York.
Snow, Dean R.
1977 Archaeology and Ethnohistory in Eastern New York.
In Current Perspectives in Northeastern Archaeology.
Researches and Transactions of the New York State Archeological Association 17(1):107–112.
1980 The Archaeology of New England. Academic Press, New
York.
1984 Iroquois Prehistory. In Extending the Rafters: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Iroquoian Studies, edited by M. K.
Foster, J. Campisi, and Marianne Mithun, pp. 241–257.
State University of New York Press, Albany.
1994 The Iroquois. Blackwell Press, Oxford.
1995a Migration in Prehistory: The Northern Iroquoian
Case. American Antiquity 60:59–79.
1995b Population Movements during the Woodland Period:
The Intrusion of Iroquoian Peoples. In Origins of the People
of the Longhouse, edited by A. Bekerman and G. Warrick,
pp. 5–8. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Symposium of
the Ontario Archaeological Society.
1996 More on Migration in Prehistory: Accommodating
New Evidence in the Northern Iroquoian Case. American
Antiquity 61:791–796.
Starna, William A., and Robert E. Funk
1994 The Place of the In Situ Hypothesis in Iroquoian
Archaeology. Northeast Anthropology 47:45–54.
Stevens, J. Sanderson
1991 A Story of Plants, Fire, and People: The Paleoecology
and Subsistence of the Late Archaic and Early Woodland
in Virginia. In Late Archaic and Early Woodland Research in
Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by T. R. Reinhart and M. E.
Hodges, pp. 185–220. Special Publication 23. Archeological Society of Virginia.
Stewart, R. Michael
1984 South Mountain (Meta) Rhyolite: A Perspective on
Prehistoric Trade and Exchange in the Middle Atlantic
Region. In Prehistoric Lithic Exchange Systems in the Middle
Atlantic Region, edited by Jay F. Custer, pp. 14–44.
University of Delaware Center for Archaeological Research, Monograph 3.
Sullivan, Lynne P.
2005 The Dallas Phase and Qualla Connections. Paper
presented at the Qualla Ceramic Workshop, University
of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Trigger, Bruce G.
1970 The Strategy of Iroquoian Prehistory. Ontario Archaeology 14:3–48.
Truncer, James
2004 Steatite Vessel Age and Occurrence in Temperate
Eastern North America. American Antiquity 69:487–513.
Tuck, James A.
1977 A Look at Laurentian. New York State Archeological
Association Research and Transactions 17(1):31–40.
Turnbaugh, William A.
1975 Toward an Explanation of the Broadpoint Dispersal in
Eastern North American Prehistory. Journal of Anthropological Research 31:51–68.
Ward, H. Trawick, and R. P. Stephen Davis, Jr.
1999 Time Before History: The Archaeology of North Carolina.
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Warrick, Gary
2000 The Precontact Iroquoian Occupation of Southern
Ontario. Journal of World Prehistory 14:415–466.
White, Max E.
1980 An Ethnoarchaeological Approach to Cherokee Subsistence and Settlement Patterns. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation. Department of Anthropology, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Whyte, Thomas R.
2001 Distinguishing Remains of Human Cremations from
Burned Animal Bones. Journal of Field Archaeology 28:
437–448.
2003 Prehistoric Sedentary Agriculturalists in the Appalachian Summit of Northwestern North Carolina. North
Carolina Archaeology 52:1–19.
2005 An Archaeological Study of Cherokee Ethnogenesis.
Paper presented at the 62nd Annual Southeastern
Archaeological Conference, Columbia, SC.
Williams, Samuel C.
1948 Lieut. Henry Timberlake’s Memoirs, 1756–1765. Continental Book, Marietta, GA.
Wright, James V.
1972 Ontario Prehistory: An Eleven-Thousand-Year Archaeological Outline. National Museum of Canada, Ottawa.
1984 Cultural Continuity in Northern Iroquoian–Speaking
Peoples. In Extending the Rafters: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Iroquoian Studies, edited by M. K. Foster, J.
Campisi, and Marianne Mithun, pp. 283–299. State
University of New York Press, Albany.
Wykoff, Milton W.
1989 Iroquoian Prehistory and Climate Change: Notes for
Empirical Studies of the Eastern Woodlands. Ph.D.
dissertation. Department of Anthropology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Yarnell, Richard A., and M. Jean Black
1985 Temporal Trends Indicated by a Survey of Archaic and
Woodland Plant Food Remains from Southeastern North
America. Southeastern Archaeology 4:93–106.
144