Forager-farmer transitions in coastal prehistory Green, Paul Randolph ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; 1987; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global pg. n/a Tl\.TJ.IODllll .lmT,n,.. T ...._"\ --,-ERS .&J.'1.a: 'V.U,.lU...t:1.1..1.Vl" J.v UIS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from a computer printer. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and. continuing from J.eft to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ,U·M·I Ace;essing the World's Information since 1938 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ---------------·~ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Order Number 8821469 Forager-farmer transitions in coastal prehistory Green, Paul Randolph, Ph.D. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1987 U· 1'1·1 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark~· 1. Glossy photographs or pages __ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print ___ 3. Photographs with dark background / 4. Illustrations are poor copy ___ 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy ___ 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page ___ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages / 8. Print exceeds margin requirements __..L 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine ___ 10, Computer printout pages with indistinct print ___ 11. Page(s) lacking when r.;ateiial received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s) seem to be missing in numbering only as text follcws. 13. Two pages numbered . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled pages ___ 15. Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed c1.s received ____ 16. Other-----------------------------~ U·MI Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. FORAGER-FARMER TRANSITIONS IN COASTAL PREHISTORY by Paul R. Green A Dissertation submitted to the faculty of The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Anthropology Chapel Hill 1987 Reader Re. er ---- -------- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PAUL RANDOLPH GREEN. Forager-Farmer Transitions in Coastal Prehistory (Under the direction of Carole L. Crumley). A comparison of the process by which sedentary communities and full scale agriculture appear in two independent cultural settings, one in the Mediterranean basin and the other in Mid-Atlantic North America, shows it to be gradual and influenced by both local and exogenous factors. The nonagricultural Mesolithic cultures of the French Languedoc, their nominally agricultural successors: the Cardial Neolithic groups, and the nonagricultural Meckley culture of North America for a long time all resisted complete acculturation to a true farming lifestyle. Local social processes working within a bountiful estuarine ecosystem did eventually produce sedentary life, ceramics, and some social ranking. In both cases, however; full scale agriculture and the appearance of large village populations with clear class differentiation did not appear until much later in their respective historical sequences: the late Neolithic and Chalcolithic in France and the ultimate late Woodland in coastal Virginia. When this change finally came, it had much to do with external factors such as trade and population movements. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .• iii LIST OF FIGURES •• vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS •. • • • xvi INTRODUCTION • • • • • • • • • • 1 The Comparative Archaeology of Coastal Societies. 2 Maritime Adaptations, Sedentary Life, and Agricultural Origins • . • • 10 CHAPTER I. HOLOCENE COASTAL ECOLOGY •. 27 Coastal Environments and Ecosystems •• 27 Changes in Climate, Sea Level, and Coastal Environments •.•••• 31 CHAPTER II. THE FORAGER-FARMER TRANSITION IN SOUTHERN FRANCE. • • • . • • • • • 55 The Environmental Setting. • • • . • • • • • 55 The Cultural Setting. • • • • • . • • • • • 57 The Evolution and Dispersal of Sedentary Life and Agriculture in Southern France. 64 CHAPTER III. THE FORAGER-FARMER TRANSITION IN MID-ATLANTIC NORTH AMERICA. 72 The Environmental Setting ..••.• 72 The Cultural Setting .•..••• 80 Archaeology of the Lower Chesapeake Bay: Excavations on Cape Henry ••• . • 107 -Swing Site {44VB16) • • • • • • 108 -Cedar Point Site (44VB40) •••• • 114 Excavations on Broad Bay -Great Neck Site (44VB7) •••••••• 116 Assemblage Comparisons in Southeastern Virginia and Northeastern North Carolina •••••••• 129 The Evolution and Dispersal of aedentary Life and Agriculture in Mid-Atlantic North America. 136 CH.A.PTER IV. CONCLUSIONS: THE ORIGINS AND EVOLUTION OF COASTAL SEDENTARY LIFE AND AGRICULTURE .• 141 REFERENCES CITED •.••••.•• •• 328 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES 1. Legend for ceramic tables ••• ••••• 145 2. Radiocarbon dates from sites in coastal areas of Atlantic North America ••••••••• 146 3. Archaeological sites in the Mid-Atlantic and adjacent regions of North America discussed in the text or listed in tables ••••••••• 150 4. Ceramic distributions at the Swing Site, 44VB16 • 154 5. Summary of principal ceramic surface treatments at the Swing Site, 44VB16 .•••••• 158 6. Ceramic distributions at the Cedar Point Site, 44VB40 ••• . ••. 159 7. Summary distribution of principal ceramic types at the Cedar Point Site, 44VB40 ••••.• 160 8. Ceramic distributions at the Great Neck Site, 44VB7 •.•. • • • • . 161 9. Summary of principal ceramic types with surface treatments at the Great Neck Site, 44VB7. 163 10. Ceramics in features of Lot 3, Great Neck Site (44VB7), excavated by the Virginia Research Center for Archaeology •••••.••• 164 11. Ceramic distributions at various sites in Virginia Beach, Virginia .••••••• 165 12. Lithic assemblages from sites in Virginia Beach, Virginia. • • • 167 13. Ceramics at four sites in the coastal plain and piedmont of Virginia (after Buchanan 1966, 1976; Maccord and Livesay 1982) • • • • . • 168 14. Ceramics at four sites in the Virginia coastal plain (see Maccord 1967; Gregory and Jerrell n.d.; Mccary 1958; Buchanan 1983; Maccord 1982) ••••••••••••••• 169 15. Ceramics at three sites in Virginia and Maryland (after Stephenson 1963, Winfree 1967, Evans 1955, and Mccary 1967) •••••••• 170 iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 16. Ceramic distributions in Portsmouth, Virginia sites collected by Gardner et al. (1981a, 198lb, 1982) ••••••••-. -•••••••••• 171 17. Ceramic distributions at selected sites in the Virginia coastal plain (Evans 1955) •••• 172 18. Ceramic distributions at sites in the Virginia coastal plain (after Geier 1983, Opperman 1980, Reinhart 1978, Malpass 1976, and Mccary 1976) ••••••••••••••••• 173 19. Ceramic distributions at sites in the Northern Neck of Virginia (after Potter 1982 and Waselkov 1982) •••••• 174 20. Ceramic distributions from sites in Northumberland, Lancaster, and Richmond counties, Virginia (Potter 1982) ••••••••• 175 21. Features from the Hand Site (44SN22), Southampton County, Virginia (Smith 1971) containing Colington simple stamped or Mockley net impressed pottery. • • • • • 176 22. Ceramics at four sites in the piedmont and coastal plain of Virginia (after Egloff 1981, Sasser 1972, Anderson 1974, Holland 1985, Bott 1979, and Outlaw 1980) • • • • • • • . 177 23. Ceramic distributions at five sites in the Virginia coastal plain (after Clark 1977, Wittkofski 1980, Bott 1980, and Gardner et al. 1982). • • • • • • • • 178 24. Ceramic distributions at sites in southeastern Virginia, based on collections in the Virginia Research Center for Archaeology ••••••.•• 179 25. Ceramic distributions at sites on Colington Island, Dare County, North Carolina (after Phelps 1981). • •••• 183 26. Ceramic distributions at various