CEMETERIES AND HUNTER-GATHERER LAND USE PATTERNS: A CASE STUDY FROM THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY, ONTARIO A thesis submitted to the Committee of Graduate Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of Arts and Science. TRENT UNIVERSITY Peterborough, Ontario, Canada © Copyright by Samantha Leigh Walker 2015 Anthropology M.A. Graduate Program September 2015 ABSTRACT Cemeteries and Hunter-Gatherer Land-Use Patterns: A Case Study from the Middle Trent Valley, Southern Ontario Samantha Leigh Walker The principle aim of this thesis is to evaluate the applicability of the Goldstein/Kelly hypothesis, which proposes that hunter-gatherer cemeteries emerge as a product of resource competition, and function to confirm and maintain ancestral ties to critical resources. My evaluation centres on a case study of the earliest known cemeteries of the middle Trent Valley, Ontario. To determine whether these predictions are true, I investigated the ecological context of local wetland-based foraging, and undertook a locational analysis to determine if the placement of cemeteries correlates with environmental characteristics that reflect the presence of valuable resources that are unique to these locations. The analysis reveals that ancient cemeteries in the middle Trent Valley were located near seasonal riparian wetlands, possibly to secure wild rice and the variety of fauna it attracts. Through the integration of paleoecological, archaeological, and ethnographic information for the region, this research finds support for the Goldstein/Kelly hypothesis. Keywords: Ontario Archaeology, Geographic Information Systems, GIS, Environmental Modelling, Eco-Cultural Niches, Spatial Analysis, Mortuary Archaeology, Cemeteries, Hunter-Gatherers, Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, Southern Ontario. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my utmost gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. James Conolly, whose expertise, patience, and support have added considerably to this thesis and to my overall graduate experience here at Trent University. I appreciate your passion, many skills, and insightful suggestions which have guided me throughout this study. I am also very appreciative of your efforts to accommodate my circumstances, providing me with the means to work on my project off-campus, making the completion of this project possible. Truly, thank you. I extend my gratitude to the other members of my thesis committee, Dr. Jocelyn Williams and Dr. Marit Munson, for their feedback and assistance throughout this research process. Your suggestions and advice have allowed me to refine my ideas in an effective way. To Marit, your words of wisdom and kindness throughout this past year have meant a great deal to me. Thank you, as well, to the many other members of the Anthropology graduate program at Trent. To Dr. Eugene Morin and Dr. Gyles Ianonne, thank you for your insightful theoretical discussions. To Dr. Anne Keenleyside and again to Dr. Marit Munson, many thanks for your guidance in designing this research project. A special thanks to Kristine Williams, Kate Dougherty, and Judy Pinto, who were always available to answer questions and simplify life for us graduate students, regardless of their busy schedules. The advice, guidance, and friendship of the many wonderful people in this department have truly enriched my graduate experience, and I am glad to have met you all. iii A special thanks to Dr. Dimitri Nakassis for granting me the opportunity to work as a GIS Analyst on the WARP project, and to Dr. Bill Caraher for guiding me through the physical and digital landscapes of the Argolid. My experience working with both of you has provided me with foundational GIS skills to complete this study, and I am grateful for your advice and friendship. Many thanks also to Dr. Gyles Ianonne for including me in his SETS project; understanding settlement patterns in this very different context has challenged my previous assumptions of the relationship between settlement strategies and environmental change. Working with you on SETS, and in class, has been a truly rewarding experience. I would also like to thank Jeffery Dillane for graciously allowing me to use his Rice Lake research and to Gordon Dibb for providing valuable information about several of the cemetery sites used in this study. These contributions have greatly improved the quality of my study. I would like to express my appreciation to Phil and Arthur for their edits, advice, and friendship. To Faris: thank you for putting up with me this year. Thank you, also, to my Uncle Kevin for his positivity and guidance. My innermost gratitude to my mother Doris and to my stepmother Alison – the strong and beautiful women who have pulled me through this year and encouraged me to complete this project – I am so thankful for your support. Most of all, I would like to thank my father, Michael. You have always guided me, encouraged me to learn, and supported me. You have been a wonderful teacher and an amazing dad. All my accomplishments this year I owe to you, and your unwavering love, strength, and courage. Your passion for knowledge has inspired me throughout my life, and will follow me in everything I do. Thank you for everything, always. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii TABLE OF CONTENTS v LIST OF TABLES ix LIST OF FIGURES x 1 CEMETERIES AND HUNTER-GATHERER LAND USE PATTERNS: A CASE STUDY FROM THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY, ONTARIO 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1.2 DATA AND METHODS 3 1.3 OUTLINE OF THESIS CHAPTERS 4 2 CEMETERIES AND HUNTER-GATHERERS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL THOUGHT 5 2.1 HUNTER-GATHERER AS A HEURISTIC CATEGORY 2.2 CEMETERY: A HOLISTIC DEFINITION 7 2.3 THE CEMETERY AS PLACE FROM THE 1970S TO THE NEW MILLENNIUM 12 2.3.1 Cemetery studies in the 1970s 2.3.2 Cemetery studies in the 1980s 14 2.3.3 Cemetery studies in the 1990s 18 2.4 REVISING THE SAXE/GOLDSTEIN HYPOTHESIS 19 2.4.1 Evolutionary Theory and Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology 2.4.2 Rebuttal to Criticisms 23 2.5 SUMMARY: THE GOLDSTEIN/KELLY HYPOTHESIS 25 v 3. THE ANCIENT HISTORY OF SOUTHERN ONTARIO: REGIONAL SETTLEMENT AND MORTUARY VARIABILITY 28 3.1 BACKGROUND AND SETTING 29 3.2 THE LATE PALEOINDIAN PERIOD 32 3.3 THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 35 3.3.1 Early and Middle Archaic Periods 3.3.2 Late and Terminal Archaic Periods 37 3.3.3 Mortuary Evidence of the Archaic Period 40 3.4 THE EARLY WOODLAND PERIOD 45 3.4.1 Meadowood Complex 46 3.4.2 Middlesex Complex 48 3.5 THE MIDDLE WOODLAND PERIOD 49 3.5.1 Saugeen Culture 51 3.5.2 Point Peninsula Culture 52 3.5.3 Hopewellian Influences in the Middle 54 Woodland Period 3.6 TRANSITION TO THE LATE WOODLAND PERIOD 58 3.7 CONCLUSIONS 59 4. WETLAND FORAGING, LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY AND CEMETERY PLACEMENT IN THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY 62 4.1 THE STUDY AREA 63 4.1.1 Physical Geography 4.1.2 Cemeteries 69 4.2 EXPECTED RESOURCE EXPLOITATION IN THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY 72 4.3 THE SOCIOECOLOGY OF WILD RICE 73 4.3.1 Classification and Distribution 75 4.3.2 Physiology 77 4.3.3 Wild Rice and Animals 78 4.3.4 Phenology of Wild Rice 80 4.3.5 Wild Rice and Human Subsistence 82 4.4 PREDICTIONS, ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS, AND CEMETERY PLACEMENT 84 vi 5. A LOCATIONAL ANALYSIS OF HUNTER-GATHERER CEMETERIES IN THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY: METHODS AND DATA 86 5.1 METHODS OF ANALYSIS 87 5.1.1 Maximum Entropy Modelling of Eco- Cultural Niches 5.1.2 Using ArcMap 10.2 92 5.2 DATASETS FOR LOCATIONAL ANALYSIS 5.2.1 Mortuary Sites: Defining Cemeteries 93 5.2.2 Non-Mortuary Sites 97 5.2.3 Environmental Variables/Parameters 102 5.2.4 The Use of Modern Environmental Data 107 5.2.4.1 Hydrological Variables 5.2.4.2 Edaphic Variables 5.3 THE GOLDSTEIN/KELLY HYPOTHESIS: 109 PREDICTIONS AND CORRELATES 6. A LOCATIONAL ANALYSIS OF HUNTER-GATHERER CEMETERIES IN THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY: RESULTS 111 6.1 REFINING ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES FOR ANALYSIS 6.2 MODEL VALIDATION 116 6.2.1 Receiving Operator Characteristic Curves 6.2.2 Area under the ROC Curve 119 6.3 PREDICTED ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY ACROSS THE STUDY AREA 120 6.3.1 Point-Wise Mean Distribution Models 6.3.2 Binary Distributions of High Predicted Suitability 124 6.3.3 Mann-Whitney U-Test of Mean Euclidean Distances 128 6.4 RESPONSE CURVES OF FINAL MODEL 132 6.4.1 Cemetery (C) Model Response Curves 6.4.2 Total Mortuary (TM) Model Response Curves 135 6.4.3 Non-Mortuary (NM) Model Response Curves 137 6.5 WATER LEVEL RECONSTRUCTIONS FOR PIGEON LAKE AND RICE LAKE 139 6.6 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 144 vii 7. CEMETERIES, RESOURCE AVAILABILITY, AND THE GOLDSTEIN/KELLY HYPOTHESIS 146 7.1 THE PALEOECOLOGICAL CONTEXTS OF CEMETERIES IN THE MIDDLE TRENT VALLEY 147 7.1.1 Cemeteries, Soils, and Wetlands 7.1.2 Aerobic Wetland Diversity in the Middle Trent Valley 150 7.1.3 Resource Variability among Seasonal Riparian Wetlands 152 7.2 CEMETERIES, WETLANDS, AND THE GOLDSTEIN/KELLY HYPOTHESIS 155 8. CONCLUSIONS 161 8.1 SUMMARY OF RESEARCH 8.2 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH 164 DIRECTIONS REFERENCES CITED 167 APPENDIX: DATASET DESCRIPTIONS AND SOURCES 185 A.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE LOCATIONS A.1.1 Cemetery Sites Datasets A.1.2 Non-Mortuary Sites Dataset 196 A.2 ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES 199 A.2.1 Topographic Variables A.1.2 Edaphic Variables 200 A.1.3 Hydrological Variables 204 A.3 MAXENT PRELIMINARY RESULTS 206 A.3.1 C Model Preliminary Results A.3.2 TM Model Preliminary Results 209 A.3.3 NM Model Preliminary Results 211 A.4 PIGEON LAKE RECONSTRUCTION 213 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Description Page 4.1 Nutritional value of wild rice in comparison to other 74 grains.