An Archaeological Overview of the South Carolina Woodland Period
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AN ARCHAEOlOG~CAl OVERVIEW OF THE SOUTH CAROL~NA WOODLAND PERIOD: ~1r'S THIE SAME OLD RIDDLE RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION 4 © 2001 by Chicora Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or transcribed in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior permission of Chicora · Foundation, Inc. except for brief quotations used in reviews. Full credit must be given to the authors, publisher, and project sponsor. AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL OVERVIEW OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA WOODLAND PERIOD: IT'S THE SAME OLD RIDDLE Michael Trinkley Chicora Research Contribution 4 Chicora FoWldation, Inc. P.O. Box 8664 Columbia, South Carolina November 1984 ~ ' I I ·,.· When the Southeastern Archaeological Conference was last held in Columbia, during October 1970, Charles Fairbanks presented a paper entitled, "What do we know now that we did not know in 1938.?" · He charitably remarked that "South Carolina for long was more interested in ancestors than in artifacts and not too much is readily available," and went on to note that "local chronologies are available for every southern state, with the possible exception of South Carolina" although "publication is surely just a matter of a comparatively brief span" (Fairbanks 1971:41-42). Fairbanks ended his talk with a redefinition of archaeological aims and one point of specific importance to my discussions. He remarked that "the complex relationship of coastal to inland or piedmont phases, which often share many specific traits such as pottery styles, but often seem to differ in ecological orientation, remains to be defined" (Fairbanks 1971:44). Unfortunately, many researchers, myself included, frequently view either the coastal plain or piedmont with a mecca-like devotion, ignoring the interplay between the two regions. As a result, w.e have made imperfect progress not only toward publishing local chronologies, but also toward understanding the archaeology of the state as a whole. Those hoping for me to solve these riddles in this paper will be disappointed. I will try, however, to show that some progress has been made and, hopefully, will be able to convince Dr. Fairbanks that not all South Carolinians are "more interested in ancestors than in artifacts." The Woodland period, for the purpose of my discussion, begins with the introduction of pottery (see Sears 1948:124; Byers 1959:231; Willey 1966:267), sometime around 2000 B.C., either in the Savannah River drainage or possibly along the coast (based on the 2515+95 B.C. date from Rabbit Mount [GX0-345] and the 222o+350 B.C. date from Spanish Mount [UGa-584]; see Stoltman 1966, 1974; Sutherland 1974). This early pottery, called Stallings, is Spanish moss tempered and decorated with punctations, finger pinching, and incising (Sears and Griffin 1950). Associated artifacts include soapstone disks, engraved bone, and worked antler (Claflin 1931; Williams 1968). These sites are found clustered in the Savannah River drainage and in the coastal zone south of Charleston (Anderson 1975). Stallings ware, however, does extend northward to the Tar drainage in North Carolina (Phelps 1983:27-28). Both shell middens (fresh water mussel in the Savannah drainage and oyster along the coast) and non-shell sites occur (Claflin 1931; Bullen and Greene 1970; Peterson 1971; Stoltman 1974; Trinkley 1974; Trinkley and Zierden 1983). Frequently associated with the Stallings ware is Thom's Creek, pottery similar in all respects except the fiber tempering (Griffin 1945; Phelps 1968; Trinkley 1980b). Again, both large shell middens and sites with no shell are found throughout the coastal plain and into North Carolina (Phelps 1983). R,ecently investigated sites include ~ighthouae Point Shell Ring, StrattQn Place Shell Ring, and Venning Creek Midden (Trinkley l980c). Paper presented at the 1983 Southeastern Archaeo~ogical Conference, Columbia, South Carolina, in the symposium entitled "Aboriginal Archaeology of South Carolina" Although Stallings sites are found in the Savannah River drainage in the piedmont (Claflin 1931; Smith 1974; Hanson 1982), . ~hese phases are primarily coastal plain in orientation. The large shell rings found on the South Carolina coast suggest relatively permanent, stable village life as early as 1500 B.C~ with a subsistence base oriented toward large and small mammals, fish, shellfish, and hickory nut resources (Trinkle7 1979)~ These sites continued until about 1000 B.C. (based on a 935+175 B~C. terminal date for the Lighthouse Point Shell Ring [UGa~2904.l and a 98o+'l60 B.C. date from Venning Creek· [UGa-3116], a late Thom's Creek site) when there is evidence for fragmentation (Trinkley 1979, 1980c). Following Stallings and Thom~s Creek are the Refuge and Deptford phases, both strongly associated with the Georgia sequence and the Savannah drainage (Williams 1968; DePratter 1976; Trinkley 1982a; Lepionka 1983). On the coast these sites are generally small, especially when compared to the earlier Thom's Creek sites, and they often contain little shell. The Deptford phase begins to evidence a strong inner coastal plain association with hardwood swamp ecosystems (see Ward 1978; Anderson 1979; Trinkley 1980a), an association which continues into the late Middle Woodland and which provides some tenuous suggestion of seasonal rounds. Typical of the Refuge phase are simple and dentate stamped ceramics. The Deptford pottery includes both carved paddle stamping (representing the Gulf tradition) and wrapped paddle cord marking (representing a Middle Atlantic tradition)(see Trinkley 1982b). Throughout much of the South Carolina coastal plain, particularly north of Charleston, this early cord marked pottery occurs without check stamping and has been called Deep Creek (Phelps 1981, 1983). This pottery, characteristic of the "Northern Tradition" (Caldwell 1958) probably spread into the North Carolina coastal plain between 1000 and 1944 B.C. (Phelps 1983:29) and into the South Carolina coastal plain at least by 500 B.C. As Goodyear et al. (1979:116) note, "Early Woodland data from South Carolina [piedmont sites] are yet rather meager." In Georgia the Early Woodland is recognized, through the work of Caldwell (1958), by the Dunlap and Mossy Oak series, with considerable emphasis on fabric impressing and simple stamping (these dates range from about 800-400 B.C.). Coe (1964) notes that the North Carolina Ba.din series contains both cord marked and fabric impressed pottery. Although the Badin series is placed by Coe (1964:55) at the "beginning of the Christian era," it is likely that Badin pottery was introduced into the North Carolina piedmont as early as 500 B.C. A few of the more northern counties in South Carolina evidence pottery which may be a local variation of the Swannanoa series (Rodeffer et al. 1979:50) and these sites usually cluster along the riverine zone, adjacent to major drainages. Most of the inter-riverine zone of the South Carolina piedmont is devoid of Early Woodland settlement. Consequently, our knowledge of Early Woodland site settlement and subsistence in the piedmont largely comes from Georgia, although recent work in the Richard B. Russell Reservoir may expand our knowledge. By the Middle Woodland period the coastal settlement and subsistence had completely shifted away from the earlier permanence of the Thom's Creek phase. Although sites with coarse sand tempered Deep Creek pottery are still found, the sherd temeered Hanover, or fine sand tempered Mount Pleasant pottery tend to characterize the Middle Woodland period of the northern coast (Trinkley 1982b.). To ·. the south the Wilm~ngton, St" Catherines, and early Savannah wares dominate (see Williams 1968; DePratter 1979). ·Along the southern coast the· shell middens at Pinckney Island and at Victoria Bluff have been intensively studied {Trinkley 2 198lc). To the north shell middens in the Francis Marion National Forest, where three have been tested (Trinkley 1981a, b; work by Trinkley, Zierden and Logan) complete the sample. In addition Brooks has been collecting data from several Georgetown County middens for his sea level studies (Mark Brooks, personal communication). Sites are found throughout the coastal plain; some are shell middens, others are nQt. Artifacts are very spa~se. Gone are the abundant shell tools, worked bone items, and clay balls. Clay pipe fragments are rare, lithic remains are uncommon, and even pottery is not abundant. All of these sites suggest seasonal rounds with exploitation of the coast during the fall and winter, primarily for shellfish, with minimal emphasis on mammals or fish. Although the Middle Woodland shell midden sites generally contain the same approximate caloric content per cubic foot as the Early Woodland middens, the source of the calories is quite different. About 4% of the calories at Pinckney Island are provided by mammals, birds 0r fish, while 46% of the calories from the Early Woodland Lighthouse Point Shell Ring came from fauna! species (Trinkley 1983a). Plant foods are rare and there is no evidence of any domesticates or encouraged plants during the Middle Woodland (Trinkley 198lc, 1983b; Ward 1983:73). Interior sites are found on low sand ridges adjacent to high-energy hardwood swamps. While pottery styles changed from the Early to Middle Woodland, site locations in the inner coastal plain, and presumably subsistence, did not (see Ward 1978; Anderson 1979; Trink.ley.1980a; Anderson et al. 1982). The piedmont Middle Woodland period includes the Cartersville ceramics in Georgia (Caldwell 1958), the Pigeon and Connestee ceramics from western North Carolina. (Holden 1966; Keel 1976), and Yadkin ceramics from south central North Carolina (Coe 1964). Catersville represents a continuation of check and simple stamping and dates to about A.D. 1-500. Pigeon is a similar manifestation, dating from about 300 B.C. to A.D. 100. Connestee pottery, which dates from about A.D. 100 to 600 is brushed, simple stamped, or plain surfaced. Yadkin pottery dates from about A.D.