Emans NSF Proposal 2006

Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant: Questions of Migration, Social Transformation, and Chronology of the Allegany Plateau Region of Western New York. Rebecca J. Emans Project Summary Under the supervision of Drs. S. Milisauskas and D. Perrelli, Ms. Rebecca J. Emans will conduct doctoral research addressing evidence for emigration from the Allegheny Plateau of southwestern New York, between AD 1350 and 1700. This proposal is a request for funds for radiocarbon (AMS) dating to clarify the ceramic chronology of southwestern New York. In addition, since some interpretations of the depopulation of the plateau argue that the area was not suitable for agricultural, funds for botanical analysis are also requested. Current archaeological interpretation of the region is that it was occupied during the early Late Woodland, but at some point, all or part of the region was depopulated by emigration, either with the advent of agriculture during the Late Woodland (AD 1350-1550), and/or in the Contact/Protohistoric Period (AD 1550-1700). During the Contact Period, the Erie-Ontario Lake plain of southwestern New York was occupied by the Erie, and a small portion of the Allegheny Plateau along the Allegheny River was occupied by what is referred to as the Allegheny Valley Iroquoians. Between 1654 and 1656, the Erie, and possibly the Allegheny Valley Iroquoians, “were dispersed” by the Seneca and League of the Iroquois. The historic records relate this “dispersal” as forced mass migration westward into Ohio, and eventually Wisconsin. There are two levels of research questions which will be answered by this dissertation. The first will elucidate the prehistoric and protohistoric chronology and culture history of southwestern New York to better understand economic lifeways, settlement patterns, and short-distance migration in relation to populations living on the Allegheny Plateau. The second involves the interpretations of the dynamics of migration, tribalization, and ethnic transformation during both the prehistoric and contact periods, as well as the impacts of contact on native populations in southwestern New York In general, archaeologists have neglected studies of emigrant (or abandoned) areas, typically focusing on the immigration of new peoples into an area. This dissertation will study the emigrant area, the events and causes leading up to abandonment, and the aftermath of abandonment on any populations left behind. Voluntary and gradual migration leaves a series of markers within the archaeological recorded, including changes in settlement patterns, signs of shortages of human resources, and the presence of materials from the (presumed) immigration area, such as trade wares and goods. In contrast, sudden and forced mass migrations may not leave such markers, but instead be represented by evidence of rapid abandonment, and resistance. This dissertation will contribute to our understanding of prehistoric culture change, and the impacts of culture contact on borderland groups by focusing on the dynamics of migration from the perspective of the emigrant area. Through the comparison and contrast of various kinds of emigration, including short distance and long distance migration, as well as gradual and sudden, and voluntary and forced migrations, archaeologists will be able to distinguish voluntary emigration from forced mass emigration. Recent political and environmental events occurring in other parts of the world, such as Africa and New Orleans, have focused the world’s attention on historical, political, economic, and environmental catalysts for migration, as well as the impacts of migration on these aspects of human society. This dissertation will also assist in training an extremely promising scientist.

i

Table of Contents Project Summary .........................................................................................................................i Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Theories of Migration ................................................................................................................. 1 Background of New York Culture History .................................................................................. 3 Terminal Late Woodland ........................................................................................................ 3 Tribalization, Migration and Sociopolitical Development in the Northeast .............................. 5 The Contact/Protohistoric Period ........................................................................................... 7 The Erie and Southwestern New York .................................................................................... 9 The Allegheny Plateau and Questions of Migration ................................................................... 9 Population and Depopulation of the Allegheny Plateau ....................................................... 10 Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 11 First Level of Research Questions .................................................................................... 11 Second Level of Research Questions ............................................................................... 12 Expectations in the Archaeological Record .......................................................................... 12 Research and Analysis ............................................................................................................ 13 Research Stages ................................................................................................................. 13 Methods of Analysis ............................................................................................................ 14 AMS Dating ...................................................................................................................... 14 Botanical Analysis ............................................................................................................ 14 Ceramics .......................................................................................................................... 14 Other Artifacts................................................................................................................... 15 Funding Requirements and Sources ....................................................................................... 15 Justification .......................................................................................................................... 15 Direct Costs: Scientific Analysis ........................................................................................... 16 Broader Implications of the Study ............................................................................................ 17 Dissemination of Results .......................................................................................................... 17 Treatment and Storage of Newly Recovered Cultural Materials ............................................... 17 References ............................................................................................................................... 18 Figures 1. Study area and physiographic provinces ................................................................................ 1 2. Late Prehistoric chronology of Western New York .................................................................. 4 3. Iroquois groups in the Northeast ............................................................................................. 8 4. Sites Analyzed by Schock (1974) ......................................................................................... 14

ii

Introduction: This proposal is a request for funds for radiocarbon (AMS) dating and botanical analysis as part of a study of prehistoric and early historic emigration in southwestern New York. Doctoral research will investigate evidence for the emigration of people from the Allegheny Plateau region of southwestern New York between AD 1350 and 1700 (Figure 1). Current archaeological interpretation of the region (which includes Chautauqua, Cattaraugus, Allegany, and southern Erie counties) is that it was occupied during the early Late Woodland, but at some point the region was depopulated by emigration (Engelbrecht 1991:3-4; Engelbrecht and Sullivan 1996). If the Allegany Plateau was depopulated, this may have occurred during the Late Woodland (AD 1350-1550), and/or in the Contact/Protohistoric Period (AD 1550-1700). Absolute dates (AMS) will help to clarify the ceramic chronology of southwestern New York. Previous doctoral dissertations for southwestern New York contain serious errors in interpretation (Guthe 1958; Schock 1974). In particular, Schock’s chronology for southwestern New York is based on mixed assemblages from multi-component sites (Perrelli 1997). Schock (1974) identified two phases: the Allegheny for the Early Late Woodland, and the Chautauqua for the Terminal Late Woodland. He based descriptions of each of these phases on mixed assemblages, assuming that each site he analyzed was a single component site. Because these sites are actually multi-component, it is important to use narrow absolute dates (AMS) to interpret the ceramic chronology of features within the sites. Figure 1. Study area and physiographic provinces (based on Hasenstab 1996:18). In general, archaeologists have neglected studies of emigrant (or abandoned) areas, typically focusing on the immigration of new peoples into an area. This dissertation will study the emigrant area, the events and causes leading up to abandonment, and the aftermath of abandonment on any populations left behind. With a better understanding of the ceramic chronology, it is expected that this dissertation will be able to make conclusions about possible emigration during the Late Woodland to Contact/Protohistoric Periods between AD 1350 and 1700 in southwestern New York. There are two levels of research questions which will be answered by this dissertation. The first will elucidate the prehistoric and protohistoric chronology and culture history of southwestern New York. The second involves the interpretations of the dynamics of migration, tribalization, ethnic transformation, and the impacts of contact on native populations. These questions are elaborated upon below. By comparing and contrasting short distance and long distance migration from the perspective of the emigrant area, it is expected that a better understanding of the dynamics of migration will result. Theories of Migration. The processes of cultural change are dynamic phenomena, dependent on various human behaviors, including migration, sociopolitical developments, subsistence changes, and cultural interaction. The study of migration has a long history in archaeology, and is today a central interpretive concept in the archaeology of the Northeast (e.g. Snow 1995, 1996). However, most archaeologists focus on studies of immigration, or intrusive groups into an area, and the effects of migration for those who immigrate. In general, archaeologists have neglected studies of the abandoned areas, events and causes leading up to abandonment, and the aftermath of abandonment on any populations left behind (e.g. Anthony 1990, 1997; Burmeister 2000). 1

Schwartz (1969) defines migration “as a geographical movement of individuals or groups over a significant distance. Such a movement is relatively permanent [non-seasonal and non-periodic] and the old territory is abandoned by the migrating group” (ibid:176). In addition to geographic changes, migrant communities experience change in technology, economy, social structure, and religion (Schwartz 1969:182-187). Technological and economic changes depend on whether the destination locale is similar or different from the home locale. If the environment is markedly different, than changes can occur in types of crops grown, agricultural techniques, housing structure, and utilitarian and tool technologies. After migration, non-utilitarian crafts may become less common or may be abandoned altogether. He identifies four catalysts for migration: threats to the community and its core values, economic factors, overpopulation, and factionalism. Schwartz (1969) identified three stages to migration: the pioneering stage, the consolidation stage, and the stabilization stage. All of these stages focus on the migrant population after the migration has occurred. In general, archaeologists have neglected studies of the abandoned areas, events and causes leading up to abandonment, and the aftermath of abandonment on any populations left behind. Each of the phases identified by Schwartz is represented differently in the archaeological record. The pioneering phase assumes that the migrants are moving into a hostile physical or cultural environment, so that there is a transitional period in which the community must direct its efforts and resources to their physical survival. Activities of the migrants include building shelters, the preparation of new agricultural fields, and the planting of the first crops. At this phase there is strong group solidarity and ethnocentricity compared with their home community, unless the migration occurred as a result of factionalism. Pioneering phase migration may be visible in the archaeological record by 1.) a more utilitarian form and construction of buildings, 2.) a lower frequency of non-utilitarian artifacts, 3.) a lower quality and frequency of decorated pottery, 4.) cruder artifacts in general, 5.) and a restricted tool kit, focused on utilitarian and functional activities. In addition, a narrower range of artifact variability would be a sign of group solidarity. During the pioneering phase, signs of the reduction of social stratification would be see in standardized room size and function. Changes in social units, such as the increase in the importance of the nuclear family or the larger kin groups would be seen in ceramic styles and their distribution across a site. The consolidation phase develops after the first or second successful harvest, when permanent shelters and community structures are built (Schwartz 1969:178-182, 189-193). Social institutions and associations develop and crystallize, while factions within the group begin to develop. The consolidation phase would be evidenced by new technological developments, an increase in nonutilitarian arts, crafts, and architecture, improved workmanship and quality of artifacts, an increase in decorated pottery, and the number of sites would increase, while the size of the sites would decrease. Changes in social structure would also be evident. The stabilization phase is when the community has settled down, and social dynamics shift to those not related to the move. Anthony (1990) identifies a similar pattern of migration, with concomitant archaeological correlates. There are two models of migration: the push-pull, and the exploitive. The push-pull model of migration states that migration occurs when there are negative, or “push”, stresses in the home locale, and positive, or “pull”, attractions in the destination, and the transportation costs of people and supplies are acceptable. Push factors are negative characteristics of the original locale, and include environmental stress, population pressures, resource depletion, and conflict (political or ideological). Pull factors are positive attractions about the destination locale, and include favorable environment characteristics of the destination, existing political or kin relationships, and prior knowledge of the route and the destination. Anthony warns that the push and pull factors should not be seen are purely mechanical determinants. The exploitive model of migration is when a 2

dominant population is exploiting a dependent population, and the dependant population has no control over the migration. Anthony also states that cultural values and beliefs can also effect and motivate the migration. Nevertheless, Anthony’s article focuses on the push-pull model. Anthony (1990:902-905) also identifies five patterns of long-distance migration: leap-frogging, migration streams, return migration, migration frequency, and migration demography. In demography, leapfrogging is known as channelized or chain migration, which has been extensively studied in that discipline. Scouts are sent out ahead of a community of villages to identify possible destinations, and families follow. Then second generation villages do the same. An important issue in the scout stage of the migration is socially communicated information available about the destination. The initial scouts may have had very different reasons for their migration, such as trade, trapping, mercenaries, or craft specialization. The archaeological patterns of settlement should be spotty, producing islands of settlement with less desirable areas in between. The migration stream pattern is when migration occurs along defined routes toward specific destinations, so that artifact distributions are along these lines of movement. This pattern typically flows from a highly restricted point of origin, and artifact attributes are likely similarly restricted. Migration can also occur two-way. In return migration, those who have migrated return to their home locale. These migrants often have prestige goods, and benefit socially and economically from the materials they collect and the information they have acquired. This pattern may explain evidence of long-distance trade. Migrants often are those who have migrated before. Therefore, the migration frequency influences migration patterns. If someone has migrated recently, they are more likely to migrate again. With migration demography, young males are far more likely to migrate than any other demographic group. Burmeister (2000) posits a method to distinguish cultural change resultant of migration from other, non-specified forms of cultural transfer (e.g. trade, diffusion). (He does not develop a method to identify and distinguish all three). Basing his model on Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of the habitus, Burmeister argues that proof of migration can be seen in the internal domain of the habitus. The external, public domain is a “zone of contact” with other societies, such as a destination population/culture that an immigrant population will encounter. The habitus tends more towards tradition, and would only be changed with assimilation that results in a shift of status for the family. Therefore, the internal structure of a house, such as floorplan, location and form of fireplaces, and window placement, will remain traditional for the family. Other aspects of the habitus, such as the daily routine and leisure time, will also remain unchanged in an immigrant context. Background of New York Culture History. The relevant time span for this dissertation is between AD 1350 and 1700. Archaeologists generally divide this into the Terminal Late Woodland and Contact/Protohistoric periods (Figure 2). The Terminal Late Woodland. Beginning around AD 1300, (also known as the prehistoric Iroquois or the Late Late Woodland), and until contact, the Terminal Woodland was marked by an increase in reliance on maize agriculture, larger settlements, and, at least in some parts of the Northeast, changes in settlement locations. Villages were often fortified, and houses were rectangular longhouses. The villages were moved about every ten to twenty years due to soil, wood and game depletion. In contrast to the Early Late Woodland, Iroquois villages were located on defensible sites near small creeks (Funk 1983; Ritchie 1969; Snow 1994a). A clan lineages socio-political system had developed by AD 1400 (White 1971). The clans were divided along matrilocal and matrilineal lines, which initially developed into matrilocal tribes. After, and as a result of contact, these clans formed the Iroquois Confederacy of central New York (Englebrecht 2003; Tooker 1978; Lenig 1965).

3

Figure 2. Late Prehistoric chronology of Western New York (based on Englebrecht and Sullivan 1996:18). Time Years A.D.

Period

1700

Historic

1600 Contact

1500

Niagara Frontier Neutral, Wenro, Erie? Village Sequences Western Eastern Kleis Bead Hill Ellis Simmons Green Lake NewtonHopper Eaton Buffam Goodyear

Southwestern New York Erie, Allegany Valley Iroquoians

?

Chautauqua Phase 1400 Terminal Late Woodland

Uren/Middleport Phases Middle Ontario Tradition?

1300

1200 Princess Point Complex?

Allegheny Phase

1100 Early Late Woodland 1000

During the Oak Hill phase of the Terminal Late Woodland, starting around AD 1300, true Iroquoianstyle longhouses were evident, at least 100 ft and more than 300 ft long (Ritchie and Funk 1973). These villages were also stockaded. The Kelso site had two overlapping stockaded villages, represented two occupations during the same phase. The internal structure of the houses at this site is like that of Iroquoian houses, with a central line of hearths, and evidence of bed platforms. Trash or storage pits are unusually small at this site, and in central New York in general, but are very large along the Schoharie and Mohawk river valleys. The Kelso site had no large subsurface granaries, so that bark barrels and corn cribs were probably used. During the Chance phase, there were slightly larger houses, and there was a thick occupation midden at the Getman site, relative to the occupation middens of the Oak Hill phase sites. Otherwise the settlements and features within the sites are very similar to the Oak Hill phase sites. At both the Oak Hill and Chance sites, large roasting pits were found. Sites dating to the Garoga phase, located along the Mohawk River, are all palisaded, and located on high, defendable hills, located away from the river and its major tributaries. These sites are very large, reaching up to ten acres in size (Ritchie and Funk 1973). Iroquois sites were located in frost-free zones with relatively long growing seasons, on elevations which allow for cold air drainage such as the Niagara Escarpment in western New York, and the Tug Hill Plateau in northern New York (Englebrecht 2003:31; Hasenstab 1996). They were also in areas of moist loam or sandy loam with high lime content. The high lime is beneficial to bean growth. It is of some contention as to whether soil depletion was a problem, as there is with swidden agriculture in other parts of the world. The cultivation of maize and beans on high lime soils with good moisture may have combined to counteract the detrimental effects of repeated use of the same fields (Englebrecht 2003:30). 4

During what Hasenstab (1996; Niemczycki 1988, 1995) calls the Transitional Iroquois, Ontario Iroquois began to move onto the Niagara Peninsula, possibly fleeing from a drought in Ontario. Iroquois villages also were located along the east side of Lake Erie and Ontario, and the Finger Lakes, in order to take advantage of the increased rainfall resulting form Lake Effect. By AD 1400, Prehistoric Iroquois were living and farming in areas of rocky till soils that have a high soil rating for corn, and a high lime content to aid in bean growth. Previously, settlements were on sandy glacial outwashes (Hasenstab 1996). In coastal areas of New England, soils were often too acidic and rocky for farming (George 1999:20). For defensive purposes, sites moved progressively away from canoe-navigable waterways, due to increased hostility and warfare (Hasenstab 1996). By AD 1500, villages were shifting eastward, possibly to avoid hostilities with the Ontario Iroquois. During the Transitional Iroquois to Prehistoric Iroquois, large fortifications were along most of the navigable waterways. Site density increased dramatically along the lake plain as Ontario Iroquois moved into western New York. There may have been game shortages in Ontario, and the migration into the area appears to have been to increase hunting territories. Following the intrusion of the Ontario Iroquois into western New York, warfare increased, and settlement of the New York Iroquois moved eastward, as an apparent attempt to avoid conflict. It was at this time that the social systems may have developed into tribes (Niemczycki 1988). By around AD 1400, formal lineages had developed, with clans as the basic socio-political structure. These clans were divided along matrilocal and matrilineal lines. Eventually, the social system was solidified into matrilocal tribes. As a result of contact, this socio-political system developed into the Iroquois Confederacy (Englebrecht 2003; Tooker 1978). As population contracted and villages became more isolated and self-sufficient, the different Iroquois languages may have developed (Snow 1994b:255). By the time of the historic period, the Iroquois had relatively low population density because of women’s work loads, purposeful spacing of childbirth, long periods of postpartum taboos, and the maintenance of low village populations for defensive purposes within the fortified villages (Engelbrecht 1987). Tribalization, Migration and Sociopolitical Development in the Northeast. The Iroquois were a linguistic and cultural group with a tribal, if not a chiefdom, level of sociopolitical complexity. Ethnohistoric documents describe a number of confederacies of what appear to have been tribes. In New York, the timing and process of tribalization is currently debated, with possible early dates of origination in the early Late Woodland. Over time the development of tribes culminated into what was in historic times a series of tribes allied into egalitarian confederacies or a chiefdoms. South and east of Lake Ontario was the League of the Iroquois, along the north side of the lake was the Huron Confederacy, and to the west of the lake were the Neutral, who later allied with the Huron (Engelbrecht 2003; Richter 1992; Chapdelaine 1991). Since the 1960s, archaeologists have interpreted the development of the Northern Iroquois tribal societies as an in situ process, developing from the Point Peninsula, Princess Point, or Owasco cultures (complexes/traditions), depending on the location either in New York or in Ontario, Canada (Snow 1995:72-73). This tribal development was viewed as the result of the adoption of horticulture, the development of sedentary villages, and an increase in population, which brought about internal pressures, and which in turn increased competition and warfare (Niemczycki 1988:78). Thus the need for tribal societies is viewed as a response to increased competition and warfare: tribes form for mutual defense. In order for tribal formation to be a result of horticulture, sedentism, population increase, or warfare, these causes must have come before tribalization, and must have been immediately followed by tribalization. However, according to Niemczycki (1988, 1995), none of these were immediately followed by tribalization. This traditional model does not include two important factors: diffusion and immigration. She studied the development of Seneca 5

tribalization using Braun and Plog’s (1982) risk management model which states that tribalization is a process that mitigates risk arising form increased environmental uncertainty. It is an adaptation for an egalitarian society by the formalization of pan-residential networks within existing social networks, in order to reduce risks. Niemczycki’s (1995) later work on the Seneca focused on mechanisms of culture contact: displacement, acculturation, and diffusion. She identified two populations in central New York based on ceramics, settlement patterns, burial practices, and territorial distribution, and argued that diffusion, rather than acculturation, was the mechanism for cultural change during the Oak Hill phase/horizon (1250-1350). She found that immigration came before tribalization, and was immediately followed by tribalization, and, therefore, Seneca tribalization was an in situ adaptive response by local protoSeneca to the influx on Ontario Iroquois. Immigration of the Ontario Iroquois brought culture change, including new ideas, as well as a need for new subsistence, settlement, and sociopolitical strategies, in order for the proto-Seneca to compete with the new population (Niemczycki 1988:78). Changes continued until AD 1450, the time of the Seneca tribal emergence, and by 1550, only the Seneca are represented archaeologically, implying the displacement or acculturation of the Ontario Iroquois (Niemczycki 1995:44, 53). In contrast to Niemczycki’s (1988, 1995) model, Snow (1995:72-73) identifies discontinuity at an earlier point, between the Point Peninsula (New York)/Princess Point (Ontario) complexes and the Late Woodland Owaso, Glen Meyer, and Pickering, as well as between them and later, protoIroquois/Early Iroquois cultures. Technological differences in the manufacture of prehistoric pottery show a discontinuity between the earlier indigenous groups and the later Iroquois groups. In addition, site distribution into more restricted space for early Iroquois villages compared with the Point Peninsula is also viewed as a too dramatic shift for an in situ development (Snow 1995:6872). Instead of the in situ process, Snow argues that the Iroquois in New York, along the St. Lawrence River, and in Ontario, developed as a result of a series of migrations from central Pennsylvania. He places the Clemson Island culture as the parent culture for developments in New York and southern Canada. Iroquoian compact villages, horticulture, and probably matrilocal residence patterns are distinctive and linked to what he interprets at migrating tribal societies from the Clemson Island culture area northward. Working in Ontario, Crawford and Smith (1996) have argued against Snow’s model, suggesting that there is evidence that Princess Point is directly ancestral to Glen Meyer, and thus Ontario Iroquois tribes developed in situ. Both Rayner-Herter (2001) and Engelbrecht (2003) argue for an ethnogenetic interpretation of the Iroquois and their political system. Under ethnogenesis, human groups are the result of continued interaction across ethnic and cultural boundaries. Cultural change comes about through hybridization of cultures that come into contact with one another. Therefore, the in situ and the diffusionist/migration models are not mutually exclusive, but are part of the continuous interplay of cultural change. Rayner-Herter (2001) says that there is no evidence of two groups in west-central New York during the Terminal Late Woodland. Between AD 1300 and 1500, there was a peer polity of two or more communities which were integrated by a matrilineal social organization. By the sixteenth century, villages were located on promontories and had defensive works surrounding larger villages. The shift to two large villages was a phenomenon of settlement nucleation. A severe drought in the middle of the sixteenth century resulted in the development of tribal groups. Defensive structures, according to Rayner-Herter, are a sign of the development of region-wide warfare. More politically complex tribal-level coalitions in Ontario are supposed to have resulted in the consolidation of people in New York.

6

Rayner-Herter views Niemczycki’s study as a cladistic model, and an erroneous interpretation. Rayner-Herter supports an ethnogenetic model in which the Iroquois developed from a number of different ancestral groups. She says that acculturation is the mechanism of cultural exchange between the Ontario Iroquois and Late Woodland groups in the Genesee Valley. Both the Ontario Iroquois and the Owasco Iroquois are the ancestors of the Seneca, and the Seneca are the result of a continuous process of divergence and recombination (Rayner-Herter 2001:256). Engelbrecht (2003) argues that the dichotomy of in situ or migration is too simple. These kinds of interpretations are the result of a strong emphasis in archaeology on taxonomic definitions of prehistoric cultural groups. The problem is derived from defining the Iroquois by a trait list of maize horticulture, longhouses, incised ceramics, matrilineality, and language. Each of these characteristics developed and changed at different rates. He uses the ethnogenetic model to argue that the Iroquois developed from several different antecedent groups. The shift from dispersed homestead to clusters of villages, from bands to tribes, in defendable locations during the fifteenth century is due to warfare. Therefore, the formation of each of the separate tribes or nations developed as a process, and not a single event. This process of ever-increasing region-wide alliance making did not end with the formation of the separate tribes in central New York (Seneca, Cayuga, Onondoga, Oneida). Towards the end of the prehistoric period, the League of the Iroquois emerged as a descendent sociopolitical entity. This was not a result of contact, since the League was formed beforehand. The earliest alliance appears to have been between the Onondaga, Oneida, and the Mohawk, the Cayuga and Seneca may have had a similar kind of alliance. The origin myth of the formation of the Five Nations relates a story about a visionary leader known as the Peacemaker, who traveled with Hiawatha, spreading a message of peace (Engelbrecht 2003:130). The first to follow the Peacemaker were the Mohawk, and the last were the Seneca, although the Seneca may have been originally two branches which allied previously. The formation of the League prior to contact can be seen through oral traditions, archaeological and historical evidence of the disappearance and relocation of populations, and the movement of nonlocal items across the area. The formation of the Five Nations can be seen in the presence of five population clusters in the region, and the disappearance of archaeological populations in peripheral areas (Engelbrecht 2003:142). The Saint Lawrence Iroquois, possibly the first to encounter French explorers, disappeared immediately after contact, and may have been subsumed under the Huron Confederacy (Engelbrecht 2003:143; Chapdelaine 1991). The emergence of sociopolitical complexity among the Iroquois was a long process of alliance forming for mutual defense and trade, migration and subsuming of neighboring populations, clustering of villages within fortifications, commonality or complementariness of subsistence and other economy needs, and the formation of common identities through the representation of symbols and the creation of common origin myths. The Contact/Protohistoric Period. The traditional lifeways of native populations of the New World were dramatically impacted, directly and indirectly, by European colonization along the coast of North America (Ray 1974; Dennis 1993; White 1991; Trigger 1985). Early historic peoples who were impacted indirectly by colonization are commonly referred to as “protohistoric”. For the Iroquois, in general, the Contact Period begins in 1534 when Jacques Cartier explored the St. Lawrence River. During his expeditions he encountered Iroquoian-speaking people along the river valley (Trigger 1978:349-352; Abler and Tooker 1978:505-506). After this event, European exploration and settlement expanded, and the lifeways of the Iroquois were dramatically impacted by the economic, military, and political objectives of the new arrivals. Trade was the initial and early trigger for major cultural changes among the native populations 7

neighboring the European settlements. Although several native groups had formed alliances or confederacies prior to contact, after 1640, the fur trade intensified the formation and power of Native American confederacies, including the Five Nations Confederacy, the Neutral Confederacy and the Huron Confederacy (Trigger 1978; Abler and Tooker 1978; Dennis 1993; White 1991). With contact and the fur trade came epidemics of European diseases, which were new to the immune systems of the Native American populations. These epidemics wrought havoc on the existing social order. Native Americans misinterpreted the diseases as being caused by their native neighbors, the fur traders, or the missionaries, and waged war against each other for revenge, and to restock their villages with people for labor and family members, often forming fictive kin relationships with their captives (Snow 1994b:111; Trigger 1985; White 1991; Betts 2006). European kingdoms also used native tribes to fight European wars, resulting in an increase in the importance of the military aspect of these confederacies. The usury of these groups even entailed the arming of the native allies by the Europeans. This disrupted the traditional balance of power in the region. Trigger (1976) argues that the reason the Iroquois were so successful in exploiting the shift in power was because of their location in central and eastern New York. Initially, because of their location, surrounded by sedentary agriculturalists, they did not have direct access to fur resources. The increased importance of military power and their proximity to sources of new armament technology (the availability of guns from the European settlers along the coast) increased the Iroquois’ ability and need to expand their territories. During the seventeenth century, the Iroquois waged war on their neighbors the Huron and Neutral, who were acting as middlemen for the fur supplies (Figure 3). With the so called dispersal and removal of these competitors, the Iroquois Confederacy expanded into a powerful force in the region (Trigger 1976; White 1971. 1978a and b). Figure 3. Iroquois groups in the Northeast (Englebrecht 2003:2). In western New York, the Seneca “dispersed” the Wenro in 1638, and successfully dispersed their competitors the Huron Confederacy, by 1649. The other groups in the eastern Great Lakes region were dispersed soon after. The Petun were dispersed by 1650 and the Neutral Confederacy by 1651 (Trigger 1976; White 1978a; 1978b). As an almost purely protohistoric (little direct contact with Europeans), the Erie disappeared as a distinct group by 1657, possibly having been absorbed into the neighboring Wenro and Neutral groups, the Seneca, or possibly having moved westward into Ohio (Trigger 1976; White 1971, 1978b; Snow 1994b). Therefore, by 1670, the abolition of the League’s neighbors and competitors was complete (Morgan 1851:12; White 1991; Snow 1994b:117).

8

The Erie and Southwestern New York. The territory of the Erie is generally known based on historic maps made by the early explorers of the region. A map from 1650 shows the Nation du Chat, or Erie, located south of Lake Erie, around Chautauqua Lake and westward into Ohio. This area includes the Ripley site on Lake Erie in Chautauqua County (White 1978b:413, 415; Engelbrecht 1991:2). Despite the evidence this map represents, archaeologists such as Engelbrecht (1991:3-4) and White (1978b), argue that the prehistoric territory of the Erie, and even their ethnic identity as Erie and Iroquoian, is unknown and conjecture. White (1978b:415) argues that the Erie may have moved southward from the Niagara River area, along the lakeshore. This would suggest that the Erie were not an insular group within what is now southwestern New York, and that prehistoric or protohistoric groups in the interior of the region, especially the Allegheny Valley Iroquoians situated along the Allegheny Valley, may be as-yet unidentified Iroquoian groups without any historic mention, or possibly more closely related to the Algonquins of Pennsylvania. The late prehistoric/contact-period occupation of southwestern New York is generally referred to as Chautauqua Iroquois or Allegheny Valley Erie (see Figure 2; Engelbrecht 1991:4). These groups may have lived on the upland Alleghany Plateau, away from the lakeshore and the Erie-Ontario Lake Plain. As it has been argued that this plateau was depopulated in the Late Woodland, as maize agriculture increased in importance. The plateau is less suitable for agriculture because it has poor soils, a shorter growing season, and lower temperatures. The topography of the plateau is also generally steeper than the lake plain, so that areas suitable for growing prehistoric maize are restricted to the infrequent floodplain area along the major rivers of the region. The first European explorers in western New York were French missionaries and traders during the first decades of the seventeenth century. However, it was not until the 1660s that more extensive intrusion of the area by the French began. In 1678 René-Robert Cavelier de La Salle built a ship and explored Lake Erie. Initial settlement was in the form of military and trading posts. The first post was where the Niagara River flows into Lake Ontario. In 1679, La Salle constructed a post known as Fort Conti, with the permission of the Seneca, in the area that would eventually house Fort Niagara (Trigger 1978:349-352; Abler and Tooker 1978:505-506). During the seventeenth and into the middle of the eighteenth century, western New York was almost unpopulated, the Seneca only using the area for hunting expeditions. The Seneca appear to have driven out or subsumed any existing local populations. During this period, the French established a series of posts along the Lake Erie shoreline into Ohio. These posts were from Fort Niagara to what is now Erie, Pennsylvania. They include posts at French Creek and at the confluence of French Creek and the Allegheny River (Tooker 1978:432434; White 1978b:415-416). The French were the first recorded Europeans to enter into southwestern New York. Captain Bienville de Celeron led an expedition into the interior in order to roust English squatters and fur traders, to maintain the territory for the French. Celeron left engraved metal plaques as he went, which declared the area the property of the French King (Young 1974[1875]). The Allegheny Plateau and Questions of Migration. This dissertation focuses on prehistoric and early historic emigration and possible ethnic transformation during the Terminal Late Woodland and Contact/Protohistoric periods. The League of the Iroquois had formed prior to contact, consisting of the alliance of five groups or tribes (historically referred to as the Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, and Mohawk) living along the Finger Lakes to the Hudson River. At the same time were the Erie and perhaps other Iroquoians, located at the borderlands of the League of the Iroquois, and westward through Ohio. Contact between Europeans and Native Americans in Northeast North America brought about drastic changes in economy, social and political structures, and the relationships between native groups. Epidemics resulted in significant loss of life, and brought about conflict between groups. With European contact came the addition of new trade 9

partners, new economies, new competitors, and new political alliances, which resulted in the dramatic restructuring of native societies and their relationships to one another. This dissertation posits questions of the timing and dynamics of short and long distance migration, settlement clustering, tribalization, ethnic transformation and the impacts of contact on the protohistoric groups living within the borderlands of the Middle Ground (White 1991). Population and Depopulation of the Allegheny Plateau. Some archaeologists argue that depopulation of the Allegheny Plateau occurred during the late prehistoric period, as agriculture became more important to the prehistoric societies. Southwestern New York contains two physiographic regions: the Allegheny Plateau, and the Erie-Ontario Lake Plain. The Allegheny Plateau is part of the Appalachian Uplands. Beginning approximately six miles north of the Allegheny River, the plateau consists of rugged terrain, with steep valley walls, wide ridgetops, and flat-topped hills (Puglia 1994:3; Owens et al. 1986:2). The drainage for the plateau flows generally southwestward being part of the Allegheny-Ohio-Mississippi River system. Vegetation of the plateau is dominated by the Northern Hardwood forest zone, which consists mostly of beech and sugar maple as well as basswood, hemlock and white pine. In contrast, the Erie-Ontario Lake Plain province is nearly level, typical of abandoned lakebeds. The plain is only two to six miles wide along the shore of Lake Erie in the western part of the study area. The drainage for the plain is the Lake Erie-St. Lawrence River system, with creeks and streams flowing west and northwest into Lake Erie. The plain is within the Elm-Red Maple-Northern Hardwood zone, with predominant trees consisting of elm and red maple, with some oak and northern hardwoods. The distribution of these trees across the landscape is determined by direction of slope, with those facing south towards the sun having more oaks and hickory, and those facing north having more elm, red cedar, hawthorn, and evergreens (de Laubenfels 1966:92-95). Because of the dramatic differences between these two physiographic provinces, archaeologists have suggested that the Allegheny Plateau, in contrast to the Erie-Ontario Lake Plain, was unsuitable for agriculture, and, thus, as agriculture became more important, people migrated off of the plateau to settle where there were larger areas of arable land, and a less harsh climate (Englebrecht 1991:3). Therefore, migration off of the plateau may have occurred between AD 1350-1550. Represented in historic times by the League of the Iroquois, prehistoric populations in central New York around this same time changed their settlement patterns to be concentrated into larger villages on the Ontario Lake Plain, leaving large areas of the Appalachian Uplands unpopulated but exploited for hunting and other resource procurement. Another possibility is that southwestern New York (including both the plateau and the lake plain), became depopulated during the Contact Period of western New York. Between AD 1550 and 1660, the Erie and what is referred to as the Allegheny Valley Iroquoians are believed to have occupied parts of the region at least for some of the time (White 1978b; Engelbrecht 1991; Engelbrecht and Sullivan 1996). The Erie may have immigrated from the north (the area of Buffalo, New York) and established settlement just prior to or near the beginning of the Contact Period. Their villages, one of which is represented by the Ripley site in Chautauqua County, were restricted to the lake plain along Lake Erie. The Allegheny Valley Iroquoians are an archaeological culture without any historic record. They may have had villages along the Allegheny River in the southern part of the study area, within what is now the Salamanca Reservation (belonging to the Seneca Nation) at the beginning of the Contact Period. Little is known about both of these groups, although more is known of the Erie (White 1978b). The Erie were considered fierce warriors and formidable foes, participating in raids with and against the other Iroquois groups of western New York prior to and during the Contact Period. The location and boundaries of the Erie territory, and their ethnic relationship to other Iroquois of the area (including the Seneca, Neutral, Wenro, and Allegheny Valley Iroquoians), is not clear. Even less is 10

known of the Allegheny Valley Iroquoians, who may have been an extension of the Erie or Seneca, or who may have been related to Algonquin groups in Pennsylvania. Therefore, they may have been an Iroquois speaking group or possibly Algonquin. As part of a series of actions by the Seneca, the Erie, and possibly the Allegheny Valley Iroquoians, were “dispersed” by the Seneca Iroquois between 1654 and 1656 (White 1978b; Snow 1994b; Engelbrecht 1991; Engelbrecht and Sullivan 1996). The word “dispersed” is commonly used in historic records apparently signifying the end of an ethnic or political group, resulting in the end of competition for trade or threats of warfare. Other western Iroquois groups, including the Wenro and Neutral, were also considered to have been “dispersed” by the Seneca immediately prior to the Erie. Based on various historic records, there are several possibilities as to how the Erie were “dispersed”: a.) the dispersal of the Erie in southwestern New York was the result of direct battles, with dramatic loss of life; b.) the Erie emigrated and joined the Seneca in central New York; c.) they emigrated and joined other Iroquois groups such as the Neutral in western New York and Ontario, Canada; and, d.) they emigrated westward into what are now the Midwestern States (Lupold 1975; White 1971, 1978b; Engelbrecht 1991; White 1991; Snow 1994b; McConnell 1987:94-95). The dispersal of the Erie may have been a dynamic phenomenon, which included one, two, or all, of the above possibilities, with some members of the Erie loosing their lives, others emigrating to the Neutral in Ontario or westward into Ohio, and still others emigrating or being enslaved by the Seneca. In addition, the extent of the impact of epidemics effecting these changes is debated, but may have amplified any of these possibilities (Trigger 1985; Snow 1994b; White 1991). The Allegheny Valley Iroquoians may have experienced a similar fate, although no historic records clearly describe this group. Research Questions. There are two levels of research questions which will be answered by this dissertation. The first level consists of questions related to chronology and culture history, and the second level involves the interpretations of the significance and dynamics of migration, tribalization, and ethnic transformation. First Level of Research Questions. The proposed dissertation will elucidate the prehistoric and protohistoric chronology and culture history of southwestern New York to better understand economic lifeways, settlement patterns, and short-distance migration in relation to populations living on the Allegheny Plateau (Englebrecht 1991:3). Research questions focus on the context and timing of the depopulation of southwestern New York: •

•

•

If the plateau was depopulated in prehistoric times (AD 1350-1550), was this an abandonment of the region as a whole? Or, did the prehistoric population concentrate settlement into larger villages near the Erie Lake shore (Engelbrecht and Sullivan 1996), or other major waterways such as the Allegany River, as occurred in other parts of New York around this time (e.g. the central New York Iroquois concentration of settlements around each of the major Finger Lakes; Niemczycki 1988, 1995)? Did depopulation of the region occur in early historic times (AD 1550-1700) as a result of trade opportunities? Did the Iroquois populations of the region abandon southwestern New York to seek out trade opportunities with Europeans, and were they subsequently absorbed into the Seneca, Neutral, or Wenro (White 1971, 1978a, 1978b; Abler and Tooker 1978)? Was the depopulation of southwestern New York a result of the Seneca “dispersal” of the Erie in the 1650s? Did warfare drive out the Erie, and other possible protohistoric Iroquois groups, from the region to the Neutral or Seneca? And/or, did they emigrate southward to what is now western Pennsylvania (White 1971, 1978a, 1978b; Abler and Tooker 1978)? 11

Second Level of Research Questions. By answering the above questions, it will be possible to interpret the significance and dynamics of migration, tribalization, and ethnic transformation during both the prehistoric and contact periods, as well as the impacts of contact on native populations in southwestern New York. Research questions related to models of migration, tribalization, ethnic transformation, and the impacts of contact on native populations include: •

•

•

•

What factors affected migration and depopulation of the area? What were the dynamics that let up to and brought about the abandonment of the plateau, and the region as a whole? Are the dynamics of migration different for the prehistoric populations (AD 1350-1550) versus those of the Contact Period (AD 1550-1700)? Did migration during each time period occur gradually over time, or was there sudden, mass migration? Did circumstances force the migration, or was the migration voluntary? Are tribalization and/or ethnic transformation reasonable alternatives or additional dynamics to migration for either the prehistoric or historic periods? Which migration model, such as the push-pull or exploitive models described by Anthony (1990), is relevant for each time period? For example, is the push-pull model more relevant to the prehistoric period, and the exploitive model for the Contact Period? How did contact between Europeans and the League of the Iroquois impact those living in southwestern New York? What changes in the economy, social and political structures, and the relationships between the Iroquoian groups in southwestern New York and the League of the Iroquois, are visible in the archaeological record of this region? What role did other Iroquoian groups (e.g the Seneca), European contact (including epidemics), and the development of the fur trade economy have in this migration? Did the Iroquoian groups of southwestern New York move towards the Seneca, or away from them? What are the implications of each of these alternatives? Were the Iroquoian groups enslaved by the Seneca? Were they adopted by them? Why would the Seneca want to do either? How did the new economies and politics, transformed by the arrival of European trade, change the motivations and resources of the Seneca and other members of the League? And, how did these changes effect the relationships between them, the Erie, and others within the Middle Ground?

Expectations in the Archaeological Record. Voluntary and gradual migration leaves a series of markers within the archaeological recorded previously identified by several researchers (e.g. Anthony 1990, 1997; Burmeister 2000). Evidence of emigration can be identified by examining settlement patterns and material culture correlates. Signs of the impact of emigration should be seen in material culture in two ways. Internal changes leading up to emigration will include evidence of the reduction of investment in material culture. For example, the quality and decoration of pottery is reduced, with signs of repair and reuse, and there will be an increase in expedient technology with the use of marginal raw materials. External contacts will result in the adoption of outside material culture and stylistic and functional attributes. Therefore, there should be the presence of some trade wares or goods, and exotic lithics, as well as stylistic similarities for utilitarian objects with other areas (e.g. the Seneca). In contrast, sudden and forced mass migrations may not leave such markers, but instead be represented by evidence of rapid abandonment, and resistance. Prior to emigration, signs of external contacts (e.g. adoption of outside material culture and stylistic and functional attributes) may initially be common, but the nature of, for example, stylistic attributes of pottery may shift to signs of resistance (sudden rejection of adopted traits, and return to traditional styles), or to the adoption of alternative external contacts (e.g. alternative contacts and different stylistic traits).

12

Specifically for the study area, the Erie and Allegheny Valley Iroquoians living in southwestern New York who experienced gradual and voluntary migration, such as towards trade sources, may have initially procured trade items, and altered their pottery styles to those of the Seneca, Neutral, or Wenro. However, just prior to the “dispersal” by the Seneca, there may have been a rejection of Seneca styles, and perhaps the adoption of pottery styles of Ohio and western Pennsylvania (the possible new destination locale). Alternatively, if the time-span involved was too rapid, pottery styles would be left as is, but perhaps with greater evidence of repair, reuse, or whole vessels abandoned. Research and Analysis. This study will involve the diachronic analysis of artifact assemblages, in particular pottery. According to Perrelli (1997), knowledge about southwestern New York’s prehistoric and protohistoric ceramic chronology is sketchy. Guthe (1958) and Schock (1974) both conducted doctoral dissertations for southwestern New York. However, these contain serious errors in interpretation. A particular problem is Schock’s chronology for southwestern New York which is based on mixed assemblages from multi-component sites (Perrelli 1997). The Late Woodland in New York is generally divided into Early and Terminal (Englebrecht and Sullivan 1996). Schock (1974) identified two phases for each: the Allegheny phase for the Early Late Woodland, and the Chautauqua phase for the Terminal Late Woodland (see Figure 2). However, he based descriptions of each of these phases on mixed assemblages, assuming that each site he analyzed was a single component site. In other parts of New York, Early Late Woodland pottery is cord-impressed, and Terminal Late Woodland pottery has linear, incised decoration on rims and smooth-walled bodies. Since Schock assumed sites to be single component, Allegheny and Chautauqua phase assemblages each contain greater variety in ceramic attributes than individual phases in other parts of New York. Therefore, traits such as cord-marked pottery reappear over time, and rim decorations and temper (sand, flint, and shell) vary within phases to an extent unlike those at comparable sites in northwestern and central New York. Dr. Douglas Perrelli, of the State University of New York, has been untangling the ceramic chronology for the Allegheny/Early Late Woodland. Ms. Emans’ will concentrate analysis on the Chautauqua phase of the Terminal Late Woodland Period (AD 1350-1550) and Contact Period (AD 1550-1700) to aid in the interpretation of cultural developments on the Allegany Plateau, within the context of emigration and social developments. Research Stages. The doctoral research will include the following parts: 1. Reanalysis of pottery, with absolute dates (AMS), for the Chautauqua Phase to resolve the problems of chronology and multi-component sites. 2. Identification of possible ceramic attributes as signatures for the region (ethnicity), and comparative analysis of them in relation to prehistoric and historic Iroquois ceramics of New York (e.g. the prehistoric Seneca, Wenro, and Neutral). 3. Analysis of the material culture of village sites in the region to identify the material culture correlates of emigration, described above, including the quality of pottery manufacture, signs of reuse and repair, evidence of expedient technology and marginal lithic materials, as well as evidence of the adoption of pottery styles of the other areas, trade wares or goods, and exotic lithics (stone tool raw materials). 4. Survey and excavation within southwestern New York to acquire new data, increase sample size, and improve the archaeological context of pottery types and chronology. 5. Analysis of settlement patterns to discern changes and trends that might parallel those of other prehistoric and historic Iroquois groups. 6. Botanical analysis will be conducted by another graduate student at the University at Buffalo, to identify environmental changes related to agricultural productivity of the region.

13

Methods of Analysis. The proposed study will involve the analysis of data from existing collections and the survey and excavation of select sites. Archaeological materials at the University at Buffalo will be used. Analysis will include relevant materials from previously analyzed sites, such as those included in Schock’s study (Figure 4). In order to clarify the chronology, absolute dates in the form of Carbon-14 and AMS dating techniques are necessary. In addition, since some arguments for the depopulation of the Allegheny Plateau, and the timing of the migration of horticultural societies in the northeast, are dependent on climate change and the development of maize agriculture, ethnobotanical analysis of soil samples and residue on pottery will aid in the interpretation of these issues. Figure 4. Sites analyzed by Schock (1974). Period Late Woodland

Chautauqua Phase

Related

Related/Early Historic Early Historic

Site Name Ellington Lawrence/Boyd Rhinehart J. Falcone Griffiths Point Cassadaga Lake Gerry McCullough Segerlin Ward Benedict 22-Towerville Anzalone Bloomer Road Burning Spring Cadiz Crandall Dennison

Kinzua Witchs Walk 1 Stow Loen Johnson West Onoville Bridge Archie Winton B 26, 31, 32 29 33, 34 37 and 38 41, 42, 44, 48 Double Wall Fort Humphrey Center Kiatone FD Little Valley Peacock Portageville

Stoddard Dolgrin 76 30Ca15 30Ca35 45 46 47 49

Sheridan Sugartown Vouch Westfield 71 Silverheels

Ripley Fentonville

Glen Jamison High Banks

28th Street Scadden

AMS Dating. Samples for absolute dates will be obtained from two sources. Encrustations on pottery fragments in museum collections will be obtained. These samples will probably require AMS dating. In addition, carbon samples from features found during excavation will also need to be dated. It is unknown whether these samples will require traditional Carbon-14 dating or AMS. The objective is to get the most narrow dates possible, due to the short time-span involved. Botanical analysis. Soil samples for botanical analysis will be obtained during excavation. In addition, some evidence of botanical remains may be found on archived museum pottery fragments. Ceramics. Ceramic analysis can be conducted whether from a typological standpoint, or by the study of attributes. This dissertation will initially involve attribute analysis. Nancy Rayner-Herter (2001) conducted an analysis of ceramics from sites in the northern part of Western New York. She did an attribute analysis based on one developed by William Engelbrecht. She and Engelbrecht have found that Richard MacNeish’s typology , developed for New York state, was problematic for western New York. Pottery types in his typology were not always mutually exclusive, and about ten percent of ceramics were atypical. As Rayner-Herter points out, MacNeish’s typology only includes the western New York sites of Buffam, Goodyear and Ripley. Of these, only Ripley is within southwestern New York. This site is a chronologically mixed site of late prehistoric and 14

protohistoric Erie occupations. Most important for this dissertation, the Ripley site is on the ErieOntario Lake Plain, outside of the Allegheny Plateau, the area proposed to be studied. Since there is an assumption that there was a border or marginal aspect of the Allegany Plateau, MacNeish’s typology may only serve to obfuscate any possible differences between the sites under this proposed study and other New York sites. The proposed dissertation will include an attribute analysis using Engelbrecht’s (and Herter’s) system. This system uses the vessel as the basic unit of analysis. Attributes recorded and analyzed under this system include rim shape, rim height, lip motif, interior motif, primary motif, secondary motif, and when available, neck decoration. Rayner-Herter only used rim sherds that were three centimeters long or longer. That may not be possible with small sample sizes, so smaller pieces may also be used. Comparison of findings based on the attribute analysis to MacNeish’s typology will also be conducted for discussion of the pottery and chronology with other areas of New York. Other artifacts. Other artifact relevant to the study, such as lithics and trade items, will be included. Typical trade items are glass beads, iron axes and knives, and copper vessels which may have been cut into pieces to make projectile points or ornaments. Funding Requirements and Sources. In order to clarify the chronology, absolute dates in the form of Carbon-14 and AMS dating techniques are necessary. In addition, since some arguments for the depopulation of the Allegheny Plateau, and the timing of the migration of horticultural societies in the northeast, are dependent on climate change and the development of maize agriculture, ethnobotanical analysis of soil samples and residue on pottery will aid in the interpretation of these issues. This doctoral dissertation improvement grant is a request for funds for absolute dates and botanical analysis. In addition to this application, I have also applied for funding through the Department of Anthropology of the University at Buffalo, including a Dissertation Scholarship and travel scholarship. The funds from the department would help to pay other research costs, including those related to archaeological fieldwork in southwestern New York including gas, equipment, and other supplies (e.g. plastic bags, sharpies, excavation field forms). Justification. An estimated twenty (20) AMS dates are needed in order to clarify the chronology of southwestern New York. Because some of the samples will be from encrustations on archived pottery fragments or fragments from archaeological features, the estimated amount is for AMS dating. This would also enable the most refined dating for the establishment of the prehistoric chronology, which spans only about 225 years. The following budget includes both the funds requested from the National Science Foundation, as well as other costs related to the dissertation research.

15

Direct Costs: Scientific Analysis Requested from the National Science Foundation Dissertation Improvement Grant AMS dating -- $525 per sample, 20 samples (Beta Analytic) ......... $10500 Botanical analysis ................................................................................. 1500 Analysis Total ..................................................................................... $12,000

Archaeological Field Work in Southwestern New York Travel to and from southwestern New York 13¢ per mile ($3.00 per gallon), 70 miles one way, 40 trips ................. $360 Field Technicians, 2, at $10/hr, 8 hrs per day, 20 days ......................... $3200 Per Diem for Technicians, 2, $6/day, 20 days.......................................... $240 Supplies: plastic bags, sharpies, string, nails, paper for field forms, graph paper, pencils, pens, clipboards, level, measuring tape, etc. .................................................$75 Equipment, e.g. shovels, trowels, screens, buckets ................................. $100 Cameras (film and digital), digital strips, film ............................................ $400 Field Work Total .................................................................................... $ 4535 Artifact Analysis Expenses Laptop Computer..................................................................................... $600 Supplies: paper for analysis recordation, graph paper, etc. .......................$25 Artifact Analysis Total........................................................................... $625 Total .................................................................................................... $17,160

16

Broader Implications of the Study. This dissertation will contribute to our understanding of prehistoric culture change, and the impacts of culture contact on borderland groups by focusing on the dynamics of migration from the perspective of the emigrant area. Through the comparison and contrast of various kinds of emigration, including short distance and long distance migration, as well as gradual and sudden, and voluntary and forced migrations, archaeologists will be able to distinguish voluntary emigration from forced mass emigration. By doing so, this dissertation will contribute to the understanding of factors affecting mass migration and depopulation of an area. Recent political and environmental events occurring in other parts of the world, such as Africa and New Orleans, have focused the world’s attention on historical, political, economic, and environmental catalysts for migration, as well as the impacts of migration on these aspects of human society. Forced and voluntary migrations, whether in the historic period or in Africa today, have a dramatic effect on settlement patterns, social systems, and cultural continuity. Dissemination of Results. The results of this dissertation will be presented to the scientific community through submission to peer-reviewed journals and presentations at conferences. In addition, dissemination of the results to the public will be possible through local amateur societies and museums. Treatment and Storage of Newly Recovered Cultural Materials. If new artifacts are found during excavation, the artifacts found will be housed in an appropriate archival facility. This may be the State University of New York at Buffalo, or the New York State Museum.

17

References Abler, Thomas S., and Elisabeth Tooker 1978 Seneca. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 505-517. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Anthony, David W. 1990 Migration in Archaeology: The Baby and the Bathwater. American Anthropologist 92:895-914. 1997 Prehistoric Migration as Social Process: Material and Social Constraints. In Migrations and Invasions in Archaeological Explanation: Long-term Perspectives. Edited by J. Chapman and H. Hamerow. Pp. 21-31. BAR International Series 664, Oxford. Betts, Colin M. 2006 Pots and Pox: the Idenificaiton of Protohistoric Epidemics in the Upper Mississippi Valley. American Antiquity 71(2):233-82. Braun, David P., and Stephen Plog 1982 Evolution of “Tribal” Social Networks: Theory and Prehistoric North American Evidence. American Antiquity 47(3):504-25. Burmeister, Stefan 2000 Archaeology and Migration: Approaches to an Archaeological Proof of Migration. Current Anthropology 41(4):539-567. Chapdelaine, Claude. 1991 Poterie, ethnicité et Laurentie iroquoienne. Recherches amérindiennes au Québec v. 21(1-2): 4452. Crawford, Gary W., and David G. Smith 1996 Migration in Prehistory: Princess Point and the Northern Iroquoian Case. American Antiquity 61(4):782-90. Dennis, Matthew 1993 Cultivating a Landscape of Peace, Iroquois-European Encounters in Seventeenth Century America. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Englebrecht, William 1991 Erie. The Bulletin. Journal of the New York State Archaeological Association, No. 102. Pp. 2-12. 2003 Iroquoia, the Development of a Native World. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse. Englebrecht, William, and Lynne P. Sullivan 1996 Chapter 3. Cultural Context. Reanalyzing the Ripley Site: Earthworks and Late Prehistory on the Lake Erie Plain. Edited by Lynne P. Sullivan. New York State Museum Bulletin Number 489. Guthe, Alfred K. 1958 The Late Prehistoric Occupation in Southwestern New York: an Interpretive Analysis. Research Records No. 11, Rochester Museum of Arts and Sciences, Rochester, New York. Hasenstab, R. J. 1987 Canoes, Caches, and Carrying Places: Territorial Boundaries and Tribalization in Late Woodland Western New York. The Bulletin. Journal of the New York State Archaeological Association 95:3949. 1996 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in Late Woodland Upper New York State. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 12:17-26. 18

Lenig, Donald 1965 The Oak Hill Horizon and its Relationship to the Development of the Five Nations Iroquois Culture. Researches and Transactions of the New York State Archaeological Association XV(1). Lupold, Harry Forrest 1975 The Forgotten People: the Woodland Erie. Exposition Press, Hicksville, New York. MacNeish, Richard 1952 Iroquois Pottery Types, a Technique for the Study of Iroquois Prehistory. National Museum of Canada Bulletin No. 124. Canada Department of Resources and Development. McConnell, Michael N. 1987 Peoples “in between”: the Iroquois and the Ohio Indians, 1720-1768. Beyond the Covenant Chain, the Iroquois and their Neighbors in Indian North America, 1600-1800. Daniel K. Richter and James H. Merrell, editors. Pp. 93-112. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania. Morgan, Lewis H. 1851 The League of the Iroquois. Citadel Press. Niemczycki, Mary Ann Palmer. 1988 Seneca Tribalization: and Adaptive Strategy. Man in the Northeast 36:77-87. 1995 Ceramics and ethnicity in west-central New York: exploring Owasco-Iroquois connections. Northeast Anthropology 49: 43- 54. Perrelli, Douglas J. 1997 Problems with the Late Woodland Chronology of Southwestern New York State A. D. 900-1300. Paper presented at the 1997 Joint Symposium of the Ontario Archaeological Society and the Midwest Archaeological Conference, North York, Ontario, Canada. Ray, Arthur J. 1974 Indians in the Fur Trade: their Role as Trappers, Hunters, and Middlemen in the Lands Southwest of Hudson Bay, 1660-1870. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. Rayner-Herter, Nancy 2001 The Niagara Frontier Iroquois, a Study of Sociopolitical Development. PhD Dissertation, University at Buffalo. Richter, Daniel K. 1992 The Ordeal of the Longhouse: the Peoples of the Iroquois League in the Era of European Colonization. Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginian. University of North Carolina Press. Ritchie, William A. 1969 The Archaeology of New York State, Second Edition. Natural History Press, Garden City, NY. Ritchie, William A., and Robert E. Funk 1973 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in the Northeast. University of the State of New York. Schock, Jack M. 1974 The Chautauqua Phase and Other Late Woodland Sites in Southwestern New York. PhD. Dissertation, University at Buffalo. Schwartz, D. W. 1969 The Post-Migration Culture: A Base for Archaeological Inference. In Reconstructing Pueblo Societies. Edited by W. A. Longacre. Pp. 175-193. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 19

Snow, Dean R. 1994a Iroquois Prehistory. In Extending the Rafters: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Iroquois Studies. Pp. 241-257. State University of New York Press. 1994b The Iroquois. Blackwell Publishers, Ltd., Malden Massachusetts. 1995 Migration in Prehistory: the Northern Iroquoian Case. American Antiquity 60(1):59-70. 1996 More on Migration in Prehistory: Accommodating New Evidence in the Northern Iroquoian Case. American Antiquity 61(4):791-96. Tooker, Elisabeth 1978 The League of the Iroquois: Its History, Politics, and Ritual. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 418-441. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Trigger, Bruce G. 1976 The Children of Aataentsic: A History of the Huron People to 1660. McGill-Queens University Press, Montreal. 1978 Early Iroquois Contacts with Europeans. In Northeast, pp. 344-356. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 1985 Natives and Newcomers: Canada’s “Heroic Age” Reconsidered. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Kingston and Montreal. White, Richard 1991 The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650-1815. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. White, Marian E 1971 Ethnic Identification and Iroquois groups in Western New York and Ontario. Ethnohistory 18(1):1938. 1978a Neutral and Wenro. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 407-411. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 1978b Erie. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 412-417. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Young, Andrew W. 1974 [1875] History of Chautauqua County, New York. Printing House of Mathews & Warren, Buffalo. Rpt edition: Unigraphic Inc., Evansville, IN.

20