The Little Ice Age and the Contact Period, 1300-1850
Did the Little Ice Age affect the early relationships between the Chesapeake Bay area Native Americans and the Europeans colonists?
Margaret Marzolf, Ancient Studies, UMBC
Introduction
Climate change associated with the Little Ice Age had internal and external influences on both the social and agricultural dynamic of Chesapeake region Native American and colonial populations. To explore this theory published
materials detailing dendrochronological research in North Carolina, climate data from Jamestown, published archaeological data from Maryland sites, and first hand observations of Contact Period climate were consulted. The data
suggest that Europe attempts at colonization were initially difficult because there was no precedent for the climate they encountered upon arrival in the Chesapeake region. Anticipating climate that was similar in latitude to Europe,
colonization at Roanoke failed while settlers at Jamestown initially experienced severe food shortages. Competition for resources began between Native American populations and colonists in order to sustain respective populations thus
straining relationships of all who lived in the region.
The Environmental Effects of the Little Ice Age:
f North American tree populations changed as
the cooler temperatures were less tolerated by
certain species like beech. Oak, which are more
cold tolerant, increased in population.[4]
f Squash and beans, which appear after 1300 CE were present
at the Hughes and Winslow Sites but not Claggett’s Retreat,
which was abandoned before that date.[5][14][15]
f Roanoke colony was founded in 1585. Jamestown established in 1607
in Powhatan Cheifdom’s territory.
f Colonists encounter severe drought that lasts from 1607-1612.
(Figure 3)
f Seasonal subsistence patterns took advantage of the estuarine
resources and the fertile soil. Subsistence included domestic
plants (maize, gourds, melons, sunflowers) and wild food
sources (acorns, nuts wild berries, seeds, grapes, and plums)
with a focus on plants which offered greater returns. [3][6][14][15]
Figure 1. Location of Blackwater River, Nottoway River,
Virginia. [20]
f In France wine harvests were shortened or were non-existent when grape
vines did not survive the cold. In Scotland, famine also became widespread
during the 16th century, forcing part of the population to emigrate to other
countries.[2][12]
f Dendrochronology data from bald cypress trees located along the Black
River in North Carolina and along the Blackwater and Nottoway rivers in
Virginia (Figure 1) demonstrate that initial colonization of Roanoke and
Jamestown colonies occured during two severe droughts. (Figure 2)
Figure 2. Cross stem example from Bald Cypress Tree from Blackwater River, Virginia. [21]
f European estimations place the Native American population
between 30,000-45,000 in permanent settlements.[3]
f Corn not prevalent in the Chesapeake Region until 1100 CE.[5]
f Glaciers in the Alps continue to grow through the
Little Ice Age and affected nearby populations,
causing the failure of crops and abandonment
of mines, which became buried under ice.[2][12]
f In England wheat, oats, and barley were difficult
to grow because of colder temperatures, colder
ground temperatures, and longer winters.
Growing seasons were shortened by five to eight
weeks. (Figure 4)[12]
Native Americans at the Time of Contact: European Arrival in the Chesapeake Region:
f Reliance on hickories (deadfall) for fuel, which grew scarce by
the late 1600’s at Hughes/Winslow site.[7]
Figure 3. July PHDI, Tidewater Region of Virginia and North Carolina [20]
f Exhaustion of soil nutrients, disruption of forest cover due to
slash and burn agriculture, and increase in edge environments
prompt relocation further south along the Potomac towards
the Chesapeake.[14]
f Possible warfare indicated at the Winslow site because of
changes from circular palisades to rectangular which are better
for defense.[7]
f Winslow site was only occupied for 10 years before movement
of its population towards the Chesapeake coastal region.[7]
f Water quality in the region would have deteriorated due to
drought and turning available water brackish.[1]
Father Segura, Spanish Mission, Chesapeake Bay 1570
“We find the land of Don Luis [a local native] in quite another condition
than expected, not because he was at fault in his description of it, but because
our Lord has chastised it with six years of famine and death, which has
brought it about that there is much less population than ususal. Since many
have died and also have moved to other regions to ease their hunger, there
remain but few of the tribe...they have no maize, and have not found wild
fruit, which they are accustomed to eat.” [18]
Bibliography
1. Blanton, Dennis B. “Drought as a Factor in the Jamestown Colony 1607-1612.” Historical Archaeology 34.4 (2000): 74-81. JSTOR. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
2. Bryson, Reid A., and Thomas J. Murray. Climates of Hunger: Mankind and the World’s Changing Weather. Madison: U of Wisconsin, 1977. Print.
3. Curtin, Philip D., Grace Somers. Brush, and George Wescott Fisher. Discovering the Chesapeake: The History of an Ecosystem. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins UP, 2001. Print.
4. Campbell, Ian D., and John H. McAndrews. “Forest Disequilibrium Caused by Rapid Little Ice Age Cooling.” Nature 366.6453 (1993): 336-38. Web.
5. Dent, Richard J. “Claggett Retreat: Formative Settled Life in the Middle Potomac Valley.” Maryland Archaeology 46.1&2 (2010). Print.
6. Dent, Richard J. “Excavations at the Hughes Site: Life on the Middle Potomac Valley Bottomland.” Maryland Archaeology 45.1&2 (2009): 1-28. Print.
7. Dent, Richard J. “The Winslow Site: Household and Community Archaeology in the Middle Potomac Valley.” Maryland Archaeology 41.1&2 (2005): 1-51. Web.
8. Esper, Jan, Edward R. Cook, and Fritz H. Schweingruber. “Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability.” Science 295.5563 (2002): 2250-253. Web.
9. Fritts, Harold C. Tree Rings and Climate. London: Academic, 1976. Print.
10. Gallivan, Martin. “The Archaeology of Native Societies in the Chesapeake: New Investigationsand Interpretations.” Journal of Archaeological Research 19.3 (2011): 281-325. JSTOR. Web. 18 Mar. 2015.
11. Harding, A. F. Climatic Change in Later Prehistory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1982. Print.
12. Lamb, H. H. Climate, History, and the Modern World. London: Methuen, 1982. Print.
13. Matthews, John A., and Keith R. Briffa. “The ‘little Ice Age’: Re-Evaluation Of An Evolving Concept.” Geografiska Annaler, Series A: Physical Geography Geografiska Annaler A 87.1 (2005): 17-36. Web.
14. McKnight, Justine W. “Analysis of Flotation and Waterscreen-Recovered Archeobotanical Remains from the Hughes Sites (18MO1), Montgomery County, Maryland.” Maryland Archaeology 45.1&2 (2009): 29-39. Web.
15. McKnight, Justine W. “Analysis of Flotation-Recovered Archeobotanical Remains from the Claggett Retreat Site (18FR25), Frederick County, Maryland.” Maryland Archaeology 46.1&2 (2010): 38-46. Web.
16. Miller, Henry M. “The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters Along Chesapeake Bay: An Overview.” Revista De Arquelogia Americana 23 (2004): 231-90. JSTOR. Web. 18 Mar. 15.
17. Robock, Alan. “The Little Ice Age: Northern Hemisphere Average Observations and Model Calculations.” Science 206.4425 (1979): 1402-404.
18. Rockman, Marcy. “New World with a New Sky: Climate Variability, Environmental Expectations, and the Historical Period Colonization of Eastern North America.” Historical Archaeology 44.3 (2010): 4-20. Web.
19. Speer, James H. Fundamentals of Tree-ring Research. Tucson: U of Arizona, 2010. Print.
20. Stahle, D. W., M. K. Cleaveland, and J. G. Hehr. “North Carolina Climate Changes Reconstructed from Tree Rings: A.D. 372 to 1985.” Science 240.4858 (1988): 1517-519. Web.
21. Stahle, David W., Dorian J. Burnette, Jose Villanueva, Julian Cerano, Falko K. Fye, R. Daniel Griffin, Malcolm K. Cleaveland, Daniel K. Stahle, Jesse R. Edmondson, and Kathryn P. Wolff. “Tree-ring Analysis of Ancient
Baldcypress Trees and Subfossil Wood.” Quaternary Science Reviews 34 (2012): 1-15. Web.
22. Stahle, David W., Malcolm K. Cleaveland, Dennis B. Blanton, Matthew D. Therrell, and David A. Gay. “The Lost Colony and Jamestown Droughts.” Science 280.5363 (1998): 564-67. Web.
23. Tkachuck, Richard D. “The Little Ice Age.” Origins 10 (1983): 51-65.
Figure 4. Earth surface temperature variations [19]
f Given lands by the Native groups that were already cleared by Native
slash and burn practices. Native groups also exchanged food, such as
maize, beans, and squash for precious commodities such as copper.
[10][16]
f Native American reports of food shortages were not attempts to
circumvent the colonists’ requests because the shortages did exist.[18]
f Adoption of tobacco as primary crop as a way to recoup losses to
British investors who assumed products like olives and grapes could
be successfully grown.[18]
f Clashes between Native populations and colonists begin as colonial
populations rise and therefore require more land.[16]
f Labor intensive agriculture begins. [16]
Lasting Impact of Contact
f Although their social structure was disintegrating, smaller separate tribes
began to unify and blend their traditions in an effort to resist European
colonization and acquisition of lands.
f Colonist push for agricultural lands and attempts to restrict Native
populations to reservations with resources that could not sustain them.[16]
f Native American populations decreased due to the introduction of new
diseases such as smallpox. The smallpox fatality rate is 20-40%.
f Changing climatic conditions affected Native American populations
before Europeans arrived. However, the combined effects of climate,
European diseases, and European land acquisition practices resulted
in substantial population loss, which had a profound effect on Native
cultures. In some cases, the loss of group members and ritual spaces
resulted in a loss of cultural traditions and knowledge.