ONTARXO IROQUOIS TR ADXTLCM LCNGHOUSES
Christine Prances Dodd
B. 8, flniversity of Calgary (1976)
A TWZSXS SUBPI1 TTED IN PART1 AL PgLPILLREWT
DP TRE BEQDTRE3ENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
in the Departaent
of
@ Christine Frances Dodd 1982 Simon Fraser University
December 5 982
A11 rights reserved, This thesis Ray not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other aeans, withont per~issionof the author. ------APPROVAL
Name: Christine Frances Dodd
Degree: Masters of Arts
Title: Ontario Iroquois Tradition Lonqhouses
Fxamininq Committee:
Chair man: Dr. Richard Shutler, Jr.
Arthur hoberts Department of ';~ogr~iphy Simon Frascr rJr~ivor:;rty PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE
1 hereby grant to Simon Fraser University the right to lend my thesis, project or extended essay (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University L ibrary, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this work for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.
Title of Thesis/Project/Extended Essay
Ontario Iroquois Tradition Longhouses
Author: (signature)
Christine F. Dodd
I / (date) Phis is a study of longhouse attributes through tin?@and space, Statistical test results suggest that house length and fc3ture anti post mofa density reached mxintum dimensions
Euring the Riddle Ontario Iroquois stage. House length and "v related attributes (eg,, storage partition length, hearth number and spacing, touse width) are apparently associated ~~idshthe nu~her02 occupants and their wealth or status. Feature and post mold density are thought to be related to intensity and/or length of occu gation,
An increase in frequency of expansions to Southern Huron villages and loaghouses, not evident on Neutral sites of the same period, may reflect architectural differences and/or intensity of warfare or trade, The longer Southern Huron houses wers aore frequently exte~dcd, suggesting that perhaps nealtkier laausehoXis coufd aore readilp absorb refugees and/or neighbollring villdgers seeking protection or advantages in the newly established European trade ae tuork,
Arafysis of the Protohistoric - Historic Ball viflage- longhouses indicates that ethnohistoric depict ions of f obghouses nore precisely describe the longest houses in tb~village and were apparently not an accurdte representation of Iroquoian
Longhouses in general. Eo significant clan seyaent localizations were detected within the Ball village based on longhause attribute variations among house orientation clusters,
iii
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Anthropoloyical Interpretations of Longhouses *--*=-.a 35
AnthropoPogical Interpretations of Villages *1w19a.-..38
The Saaple ~w~,.w~~.,~,,~w~gIPw~t~Iw~.o~w~~~w~'L..t~~~~53
The Results ,,,, -w,,=,,,l.w,~~aw*a~a~..-.. w*.-sl.. *. .*1,*75
LIST OP TABLES
Table
1 General Chronology for Sauithwestern Ontario -,- - - ;.,* w0 7
2 Sites and Longhouses Considered in the Study -.--,-.,,55
5 A Cornparison of Houses vith aria without ~xten&ons.,,,82
7 Descriptive Statistics on Village Plan
Attributes by Time Periods,,,.,.,,,,,,~-,.,,,,---..-,-99 LIST OP FIGURES figvre 1 Cultusal Sequences of the Ontario f royuois
7 A Floor Plan of an Excavated Neutral Longhouse -s a- .--34
8 Location of Sites Used in Saoaple ,5-*--a-*--*-.a.-.w. ,.....511
9 nethod of Taking External Bouse Ball Fleasurements *,*,64
10 3 ethod of Taking Interior Bouse Hcasurements a- s1 .-.-..05
7 1 ?lethod of Taking Village Plan fleasu~eiaents.-e.e01.01173
12 Scatter Plot of Bouse Length vs, End Storage Figure 17 Relative Frequency of Hail Post
Diameter by Time Period ,C-P,~~l.-t-.tw~Ol ..-*- .).1=t..185
18 Beiative Frequency of House Length by Time Period ,,,,,,,,,,.. -.t0.*..*.i.~~.g=oi.ai..).*.IIt~-87 19 Relative F~equencfof Interior House Post
Hold Density by Ti~ePeriod ~.~o,t.w~~~0111..11~~~01t.88
20 Przferredurientatian of iiousesin Sample Ig.r.-wn-*s-Y7
21 Relative Frequency of Site Size by Time Period ,,.,,-.98
22 Ball Houses Grouped by Length f~~.~~.~~.-~~40-~~.~g*-lD1 23 Ball Houses Grouped by the Presence or
24 Ball Bouses Grouped by the Presence or
Absence of Storage Cubicle Posts ,,t.,-,l~~....-oo.OIgOS
25 Relative Frequency of Longhouse Attributes between Baff Core and expansion Houses.,,,,,,,= .. ,,-. 107 '25 Relative Frequency of Glen Meyer
ant3 Pickering Longhouse attributes 11 1 27 Relative Frequency of Prehistoric-Protohist~ric
Huron and Neutral Longhouse Attributes .*-* 312
28 Relative Frequency of Historic Haron and
Neutral Longhouse Attributes .~sl-et-~e*.0111.~01-I.*133 I, Introduction
This thesis provides a spatio-temporal analysis of Ontario
f roguois longhouses, The analysis of available archaeological
lonyhouse data furnishes additional information regarding Ontario
f roquois developnent and society, Also, in assemtling and describing available lonyhouse flcor plan data, a comparative fonghouse sample is provided for future studies.
Houses are thought to be a reflection of the builders* culture (Duly 1979; Guidoni 1975; King 1980; Hoholy-Wagy 1957;
Oliver 1969; Bapoport 3959; Trigger 1967, 7968) Dwellings and
their spatial configuration in the community act as a foratt of non-verb l colltmunicaticn relating characteristics of a society8s socio-political, econoaic, and religious organization, As
Eapoport (1969: 47) notes:
Given a certain clinate, the availability of certain materials, and the couslraints and capabilities of a given level of technology, what finally d~cidcsthe forrn of a dwelling, and aoulds the spaces and their relationships, is the vision that people have of the ideal life. The environment sought reflects many socio-cultural. forces, including religious beliefs, faailp and clan structure, social organization, way of gaining livelihood, and social relations between individuals, The study of houses is only one aspect of archaeological settlement patterns, Trigger (1968) defined three levels of settlement analysis: individual dwelling; coentnunity, (irn this
case the village) ; and zonal pattern, (the segioaal density and distribution of the population), This thesis deals exclusiveip with individual Guildinys and the community pattern,
Despite the possible wealth of infornation that may be extracted from the analysis of houses there have teen feu such studies (Trigger 19168: 55) ,. Indeed, a coaprehensive study of
Ontario f roquois longhouses has never been undertaken, As the foliowing brief sumary of the histof y of Ontario longhouse archaeology de~onstrates,aslal ysis of longhouses as an integral ele meat in the interpretation of archaeologi~alexcavations has
Lagged behind the aore traditional sethods of pottery, lithic, and faunal analysis,
-A ----Brief ---History of Lonqhousg Excavations &g Ontario
Betseen 1887 and 1911 David Boyle araassed extensive coPlections of artifacts through aound trenching and surface collecting throughout Ontario, especially in the Lake Siacoe region (Kidd 1952:71), W.J, ginternberg was the f isst of Boyle8s f ieZd survey crew @embers to excavate portioas of village settleaents, in addition to middens, Hinte~berg'swork at such prehistoric villages as Efren f 1928) , Roebuck 119363, and Lawson
(1939) laid the fonndation for current theories concerning late prehistoric occupations of southern Ontario (Noble 3972b: 16, 1973: 6U), However, since Wintembergls ~rinaryinterest was in artifacts, their cultural. association, function and frequency of occurence, little was written about pose molds other than that they "may be referable to such structures as lodqes, corn cfibs, and scaffolds" (Wintemberg 19 l5:42). Possible house tarnis sere reconstructed solely on the basis of ethnohistoric aata
(Wintemberg 1936: 3 1)-
By the Late 1940's and early 1950's descriptions of house structures began to appear in published reports (e-'J-,Jury 's
194 8a, l948b descriptions of the Flanagan and Gra~fosdhouses;
Jury and Jury's, 3955, Saint Louis excavatior;~;and Emersonts
1954 discussion of the dckenzie and Nardrock lonqhouses),
However, these descriptions are short and often lack any discussion of post ~oldsor othef features,
On the basis of ceca~icassemblages, settlement pa ttetns and ossuary data, supplenented by ethnohistoric and ethnographic information, Wright (1965) formulated what; became the accepted sequence of f roquoian development and Noble (1968) traced the development of Iroquois social organization, However, the longhouse devefoplnental sequence was still virtually unknown.
Since the 196O1s, acquisition of settle~entpattern data has becotae an increasingly important focus of Ontario archaeology, Excavation has emphasized large protohistoric and historic villa ges, There are fewer prehistoric longhouses excavated, and the data base is especially weak for the middle per iod of Onta rio f roqnois development, Unrortunately, f loorplans of excavated f onghouses are nat
often puhlishe3 (for example, of 417 archaeological houses
examined in this khesis, 20% have been ~ublished, 36% came from
unpublished theses and the rewining 44% ffoa un~ublishedsite
reports), Nor is there a synthesis of longhouse data available,
Therefore, an inital ~bjectiveof this thesis is to amass all
available longhouse data and describe lcnghouse attrikutes
through ti~eand space,
Gutl ine of Chapters
In order to place this study in perspective, the archaeological sequences a5 Ontario 1 roquois develo@mea*, based
pri~arilpon pottery analysis, is outlined in the succeeding
cba pter, The Huron and Neutral peoples, and their arteceden-ts,
are the specific subject of this thesis, therefore Chapter Two
ends with a discussion of Rurcn and Neutral culture as
documented ethnohistoricalf y and interpreted aschaeologically-
Chapter Three deals exclusi~efy with icnghouse and commufii t~
patterns as descriked in ethnokistoric ch fonicles and
interpretred anlhro~ologica llg, Chapter four: presents hypo theses
on the development of the Ontario I roquois longhouse, village
planning and regional longhouse variations, based on information
provided in preceding chapters, A samgle of 50 sites,
containing a total of 417 longhouses, was used to test these
hypotheses, Statistical procedures were ea~loyedto test for significant associations between variables through time and space, Conclusions based on this analysis are discussed in the
fifth and final chapter, 11, Description of the Ontario Iroquois
In this chapter the basic sequence of Ontario Iroquois
developmat is briefly su~marized, A short introduction to the study area and the Neutral and Huron tribal confederacies is
provided. These groups forn the focus of this thesis,
------Prehistoric Sequence
Pre-Iroquoian Sequence
Table 1 provides an outline of the chronological sequences
of southern Ontario psehistory, As this table indicates, the
earliest houses excavated to date in Ontario belong to the
1Yl iddfe #aodland period (ca, 700 B.C,-A- D, 5OO-fiOO). This period
was apparently characterized by sinall baads of hunters and gatherers {Trigger 197.6: 1: 122)- #idill@ Woodland houses, such as
those at the Donaidson sits, ca, 500 ELL (Wright and Ande~son
19631, and Sumrser Island, ca, R,D, 400-200 (Drose 1970) , are s~all,elliptical dwellings containing hearths, not always centrally aligned, and few other features, The Summer Isiand
settlement is thought to have been a seasonal fishing camp, possibly occupied by a patrilineal band (Brose 1970: 1 Q8)- Table 1: General Chronclwgy for Southern Ontario,
Ti~e Period Culture Cultural Traits
Ponghouses palisaded villages horticultural first villages first evidence of corn HopewelLian burial cere@onialism small ovate houses riverine settleaents
first pottery .
ground and polished stone tools
diversity of tool types
large ~ammal hunters
+after Noble (1975c:98) The onset of the Lake Eoodland period and the birth of
I~oguoiaaculture is assuciated with the shift in subsistence froxi hunting and gathering to corn cultivation ca. A.D. 500
(Trigger 1976: 1: lO5),
Adoption of ho~ticuftureas the primary subsistence pursuit probably led to increased territoriality and increased sedentisa
(Plannery 1972:28; Trighant l?37Z:U69) , as the cultivaiors struggled to establish ownership of their fields, arid protect and maintain storage facilities, Also associated with increased sedentism were a larger or more concentrated population, increased warfare, increased trade and, formalization of village social and political organizati.cn (S~ith1976: 60)-
The Ontario Zroquois Tradition
Until the aid-1940's the froguoiaus were considered an intrusive culture in a widespread Algooquiarn matrix fTri3yer
7969:25), fn 1952 R,S, HacNeish devised the 22 situ theory of
Xroquois developaent, based on pottery styles, He proposeil Point
Peninsula as the ancestral culture base for the regional development of four Owascoid variants: Hohawk; Onondaga-Oneida;
Cay uga-Seneca; and, Neutral-Erie-Huron (PlacNeish 1952, 1976) ,
f n 1966 J-V, Wright expanded and revised HacNeisC*s ~jtg theory as it applied to Ontario Iroquois archaeology, He f ocmulated a three stage developmental sequence of f roquoian culture, co~mencingca, A-D, 1000 with the Edrly Cntario Iroytaois stage, Decent excavations at such sites as Auda,
Rarteouz; and others, have projected this stage backwards an addit iona l 300 pears (Kapches 1981; Noble l975a: 5, 1975b:30)
The Early Ontario Iroquois Stage
During the Early Ontario Iroquois stage southern Ontario was occupied by two geographicall1 and culturally distinct complexes: the Pickering culture in the southeast, and the Glen
Meyer culture in the southwest, Two characteristics considered diagnostic of th2 stage are: a suksistence economy b,ased on an increased reliance on corn horticufture suppiernented by huating and fishing; and saalf, nucleated villages, usually enclosed by palisades, situated on high ground (Hoble 1975a:L5, 1975~:111;
Stothers 1375: 135; Trigger 1976: 1: 326; Wright 1966: 22) = Other shared tsaits include secondary bundle and flexed burials
(Bright 1965: 52), a weakly develo~ed worked boae industry, and similar ~ethodsof pottery manufacture, including vessel shape, region of design and bossing fgoble 1975a:YJ; Trigger
1976: I: 126; Wright 1956: 44,521- There is evidence of long distance trade netvorks with peoples of Ohio (for opaque chert), the upper Great Lakes (for native copper), Pennsylvania (for bluish steatite), and the Maltwav River region (for red ochre)
(Noble 1875a:48; Reid 1975a:9), Fig. It Cultural Sequences of the Ontario Iroquois Tradition
Time Stage Culture
A.D. 1650
Huron - Petun
A.D. 1450
iddleport
A.D. 1300 Uren ?
A.D. 700 Glen Meyer ~ickeiin~
after Wright (1966) 10 Gaairig discs and cup-and-pizl deer ~halange~have been recovered from Pickering sites exclusively, whereas slate pebble pendants ace a feature of Glen Keyer sites (Trigger 1976:7:126;
Wright 1966: 53)- Pickering body sherds are co&monlp treated with a ribbed paddle or checked stamp; Glen Pleyer vessels are scarified, corded, or fabric impressed (Reid I975a: 12 ; Trigger
1976:l: 126; @right 1966:29,53), Push-pull and dentate stanping techniques of rim decoration are more frequert among Pickering ceramics; Glen Heyer pottery is laainf y linear stamped, corded, or plain (Reid 1975a: 9)-
Wright (1 966: 22) ter~inatesthe Early Lrttqusis stage uith the vestward expansion of Pickeriag and subsequent was, conquest and su k jugation of their Glen 8eyer neighbours. ALthough Noble
It975c: 11 1) agrees that there was a aesger of Glen #eyer and
Pickering, he is uncettain as to the manner of fusion.
The Hidale Ontario Xroyuois Stage
According to Wright [1966:54), the conyuest of Glen Weyer culminated in the Uren substage, A.D, 1300-1350, of the aiddle Ontario lroguois stage, Others feel that there is not suificicnt evinence as yet to determine the role of the Uren substage in the developaeatal sequence of Ontario Iroquois prehistory [Moble
1975a:52). The Bren substage led directly into the following
Hiddlcrport substage, which also lasted ca, 50 years, However, several Middlepart sites, such as Slack Caswell, Unick, and Chypchar, have been occupied beyond the projected A-D, 1U00 ternination date (Jaaieson 1979; Saith per% COB@. 1982)-
Therefore, for the purposes of this thesis, the Middleport horizon %illbe taken to extend to A,D, 1450,
The Hiddle~ortsubstage is a horizon of widespread cultural hofaogeneity across southern Ontasio, It is distinquished by the development of an elaborate pipe coiaplex and the dominance of Bidalepost Oblique, Lawson Incised, and Ontario Horizontal pottery styles {Wright 1966:5-6) , During this stage ossuary intern~enitsbecame more frequent and contained more indiv%duals
(Trigger 7976: 7: 147). Expansive trade networks between the regional WiddLepo;~;tgroups (Sutberlarnd 1980: 33) and with the
Algonquians to the north (Yright 1974:304) have been suggested.
The Biddleport substage provides the foundation for the foraation of the Huron-Petun and Neutral-Erie branches of the
Late Ontario Iroquois stage of AID, 111150- 3651)-
The Late Ontaric Iroquois Stage
The Late Ontario Iroquois stage can be divided into Late Prehistoric, Protohistoric, and Historic periods, linfortuna$ely, the boundaries between these periods are poorly dcfined, The
mi^ proble~lies in attempting to establish a time frame for the onset of the Protohistoric, The Protohistoric period is defined as the first appearance of European goods on Eroquoiaa sites (Noble 3 975c: 11 I), The potential existed for European goods to be traded to Hurons at an early date, since European fisherman and explorers had travelled the Atlantic coastline since the late 149Oas (Quirnn 1974)- Howeves, early trade materials were often perishables (Fitzgerald 3981: 93 and may not be 2reserved on Protohistoric sites, Due to the problems gnherent in attempting to establish the start of the
Protohistoric period, no distinction will be aade between the late Prehistoric and the Protohistoric periods, The Late Psehistoric - Protohistoric Huron are classified into southern and northern di~isions.The southern division coiriprises sites arouad the Rouge, Buaber and Treat rivers,
Northern Huron sites are Located ia the vicinity of the Penetanguishone Peninsula (Yright 186tt:71) - The sou&efn division is differentiated by Black Mecked, Huron Incised,
Lawson Incised, and Lawson Opposed pottery, while northern division pottery styles are predoninately LaPonde Hi3h Collar,
Huron Incised, and Black Necked (Wright 1966: 73)-
Southern Hurons are thought to have migrated north and fused with the northern divisio~to form the Historic Huron shortly before direct contact with Europeans (Wright 1966:67), A desire to be close to the source of furs is the reason usually accorded for the northerly location of the Ristoric Buron
The Prehistoric Meutral are @ore closely relate3 to their Hiddleport antecedents, and developed in the region of the Niagara Escarp~ent(Trigger 1976: 1: 27-30), ---The ------Historic Lg=goiggs
The Mort-beast cultuse area includes meiitbers of the Algoaquia~
and Iroquoian language families. The Iroquoian stock is composed of the Ontario Iroquois [Buron, Neutral, and Petun) in the southern portion of the province and the St, Lawrence Iroquois, along the St, Lawrence River valley. The New York Iroquois
include the League of Five Nations Iroquois (Hohawk, Onondaga,
Oneida, Cayuga, Seneca and later the Tuscarora), and the Erie, south of Lake Erie, The Susquehannock Iroquois inhabited
Pennsylvania f Fig, 2)- These Iroquoian groups all shared a
coaaon subsistence gattern based on slash and burn horticulture,
suppleraented by huntiag and/or fishing, depending on the local
resource base {fenton 1378:298), They all lived in large, often
palisaded villages comgosed of longhuuses, Rany of the groups
forreed confederacies, and all were involved in expansive trade networks, alliances and wars. Pos instance, the Huron were
allied with the Susguehannock in a vicious war against the, Five
Rations Iroquois, while the Neutral reaained neutral in that conflict but were engaged in a fierce struggle with the "Fire
Nationn, thought to be the lYIascoutens of southern Michigan
(Thwaites 1959:20:193; Wrong 1939:157), 15 after Trigger (1976:2: Although Northeast Iroyuoiaas a11 shared the same tasic cultural traits, specific environmental settings and econo~ic-subsistence orientations were dissimilar. In the foliowing pages, variations between Huron and Neutral habitat, and economic and suksistence patterns will be briefly sumsarized,
The Historic Ruron
The topography of southern Ontario, largely the result of glaciation, is characterized by gently rolling moraines, till plains, aad druralins (Chapman E Putnaa 1966) - The cii~ateof the area arou~dLake Ontario, inhabited toward the east by the southern division of the Prehistoric - Protohistoric Huron and
in the west by the Eistozic Neutral, has ~ilder, drier, and warmer sumaers, and more frost-free days than Ristoric Euronia
(Trigger 1969:11), There is a great deal of variaticr, in uind direction, but the strongest gales generafly come from U to SF
(Norcliffe E Neidenreich 3974: 38).
Huron set tle~entsdiffered fro@ those of other Iroquoian groups in that the total population of the confederated tribes, estimated at 20,000 to 30,000, sere all concentrated in a small region of 2,072 sq, k~ (Heidenreich 1978:369; Trigger 1352:137,
l976:l: ?OEi), At the tiwe of contact the Huron occupied the territory from the Penetanguishene Peninsula south to the
Bottawasaga River, bounded on the west by Mottawasaga Bay, ana on the east by Ratcbedash Bay and Coldwater Biver (Pig- 3)- Huronia lies at the northern edge of the Great Lakes-st, Lawrence Eorest, a region of highly nnixed forests characterized by eastern white pine {Pinus st~obug),red pine {Pinus -----sesionsa) ,eastern hemlock (_Tsx= cartadensis). and yellow birch
(Betula alleqhaniensis]a Sugar {Acer saccharurn) and red rnaple
(Beer yubrug), basswood frjlia =qricana) and red oak {guercus --robra) are also found in this zone {Hoise 1973:22), Gaae is abundant and includes deer (odocoileus virqin_iang@, bear fflras americanus), beaver (Caster ~anaipde~si~)-Fishing, particularly -I--- for whitefish {Coreuonus cuipeaformis) , is considered to Rave been an inipostant subsistence task {Trigger 1F69:9),
Based on ethnohistoric and ethnographic sources, the Nnron are considered to have been a confederacy of at least four tribes (Beidenreich 1971:81; Hoble 1968:63; Trigger 1976:1:30),
The uesternmost, and largest tribe was the Attignawantan (Rear
Hation) ; the easternmost, and second largest tribe, was the
Arendarhonon (Bock nation) ; sandwiched in between were the
Attigneefaongna'ttac {Cord of Barking Dog nation) in the north, and the Tahontaenrat (One BJhite Lodge nation) in the south, The Ataronchronon {Nation Beyond the Silted Lake) was a fifth tribe that may have been a member of the Buron confederacy- Nation - Beyond- the- Silted Lake Rock ~ation
Barking Dog Couchiching .or Cord Not ion White Ears or Deer Nation
Nottawasaga Bay Lake Sirncoe The Huron confederacy is thought to have developed from the
Biddleport substage ca, A.D. 1380-1U00, with the Attignawantan and Attigneeaongnahac as founding members, and the Arendarhonhon and Tahontaenrat joining in the late 16th Century {Trigger
3962: 340, lW8:34Q),
A Huron village represented a cohesive group acting in mutual defense and cooperation in clearing fields and erecting houses and palisade (Thuaites 1959: 14:57)- The Jesuits noted the presence of village governments composed of civil and war chiefs and councils of elders (Thvaites 19!59:10:229-231)- Small. villages probably consisted of a singie clan segment (Noble
1968: 38; Trigger 3969: 55)- Larger villages may have included several clan segments, each with their own civil and war chiefs
{Heidenreich 1971: 78)- These chiefs may have each been housed in their own quarter of the settlement (Trigger 1976: l:55) . According to the Brebeuf, trade routes were family own@$ tThwaites l959:lO:229). Apparently the Arendarhonons were the first to directly encounter Europeans and consequently trade rights uere reserved for them, although they shar~dthe products with the other nations (Thwaites 1959: 19-20].
According to the earliest records of A-$3- 1515-1b23, villages mere relocated every 10, 20, 30, or 40 years (Biggar
1932:3:304; Sagard 3636~235;Wrorsg 1939~92)- By A.D. 1639 villages were apprenkly moved every 10 to 12 years (Thwaites
1959:15:153). and by B,D, IbiYO, every eight or nine years
{Thwaites 1959: 19: ID), The reason given by ~aissior~ariesfor
19 this aooement was always the same: depletion of the soil fertility and/or the wood supply, Fitting (3872: 111 suggests that length of villaye occupation coincides with the lenjth of time it takes a post to rot in the ground and the aaount of time required to repair posts, It has been noted that so@@Historic villages occasionally split in two new villages {Girong l939:92), The stated reason 9 was, again soil fertility depletion or exhaustion of the uaod supply. However, the economic system and the political climate
Bay have dictated vif lage size, requiring f issioning of elrccssiyely large corornunities (Plannerp 1972; Ha yden l978), It is thought that vif lage size, particularly aBong slash-and-burn horticulturists, is maintained below the aaxi~umcarr yiny capacity of the land. Once an optimal size is attained the comnunity fissions as a result of weak social-political incchanisas incapable of adequately policing the various, often feuding factions of the village (Flannery 3972:47; Hayden
1978:108),
During the Historic period there was great turmoil, aad expansionist wars created a refugee problani, The Jesuits - document on several occasions the adoption of dislocated people by another tribe, For instauce the Wenroe, when defeated by the
Five Nations Iroquois in A,D, 1639, fled tc the Huron and were accepted and dispersed throughout theis villages (Thwai tes
11)59:17:29, 35:207)- In 3649 the Buron confedezacy was defeated and members of an entire village relocated in a Seneca village as a distinct unit and @anaged ko "retain their own customs and peculiar usages, and live aprt fro& tathe Iroquoisw (Thwaites 6959:44: 21)-
The Neutral
P The Historic Neutral population, variously estimated at 12,000 (Bason 1389:37) to 35, - 40,000 (Noble 1968), inhabited the region between the lower Grand and Biagara Rivers, in the warmer cliaes of southwestern Ontario, The shorlines of
Lake Ontario and Laire Erie contain the only segment of the Deciduous Forest Region outside of the eastern United States
fMoise 1973)- In addition to sugar maple, beech (Paqus qwghifolia) , white ela f Ulrnus anrerica~mg), basswood and red ash (E~.axinusgeansnlvariic_a), this zone @arks the northern limit of trees such as the tulip tree (Liriodendymn tulipifera),
black oak (gueucug ~lutirrta), black walnut (&glans nicrra) and sycaaore {g&aJgnu_s occidentai_ls) (noise 1973: 2 1) - According to Charlevoix (176 1: 1525, the Heutral spent more ti@@ hunting and %ere less sedentry than the Huron, Trigger
(1969218) feels that Neutral settlements may have been fairly small and dispersed in order to maximize hunting cfflcieiacy-
Horaever, the early @issionariesmention only two visits to the country of the Neutral so ethnohistoric information is limited,
Direct trade vith Europeaas may have been withheld from the Neutral by the Huron (Hunt 1940: 56-57; Trigger 3976: 2: 736;
Bright 1963: 11- 12) , The first European contact with the Neutrals was made by Recollet Father DaiLlon in 1627 (LeClerq 1973: 2: 263-272) - Daillon claimed that he stayed in the viflaqe of a great man:
This man is the chief of the greatest credit and authority that has (ever) been in all these natiwns, for he is not only chief of his village, but of all those of his nation, comFosed of [in number) 28 towns, cities, and villages, made like those in the Rus~ncountry, and also of several little hamlets of 7 of 8 cabins, built in various parts convenient for fishing, hunting, or agriculture (LeClercq 3973: 263-266) ,
This statement has been used by archaeologists to assert that
the Neutral had chiefdoms (Jamieson 1981; NobFe 1978). The next visit was in 7640 when Jesuits Brebeof and Chausonot travelfed through 18 of the 40 Seutral villages- The only sigaificant difference they not& between Huron and Neutral house structures
was that the Xeutral dead reaained in the ionghouse longer than
Huron dead, often over an entife vinter {Thwaites 1959:21:199),
The Neutral are thought to have been a confederacy of up to nine tribes (Noble 3978: tfibf, The Neutral confeileracy was defeated by the Five Mations Iroyuois in A-D, 1651, Neutral. hotneless sought refuge amoog their enenties as had the .Huron, In one instance, Jesuit Father Frelltin described a Seneca village composed of Huron and Neutral (Thwaites 1959: 54: 81) ,
In conclusion, the sequence of Iroquois cultural
development devised by Urigbt (1956) has undergone few
revisions, By the onset of the Early Ontario Iroquois stage, horticultural viflages were well established, The geographically restricted Glen Beyer and Picke~inggroups both practised cosn horticulture and inhabited small nucleated villages, The Riddle
Ontario lroquois stage commences with the fusion of the Glen
Weyer and Pickering cultures, and is characterized by widespread cultural homgenei ty, I The histosic Huron and Neutral shared iaany cultural traits,
The main differences were in geographic location and suksistence orientations, The Neutral inhabited the warmer Deciduous Porest biotic region and their subsistence pattern may have been geared more tovard the huut, The Hurcn, on the other hand, were situated in a prime trading location, close to the Algonquian
(source of the prized keaver pelts) and the Europeans, fndeed, the Rufon roba ably felt the effects of Eurpoean presence before the Heulral. 111, The Longhouse
In the preceding chapter the devclopaental sequence of Ontario iroquois culture was summarized and the Huron and
Neutral tribes of the Historic period were in%roduced, This chapter is concerned with ethnohistoric accounts and
aot hropolsgical int~rpreta tions of longhouses,
Ethnohistoric documents play a large sole in the I
interpretation of Historic and Prehistoric Huron culture- The
following is a brief sumation of the Iroquoian lcnghouse as
gleaned Erortl ethnrshistoric accounts to t'ne wid 17th century and
supple~entedby later ethnographic sources. Appendix A provides
a complete transcfiption of refevent ethnohistoric documents
pertaining to the fonghause and a conparison with excavated
longhouses of the Historic period. Pig. il is a representation of
a typical longhouse, as descsiLed by the early chroniclers, Fig. 4: Idealized Longhsuse Floor Plan Based on Ethnohistoric Documents
qo storage Op post P .
house wall posts .. heal I 11 w
bench line post sleeping 0 w. platform
I' casks I' of corn and firewood stored in end door .. . Thefe was apparently general unanimity among early 17th
Century explorers and missiona~iesthat Iroquoian houses were totally covered with large bark sheets (Biggar 1929: 3: 133;
Jaweson 1909: I41; Thwaites 1959: 30: 93, 14:75, 15: 153, 17: 17, 18: 17, 23:345, 35~173, 383247, 42:139,159, 43: 176; Wrong I
1939:95), except for a slttoke hole opening along the midline of the roof [Biggar I929:3r 126; Thwaites 1959~8:107; 18: 17; Erong
1939: 95)- Cedar {Thu-ia occidentalis) was considered the best kark covering (Thwaites 1959:8:105, 13:U5,14:43), although ash, elm, or spruce (Picea) were also used (Tfnaraites 1959: 8: 105)-
Bppdrentfy by A,D, 166Q scarcity of cedar necessitated the use of these alternatives Bore f requentf y {Boucher 1883: 105)-
The fronts of lodges were often painted with figures of birds, men, and "beastsw in red or black colours (Jameson
1939:98). These figures have been interpreted as clan totem (Noble 1960)-
Pew early observers vere much concerned with actual ~ethods of construction, Lalemant mentioned walls and soofs of bent poles (Thvaites 1959: 17: f7), while Bressani noted that the ,bark covering was held in lace by beaas (Thuaites 1959:0:247),
Although van den Bogaert interpreted Bohawk houses as being "aost'ly flat at the top1' fJa&ieson 1909: 141) most authors could find no coraparable European structures other than the afbors or bowers in their gardens (Biggar 1929: 3: 123; Thwaites 1959: 8: 305,
15: 153, 17: 175; Wrong 1939: 93)- Some house entrancegags vere sheltered by a small roof (Thvaites 1959: 16: 24 I), and the two doors (Thaaites 1959: 19: 221): one at each end, were usually open to all visitors (Tfnwaites 1959: l6:24l) ,
Iroquoian cabins were described as "long, vide and high in proportionH (Thwaites 1959: 15: 153). Specific lengths ranged anywhere from 2 brasses (3.1-3.7 a) (Thuaites 1959:8: 107) to 400 paces (36.2-106.7 mf (Jaiueson 1909: ti1l,l44,lU5), with the nnost aftea cited length being 25 fathores (38-1-45-7 a) or 50 paces
(38-1-53.4 R) [Biggar 1924: 156; Biggar 1929: 3: 323; Ja~ieson
1909: 142; Wrong 1939393) , Certain cabins, normal f y those of the civil chiefs or war cagtains (Thwaites 1959: 13: 59) , %ere especially long to acco~odatelarge crowds asse~bledfor council meetings, feasts, and gaaes, and also to house visiCing dignitaries, such as missionaries (Coyne 1903: 25; Joyues
1977~38;Thxaltes 1959:8:93, 10: 181,233,251, 13:59,193, 15: 173,
18: 79, 39:65, 42:87,95,115, 47~77;Prong 1939: ll5,I4f),ltal),
L cnghouse widths were more unif on. Initial. observers estiraated longhouse width to be around 6 fathom (9-2-11,0 m) or
12 to 13 paces (9.1-12-8 to 9-9-13-9 m) (Biggar 1924:156; Biggar
1929:3: 133; k'song 1939~93)although Bfebeuf caiculated theis: breadth to be U brasses I5.1-7.3 m) (Thwaites 1959:8:107), These lodges were apparently as high as they were wide (Thnai.fies
Hearths were located along the length of the centre of the house, For each hearth there were said to be two fanilies (Biggar 3929: 3: 123; Thuaites 1959: 16: 234; Wrong 1939: 9Y) - The nurttber of hearths depended on the nu~berof families (I"hwaites
l959:17: !?5-177), varying Eroa 4 or 5 (Thwaites 1959: 15: 153,
10: 238) to 12 (Biggar 1929: 3: 123).
Large logs for burning ia the central hearths, and Ncasksn
of corn were stored at one (Biggar 192923: 125) or both ends
(Thtnaites 1959:21:285; Brong 1939:94), Corn and fish were hung D from the roof (Eiggas 3924: 157; Wrong l939:95),
Cartier states: "An6 inside these houses are many mums and
charabers ,, ,afterwards the men retire to the above-mentioned
quarters with their wives and children (Biggar 1924:72fi), Van
den Royaert also notes the Fresence of "inside doorstt {Jartlielson
1909: 141) , On the contrary, the later ~laissionariessa# no different stories, garrets, cellars, rooms, closets, or
apartments (Sagard 1636: 7:237; Thwaites 8: 107, 18: 17, 35: 153)-
Stiff_, sections of the longhouse could be partitioned off, for
instance, to hide a sick child fro@ Jesnit baptismal rites
(Thwaitss 1959213: f21), or to fast in fulfillment of a dreaa {Thwaites 1959: 13: 227) .. A "sort of platforaH {Jamieson f9O9: 149; Thvaites
1959: 8: 107, 10: 187, l3:6 1, f7:X3), or "goles,,,faid aria
suspended the whole length of the cabin" {Thwaites
1959: 17: 2O3-2O5) "as high as t6e roofn (Thaaites 1959: 10: 187)
was used to seat large crowds viewing a game of plum stone, or
the torture of a captive. These platforms were raised 1.2 to 1.5
m (4 ta 5 feet) off the ground (Biggar 1929:3:123; Wrong
l939:93), and the space beneath Mas used to store a winter's supply of firewood (Thwaites l'-359:8: 107-109; #rang 1939:?3ri), The
3-1 to 3-7 EI 110 to 12 feet) wide central corridor was the focus ~f longhouse activities including cooking, eating (Jamieson
1909: 144; Thwaites 19 59: 15: 153, 15: 2431 , and sleeping (Biggar
1924:247; Biggar 1929: 3: 123; Thwaites 1959: 172203, 38~247; Wrong l939:93), Sweatbathing (Thsaites 1959: 13: 203, 38~247; wrong 9 1939:93), and raising bears and buzzards fox feasts (Thwaites
1959: 13:51,97) were other activities carried out in the Ion ghouse,
Chronicless of the 13th Century were more explicit in their descripticns of fonghouses, These nore detailed narratives have often been used to describe I~oquoianlonyhouses instead of the earlier accounts, for exalplple, Bartratn*~1751 account of an Onondaga council house has been reproduced as the typical longhouse in works by tlorgat (1837), Douglas (1939). Ragoport
(1969), and Guidoni (19751, and is represented here in Fiy, 5-
Laf itau's 172b description of Hohawk .Longhouses on a reserve near Bontreal is anothef account Erequentfy referred to when detailing Iroquoiaa lonyhouses.
The basic siailarity between accounts of the 17th and 18th Centuries is in the description of longhouses as arbour shaped
(Boucher 3883: 54; Fentoll and Bloore l97U:2: 39; Quaife 1962:9),
Important dissimilarities included type of bark used, house length, and interior house organization, Fig.5: A Floor Plan of an ononda$a Council Longhouse in 1743 Shed
Q) 0 0 -n z .-.c u c u a, CT 0 cn cn a0 C 0 E E 0 0
Door lfter Morgan (18811 By the 18th century only elrrt bark was mentioned as the house covering material (Fentcn & Hoore 3974: 2: 19; Lahontan
I703:2:YW) The cahias of the 1700's were smaller, estimated at
3-7 m (12 feet) (Wallace 1945t93). 5-2 m (17 feet) (Bartram
1966:40) and 7-3 or 7-6 EI (24 or 25 feet) long (Fenton and Woore
1974: 2: 19; lahontan 1703:2:417). Accounts o)f the mid 17th and
18th Centuries also invariably re~ortfdthe existence of apartment units utilized by individual farsif ies (Bartram
196tj:YI; Fenton E Hooxe 1974:2:21; Lahontan 1703:2:438; Quaife
1952:9) , miis decrease in house size and addition of partitionrd apartment wits aay reflect increasing European influence on f roquoian culture,
A Erief Cosparison ketueen Etbnohistoric and Archaeolosical Longhouses
As the above sumnary suggests little attention was paid to
Iroquoian housc~structures by 17th Century European chroniclers,
In addition, it appears that ethnohistoric longhouse descriptioris were often iuaccusate. (A furthes elaboration of this statement is provided ia Appendix A), Figure 6 is a floor plan drawing of an archaeologically excavated Huron longhouse,
As this figure indicates many longhouse characteristics detailed by gissionaries are of ten nct recovered archaeoloyicalf y. These incongruities have Zed some archaeologists to suggest that certain longhouse attributes may have been restricted to certain nations. For example, Noble (1968) is of the opinion that bunklines may not have been characteristic of Bock Nation houses,
Fiqufe 7 is a floor plan drawing of an archaeologically excavated Neutral longhouse, Bissionaries @ention no d&fferecces
between Suron and Neutral house styles, however dissi~ilarites are readily apparent. ia archaeological floor plans, For exainple, Heutrai houses often have "slash pit" and "linear endH features in place of bench and storage line posts. It is thought that these features contained wooden planks used to separate the central corridor froa the skorag~and bench areas, and may have also partitioned the house into fawily apartaent units {Pitzgerald 1981; Lennax 3978, 3981) - Fig. 6: A Floor Plan of an Excavated Huron Longhouse
.. * house wall post molds
post molds
- central hearth
after Knight and Snyder (1982) Fig. 7: Floor Plan of an Excavated Neutral Longhouse
linear en
liscellaneous 'posts
slash bit
hearth
after Lennox (1978) In the following section, theories on the use and development of longhouses worldwide, and aeong Iroquoians in particular, will be briefly discussed, These theories will provide the framework for hypotheses to be stated and Jtfsted in the succeeding chapter,
Ethnagrahphic Longhouse Studies
Dwelling shape has been the focus of many cross-cultural studies on priaitive architectu~e,X circular dwelling form is said to provide ltraximun heat retention, most resistence to wind, and encompass the greatest amount of volume for the saaflest arsauni: of area (Fitch and Branch l96U) - Generally, rectilinear houses are said to be associated with more sedentary, resource-rich comunities (Hunter-Anderson 1977: 3 12 Robbins
1966:7; Simonsen 1972: 188; iihiting and Ayres l968:l33), Apparently rectilinear houses are more readily enlarged in order to aceowdate extra storage space and additional ~eople
(Flaanery 1972 ; Runter-Anderson 1977)-
There are several possible explanations for the use of longhouses. As Rapoport ( 1969: 32) notes, the longhouse is of ten thought of as a survival unit when communal living is considered necessas3 for survival, Three of the most often mentioned benefits of conwnal lonyhouse living are: mutual defence
(Rallace 19715 68) , subsistence cooperation (Wallace 197 l28b) , % and lineage associations (Trigger 1968: 581, A survey of ethnographic sources indicates longhouses are not always occupied by related and/or corporate groups, For example, the
Land Daynk live in extremely Zong houses, and yet each individual, unrelated family unit acts independently of its neightrours, In this instance, the prigtary reason for cohabitation is thought to be economic, constructing one fonyhouse instead of several nuclear faaily houses reduces the alnouat of ~tateriafand the necessary for constr_uction (walkace
Throaghout the world native house styles changed rapidly under the influence of European cultare {Cranstone 1972: 501)- For exa~ple,houses often changed from circular to rectangular in plan, apparently as a symbol of urban life (Prussin 1969:35;
Walton 19563 142). Among the Guarani of Paraguay, houses decrease3 in size {Schaden 1962: 351, while among other South
R~ericantribes the lonyhouse disappeared altogether, The ,
Christian Garo of the Assam region in India began to build squarer and shorter dwellingsl The reasan accorded these changes are: "to be ilifferentf8 and, because the Christian Garo no longer hold feasts they have no need for the icnger houses (Burling Xroquoian Longhouse Studies
Longhouses have usuaflp keen interpreted as develo~ingin response to the formation of the lineage, specifically the tnatrilinage [Mobla 1969:18), The Iroqnoian longhouse has also been interpreted as being occupied by the corporate group, loosely based or, kinship groupings (Hayden 1376, 1978, 1982)- Hayden describes the residential corporate group as the living unit involved in economic production under a 4qtituiar head"
{gayden 1975:9), He soggests that this status difference is manifested in the disproportio~atedistribution gf posts and features within the longhouse, assunting that feature and post density are indicative of feasting and other ritual activities pertorlsed by the head faailiy [Hayden lW6:8) -
Among the Mew York Imquois, longhouses attained aaximum leagth in the 15th Century,. Whalfon (39683 241) @quates increase in house dimensions tc a rise in population resulting frog the late addition of beans and squash to the diet- However, Tuck
(1978:328) relates the increase in size of Mew fork froquois houses through tias to endemic warfare,
Tuck ('1971:328) attributes the late decline in the length of Onondaga houses to the diminishing power of the matrilineage,
This appafently resulted f rorn #he fortsation of the.League of
Five Nations arcund A-D. 1400, which lead to a decrease in village sodogamy, and a breakdawn in the matrilocal residence pattern, However, Englehrecht (1972: 12) associates the increase in pottery ho~ogenietyand decrease in fonghouse length with increased trade, rather than with the formation of the League,
Amoug the Ontario Iroquois, the prehistoric sequence of longhouse development is not neli defined. Egobie (1975b:YZ) states that houses reached aaxi~umlength in im~ediate post-Hiddleport tires, Baydcn (1982: 151) feels that the growth of the Ontario Iroquois longhouse is associated wit$ differential control of resources such as Xand and trade. Hayden
(1982: 149) and Noble (3975b:42) attribute the reduction in size of longhouses to European influence on native culture during the
Late Protohistoric period, Mayden (7982: 149) suggests that this decrease in house length may be related to a weakeainq in the power of the carpoxate elite as trade goods became available to everyone.
Ethnographic Village Studies
In this section theories concerning the layout and variations of houses within villages, and within Iroquoian
illa ages in particular, will be briefly summarized, An overview of theories on village planning provides a framework for the formalization of hypotheses in the next chapter, village Plan
Generally, village plan is thought to be associ9ted with local topography and cllaate, and also with socio-political organization. Settlement plan is often determined by features of the landscape (8hiting and Ayers 1968: 126)- 4Jhere such considerations are not important, the plan of the settlement will corsespond to the shape of the dwellings, Praser (1968:47) maintains that the major factor in detefeining house 1ayout is social relationships and that an organized village plan is related to the complexity of the.economic situakion fe-g,, villages of hunters and gathers are the most flexible),
The presence or absence of a palisade could affect village plan (Noble 1969:f9; Rowlands 1972:460; Trigger 1976:1:1YS), If the enclosure constricts space, some sort of organized effort at village planning would be r~quired,
Intra-Village Bariations
Siwilarity of house styles within a village is said to be a reflection of restrictions iiaposed by uuilding materials, the co%!nunal nature of house building and, nore importantly, group identity and social cohesiveness (Pussin 1969: IlEi), ZBhen
different tribes or bands unite in one village the newcomers Bay copy the style of the original residents (Fraser l968:I2), or they may retain their sun house style (Hilliams 1968:16$), According to fiodder (1979) , different groups in close contact and competition for the sane resources may strive tolassert their ethnicity, or maintain social or political boundaries through variations in house plan or interior house organization,
Anong the Kachin of Burma clans or lingeages may or illay not be localized irr the village (Leach 7954:123),
&Bong South Awexican tribes, such as the Kdla~al0of
Brazil clans/fineages ace not localized within the siPlaye
(Basso 19?5:48), whereas aaong the Bpinaye clans are spatially segrega tctd within the village (Nimuendaju 1947:21J,
Longhouse length may reflect the wealth and/or status sf the occupants (Burling 1963; Hapden 1982; Kaplan 1975; Leach
IgSU), For example, aritong the Caroline Islanders, the chief's residence is larger than the corelooners' dwelling (Alkire
1970: 78-20), According to Burhing ( 1963:48l), the best single indicator of political and econo~icstatus amouny the Garo of
Assam is house length; in ether respects their houses are reaarkably siailar, Among the Piaroa of the Orinoco, the poor people live in small houses, and wealth is associated with the nuraber of people living together in one house (Kaplan l97533$),
Hayden (3982: 138-139) states that, aaony 150 highland Bayan households he studied, the wealthier households have, on average, more living spce than the poorer households,
Bayden (1976:5) maintains that du~ingtimes of shortage or ti~esof ~lentypeople will, more readily associate with the economically more viable households than with deprived households. He points to the nuaerous extensions to froquoian 1 longhouses 3s reflective of this type of flexible, economically oriented house membership that grows or declines depending on the wealth and status of the corporate head,
Archaeological Village Studies
The establishment of villages is usually thought to be associated with increasing reliance on a stable and ref iable resource subsistence base which required an increase in the cooperative labour force, a peraanent location for the stohage and aaintenance of surplus foodstuffs, and protection of the cultivated fields fron raiders (Blouet 1972: 4; Planaery 1972: 28; Trighas 1972:469), In Ontario, the village is thought to have been established ca- A.D, 500 (Noble 1975b:37]
Noble 339753 38) defines an archaeological viilage site by the following criteria:
1, Size: a site of 0-2 to 5.0 hectares is lakelfeil a village, anything larger is a tarn;
2. The presence of midden deposit as opposed to a randola scatter of debris; and,
3, Nucleated settleaent of conteaporary dwellings.
Sear's 11956: 46) definition of villages includes the added criterion of definite village plan, ViEf age Plan a
Palisades on Iroquoiisn sites are usualiy interpreted as
defensive structures (Noble 1969: 19) However, it has also been
suggested that the plisade could serve to protect villagers
from marauding animals (Latta 1980) or the destructive torce of
the wind {for 1976). It may also act as a barrier to reinforce
village identity (Hcwlands 1972: YY8,YSg).
Longhouse Orientations
Preferred house oxieritation has been associated ui th cosnological religious beliefs (Rapoport 3968: 51) , ,
socio-poLiticat groupings (Sangaeister 1957), and environmental.
factors. The last explanation is particularly favoured ty
researchers studying longhouses of the Linear Pottery culture of
Neolithic Europe. Marshall t1939, 1980) has discerned
siailarities in house construction and orientation bet~eenthe
axially pitched trapezoidal houses of Enga Province, Papua Mew
Guinea and Linear Pattery culture longhouses, fie asserts thdt
both groups placed the narrow end of the house into the
prevailing wind to assure maxi~unheat retention and smoke ventilation.
Sang~eister3 395 13 hypothesized that minor variations in
Linear Pottery cultufe longhouse orientations may be useful in
chronologicaff p o~deringthe occupation sequence of a viilage,
Bilisauska {l97Z: 62) tried this approach DU t was not convinced sf its usefulness, ~referrinyinstead to cluster the houses of a one occupational level on the basis of house structure and
pottery content, Soudsky (1969:73) argued that variations in orientation of plus or minus 5 degrees are of no inport, whereas
orientations fluctuating 10 to 15 degrees from the norm are
significant reflections of changes in the environment, especially vind directions, Among Ontario researchers the sole study of orientations
was done by Norcliffe and Heidenreich (1974) Their figures
ind.icate that, for the Huron, the preferred orientation was to
the vest of north- They infer that this was the direction of the
prevailing vind during the winter, Trigger (19 69: 58) stdtes that
Huron houses were oriented to the northeast, often with the narrow ead facing into the prevailing wind to preveut Eire
spreading to adjacent buildings or house collapse.
Variation in Longhouses of an Iroquoian Village
Xroquoian houses aligned parailel to one another are
usually assu~edto be contemporaneous (Tuck 1971: 61) , representing a clustering of affiliated relatives
(Pagner,Toombs, and Riegert l973:9), In fact, WoBle f1969:19,
197%:4O) associates ay?pearance of houses parallel to one
another with the ficrystallization?9 of tbe matrilineage* Houses
grouped together map mirror the village cLan segment or moiety
organization (Trigger 1969: 50)- The Iroguoian longhouse is said to be composed of t matrilocal extended families (Noble 1968, 1969), perhaps even a clan segment (Tuck 1978: 328)- The longhouse nucf ear faaily is thought to be the basic unit of production, Longhouse length is
thought to vary in resgonse to the nu&ber of occupants {Heidenreich 3 971: 115; Fenton 1978: 303) . Kn fact, Emelcson {136l) ~aintainsthat house length grew in increments of 9-2 m, and
Fenton (1978:303) says in multiples of 7-6 a, Hearths have often been used as indicators of longhouse population, based on the missioaary count of two families Fer hearth (Emerson 1963:7, Reidenreich 1971: 118 1972: 48, Ferton 1978: 303) - .
Summary
The most frequently observed Longhouse traits include an arbour shape, outer bark covering, internal storage partition cubicles, plat•’oms, and two families per hearth- Eighteenth
Century descriptions of longhouses often conflict with earlier accounts, describing them as being shorter and containing separate apastaent units,
A general survey of ethnogra~hicsources indicates that the
~ainadvantage of rectangular buildings is that they can be readily extended to make @ore stofage or living space. The reasons usually given for living in longhouses are because they
offer protection, a ~ooledlabour fosce, or clan/lineage associations, Among the New fork Iroquois houses reach ~aximuol size during the 15th Ceuiurp A,D. anh decline thereafter,
Population growth due to the addition of beans and squash to their diet is one reason suggest~dfor the increase in longhouse length, Later decline in house iength is thought to be associated with increased movement between the separate tribes resulting in a deczease irn the power of the rcatrilineage,
Aaong the Ontario Iroquois, house length is thought to have reached maximum size during the 16th Century and declined in the
Late Protohistoric period as a result of European influence, IV, Hypotheses, Data, an8 Analyses
In this chapter, hypotheses will be formulated concerninq the prehistoric sequence of Fonghouse developutent, evolution of village planning, and regional vafiations, based on theories and data outiined in preceding chapters. A sample of 417 longhouses frog 50 Ontario Iroquois sites vlll be used to test these hypotheses, Heasuramnts of archaeofojical f foor ~lanattributes will be calculated, and the results will be tested for statistical signf icance,
-Amo ----- theses
Tfte Eundaaoental assumption of this thesis is that the longhouse is an integral part and centre of Iroqoaian culture, and that its for& and arrangement in villages reflect various aspects of social, political, and economic organization, as uell as environmental factors, Given this assufnption, changes through tiiae in construction laethod or house interior organization may provide inf orsation regarding the development of Iroquoian society, Across space, variations io longhouse layout may parallel geojra~hic or ethnic boundaries, Specific hypotheses
#ill be discussed under lour broad headings: general trends in loaghouse for@; development of longhouses and villages; intra-village ionghoase variations; and regional longhouse variations, 46 General Trends in Longhouse Form
Longhouse Syametry
Norcliff-e and 3eideureich {1974:22) suggest that longhouses were oriented into the prevailing winter uind to maximize heat retention, and Lineas Pottery culture arcfiaeologlsts state that end walls facing into the wilnd were reore tapered (Marshall 3979, 1983; Sowdskp 1932) - In this thesis, the hypothesis 'that deviations in Icnghouse symetry are indicative of concern for the effects of the wind will be tested, If concern for the destructive forces of the uind was a factor in hcuse construction then archaeological lcnghouses mydisplay differential tapering on the end facing into the winat Also, the windward end (or in scnte cases side) wail nay have been coreposed of a greater auaber of posts than the leeward waLL
According lo the 17th Century obsesvers, each hearth along the length of the central corridor was used by two fanilies,
Assuming that each faaillp raaintaired their own living and working space (e-g,, for the preparation and cooking of food) , features and posts aolds should be distributed equally cn eitkes
4 7 side of the aidline and between central hearths,
Longh~useCorrelations
According to ethnohistoric documents, house length is associated srith the number of occupants (Thwaites 1359: 15: 153;
Frong l939:93), Therefore, if house length is determined by nuaber of occupants, and hearth cumber correlated with number of families then the longer the house the greater the nunber of hearths.
Accor ding to ethnographic information, longex houses and a gxeater awount cf interior house space per householi3. are symbols of the occupants"waltfipstatus in the conrmunity (Rayden 1982;
Leach 19541, Therefore, distance between bearths/farailies shouid aiso increase as housg length increases,
Hayden (1935) suggests that if longhouse residential units were ffexiale,. ESeiaBers would join longhouses depending on the status of the head fa~ify.Therefore, il this theory is correct, houses with extensions should be the larger Rouses of the village, assuming that extensions represent additions .to house length and that house length is associated vith wealth. Development of the Longhouse and the Village
Development of Long houses
The hypothesis that lonyhouscs reach ~aximunextent during the Protahistoric period, as suggested by t?oble (1975b) uiil te tested, If, as supposed by Noble (147Tb) and Bhallon f1968), this increase in Length is associated with an increase in population due to a stable subsistence economy (&orticulture) , then all houses of each village should delgonstrate a concurrent increase in length, Also, length should be associated with hearth nu &her rather than hearth spacing,
However, both Hafden (1976) and Tuck (1'378) suggest that house length increases with a disproportional increase in the poser of a few faaifies, vho controlled access to status/weafth positions, either through the ownership of land or trade routes
(flayden 1976). or through warfare (Tuck 1978)- If this hypothesis is true, then houses should increase
aisproportionately and not uniformly, L Further, the hypothesis that Ontario Iroquois loraghouses began to decline in the Late Protohisoric period (Hayden 7979,
1982; Noble 1975B), will be examined, This decline in house size is thought to be associated with a breakdown in trading manopolies f oracerly ccntrolled by a few falnilies {Hayden 3982)
49 Given this hyp3thcsis, louyhousos should retufn to a more unifora ~iaef olfoving contact,
Orientation
Eiofcliffe and Beidenreich (797%) using a sairtple of 96 Qntdrio Iroquois longhouses, state that Ontario Iroquois
Zonjhouses werc prefereatially orientted into the _prevailing wicker RW-SE wind, Only Ear lp Ontasio Iroquois houses did not follow this pattern, The authors suggest this "ncn-con•’ ormityfi say aaes n tba t porpcsef vL orientation of houses into prevailing winds was not fully devefoped until thc Late Ontario Iroquois stap, In this thesis, the hypthesis that Late Ontario Iroquois houses were oriented to the NW, and that Early Ontario Iroquois houses werc randomly oriented will be tested.
Villages of the Historic period were said to be occupied for apprcr>ximately nine years (Thwaites 7959: 19: 133)- It is hypothesized that such brief occupations did not represent the average life span of Ontario Iroquois viflages. Instead, an expanding villaye popufaiicn that resulted ia depletion of wood
50 supplies and/or soil fertiltiy was the main cause for these more f reguent relocil %ions, Iu co~parison,prekistoric Xroquoian societies should have been relatively stable arld therefore villages %ere probably occupied Icnger, This should he de~onstratedarchaeologicafly in a decrease, through time, in the density of features and posts, assuming feature and post mold densities are related to length of occupation,
The BafP site is a late Protohistoric - flis&xic village and gill be used to test for significant iutra-village variatiorns in Length classes, orientation clusters, an3 interior house organization differences, T t is generally assumed that par allel ali.;ned icouses denote the presence of iirieayes
{Noble 1958, 1975a, 7 975b) , Ethnographic inf osm tion suggests that villages may be divided into distinct clan segments
{Wiauendaju l967), Therefore, it is hypothesized that orientation cfusters Bay mirror lineage or clan segaents, and that these clans nay have built their awn style of longhouse.
According to Hodder (1979) groups in close contact Bay try to aaintain their separate identity by ridgid enforcemnt of dress styles or house fayout, Assuming that village expansions represent, an influx o•’people fro@another asea, then a cogparison of houses in the original village with those in the new expansion may indicate differences in house styles fe-g,, ,
house shape, or inte~aairefinements),
The early chroniclers described longhouses as containing at least four central hearths, storage partitions, and side wall benches. However, as Noble (1968) observed, ethnohistoric desc~iptionsdo not alvays ntatch archaeological longhouse data,
Upon first arrival in Huronia the missionaries, as valu~d guests, stayed uith village chiefs. Therefore, it is hypothesized that the Jesuits uere describing thqse longer dwellings and not the average Hurcn Icnghouse,
Regional Longhouses
According to the Jesuits, the Neutral, who inhabited a rariaer region ~f sauthwestern Ontario, uere more reliant oa the hunt than were the fiurcn, Therefore, it is hypothesized that differences in geographic location, and subsistence will also be manifested in dwelling styles, These variatians in house style are expected to be mst pronounced during the Late Ontario Iroquois stage due centuries of 3. sits regional devefo~ment, The sample consists of 50 sites (Pig- 8) containing, in sum, 417 longhouses. Appendix B provides a short Oescriptio~of the sites. Table 2 lists the uumber of sites and longhouses in the saiapPe, arranged by estiaated period of occupation and cultural affiliation,
The aajor problem with the sample is the disproportionate number of Protohistoric and Historic loaghouses, since an overvhelming 314 houses (75.30% of the sample) span the years from A,D. 1450 to 1550- The data are weakest for the. fliddleport substage which provides only 7,34X of the sample, This figure reflects not only the tendency of Ontario archaeologists to eocus on later sites, but also the larger size of these sites and therefore the larger naruber of houses,
Another major problen uith the data base is irregularity in both quantity and qua1ity of longhouse informatiorn. Several of the longhouses, pa~ticularlythose excavated many years ago, arf represented only in terms of their external house uaf i. characteristics, Peatare and post mof d inforaatioo have of ten been sispiaced aad, in many cases where the field notes were retrieved, the feature information was of limited utility since often few dimensions were recorded, Key to Figure 8
Pickerim Huron I -I-- 0 ---- 1. Auda 2 I, Draper 42. Clevela~d
2, Bichardsoa 22, Elcieod 4 3- f onges
3, Boys BcKenzie 4 #$* Christianson
4, H.Lller Seed 4 5, Thorold
5. Bennett Coulter 46. Halker
6. Gunbg Kirche 47, Rood
B enson 48, Boggle I u Glen-Bezr Sopher 49, Boggle IX 7, Porteoas Bard rock 50, Barnif ton
8, Caivert Copeland
9, Dewaele Ball
70, Van Besian Farminister
11, force Alonzo
12, Kelly daurice
13, Reid Robitaille 36- Lecaron
A ------Uren - Middleprt - 14, Uren 0
15, Nodwelf 37,
16, erawford Lake 3 8.
17. Unic 39,
18, Chypchar 40,
19- Slack Casweil 41.
20. PIoyer
Table 2: Sites and tonghouses Considered in the Study,
# of sites % li: of houses years A.D.: 7130-7300
1300-14 50
1450-1609
1610-3450 total by culture:
Pickering Glen H-~leyer Uren diddleport
PreHistoric Huron
PreHistosic Neutral Bistoric Huron Historic Yeutral total The mauner ia which Iroquoian sites have been excavated ': also affects the satnple. There are three basic ar~roachesto the excavation of village sites: to ancover the entire site; to open a small area coapletely; or, to trench across the site. The first method requires either a large labour pool, money, and several years, or a bulldozer, ~d~osin~as such of the site as possible per~itsthe excavator to analyze the settlement pattern as 3 whole, including selationships between juxtaposed longhouses and betveen clusters of houses, This approach is rarely atte~ptedbecause of the 2osts necessary to open a oillage of 3 to 5 ha in size {e-g,, the Draper and Ball sites), On a smaller scale, when the budget and available time are liniited, soae researchers have opted to excavate only a small portion of the village completely (e-g* , the Yarminister, Boggle
I, and Unick sites), This peraiits the excavatcr to study the plan of that segiaent and the internal organizati.cn cf those houses, but the rest of the village re~ainsunknown,
The final, ntethod - to trench across the siLe, **chasingN house outfines and ~afisadero#s wherever encountered - is frequently employed, This method ~rovidesa general idea of village layout, and longhouse size, but infornaticn cn iaternal longhouse structuring is scarce fe, g., the Coulter, Kirche,
Eenson, Chypchar, Crawford, and MO~BZ: sites), Only a few houses have been carefully excavated in sub-units, screening all overbuxden (e. g., the fiobitaille, Draper 1 and 2, and Slack Caswell houses) - 1 n each of these cases the deposits over the site uere relatively undisturbed, and the excavator wished to take advantage of a rare oppaftunity to analyze interior hoase subgroupings, Unfortunateiy this method of eacavaticn is tiaie consuming, This fact, coupled with the Jesuit state~entthat house floors uere often swept clean, has meant that detailed excavation is not usuafly considered a worthwhile endeavor, partrcularly an disturbed (ploughed) sites,
As a result, the distributioa of artifacts, the relation between artifacts and features, and the location of possible activity areas vithin longhcuses have not been thoroughly in&stigated.
Longhouse Attributes
Only a small ~roportion,approxiaately 133 (31,8%) of the
4 18 houses in this saaple, wefe compfetely excavated, Hence piecewal information had to be extracted from various sike reports. Orientation, house width, and house length were ntost often recorded, All othek: attributes uefe far less frequently observed, Table 3 provides a list of the analytical and categorical variables acd the ~ethodof taking the weasurements,
En the section that Eoliows these variables will be discussed in greater detail. Table 3: Description of Longhouse Attributes,
House gall Characteristics (Fig. 9)
I 1, House Length (in a)
a, House length, ntaximum length of the house, measured fro& inside house wall posts,
b. Original length of house prior to extensions.
Extension Length fin a)
Length of house extension, aeasured from outside house post of original wall to inside house %tall post of extended end,
House Hidline Hidth (in a)
Rouse width aeasured as close to &idline of house
as possible, fro& inside house wall ~osts-
House End Bidth fin a) a. Vidth of northernmst end wall, measured at end of the house, from &ere the side wails begin to taper,
b, Width of southernaost end naff.
c. Hean width of house end walls-
5- Difference between Hidliae and End Widths (%)
The difference between house width at aidline and
average end width, multiplied by 100- Table 3 fcont")
6. Linear Taper Length fin m) a, Length of the taper on the northernmost side t wall, north corner of aozth end,
~easuredfro@ where the side wall begins to
curve into the end wall,
'u, Length of taper on the southern~ostside wall, south corner of north end. c, Bean ienyth of taper on north end,
d, Length of taper on northernmost side wail, north corner of south end,
e, Length of taper on southermost side gall,
south corner ~f south end. f, Bean length of taper on south end wall,
g. Rean length of tape^ for house end walls,
7. House Wall Post Mold Mumber
a, Quaer of posts in north sidle uall, counted to
the points where the side wall begins to taper-
b, Mu~berof ~ostsin south side wall,
c, Number of posts in north end wall, ccunted froa
the points vhere the side wall kegins to taper,
d, Nuntber of costs in south end waif, Table 3 (cont'd) 8. Rouse Wall Pcst Mold Density
a, Density of psts per fn cf north side wall,
b, Density of posts per m cf south side wall* t
c, Density of gosts per a cf north end wall*
e, Density of psts per m cf south end wall.
8, House Val1 Post Hol? Dia~eker (in ca)
&@andiamtef of post ~oldsin house wall,
Interior House Attribotss (Pig. 10)
10. Storage Cubicle Length (in m)
a, Distance fro@ the inside posts of the north I house wall. to: (1) a line of posts; or fin& end stains; or (2) the point where corridor
features begin; or (3) where storage features
end,
b, Length of the storage cubicle in the south end,
c, Total storage cukicfe space for the house,
d, Storage Partition Posts/Linear End Stains
i, Absent ii, Present
11, Bench Width (in m)
a, Distance froa the iaside north house wall posts
and a line of costs or slash pits parallel
to the house wall
b, Distance between the south house uali and the
line of posts parallel to the wall, 60 Table 3 (cont'd)
12, Corridor Length jizs nt)
c, Bench Line Posts/Slash Pits i absent
ii. Present Distance between the storage cukicles,
13. Corridor width [in m)
Distance betu een bench lines-
3Y. Central Bearths
a, Distance Fzom the tip of the northernmost
hearth to the north end, measured in a,
b'. Distance fraa the tip of the southernmost
hearth to the south end, measured in a- c, Bean distance between central hearths, measured
in oa fro@ the outer edges of the hearths
d, Hearth number,
15, Fea-ture Ptu~ber:
a, gumber af features in the central corridor, I;. Euraber cf features in the nosth storage cubicle, . c. Mumher cf featuses in the south storage cubicle-
d, Number of features behind the north bench line, e, Naaber of feaXvres behind the south bench line, Table 3 i(cont'df
16- Peature Density
Density of features within 4 sy, m of the
middle of the central eortri40r, centred on
a hearth if pcssible,
Density of features within @ sq. ra of: the
north end of the central corriccr, centred on
a hearth wherever possible,
D@nsity of features within 4 sq, m of the
south end of the central corridor, centred on a hearth wherever possible, Density of features in the northernmost haif a 1 onghouse, lengthwise.
Density of features in %he southernaost half
a longhouse, lengthwise,
Gene~aidensity of features in the house,
17. Distribution of Storage Features (features >25 cm deep)
a, Storage Cuhicle Features
i, Absent ii- Present
b- Storage Features in Corridor and Bench Area
i, Per or no storage features,
ii, aainly behind the bench linel
iii, Plainly in the central corridor, . iv, Zn both regions. 18, Interior House Post flold Number P a, Nurttber of post molds in the central corridor,
b, Nuskiher of gcst &old% in the north storage cubiclr;,
c, Humber of post eofds in the south storage cubicFe,
d. Wumber of gost molds bebind the north ueach line,
e, Wumber of gost molds behind the south beach line.
19, Post Mold Density
Density of post molds within 4 sy= m of the ~iddleof the central corridor, centred on a hearth wherever possible,
Density of post nolds within 4 sy. m of the ,
north end to the central corridor, centred on
a hearth wherever possible.
Density of post molds within 4 sy, m of the
south end of the central corridor, centred on a hearth wherever possible,
General density of post molds per sg, a,
General Post Density i, Few or none,
L &any
20, Post Hold Diaseter (in em)
aeaa Dia~etesof the interior hause post maltls, Fig. 91 Method of Taking External House Wall Measurements
North side -
South side
corner .-. . .- South end ' *...... South corner North side
South side The variables will be discussed uader the following headings: external shell, interior house organization, and village plan,
External Shell
Variables that comprise the external shell of the house are: (1) house length, (2) house width at the midline and at the ends, (3) linear taper length, (4) house side an3 end wall post rattold densities, a~d(5) house wall post mid diaaneter (Fig- 9)
Two laeasureiaents on house length were taken: (1) the original Length prior to any subsequent extensions; (2) and the maxirnum length. The nuaber and length of any extensions to the original length were also recorded, The presence of a double end wall is assuned to be an extension to house length for tao reasons:
First, in a ~a jorit~of cases features overlay the interior end wall and, second, the only probable reason for reducing honse length would be to ~aintainthema1 efficiency, Tt is felt that this could be nore easily accomplished by suspending skins or bark on a fen poles or front the roof, Dnfortunately, in the ad joritp of cases is was inpossible to determine if laaximum length was original. length, since relatively few
Rouses were coapletely excavated, A majority of houses in this study were msalf trenched only. House width at the midline is, aside frotg orientation, the most commonly recortied archaeof ogical longhouse aFlribute, This measuremnt was usually taken as close to the centre of the longhouse as possible; however, in several instances the centre of the longhouse could not be judged aad so &he measurement was taken wherever side walls were juxtaposed, The only difficulty encountered in ~easuringthe width at the ends was with those houses that had highly ccnvex termini which made defining end wall - side wall junctures so~ewhatdifficult, The difference between the uidth at the midline and the ends is aa index measure of the t9rectangularityfl of the structure (Ramsden
1977273.
The f inaf shape measureaent is linear taper length, Taper length was measured tangent to the side walk, at the point where the side wall began to curve toward the end wall, he length of house taper could be affected by the length of occupation and the depth of the lou ugh zone,
Although categorical variables describing the shape of the ends and ccrners and the placement of doors were originally recorded, it was soon discovered that these are highly subjective, The decision to descsibe any given corner, for example, as **curvedwinstead of **beoefledHis judgmental and open to debate by another: investigator, fdcntification of doorways on Iroquoian houses is often a matter of guesswork, since there are frequently so many gaps in house wall. posits khat any number of ehtrances could be envisioned, The Jesuits i wentioned ."doors in one or both ends of the houses, thus any gap in the end wall is readily labelled a doo~,whereas it takas much firner drchaeoLogical evidence before a gap in a side wail is accepted as a doorway. For these reasons, the variables concerned with shape uf ends and corners and location and number of doorways were akan doned,
The number of wall posts per meter and post mold diameters were also recorded, There are several sources of possible error involved in these variables, Post counts may increase by the nu~tberof roots and burrows recorded as unverified posts in the field. Perhaps the aost serious source of error is in disturbance of a site By ploughing- Snow {n.d,) has determined that plough action can diaisish the size and number of posts recovered kelow the plough zone.
Xnteraaf Layout P -L.zI Information to be obtained fro@internal organization includes: (1) the aaouett of end storage space, (2) the placement of starage pits, aud, (3) feature and post mold densities throughout the longhouse. The corridor area is a zone of fa~ily activities delineated by side wall benches and end storage cubicles (Fig- 10) - Again, there are proble~sin assessing bench lines and storage posts, Does one interpret any post positioned about 1 m fro^ the side walls as a bench post, or only the larger ones? A line of posts or .linear end stains several meters before the em2 walls are thought to delineate cubicles used for .- storage, as iueationed in the ethnohis+oric records. Above-ground storage facilities iuay be indicated by a lack of miscellaneous features and post i~oPdsin the end areas, The distance ketueen the last hearths at each end and the respective end walls was also measured. It is thouybt that this figure should correlate well with the length of the storage space at each end, since hearths would presu~ablybe placed at a safe distance f ron the stored goods,
.Hearth nuaber and spacing are two variables presumably '-_-----_l associated with the nuaber of fa~iliesand the aatount of space
_C_I--I_---___I___ allocated to each pair of f aailies, assuaing the ethnohistoric estimates to be correct, However, ploughing ofter, eradicates any evidence of shallower hearths, As Bayden noted on the unplougfred portion of the Draper site, many of the hearths were only 15 cm
\ below the surface (1979: Y) ,
Several density variables were recorded, including feature and post mold density for the entire touse and for each subdivision (storaye ends, benches, central corridor) , fn addition, in houses with central corridors at bast 12 nr long, the nulaber of ~ostsand features in each of three 4 sg, m units along the length of the corridor were counted, Pour 3 sq, units were drawn around a centre hearth and two end hearths. In those cases where hearths were missing, a unit was arbitarially placed in the centre ard ane at each end of the central corridor,
Feature and post mold densities Bay indicate increased length of occupation of any one house relative to another or *any section i of a hoasd relative to the other, or simply increased intensity of use, Again it aust be noted that disturbance of a site by pioughinq and the variable depkhs of the plowzoue may afiect the densities of interior house features, perhaps eradicating shalJoxef posts and pits co~pietely-
The Village Plan
Measurements of village planning attributes are presented in Table $4 and iilustrated in Figure 91, Village original and maximu@ size, sp3cing between juxtaposed houses, and orientation are the analytical variabfes concerned with village plan. Since feu villages were completefy excavated, ~easurementson village size are estimates, Double or ~ultiplepalisades way denote expansioes, contractions, overlapping villages, or con teapornneous but segregated communities. However, very feu villages in this sample display double palisades and in each case (vith the possible exception of Ball) the excavator found evidence 02 houses overlapping the palisade, Therefore, these double and multiple palisades are considered expansions to original viilage size. Table 4: Village Plan Attributes
1- Village Size {ha) a, Original site size p~iorto any expansions b, !faximum site size, final size of the site
2. Bou se Place men t (a) a, averaye distance of the spacing between juxtaposed houses of a vilgage,
b. Average distance of the spacing between
opposing house end walls, General Distance between Houses, i, Close - house surrounded by other houses both sides, ii, open - house in open, or with a house close
on one side, '
d, Location of nouse i, Roose located in original core village-
ii, House located in the first expansion,
iii, Bouse located in a later expansion, .
e* Overlaps i. None
ii, House - house overlap. iii, ' House - palisade overlap. 3, Orientation (degrees east of north)
a, Taken along the midline of houses, otherwise
tke xteasurement was taken from the side walls b. Orientation Gfoups
i, Northeast (0-45 degrees east of north)
ii- East-Northeast (46-90 degrees east of north)
iii, Yest-Northwest (91-335 degrees east of north)
iv, Northwest 1136-1 80 degrees east of north)
--The ----EesuZts Statistical tests, primarily nonparametric, #ere used to assess significance of the data, In all cases significance was set at the 0-05 Level, for a discussion of the statistical procedures involved see BloZoct 1972, Fox and Guire 1976,
Pax et, al, 1976 and Siegal 1956,
General Trends in Lunghouse for^
Paired student*^ t tests were used to analyze the symaetry of ionghouses, The results presented in Bppeadix C, Table 3 ind icale that there is little significant deviation between
~atcheilpairs of house attributes, Bouse wall post densities are the salne for each side wall; feature density is also the same, or does not significantly differ, cn either side of tho central hearths; nor is there any dissiailarity between linear taper or storage cubicle length, or width of end walls, ~herefoke,it uou 14 appear that houses were not canstsueled specifically to maxiniz e heat retention, nor were walls buffered against the force of the wind, Although Cark sheets or animal skins could have served this functionP
The only significant differences in matched longhouse characteristics, at the 0.05 level, are between house uali post diameters and interior house ~ostdiameters and in the distribution of features and posts along the length of the central corridor. House %all posts are, on the average, larger than interior house post mold diameters. Features and posts are concentrated in the middle 4 sy. r of the central corridor and tap~roff toward the ends, whereas features and posts at the ends of central corridors do not significantly differ from one atrother, Therefore, rsfiiie there is no difference in the number of features on either siae of the central line of hearths, the density of features and posts is heaviest in the mid31e-
Attribute Correlations
In an effort to determine which Ponghouse variables were interrelated Pearscnas Rank Order Correlation coefficient rho and KendalltWstau tests were run, The results are displayed in Appendix C, Table 2, According to the tesults, house length is apparently associated ~oststrongly with the length of the end storage cubicles (Fig- 121, and utoderately correlated with house aidline width (fig, 131, hearth nuntber [Pig. 18) , hearth/end walls spacing and s~acingbetween consecutive hearths (Fig, 15) , bench width, and length of the linear taper, This irdicates that an increase in house length appafentiy is associated with a correspon3ing increase in house: width, hearth nuaber, and storage cubicle length. As Figures 12-15 indicate the relationship between house length and other variables is curvilinear, Xt would appear that house length increases at a faster x.ite thaa storage length, This Bay meari that: flfthe salcpfe is biased; (2) extra spce was built into longer houses to accomdatc extra people not accounted for in permanent end storage
(e, g., refugees or ambassadors) ; or (3) the foodstuffs were being sto~eaelsenbere, such as along the rafters, or in individual family storage pits. The scatter plot of house length vs- house wXtK indicates tbat unlike house length, width is restricted in maximum breadth, Therefore, house width is probably constricted by aaterials and method of construction. Nouse length also increases faster than hearth number. This suggests that (1) .the sarngle is too small, (2) there is more room for each family in the farrjcr houses, cr (3) there are more people per hearth, Fig. 12: Scatter Plot cf House Length vs, End Storage Cubicle Total Leugth House Length (in a11 IOf,5+ Pig.. 13: Scatter Plot of fIoase Leeglh vs. House Ridth
Mouse Length (in w) pigt 14: Scatter Plot af Bouse Length vs, Hearth Bulaber
House Length (in a) 101-5+ Fig. 15: Scatter Plot of kiause Length vs. Mearth Spacing Spearaan*s rank crder correlatian coeZfiecient rho also indicates that there is a significant, though rtloclerate correlation betneea the fength of houses and the length of the extension, Hence, the longer the house, the longer the extension. In addition, as Table 5 indicates, the longer houses appear to be Bore frequently extended, although a saxukle of 27 houses is too small to assess statistical significance-
House length is apparently unrelated to end wall width,
feature or post nrolld density, The correltation between house width and other vidth measurements, aside from corridor width,
is veak but positive, Deasity variables are ,311 positively associated with each other, For exaapie, an increase in corridor past mold density is apparently positively associated with an increase in central corridor feature density, and house wail
post mold densities, This suggests that the density variables are all related to fength of occupation, Table 5: Comparison of Nausos with and without Sxtensions,
n range mean s
--A-D. ----700-1300 Original length, no ext,
Original length, ext,
--&,a. ----1300-1450 Original. length, no ex%. '12 5-0-39-0 23.7 12-2
Original length, ext. Y 25.0-75,s 44-7 21-8
--A,B, ------1450-1609 Original length, no ext, 59 7-5-71.0 27-6 15-8
Original length, ext, 13 72-3-66.0 30.1 15-7
--AID------1610-1550 Original length, no ert, 67 5.5-40-4 38-0 3-2
Osigianl leagth, ext, 6 14-7-26-1 20,l 2-7 Loaghouse Developneat
Table 6 presents the sample means and standard deviations of longhouse attributes by time period, Kruskal-Wallis and
Nedian statistics were used to test for significant differences in population distributions. The results suggest that a significant difference in distribution exists, and indicates that house length and associated variables increase in dimension until the 16th Century and thereafter diminish in size, Through time the lropuoia n longhouse underwent several changes in outline {Appendix C, Tabfe 3a), 05 the variables studied, only hearth nusther shows no statistically significant charrge through tine. Beat-th nvrber re~ilainsfaifly constant, averaging 2 to 3 hearths per longhouse, Therefore, although the number of hearths did increase through ti~e,the increase Mas not significant at the 0-05 level (Pig, 16). This suggests that either (1) the results are biased due to a poor satnple, and/or (2) the amount of space per fataily varied through ti~e,and/or (3) there were more than two families per hearth,
In general, of all longhouse attrikutes only house wall post diameter did not follow the basic pattern of maximum extent in the Riddle Ontario Iroquois stage. Rather, house wall post diameters increased in circa~ference from an average of 5-8 cm in the earliest house to 9.1 c& in the Historic period sites (Fig-
171.- This would suggest that houses became Bore structurally massive through tit@, Fig. 16: Relative Frequency Distribution of Hearth Number by Time Period *
hearth number
"(see Table 6 for n,X, and sl Fig.17: Relative Frequency of Wall P~stDiameter by Time Period
\ house wall post mold diameter ( cm) House length (Fig. 183, extensions, width at midli,nc, linear taper length, storage cubicle length, hearth spacing to
the end walls, hearth spacing, and feature and interior house
post mold densities (Fig- 19) all show a concurfent increase in
dinensioas from A,D, 700, culminating in maximua extent in the
first half of the 15th Century, Therefore, house length did not
reach aaximm size during the Late Ontario Iroquois stage {A.D.
1450-1650) but rather durincj the fiidd;LF! Ontario 'Iroquois stage
(A,D, 7300-1450)- Bquafly important to note is that the amount of deviation around the mean of many of these variables is greatest during the Biddle Cintario Iroquois stage (Table 6)-
Wouse length, in particular, shows the greatest amount of , variation, not only during the Bidale Ontario ~rc~udisstage but thrcuyhaut the Ontario Iroquois Tradition, House and corridor
width and feature densities display the least aiiiount sf variation through time. Although the apparent large variation in
house length could be due to the saall sample size, it may also indicate that there was a great range in house size during this
period, Indeed, the statistical results of Kruskal-gallis tests
on mini~um, raaxiai~and Bean length per village fisted in .
Appendix C, Table 3b suggests that the smallest houses did not increase in size through ti~e, Although hcuse extensions were largest during the 3iddle Ontario Ifquois stage, they were most frequent during the Late
Prehistoric - Protohistoric period, This suggests that the greatest amount of flux in longhouse population cccured during the Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric period. Fig. 181 Relative Frequency of House Length by Time Period
A.D. 700- 1300
hduse length (m)
A.D. 1610- 1650 Fig. 992 Relative Frequency of Interior House Post Mold Density by Time Period
in'terior house post mold density (posts per sq. m) Table 6 : Descrigtive Statistics on tonghouse Attributes Period
II range inea n s L
38 5-1-56-4 76-3 10-7
30 5-0-97.9 35-5 20,O
124 7-5-71-0 28.5 14.7
88 5-3-51-0 19-E 3.0
--End ----gidth [mean,@) BID- 700-1300
AwD- 1300-1450
A-D, 1450-1609
A,D. 3610-1650 E range mean s
8 28-Y5 36 5-8
11 39-57 47 5-4
34 If- 45 16 11-7
57 0- U3 24 7-8
N Side Post Density (per m) - -- -I_ --- &- D. 700-1 300 20 1-0-7-2 3-4 1-6
A.D, 1300-1Q50 17 3-0-6-8 4-8 1-1
A,D- 1450-1609 57 2-5-7-3 ri.3 1-3
A-Dm 1610-1650 75 0-2-7-1 3-5 1-1 Table 6 jcont)
W End Post Density (per E) mea~? s ------U ---- a range A, D, 700- 1300 13 2.0-6-0 4-2 1-2
A.D. 1300-1450 12 0-4-9-9 6-3 2,4
A.Do 1450-1609 53 2.2-9-9 4-5 1-3
A-Do 4610-1650 b7 0-1-5-4 2-7 1-2
__.-Pos t ------Di ameter (ca) A,D, 700-1300
A,D, 1300-7450
A.D. 1450-1609
R,D. 7610-1650 n range mea n s
38 3-0-5.Y 3-9 0.6
14 3-3-5-0 4-0 0-5
35 2.7-5-5 Y-0 0,6
80 3-3-5-6 4-2 0-4 ----Hearth aacinq (a) A,D, 700-1300
A.D. 1300-1450
A-D. 1450-1609
A.D, 1510-1550 ----Post Density fp/sq, a) A-D, 700-1300 19 0,lU-2-40 1-00 0-7
A-D. 1300-1450 15 0.18-3-64 1-90 1-1
A,D, 1450-1609 22 0-48-6-52 2-07 1-9
A-D- 1610-1650 68 0.05-2-55 0-74 .0,4
---Xnt , ---Post --_--Diaweter (em) A-D, 700-1300 13 6-3-35-4 9-4 2-4
A.D. 1300-1Q50 6 7-9-13-2 30-3 1-7
A-D, 1450-1609 70 4-7-13-8 7-5 1-5 House end width is broadest in the Late Outario Iroquois stage. Specifically houses are widest at the ends, and display the least amount cf linear tapec-in the Late PreFistoric - Protohistoric period. As denoted by the Bean difference Between widths at the midline and ends, houses are most rectangular in the Late Ontario Iroquois stage (especially the Late Prehistoric - Pzotohistoric period); whereas houses of the Hiddle Ontario Iroquois stage are the most tapered.
Village Developaen t
Orientation
In order to test NorcPiffe and Heidenreich*s hypothesis that Ontario f roguois Tradition houses are preaoininately oriented to the NW-SE, Chi-square statistics were run, The results listed in Appendix C, Table Ya indicate that the aajority of houses in the saaple were oriented to the west-of north, However, the data are heavily weighted towards the Late
Ontario stage, and raasks trends that map he iiaportant, For exaaple, Early Ontario Iroquois houses appear to be %ore randomiy oxiented, and fiiddle Ontario 1 roquois houses appear: to be oriented to the ENE, To correct for this error the village orientdtioa was calculated {Appendix C, Table
95 Unfortunately the sample size is too siaalT for statisticaP significance tests, The nodal house orientation per village displayed in Pig. 20 suggests that general osieritation per village is to the vest of north, with minor ffuctuatioas ia exact degree of orientation, These deviations may be due to variations in local topographic cr cliratic conditions,
Village Plan
Through tiae, the arraugement of longhouses within villages undergoes several changes. Table 7 presents the descriptive statistias on village plan, and Appendix C, Table 4~ the results of statistical tests concerning development of village plan, Yillages increase in size through time, although unlike longhouses, the increase in size continues into the Historic period, Palisaded village expansions, like house extensions, are most frequent in the Late Prehistoric - Protshistorlc period, In fact, the only villages excavated to date with multipre palisaded expansions are Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric
Southera Huron sites. Villages of: the Historic period .uese apparently planned on a larger scale (Fig, 21) The large amount of vasiatioa in Bistaic village size indicates that the lafger trade/aission centres were in additiori- to the average sized villages of ca, 1 ha, As expected low post and feature density suggest that Historic period villages were not occupied as long as uere prehistoric villages, Assuming feature and post density are related to length of occupation, 96
Fig. 211 Relative Frequency of Site Size by Time Period *
site size (ha)
A.D. 1610- 1650
(0/01 1
(see Table 7 for n, X and s) 98 Table 7: Descriptive Statistics on Viiiage Plan Attributes by Time Period
n range mean S another indication that Historic villages were not being occupied as Long they had been prehistorically is the lack of overlap~inghouses. Mouses overlapping others ace most irsquent during the Early Ontario Iroyuois stage. The most house - palisade over laps and the most frequent occurrence of houses outside the palisade line occur during the Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric period fhppendix C, Table Yd) .
Intravillage Longhouse Variations
Few Iroqnoian villages have been thoroughly excavated, In
this sample only the ModuelP, Draper, and Ralf sites have been
al~ostcompletely excavated. Of these sites, the most
information was obtained froa Ball record sheets and floor plan
drawings, therefore the Ball village wili be u.%d to investigate intravillage variations in longhouse attributes based on length,
orientation, and other floor plaa characteristics* The
significance of the results are difficult to interpret due to the sample size, Therefore, the fcllowing results can only be viewed as preliminary,
Knight and Spnder (1981f mentioned that the smaller houses
at Ball were apparently located in the open, not surrounded by
other houses {Fig- 22). The Bann-blhitney U test results beas out
this suggestion (Appendix C, Table 5a), Hot only are the smaller
hoases generally nat tightly enclosed by surrounding houses, they also contain fewer hearths and interior house posts.
100 EEE
I------/ in1 after Knight and Snyder (1982) The comparison of Ball houses by length classes indicates
that the same pattenn eaerges as was seen in the general lericpth correlations (Appendix C, Table 5bf- Storage partition total
Length, and hearth nursbr are greater in the larger houses,
Feature and post sold density, and mean linear taper length
reaain constant throughout the different length classes,
The results listed in Appendix C, Table 5c, suggest that houses bunkline posts contaia more end storage space an4 larger posts, The presence or absence of bunkline posts does not appear
to affect corridor width, midliae width, taper length, hearth
nursber and spacing, or feature and post density, fig. 23
suggests that tBe smaller houses do not contain bunkline posts
of any descriptioa, although the sample is too small for reliable statistical analysis, In similar manner, houses containing end storage cubicles partitioned by posts are longer,
are made with larger gall ~osts,and contain more space for
storage (Appendix C, Table 5d), Figure 24 shows that only the largest houses contain two storage partitions, one at each end,
and the smllest none at all, Oa the othef hand, houses containing features in the storage cubicle ends are small -
buildings, with little taper and less storage space than houses
without features in the end sections (appendix C, Table 5e) Whife the distsibution of large "storagem features does not
indicate any apparent differences {Appendix C, Table Sf), interior house post mold distributions suggest, as indicated
above, that the Houses with feu psis are saall, do not taper greatly, have little end storage space and few hearths (Appendix
C, Table 59).
Based on the theory that clusters of houses all oriented in - --1--+"._ + the same general directiou may indicate other differences that -/-- ---/.--.I^- '--_, may be referable to clan segments, non-parametric statistical tests sere run on Bail village houses, grouped by orientational clusters and comparison of feature and post density, and interior house layout. Group 1 was oriented 120- 139 degrees E, Group 2 130-140 degrees E, Group 3 1Q0-150 degrees E, and Group 4 $350 degrees E, The Kruskal-Ballis test resalts indicate that it was not possible -to discern clustering of hduses that say indicate clan groupings, hased on external wall shape or internal organizatian cf house orientation ciu,cters (Appendix C, Table 5h) - To test for significant differences between the houses of the "corew as compared to the *ae~~amsionM,aann-#hitney U and
Median tests were run, again the sailipie size is very small and the results can, at best, be viewed as tentative, According to Knight and Snyder (1981) there is a general difference in frequency ef pottery attribute styles between the area on the vest side of the palisade as compared to the east side, However, these authors were unable to discover any evidence that ;night suggest that the areas were not occupied tor the same length of time. Statistical results presented in Appendix C, Table 5i suggest that the aain hoase differences between these areas are in tapes length, hearth spacing, interior house ~ostdiameters and orientatiou {Fig 25)- There were no differences in post or feature densities* This woofd tend Lo suggest that the two areas were occupied at the same time or for the same length of tim, - --'I 05 after Knight and Snyder (1982
Fig. 258 Comparison of the Relative Frequency of Longhouse Attributes between Ball Houses in the Core and Expansion
house length (m) (90) mean taper length (m)
I Icore area $$ expansion ... :.: ..A...... area *.: 50.
(01~) house wall post mold diameter (cm) orientation (OE of N) I Regiona 1 Differentiation
Glen ?leyer and Pickering Longhouses
According to Studeut*s t tests, there are Eew differences in house layout between Pickering and Glen Meyer sites (Appendix
C, Tabf s 6a), There are no statistically significant differences in house length, widths at midline or ends, hearth spacing, densities, diameters or orientation (Fig, 26)- The only incongruities include differences in numbers of hearths and corridor width; Glen Beyer houses having, on the average, one ittore hearth an3 a s~alle~corridor, There is no significant difference in village size, nlthough a Glen Heyer village was expanded twice, and there are several. houses outside the palisade perimeter or overlapping palisade lines on Glen @eyer sites, Glen Meyer houses are also Nore freqently overlapped by other houses, Pinally, only Pickering villages have in-house burials,
Bearing in mind the s~aflsaaple size, it wculd appear that there are few siguifieant differences in hause form between the Glen Beyer and Pickeriny cultures, This lack of differentiation
Bay once again be an error of saagfing; or it may indicate that both cultures were ex~eriencingthe same growth in cufture initiated by their increasing reliance on corn hortic ulture, Houses of both complexes shou a concurrent increase in dimensions through tiiae- Both cultures lived in ~afisaded villages which, through tiw, became more organized.
bonghouses of the Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric Rllron and Neutral
19 number of dissimilarities occur between the Prehistoric -
Protohistoric Huron and Neutral (Appendix C, Table 6b)- These dissimilarities include house length, house uidth at midline, corridor width, teature and interior house post old densities and diameters (Fig. 27)- House end width, house wall. post densities, hearth spacing and nuabers are among variables that remain constant, The differences ir length and feature and post density may refleck differences due to the fact that oniy the
Ruron were involved in European trade, The dif •’ereaces in post diaaeter and house width Bay ke ref ated to differences in gaterial and nethod of construction, There was no significant difference in viflage sizes, although on average Huron villages were largex, often attained through expansions,
tonghouses of the Historic Roron and Neutral
Dissidlarities between Huron and Meutrai longhouses include 3ouse width, storage space, taper length, corridor length, feature densities, wall post diaaeters and orientation,
Variables that did nct indicate any significant differences are house width at the ends, corriiior width, interior house gost
dianaetes and density (Fig 20)- Or? the average, NeutrnlF houses
were smaller, and their house valls were composed of l~ssposts,
The feature density difference is probably explained by the
presence of slash pits on Neutral sites and not on Huron sites
(Appendix C, Sable bc) , Fig. 26: Relative Frequency of Pickering and Glen Meyer Longhouse Attributes*
house length (m) house width (m)
10 20 30 40 50 60 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5
house wall diameter (cm) orientation (O E of N)
*(see Appendix C, Table 6a for n,E, and s) 11 1 Fig. 27% Relative Frequency of Prehistoric - Protohistoric Huron and Neutral Longhouse Attributes
house length (m) house width (m)
5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5
house wall post diameter (cm) (O/O) orientation (O E of N)
*(see Appendix C,Toble 6b for n,X, and s) 112 Fig. 28: Relative Frequency of Historic Huron and Neutral Longhouse Attributes*
house length (m) house width (m)
house wall post diameter (cm) (O/O) orienatation (OE of N)
*(see Appendix C, Table6c for.n,Z,and s) 113 V, Conclusions
In this concluding chapter the results will be discussed in the follouing sequence: (1) general longhouse characteristics and attribute associations, (2) develop~entcf longhouses and villages, (3) conrpa~isonof f onghouses within a village, and (4) conparison of longhouses between regions, A geaeral summary and discussion of considerations for future studies is provide at the close of this chapter,
Lonjhou se Characteristics
Two distinctive traits of longhouse floor plans are bilateral symmetry and uniformity of plan. In general, longhouses display remarkably little variation in spmtry of layout. Side to side or end to end, the number of features and posts and the spacing of storage cubicles and benches is , similar. Longhouse construction also does not display any apparent concern for the destructive effects of wind. The number of posts in each side wall is similar, and the nuaber of posts in each end wall is siaijlar; nor did one end of the' longhouse taper Dose than the other, The only significant dissifailarity in reatched pairs is in the density of features and posts along the
114 central corridor,
It uould appear that, in general, the aiddle section of lonqhouses was occupied longest or most inteneivsly as shown by feature density, This may be due to one or more of the following causes : First, assuming the space for each two hearth fa~ilies overlapped, greater featore density in the central area could be explained as overflow frola adjoining fanailies, Second, the centre of the longhouse may have offered ntost protection iron; the wind and/or surprise attack, and therefore mhny sf the activities were preformed in this portion, (or this section was the first oc'cupied) , Finally, disproportionate feature distribution within the longhouse may indicate the residence of the pre-eminent family, assuaing that feature and pdst old clusters are associated with status or wealth, as suggested by
Hayden (1976) , Although this fast theory is difficult to verify, perhaps an in depth analysis of intra-Longhouse artifacts and their distriuution Bay proviae aore conclusive evidence,
Longhouse Attribute Correlations
An increase in house length is geaeralfy associated with an increase in living space f hearth nu~berand spacing, house width) and storage space (storage cubiicle length, bench width) variables, Therefore, an increase in hcuse length is not only associated with an increase in the nu~besof occupnts, but is an indicator of the wealth/status of the inhabitants. The correlation betveen house size and weal th/status has been documented in several ethnographic studies (Burling 1963; Hayden
1982; Prussin 1969)- Apparently the mose people a prominent person can have associated with his longhouse th~greater his potential labour force, and amount of extra food-stuffs, increasing his ability to maintain his status through control of access to trade iteas, and the redistribution of goods,
Longhouse Develop~ent Through time, the longhouse underwent several changes ia house plan, During each period the greatest deviaticn around the
Bean occurs in house length, storage length, and hearth spacing variables, The least deviation around the mean is found in house width attributes- This would suggest that these latter attributes verE dependent oa method of construction, uhereas length and associated variables were dependent on the number and wealth of the occugants, 8irith vasiation through tiee and spacf
Bay be indicative of enviixnmental or construction differences,
Variations in length and associated variables may signify changes in the longhouse populati~nand in distribution' of wealth,
From the onset of the Early Ontario fcoquois stage house length, storage Zeagth, house uidth, taper length, house wall post sold density, hearth spacing, and feature density all increase in di~ension,culminating in maxiauia extent during the Middle Ontario Iroquois stage, Through tiae, the Early Ontario Iroquois stage houses gradually increase in diaension- The trend toward increasing house dimosions is pan-lroquoiaa: houses of the Hew Hork
Troquois, the Pickeriny, and Glen #eyer all display the same expansion in size, These results are contrary to the conclusions reached by Hoble (1975b), who suggests that house length reached naxiaum extent during the Late Ontario froquois stage. However these findings do concur with fesults obtained by Tuck (1971) for the Hew York Iroquois, Apparently, longer houses in a village increased in size, while smaller houses remined unchanged, This increasing disparity between house lengths within a village suggests an increase in the differential control of economic (e,g,, trade networks, land resources) and/or socio-political (warfare, cerczmnial) activities,
Due to the poor representation of Biddleport an3 early
2rotohistoric houses in the saraple, it is difficult to state precisely whea the longhouse began to diminish in size, However, two ~ointsshould be raade: {I) Decline in length is not attributable to direct contact uith the Euro~eans;and (2) .This decline in Ontario hauses is ~irroredby a siailar decrease in the size of Bew Yort Iroyuois longhouses (Tuck 1971).
Decline in house length among the New York Iroquois is attributed to the formation of the League oE Five Mations, ca.
A.D. 1400, which resulted in the decentralization of the village power base, a weakening of matrilocal residence ~atterns,thus a decfine in house length (Tuck 1971)- Trigger (1969) estimated the formation of the Huron confederacy ca, A,D, 1380-140(i, This is one possible explanation for the decline of the longhouse in the late stage. The decfine in house length noted in the Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric period continued into the Bistoric period, Phis was probably associated uith effects of direct contact with Europeans. European contact, as docu~enlede thnograhpically, tended to undermine traditional trade and social' systems (Burling 1963) . Also, decimation of native po~ufatioxlthrough epiderrrics and continuing intensif icaticn of warfare wou ld have contributed to degradation cf tsibal socio-po1itica.i systeas, and a concomittaat decline in house length,
Village Development
Orientation
The majority- of houses in this sample follow Ncrcliffe and
Heidenreich*~(1974) kasic WN#-ESE oreintation. However, the large sample of Late Ontario Huron houses mask what nay be important deviations, For exa~ple,the prefered orientation among Neutral houses is apparently to the HE- This.suggests that either the wind patterns were different in Neutfalia or the
Neutral were not concerned with prevailing winds, It is more
118 difficult to interpret what the orientation preferences were during the Early and Hiddle Ontario Iroquois stages, The sample size is li~ited,there are few houses per village and houses of ten overlap*
Village Size
Assuming feature and post density variables are associated < with length of cccupation, fliddfe Ontario Iroquois villages were occupied the longest, Blso, evident during this reriod is a I decrease in the frequency of overlapping houses which aay suggest that villages were becoating more permanent, ,sedentary comaunities and therefore houses were being built to Last
Wring the Historic pefiod villages reach maximum size. The peak in village size during this period Bay be explained by a need for extra defense, or a desire to establish closer contact with Europeans in ~lissionand/or trade centre^, ghatever the reason for larger villages the result gas a decrease in length of village occupation, as denoted by a decrease in feature density variables, This decrease in length of village occupation is also evidenced in the ethnohistoric docuiaents; the earliest accounts mention village occupations of up to YO years, but by
A-D, 1640 this figure had decreased to eight to nine years,
Reasons for increasingly frequent village relocat ions include an increase in nutubers of feuds due to an inadequate poiiciuy organization incapable of controlling the evec burgeoning population (Haydea 1978) ; tbe losing war agairist the Neu York
Iroquois (Hunt 7940) ; or soil and wood depletion.
Int ravillage Longhouses
The only village in this sample sufficiently well1 docuaen ted to allow intra-village comparisons was the Ball site, i The Ball houses were compared on the basis of general proximity to neigh~ouringhouses, length, presence of bunk lines, storage I cubicles, distribution of storage fea tuxes, presence of posts, orientation clusters, and location of houses in the ,core as opposed to the expansion.
The aain differences between Ball houses weas to relate to length of the houses, Small houses (those less than 39 m long) were Bore frequently laced in the open than Here larger houses.
This may mean that houses added to the viliaye after initial settlement Bay have been restricted in 10cati.cn Lo the original plazas, and therefore house Length was constricted, The larger houses also contained a greater nu~berof hearths, larger storage partitions, storage partition lines, aad bench lines, and contained feu interior house pst ~olds,
As detailed in Appendix A, ethnohistoric docuiaents do not provide an accurate representation of the Aurcn longhouse in general {and cestainly do not fit the Neutral longhouse), It is suggested that the ethnohistoric descriptions of houses containing Y or 5 central hearths, a central corridor bordered by storage partitions at each end and benches along each side wall probably only pertained to the longer houses of each village. Considering that the Jesuits mention staying with the high ranking mentbers of villages, it is not surprising that their accounts would appear to Bore accurateiy reflect the wealthier houses.
As yet, there is insufficient evidence to 3eLineat.e clan or lineage groups in the viffage, The analysis of t'he Ball site suggests clan segments were: not localized in the viffage; did not construct different houses; or Length of occupation masked interior clan house differences,
Eegional Longhouse Ifariatiens
Glen Beyer and Pickering Houses
These is little variation in house attributes between the
Picfrering and the Glen Meyer cultures, Each had villages of ca
0-6 ha, often located on sandy hilfs, usvalily stlrrouuded by a palisade and conposed of houses averaging 16-3 m in length- The only slatistically significarnt differences between Glen Weyer and Pickering houses were in central hearth nu~ber, corridor nidth, village expansions, and house overlaps, Apparently, Glen
Beyes hcuses were @orefrequently over1 apped by other houses and
121 the palisade, and their houses @ore often located beyond the palisade. Although the sample size is small, 'these dif fecences suggest dn influx of people into Glen Beper villayes but not into Pickering villages. There are no statistically significant differences in house orientations, However, in general,
Pickering long houses were oriented to the northeast whereas the Glen Heyer village longhouses, were oriented to the northwest,
The difference in overall village house orientation say indicate local variation in wind patterns originating from the Great Lakes.
Late Preft istoric - Protohistoric Itleutral and Buran Longhouses
Differences between Weutral and Huron houses of the
Protohistoric period may relate to the fact that the Nuron were
in earlier contact with European goods, funnelled through the
St, Lawrence Iroquois and Algonquians, According to available inf or~ation,Prehistoric - Protohistoric Neatral houses were smaller and less frequently enlarged than Huron houses, In' addition, to date, only Southern Huron villages are known to
have grown in multi-palisaded expansions, This suggests that tbe Huron were undergoing changes in socio-political or economic organization not apparent amng Beutral of the sam period, The wst likely cause of this upheaval was desire for European trade goods. European trade goods, as the priaary (fastest) Beans of acquiring status and ueaith in Huron society, would naturally draw people to the major centres of trade, In this manner, villages such as Draper Bay have grown to exceptional size because of their significance as trade centres, On the other hand, war for the middlemnan trading positicns say have catrsed entire villages and tribes to be mispLaced and seek refuge in larger villages, as documented historically, The greatest number of extended houses, in this sample, date to the Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric Huron, This suggests longhouse membership was not rigidly controlled, Since the larger houses were pfeferrentially being erteaded, it uoufd appedr that wealthier longhouse groups either attracted the neuconers Coping for a share in trade (Hayden 19761, or could more readily aksorb war ref ugees,
Historic Huron and Neutral Longhouses
Probably the most readily apparent difference in house styles between the Neutral and Huron is in the presence of slash pits in piace of bunkline posts, and linear end stains i~ place of storage line posts, Other differences between Huron and
N@~t~alhouses of the Historic period include width, ta~er length, house %ail ~ortdensity and post diameter, storage length, corridor length and feature density, The difference in densities is probably explained by the presence of slash pit and linear end stain features in Neutral houses, The external valLs of Meutral houses contained Eewer an6 smaller posts, This suggests that Neutral houses were not constructed as structurally massive as Huron houses, ~erhaps because of variation in wood types available, This say also explain the smaller widths cf Neutral houses,
The Neutral houses also contained less storage cubicle space, This may relate to differences in subsistence
< exploitation, method of food storage, or food sharing, The variance in house orientation, if actually related to differences in clixnate, uoufd mean that wind directions were different in fiurormia than in Meutrafia,
Summary and considerations for Future Studies
Feature and post mold density was greatest in the middle of central corridors, For f uturr studies, an analysis of
lornyhunse features and their distributiorn and artifact distribution and density Bay help determine whether this greater centre density uas due to iatensityjlength of occupatiou or the presence of high status members,
In general, houses of the Ontario Iroquois Tradition were oriented to the vest of north, However, numerous variations exist, Deviations in house orientation nqy be due to local topographic conditiocs, ssace restsictians, or. local wind patterns, Au in-depth analysis of site wind patterns gould he germane, Through time, the earliest Y illages of ca. A.D, 730-4 I00 were apparently not orieuted to a particular direction, A larger sample size, and climatological data may hel 31~ determine il indfsd house orientation was randoet, perhaps due to milder weather conditions,
House length is related to the nuaker of occupants and their wealth, House length increases with ao increase in nuntber of fiearths/f anti lies and distance between the% I I: general longhouses displayed the greatest dimenkions and variability during the lrid31e Ontario f roguois stage (8. D, l3O@-l45O),
Brnong tha New York Iroquois house length also reached maxiinurn extdnt dtiriny this time, It is suggested that disparity between house lengths was due to dispro~ortional wealth. Preferrential access to trade routes, Land resources, or pouerful war chiefs may have been the cause for this unbalance, nnf ortunately there are few honses excavated that date to A,DI 1350-1509 and the few that have been discovered were only pastially excavated, Therefore, the nature of house length increase [either through expansions or by original design) and decrease is not well kncwn,
Clans could not be distinguished at the Ball site kased on variations in house shape or layout between orientation clusters, Careful excavation of longhouse orientation clusters and an analysis of artifact distributions my prove mare productive,
A comparison of the ethnohistoric records against archaeologicalfy excavated honses suggests that early observers were Bore accurately descrribiag longer houses, such as those belonging to chiefs, Caution is advised in i m~lementing ethnohistoric documents, especially when Aeteraining what is a typical longhouse, Differences betueen the longhouses in the Neutral territory and Huron teritorry were discovered, Theses differences iuvolve variations in width and diamter and may relate to variations in nethod cf construction, as weff as possibly due to suksisteoce ecofioray, VL ipgendix A: Eehnohistoric L~nghouseDocumentation
Ethnohistoric descriptions of longhouses have frequently been employed to describe the I~oyuoianduelling (e-g,, Bapo~ort
3969; Guidoni 1975; Duly 1979; Fraser 1368)- Sndee4, archaeologists un-til the late 19501s relied heavily on ethnohistoric documents to describe longhouses, since excavated longhouses were scarce, flowever, during the last two decades a sizable nuaber of historic longhonses have been excavated, thus , the reliability of ethaohistoric accounts can be judged by conparison to archaeoloyically excavated structures-.
Initial Contact
Sporadic trans-Atlantic contact between the Old and New
World has probably been goiag on since the time of Eric the Red in A.D- 3001, By AID, 1510, 13 pears arter CabatJs discovecy of Cape Breton, the Portuguese and French were annually exploiting the rich marine resources off the coasts of Newfouzdland and
Nova ScoLia, Fus trading was alvays closely associated with fishing, and say have begun as early as A-D, 1503-1504; by A-D-
1519 it was well established {ffoffoan 7961: 201)- Cartier charted the St, Lawrence River as far as Montreal, in the fall of A,D, 1535, providing the only description of St, Lawrence Iroquois dwelPiays, iu the palisaded village of
Rochelaga, An 80 yea hiatus exists between his accounts and those of the next explcrzr, Samuel de Champlain- During the fall of A- D, 1615, Chamgrain visited several Attiyouauntan (Huron) villages, including Gtouacha, Camarm, Touaguainchain,
Tequenonguiaye, and Carhagouha, where Becollet Father LeCaron was stationed. He erintered at the **capitalHvillage of Cahiague, a town containing some 200 "large fodge~?~(~iggar 1929: 3:Y6-91),
The Jesuits (Thvaites 1959:20:14) Later called the village of
Cahiague the najor centre of the Arendaron~nsor Rock Watioa of the Huron,
The next recorded visit by Eutopeans to the Huron #as made in LD, 1623-1628, Sagardss tuo volumes, Gong JJ_uwp (Rrofig
1939) and &istoire (Sagard 1636) are the only sukstantial. records of his, and Becollet fathers* LeCaron and Vielqs, travels among the Buron, principally the Attigyahoin-tan, (Beat
Nation), the largest and ntost gouerful of the Huron provinces or cauntriesw= The other two provinces mentioned are the
Reuarhonon and the Atigagnonqueba (Sagard 1636: 3: 234; Hrong 1939:9l) - Sagard was originally stationed in the village ok Quieuindahian; Tequeunonkiage of Champlain's time and Ossosane or LaConception to the Jesuits (Heiaenreich 1971: 36) , he later joined LeCaron at Quieunonascaran,
Jean de Brebeuf, Anne de Moue, and RecolPet Father de la
Roche Daillon arrived in Huronia in A-D, 1626- Brebeuf rcmaiaed aaong the Nurom until the capture of Quebec by the English Captain Kirke in A.C. 1629* New France was returned to France vieh the signing of the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye in A,D,
1632, and the Jesuits resuaed their missions iu Huronia until the denise of the Huron as a nation in 8,3,16Y9-155O (Tftwaites 1953:34,35),
The Jesuits established the~raission sites first among the powerful Attignawantan, (Bear Nation), and later expanded their operations to include the other Buroa nations (t6e
Bttigneenoagnahac, Arendahronons and Tohontaenrat) as wef 1 as the Petun (Thwaites 1959: 16:227),
I
Longhouse Descriptions
Jacques Gastier
Below is Cartieras description of the dwellings in the palisaded village of Bochelaga in the fall of 3535:
These are some fifty houses in this village, each about fifty paces in length, and twelve or fifteen in width, built coiupletely of wood and covered in and bordered up with large pieces of the bark and rind of trees, as broad as a table, which are well and cunningly lashed , after their Banner, And inside these houses are many rooms and chambers; and in the aiddfe is a large space without a floor, where they Light their fire and live together in cohmn, Afterwards the wen retire to the above-mentioned quarters with their wives and children, Bed furthermre there are lofts in the upFer part of their houses, where they store the corn ,,,They have in their houses also large vessels like puncheions, in which they place their fish,,., ,that are smoked in the suaser, and on these they live during the winter (Biggar . 19 24: 1%- 158) , Samuel de Champlain
Champlain's description of the Huron longhouse is as follows:
The lodges are fashioned like bowers or arbours, covered with tree-bark, twenty-five to thirty fathoms long more or less, and six nide, leaving in the middle a passage frsa ten to twelve feet wide which ruas f~omone end to the other, Un both sides is a sort of platform, four feet in height, on which they sleep in summer to escape the annoyance of fleas of which they have many, and in winter they lie beneath on ~atsnear the fire in order to be waraer than on top of the platform, They gather a supply of dry ~oodand fill their cabins with it, to burn in winter, and at the end of these cabins is a space vhere they keep their Indian corn, ahich they gut in great casks, made of tree bark, in the middle of their lodge, Pieces of wood are suspended on which they put theiir clothes, provisions and and other things for fear of mice which are in great nuabers, In one snch cabin there will be twelve fires, which make twenty-four households, and there is smoke in good earnest,, causing anany kc have great eye troubles, to which they are subject, even towards the end of their lives losing their sight; for there is no window nor opening except in the roof of their cabins by which the smke can escape (Biggar 1929: 122-124)
Gabriel Theodat Sagard
Sagard's description of the longhouse closely resembles Champlain's and reads as follows: Thexr lodges uhich they call Gpmnm&&q are constructed,, ,like arcades or garden arbors covered with tree-kark, twenty-five to thirty fathoms long, more or less (for they are not all of equal length), and six in breadth, with a passage doan the aiddle ten to twelve feet wide running from one end to the other, At the two sides there is a kind of bench four to five feet high, extending from one end of the lodge to the other, on which they sleep in sunaer to escape the importunity of the fleas;,,,and in winter they sleep below on mats near the fire for greater warmth, and Pie close to one another, the children in the warmest, and highest place as a rule and the parents next,-. The whole space underneath the benches, they fill. with dry wood to burn in winter, but as to the great trunks or logs,,. which are used for keeping the fire in by being lifted a little at one end, they pile these in front of thelr lodges or store the% in the porches,,,Alf the wmen help in collecting this store of wood ; it is done in the month of Plarch or April, and by means of this arrangenent every household is supglied with what it needed in a few days.*.ln one lodge there are many fires, and at each fire are two families, one on one side, the other on the other side; some lodges will have as many as twenty-fonr families, others fewer, according to as they are long or short,,.,at each end there is a porch, and the principal use of these porches is to hold the large vats or casks of tree-bark in which they store their Indian corn after it has been well dried and shelled, In the midst of the lodge are suspended two big poles,,,.on the^ they hang their pots, and put their clothing, provisions, and other things,, ,But the fish.,,t"rtep store in casks of tree tree-barlc~a,exc-c?pt ------Leinchataon, which is a fish they do not clean and which they hang with cords in the roof of the lodge,,,for fear of fire, to which they are very liable, they put. away in casks their most ~reciouspossessions and bury them in deep holes dug inside the lodges, then cover them with the same earth, and this Freserves them not only from fire but also form the hands of theives, because they have no cbest or cupboard in their whole establishgtent except these little casks, It is true that they rarely wrong one anothes but still there are sometimes rascals who cornwit offences when they think they will not be found out, This happens chiefly in the rnatter of eatables {wrong 193?3393-95),
Additional points gleaned from Sagard*s narrative isclude:
The entire vif lage sf Quieunoaascaran constructed an arbor
shaped cabin 6 by 3-Q-3.7 ui (20 by 10 or 12 feet) for the
Recof let Fathers (Sagard 1936: 1:234; fnlrong 1939: 80) , but only after petitioning the "captain and chief of police9* to
t,o call a rneeting of the council of notables to discuss and
agree upon the plan (Wrong '1939: 77) , Sagard maintained that
. because this cabin was constructed out of season (sometime
during the fall) the cracked bark sheeting did little to keep the fain ou-t {1939:81), Towns often split in two wheu they relocated every ten,
•’ifteen, thirty (1939292) or forty (1636: 1: 197) years, more or less,
The Fruron were fond of paintizg and decorated the "front of of their lodgei*uith "men, animals, birds and other things in cariacatureat (1 939: 98)-
Corn was "hung in rows, the whole length of the lodge from top to bottcm, on poles which they put up as a sort of rack, coming down as low as to the edge of the roof in front of the ~endh", Once the corn was dried it was then shelled and stared in those casks in the porch or in some corner of the fodga (#ronq 1939;fOU). Sagard also aentions that bears were occasionally ke~tin circular enclosures to ke fattened for feasts (EQrong I939:22O) ,
Blf large feasts, dances, torture scenes, and council meetings were held in a large cabin (#rang 1939: ll5,1Ei2,l6l) usua2ly that of a hi~hranking captain (1936:391;
1939: '149,178,), Seating was apparently imgortant at these events: for torture scenes the onlookers were "ranged along the two sides9"19 39 :I6 I) ; at feasts the men were seated on mats at the '"pper end, and the women and childfen next thefe lower down" (1 11) ; at council iaaetings the highest ranking captain sits where he can see all his counsellors and assistants (1939: 149) ; dance spectators such as old men, women and children sat on rnats "laid against the benches, and the others on top of the benches, the whole length of
the lodgeti (1939: 123) ; and at rnarriage cereraonies the
assembled were seated accot-ding to ranajr (1939: 123)
6. If attack by the eneay was h~inentthe frontier towns would
ready themselves by storing food in holes, cleaning the
houses of soak and debris, and building shelters tor the extra fighting men recruited fron nearby villages (9rong
1939: 156),
7- Sweatbaths constructed of ~ofesplanted in the ground in a
circle, bent and tied together at waist-height or higher
could be found in thq rniddPe of the lodge or elsewhere
(Wrong 1939: 197)-
The Society of Jesus
The Jesuits begau their mission to the Hvson in 1625, however no detailed description of the longhouse is iuaae until
The cabins of this country are neither Louvres nor Palaces, nor anything like the buildings of our French, not even like the saallest cottages, They are, neverthekees, soateitha t bet %er a nil more comwodious than. the hovels of the Hontagnais- I cannot better espress the lashion of the Hurou dwelling than to coinpare then to bowers or garden arbors, - sorne of which, in place of vegetation, are covered with cedar bark, soQe others rsritfr. large pieces of ash, elm, fir, or spruce bark; and although the cedar bark is best, according to common o~inionand usuage, there is, nevertheless, this inconvenieace, that tltey are alaost as susceptible to fire as ~atches.-,There are cabins or arbcrs of various sizes, sone two brasses in length, others ten, others of . twenty, of thirty, of forty; the usual width is about four brasses, their height is about the same, There are no different stories; there is no cellar, no chamber, no garret, It has neither windo@ nos chimney, only a ~iserabiehole In the top of the cabin, left to permit the smoke to escape, This is the way they built ours for us, (Brebeuf at Oenria, 1635) {Thuaites 1959:8: lOEi-lO7)- In each cabin there are five fireplaces, and two farailties at. each, Their cabins are made of large sheets of bark in the shape of an arbor, long, wide and high in proportion; soae of them seveoty feet long, jdu Peron, Ossossane 1639) [Thwaites 3959: 15: 153)
Por houses, both the Algonguirs and the Hurons have nothing else than cabins, but the former make them of bark light as parchment, uhich they stretch now here, now there, according to need, over certain pbles which form, as it were, the skeleton of the cabin, The latter build enclosed towns, or fortified st~ongholds,with crossed stakes, traversed uith trunks of trees, to protect themselves f corn attacks of enemies; and make their cabins ten, fifteen, twenty, thirty, or forty cannes i,n length, of great pieces of bark sup~ortedby beams, which served to hold up their corn, to dry it in winter. But neither of them has any other bed then either soae branches of trees, used by the f oraer, or soae bark or aatting, used by the latter - without tables, benches, or anything of the kind, the earth or sonte bark serving the% for every puzpose. (Bressani 1653) (Thvaites 1959: 38: 2W)
Other points of fonghouse information extracted from thc ----ReZations incf ude the foilowing: Villages contained 50, 60 to 100 cabins composed of 300 to 400 households (Thwaites 19%: lO:2l 1)- Roughly calculated
this Beans there were from 8 households (4 fires) to 3
households (1 or 2 fires), There is also a reference to a
small single fire or fadly house (Thwaites 1959:21 :285),
People fro@ other nations were assigned a special cabin
vhere they had to replain unless given perra-lssion to leave {Thwaites 1959:30:291),
During the Peast of the Dead members of the other villages
would unite in the main village of the nation where **each has his rendezous in one of the Cabins, ail know where they are to lodge their souls, so it is done without confusion=
(Thwaitcs 1959: 10:291), Villages changed locale every eight or nine years (Thwaites
1959: 19: 133).
Villages were occupied mainly in the winter, during the
suntzer months the Huron resided in "rural cabinss* tending
their crops or went off fishing, trading, or-warring (Thwaites I'359:R: lir3, 10: 53)- The general asssnrblies of the whole country were held in the
Lodge of' the princi~alcaptain of that country, his council chamber properly adorned ~ithsats and fir branches
(Thwaites 1959: 10: 251. Likewise torturing of prisoners was preformed in the *@houseof cut-off-heads9*, the abode of the
great war captain, uhere war councifs were also held, Relow is ara account of oae such tarture event:
Towards eight oSclock in the eveaing eleven fires were lighted along the cabin, about one brass distant froin each other, The people gathered imtnedrkately, the old men taking places above, upon a sort of platform, wh&ch extends, on both sides, the entire length of the cabins, The young @en uese Below, but were so crowded that they were almost - piled upon one another, so that there was hardly a passage along the fires (Thwaites 1959: 33:59f, Seating was also iaportant at council aeetings (Thwaites
1959: 55) uhere f"his in his own quarter of the cabin, those
of the sane Village or the same Nation near one' another, in
ordes Lo consult together*. Sweatbaths were often erected in the cabin (Fhwaites 8, Cabios were painted with red figures (Thwaites 1953:10:47),
9, The longhouse was considered to be at times "warm acd cosy"
[Thvaites 1959 :10: 93) or conversely, miserable, smoke filled, flea infested hovels {Thwaites 195'3:8:131, 10:97,
17: 13,61, 18: 17)-
10. There were two doors, one at either end of the house
(Thwaites 1959: 19: 193, 213285)
11. The roof and the wall were the same, (there was no separate
loof structure ?) (Thwailtes 195% 17: 17)-
1
Interpretations of Ethnohistoric Longhouse Descriptions
Bbsurely woraed historical descriptions have resulted in disparate ethnographic interpretations, Fox example, Tooker
(1870) mintdins that the Jesuits used the tera "nationN to ref cr to clan and tribe intercfangeably. Tooker (1970) suggests that this apparent failure to differentiate between clan and tribal system has led archaeologists to aisinterpret Mnation8v as ref ering to clans in several instances where Tooker maintains the Jesuits were in fact referiny to tribe, Noble (1968) asserts that the missionaries wete indeed refering to clans and nut tribes, Ramsden (1977a) feels that q8raationts refers to a geographical grcup rather than a 1heal descent organization-
The matrilocal vs, virilocal dispute also arises Era lack of clarity in the ethnahistoric docunsen ts, Trigger (1968) cites instances in the &I& ge1dtiops where inference is made to inatrifocality , Richards (1957) quotes sections of the &Aptions to indicate that actnallp the Burca probably were virilocal, and
S~lith(1970) uses the confusion of the Jesuits tc hypothesize a Breakdown in the matrilocal system as a result of Buropean influence on tribal society.
Baother area of contrasting interpretations' is in the reconstraction cr lcnghouses. For example, a longhouse reconstructed at Ste, Elarie among the Hurons has one bench on both sides ai the house, while the Lawson longhouse has two levels of benches on each side, Actually the ~latforzsare not as coB8on as is iin~liedia the documents (Noble 19681 It is doubtful the the primary function of the benches gas ever as a bed. During the winter months longhouse inhabitants slep huddled close to the hearth {Thwaites 1959: 17: 17) and during the summer lrronths the village was virtually deserted (Thwaites l959:8: 1431,
Since the missionaries, upon first arrival in Huronia, stayed in the Rouses of She captains (Biggar l929:3: 81 ; Thwaites
39~65, 42:87,95,115, 47~77;Wrong 1939: 1 I5,lY9,152,1Sl) perha~s they were describing the unusaaf and not the common~Pace.
Putkerraore, although "maniere dNestabliett, the phrase used in all accounts descriking these platforins, has keen translated as benck, the qictic~ariesof the 16th {Desainliens 19701, 17th
(Cotgrave 19711, and 18th (Boyers 1971) centuries translate
137 lqestabliels as stall or stable, This interpretaticn would change
, the picture of longhouse intesiors: tirst, individual apart~ent units can be Bore readily envisioned; and second, it is easier to imagine discontinuous stails or stables than it is discontinuous benches,
Another inherent problem in these accounts is the use of
non-standarized linear units when assessing house dimensions, A
pace is equal to 2 112 feet (0.8 a) or 3 1/2 feet (1-1 m)
(Cotgrave 1971), a brass equals 5 old Fzench feet (Cotgrave
1971) or 6 feet i1-8 rt) (doyer 19731, and a **toisel*is similar
to a fathont (at 6 feet (3.8 ra) (Cotgrave 1971) or 6-4 feet (2.0
ma} (Rorison 1972: xiii), as is a canne,
Comparison between Ethnohistoric and Archaeological Longhouses
Historic Huron sites in the ~rovinceof the Arendaronons
include 3ali (A,U, 1600-7610) {Knight 1'43793, Alonzo [A,D, 1600)
(OsBrian a-d,), and Warminister, considered to be Champlain*~
Cahiague of 8-11, 1615-1616 (Emerson 1951),
In comparing longbouse diinensions Heidenreich (I 97 1: 136)
states that archaeclogical data validated ethnohistoric figures,
However four of Reidenreichss sample of six sites are
prehistoric. Using historic data exclusively it is shown that
Chanp1ai.n apparently overestimated house lengths and widths
(Table 1). This is not such a terrible flaw considering
Champlain had no tape aeasure; what is aore disturbinq is that he neglected to mention any s~allerhouses, Heidenreich (1971)
also maintains that ethnohistoric depic tions of house interiors are consistent with the excavated data. Yet according to my
calculatiocs house interiors were soatenhat less cramped than
Champlain estimated: the corridors were wider, hearths fewer, and platforms were not snch a cciumon occurrence. Naturally
ploughing might eradicate some hearths and platform indicators,
Nevertheless most of the Historic houses are just too small to accomodate eight let alone twelve fireplaces, and ploughing would not destroy any but &he shallowest of bench posts.
During 'that same winter of 1615-1636 Cham~lainand ZeCaron
also visited the neighboring Petun tribe, Although the Petun
were in the midst of building two villages, no mention is made
of the construction process- In fact, Chaaplain says litte of
the Betun, other than to state that their customs are the same
as as those of the Attiynouaa titalis (Biggar: 1932: 3: 36)- Table 1 : Comparison of Ekhnohistoric and Archaeological tonghou srs n range mean s -----House Lenqzh-- Champlair? Sagard
Brebeuf du Peron
Bre ssa n i
mBock Nationas Housas 45 5-3-40,4 20-1 8-0
"Bear Nationm Bouses 5 37,O-29-0 23-6 ,4-5
Bistoric Huron Houses 50 5-3-40-4 20-4 7-8
--nouse ----rdidth (m) Chatgplain
Sagard
Brebsuf
"Rock Mat ion" Bouses "Bear Hation" Rouses Ristnric Huron Houses Table 1 (cont'df
n range taean s
"Rock Mati~n~~Rouses 38 3-3-5,b 4-2 0-4 "Bear NationM Houses S 4-1-a3-8 4-4 0-3 Sfistoric Nuron Houses tl4 3-3-5-6 t1-2 .0,4
-----Hearth ----Mu mber C ha mpia in
Sagard du Feron
Laleaeni
LeM ercier
"Rock NationJ* Souses 14 0- 5 2 1-8
14Bear nation" Houses 3 3-5 4 1-5 Historic Huron Bouses 18 0-6 3 7-8 n range mean s
"Rock Wationm 13 1-5-6-1 3-2 1-7
"Bedr Nation*# 5 2- 1-8- 8 Y, 1 2.7 1 Historic Huron Houses 18 1-5-8-8 3-5 2-0
"Rock Nation" Houses 2 2-1-2- 9 2.5 0,d
3tBear Bation" Houses 1 0-8
Historic Huron Houses 3 0-8-2-9 -19 Sagdfd penrted his versions of life in Huronia eight and twelve years after returning to France, not to enlighten public awareness of Huron ktsehavioz but rather to applaud the contribution oz the Recolfets in establishing the Hufon nissions, Hence it is not surprising that SagardSs version of the longhouse is w~stlyan e~bellishiaentof Cham~lainls-
Two historic villages located in the Huron province of the
Attiyyahointan are the contact period Wobitaille site (Tyyska Igfjg), and LeCaron {Johnston and Jaefrson 1980) site, dated ca- A-D- 1 1640. Based on these sites, Sagard ovesestigated house measurements, yet he did era~hasizevariablity in longhouse dinensions, Sagard alsc extended the number of hearths per house, to "8 to 12- which is nore reasonable, but stili an exaggeration. Sagard also was first ta aentioa the use of
sueatbaths and the presence of porches, two features Cha~plain neglected to describe, even though they are found at the
Warsinister site (houses D, and houses D, 3, I?) as well as
LeCaron (house 41, Post molds indicating bench lines sre as
difficult to discern archaeoloyically in the province of the
Bear Nation as they were in the province ot the Eock Nation, The
Jesuits cafculations appear to be the most realistic, although
the upper range of loagkouse length quoted is too long, The nissionaries mention f3nl.y two visits that they paid to the Neutral, The first was made by fiecollet Father Dailion in
1627 fZeClery l973:2: 263-2721 and the next was ir, 1640 when
Jesuits Brebeuf and Chaumonat travelled through same 40 Neutral villages, Of this the only significant difference mentioned is that the Neutral dead re~ainedin the longhouse lcnger thaa
Huron dead, often over the entire winter (Thwaikes 19S9:2l: l99),
Although the missionaries fail to percieve any differences between HeutraL and Huron longhouses, dissimilarities are apparent from revieying historic Weutral sites such as the early contact period Christianson site (Fitzgerafd 198 1) and the late Historic perio5 (cat A-D, 1535-1640) Bood (Lennox 19811 . Hamilton (Leanox 6978), and Walker (aright 1981) sites. Botable agony the differences is the presence of a regular line of slash pits in place of bench line post molds, and two sets of linear end stains at each end separating the living area from the storage cubicie (s), These two types of pits are thought to have been the recepticals for wood planks, Perhaps similar to the wbords standing a long the housew seen by Smith (1024) inside a
Virginia house, Other NeutraL house ~haracteristicsnot co~monly encountered in Huron houses include a tendency to orient their honses east of dorth, smaller house aidline aad central corridor widths, less storage space, and smaller house wall posts
In conclusion, the results of the comparison between ethnohistosic and archaeological houses indicate that: (1) house characteristics were often exaggerated; and, (2) tribal differences apparent in the archaeological record were not mentioned by the early chroniclers,
The motive for the presence of Europeans in the New World was never to unravel the mysteries of native culture [a task difficuf-t even for the trained ethnologist), Therefore it is natural that the Jesuit Relations, for instance, contain seemingly endless accounts of the number of Huron children baptized, and the progress of the novitiates instead of precise descriptions of their material culture. It gust also be kept in mind that the Euro~eanswere viewing ways of life in @any cases totally foreiga to their experience and culture, yet couLd only describe these mysteries in their own terms or reference. For exaaple, below is a rather peculiar description of a keaver:
The fora of the teaver resembles the shape of a cucumber which has a short stem, or a duck that has the neck and head cut off, or like a ball of yarn wound in Long fosa and flattened a little, being often thicker than lung, or like a swine which is flat on its back, with its belly hanging down (van der Donck in 08Donnell 1968: 115),
One can only hape that a European gardea arbor more closely resembles a longhouse,
Padden (l87Y: 329) feels that the early chroniclers invariably faiied tc prcieve subtle cultural variations or changes, they recorded everything as it it had been that way for time infznitum, rteitzel (1965) coiopared his excavation of the Patherland/Grand village site with the French accounts of the Natchez town and found that the narrators were delinquent in estimat iny house dimensions, house ofienkation, and house shape,
Quiaby (1957) contplained that ethnshistoric descriptions of Matchez material culture were either absent or not sufficiently detailed to ge cmit co@garFson vith archaeolgical data, Tbese problem suggest the documents be used only in a general manner VIE, Appendix B: The Sites
Pickering sites
The auda site (81Go-29) is the earliest Pickering village in this sample dated at ca, Bet), 700, Excavated in 1979 by
Kapches (1981) , it represents aa open, short-terni occupation by a smfl population of horticulturalists, The village contains approximat~Yyten hcases arranged with little apparent regard for a parallel alignment patterr, covering ap~roximately0- 2& ha of a sandy plateau near tuo streass, Anda houses rese~bleHiddle
Woodland Donaldson houses (might E Anderson 3963) in that they are saall oval structures, rather amorphous in appearance, and internally barren, Unlike their Danaldsoa ~redecessorsthe hearths are aligned, although slightly off centre,
The Richardson site (BhGl-41, located in the Rice Zake region, covers apprcmitaately 0.2 ha, and is the easteruaost
Pickering village excavated to date {Peasce 1978)- A tolaf -of
227 one meter squares were opened in 1976 to uncover two possible house Outlines in a palisaded village that may have been expanded. Unfortunately, preservation is poor and all that remains of one of the houses is aligned hearths, some features, one containing a burial, and a feu miscellaneous gost mclds, The site is considered a year round occupation of ca, A.D- 900-
149 The Boys (AIGs-10) site was ~xcavatedin 1972-1973 (Reid
1975~1, 1475.b)- 'ihe site is located ou 0-45 ha of land between two ravines of a creek adjoining a branch of Duffin Creek, It is a horticultural village radio carbon dated to A-D. 375 2120, with two houses discovered, one of which was completely excavated,
The house plans differ in internal organization, One house has centrally aligned hearths uith encircling ~osts, the other has a line of posts that partition the house in half a% the midline.
Hiller is the type site for the Pickerirag branch of the
Eajrly Ontario Eroguois stage, In 1958, Kenyon (1968) excavated a substantial iportion of the 0,43 $a village, exposing some six houses enclosed within a single sow palisade, The site is located on a saall glacial outwash estuary, Houses are widely spaced, althouqh several are parallel aligned and lines of posts connecting several of the houses have beeu interpreted as a defensive rrreasure, The site has been radiocarbon dated to A.D,
1125 270 (Kenyan 1968:55]; however, Eaob-Le (1975:UU) is of the opinion that Kenyon's (1958:5) original estimate of A-D, 800 is closer to the date of occupation.
The Bennett site (AiGx-7) was excavated in 1962 (Wright and
Auderson 1969) and is situated on a sandy kncli some distance
fro^ Bronte Creek, A portion of the 1-2 ha excavated area uncoverep some seven houses, and a double palisade. Persexvation is poor and thesefore %any of the houses are not cmpietefy outlined, Of the three houses readily distinguished, all have ceatra2ly aligned hearths and enci~clingposts and pits. Eadiocafbon dates are AIDI 3280 4700 and AID- 1260
The Gunby site (AiGw 5) is the youngest Pickering village,
and is the first site with the full corn-bean-squash complex in southern Ontario (Rozel 19-79)- The site is thought to have been occupied ca. A. D, 1300-3320, this date represents the averaging
of two radiocarbon aates of A,DI 1385 +80 and 7255 2135, The
1.1 ha village suggests an a~algaaationof Pickering pottery and
settlement patterns with Glen Beyer pottery (~o~el1979: 361)- CE
the ten houses located through trenching, three were coapletely
excavated,
Glen Bepr sites
Of the 6 Glen flleyer sites in the sample, Porteous (ggRb-I),
excavated in 1570-1971, is the oldest at ca, A,D. 780, This date
represents the averaging of two radioca~bondates: A, D, 820 -+I00
and 580 290 (Noble 1975: 38; Moble and Kenyon l972:3O), Forlteous was originally affliated with the Princess Poiat culture
(Stothers 1976, 1977; Stothers and Kenyon 1970: 158) ; however, it
has also been ascribed to early Glen ifeyer (Moble 1975; Sobfe
and Kenyon 1972)- The village occupies 0,61 ha of a sandy ridge
overlooking the Grand River mudflats, and is the earliest
village to be double palisaded (Stothers 1977)- Like aost Early
Ontario iroquois houses, Porteous houses are small, squarish structures with rounded ends, There is one exception - a small circular house, Van Besian, Dewaele and Ucen are all sites located along
thc upper reaches of the Big Otter drainaye- In 7972, 707 sq- m of Van Besian (AfHcP-2) were excavated (Noble
1975: 3) , Radiocarbon dates of k.D, 945 290 and 940 $90 mke it the fifst Glen fieper village to have palisaded expansions, extending the village from 0-49 ha to 1-22 ha, The site is situated on a sandy knoll, %he ~rimarysubsistence activity was corn caltivation su~plementedby deer hunting, Pteserva tion of features at the site is poor but at Least three houses cari be delineated. One of these houses overlaps the original single row palisade and anuther the double row galisaded extension, The largest house was further extended and contains several large storage pits, a possible "storagew partition, and bench line ;Fosks,
The Devaele site (BfHd-7) may represent a multi-component site (Fox 79763. The site was excavated in 1971, and has been radiocaruon dated to A.D. 1050 -+90 and 1095 +90,- It is difficult to discern house patterns in the congestion of overlapping posts and features, that ile pict interconnee tiiq houses, houses overlapping houses, and houses overlapping . palisade, The 0,32 ha site is coiaposed of two different forms of houses: swill, squarish; and, more typically, long with rounded ends, Pox (1976) is of the opinion that the longer houses may represent a later occupation, Subsistence was based on corn cultivation co~plernentedby fishing, iike DewaeZe, Calvert is characterized by a ~priadof post lines indicating overlaps, The approxiaately 0-3 ha site was alaost completely excavated in 1981 by fox (pers, coma,) and reavels some ten houses within a double rou palisade and another house outside. The houses are aligned in two ata jor orientations and juxtaposed approxi~ately20 degrees f roe parallel. The the houses are oblong with rounded ends and contain large
*%storageM f ea tuses and central hearths,
The Force (AgRd- 1) excavations, like the aforerxlentiofied sites, encountered a Bass of pits and posts, aaking it difficult to interpreF individual honses, The 0.8 ha site dates to A-D. 1240 (Fox pers- coma,). Tuo seasonally occupied, palisaded Glen Heyer villages in the sample are Kelly (A•’l?i-20) and Reid jBdNc-5) , Kelly is a snaall one longhouse village, while Reid is a 0.3 ha village containing at least six longhouses. In 4976, 2,659 sq. m of the Reid site were excavated, The site is located on an elevated knoll 2 ailes froa Long Point, Lake Erie, The site was occupied ca- BOD, 1300 and is suggested to have been a spring-sumer fishing village [&fight 1976: 25) Like Dewaele, Reid houses are of two basic sizes: s~allhouses; and, long houses that overlap the double palisade. Fox (1976:369) feels that Reid may be a ntulti-corapoaet site, while H. Wright j1978) is of the opiniort that Reid represents a long term occupation, Uren sites
The lfren substage is considered by Wright (1966) to
represeut the co-alesence of Pickering and Glen Heyer p~oples,
Uren (AfBd-31, the tyle site, is the only site in this sample
that is assigned to the substage, The Urea site is a multiple
palisaded 1.1 ha village that is bounded on two sides by
ravines, The 3977 excavation uncovered eleven hoi~ses,eight of
which were coapletey excavated [#right 1979, 1982)- The houses
Earned two rows of six and four houses perpendicular to each other,
Radiocarbon (dates fcr the site span several centuries, the
avefage places Uren arouna A.D. 3250 (8. Wright pers, coma*) ;
however, Rarasden (1977a) prefers a date of ca, 1400.
3kddlepast sites
Of the sites ascribed to the Middleport horizon, Hodwell
[BcBi-3) is the most cuw~letelyexcavated, The site, located on
a sand escarpment an the edge of Port Elgin, Lake Buron, uas
excavated in 1971 (Wright 39743, The 1.0 ha viilage is composed of 12 houses, one of which is Located beyond the double row
palisade. The houses are elongate, with tapered ends and contain clusters of posts and features as well as large "storageit
features and "storagew cubicles, The radio carbon date laces
the site at 1340 ,+95,
Excavation of the Chypchar site (AiGx-731, has produced very little in the way of scttieaaent data, Only a few fragmentary house wall post lines have been uncovered to date,
The site dates to ca, A,D, 1375 and sFans appeoxiraately 0-61 to
The Uoyer (AiFIc-2) village houses are the largest in the sample. The palisaded village covers approxiaaately 0-57 ha of a sandy ridge (Wagner, Toombs, E Riegert 1973)- The site was excavated in 1970-1972 mainly through trenching and wall chasing, only one of ten houses discovered was cbmpletely excavated, Three of the houses have one or more extensions, The site dates to ca, A.D, lW0,
Slack-Caswell (AfHa-1) is a fate Hiddleport site of ca,
1420 (Ja~ieson1979)- One longhouse of gseater than 60 meters was pmtiallp exposed, Associated with the Cravfcrd '~akesite, although soaewhat earlier at ca, 3400-1U35, is the Unick site
{Sraith pers, corn.), It covers 0.81 ha and excavations uncovered portions of 5 houses, placed at ranilcm, No palisade was located,
The Crawford Lake site fAiGx-6) is locaked some three miles from Bennett, The site was excavated in 3973-1974 to reveal a village containing at least 6 houses surrounded by a single row palisade, According to lake vaxves, the site dates to ca- 1435-1459 (Slaith pers* coram,) ,
Prehistoric - Protohistoric Huron Sites
. During the Late Prehistoric - Protohistoric period there are hypothesized to have been southern and northern divisions d ivisivns of Hiiron, Southern Huron sites include Draper and
acleod; Seed and JcKeuzie, in the Humber River drainage; and,
Rirche, Coulter, and Beason in the upper Trent River drainage-
The Draper (A1Gt-2) site is located on glacial till
deposits on the lei t bank of Duff in Creek, The site has been
explored by several archaeologists including Latta in 1972,
1973 (Ra~sden19781, Emrson in 1973, Bayden in 1973 (Hayden
1971.3), arid Pinlagson in 1975-1578, The rrrajority 8f .the site was
uncovered during the Finlapson excavations, The original Draper village occupied only 2-0 ha (Pinlayson and Pihf l98i)), buk with
five palisaded expansions the village grerp to 4-9-6-1 ha in size,
A total of 45 hcuses were uncovered, the raajoriky comgletiy, at least in terms of exposure, These is some dispute over the aye
of Draper. Uright (1966) places the site at A,L 11650 - 1500, Rarasden (1978) ~aintainsthat the presence of European lqoods indicates the site can not be earlier than 9503 and the
pottery attfibutes indicate that the site could nut be ~uch later, Host of the archaeologists working on Draper would concur
that the site dates to sometim near the onset of the 16th century (Pinlayson and Pouf ton 1979; Pinlayson and Phil 1980;
Hayden 1979) Unfortunately, much of the brass trade goods originally thought to he European have been ideniif ied as native copper, Draper radiocarbon dates ate not of aach help: 1360
575, 1308 295, 1455 +55, 1520 265, 1595 -+65, The 3cLeod site (B1Gr-1) was occupied around the same as Draper {Latta pers, cojtam,) The site, excavated in 1971-1972, covers approximately 1,62 ha and is enclosed within a single row palisade- Two houses were uncovered.
Situated on a high bluff overlooking the Humber River, the
BcKenzie (AkGw-2) site, alsc known as Woodbsidge, was first explored by Emerson in 1947 and 1949 (Emerson 1954). In addition to the one lomghouse Emerson uncovered, subsec_juent excavations in 1974 by Johnson (3980) exposed a further eight homes- The site covers 3.6 ha, 1s surrolpnded by a naulti~lepalisade, and dates to cagl A-D, 3520,
Seed (AkGv-3) is located on the right bank of the east
Eumber river, and dates to the mid 16th century (~n6vn-d-). The village covers 2-0 ha, of which three houses and a section of the multi gle palisade lines were uncovered,
Sites located in the T~entRiver valley systen include: Kirche (BcGr-1) , Coulter (BdGr-6) , Benson (BdGr-1) and llardrock,
Of these sites only Hardrock is considered indigenous, the others represent a aew group ia the region thought to be closely associated with Draper and other sites in the Toronto area, Coulter and Kirche are closely related in terns of artifact assemblages (Nssmith 39%1)- Coufter dates to ca, 1540 [Dawkjar: pers. comlo.) and Kirche was radiocarbon dated at A- D. 1550
(Nasmith 1981). Coulter was originally a 0-7 ha ~afisaded village that underwent four palisaded exgansions to reach a final size of approximately 3-0 ha, The site is located on a drumlin and contains 26 houses, many of which were rebuilt or
~verlapmainly through trenching and wall chasing,
Kirche occupies sandy land sloping to the west and south,
The site uas excavated in 1978, again most of the houses were exposed through wall trenchiug, The village was expanded once, enlarging it fro@ 0-9 ha to 1-5 ha,
Coufter and Kirche are a~parentlyrelated tc Senson, Benson is considered by Wright (1966) to be a fusion si'te; however,
Ramsden feel that this is an oversi~plification,The Denson village is palisaded and covers 1.8 ha- Three of the 25 houses uncovered at, the Benson site, bere totally excavated, and an additional four were af~ostcompletely excavated,
One Hardrock lcnghouse was excavated in 1950 by Einerson
f1954)- Emerson considered the site to be a special purpose portage site, because of its strategic location on a beach of
Balsam Lake. The site is 9-41 ha in size and dates to the late prehistoric,
Northern Huron division sites in this sample are Raurice,
Copeland and Sopher. The Copefand site was excavated in 1962 by
Channen and Clarke (1 965) , aud dates to ca, A, D, 1500. Excavations uncovered portions of 4 houses, two of which are coraplete, ana ij. palisade fine, The site is approxiiaately 7-42 ha
One longhouse was excavated at the Protohistoric Maurice site (BeYa-2) (Tppska 1969) - The village is located in the Penetang Peninsula and covets approxiraa tely 0-5 ha, The Sopher village (BdGu-7) is located on a flat, sandy tract of land with a steep ravine oa the north border, he site was excavated in 1965 by Nokle (1968), aad covers 1.5 ha of land, A go~tionof one, extended longhouse was unearthed, HQ palisade was found,
Bistoric Huron
The contact sites of Bail, Wlonzo, and Haminister are all in the same region as Sopher, Basminister is generally assumed to be Chaiu~lain's Cahaigue of A.D1 1615 (Fmerson 1963) , the capital village of the Rock Nation, Warainister .actually is co~posedof two juxtaposed palisaded villages, The western village will be examined in this thesis since the east village was only surficially trenched, The Protohistoric - Historic Ball (SdGv-3) site excavations have been ongoing since 1975, as part of the Sir Wilfrid Laurier field school, under the direction of Dr, Knight (1979,
1981, 1982)- To date a substantial portion of the village has been excavated ta reveal 26 houses in a core section and 15 houses in a fenced in area, The houses are arranged in rows that form stseets opening into a small plaza,
The Alonzo site (BeGv-15) is a sraall seasonal open hamlet of a~proximately 1.1 ha (0*8rian pers, coaam,), The site dates to the tilne of Wardnister and Ball at ca 1400-1620, Three houses were exposed, one co~pletely. The Bobitailfe site (OeHa-3) site is located is the Penetaug peninsula near to the Protohistoric Baurice site,
Robitaille is thought ta be palisaded and cover an estsimated 2-4 ha, Gne longhouse from the site was completely excavate4 (Tyyska 1969).
Approximately 202 of the 1-6 ha LeCafon site was excavated by Trent University field schoafs in the years 1970-1977
{Johnston and Jackson 1980, The village is situdted on sandy land protected to the vest and south by ravines of the Copeland Creek. Five houses have been uncovered adjacent Lo that portioa of the auLti~lepalisade lines,
Prehistoric-Protohistoric Neutral
The Lavson site fi3gtih-I) oriyinnlly covered 1-6 ha, a~idwas surrounded by earthworks, a six row palisade, and a ditch, The village was subsequently expanded to 2.0 ha and surrounded by earthworks, an eight row palisade, and a ditch, Excava%ions at Lawson have been ongoing since 1976 (Pearce 1980) . Ihe site was origniallp investigated by Emerson in 1939, and aside .frona his longhouse, there are an additional 7 houses, all but one fro@ the expanded area* The houses are placed in a row of parallel houses, The site dates to ca, 1500- I550 (Pearce "lf380),
Thought to be associated with Lawson are th~seal1 hamlets of. Ronto, Srtiallr~anand Hindemere, each of these horticultural hamlets comprise one house with associated midden and are a11 less than 8-2 ha in size. (Eearce pers, coam,) - Soutbwald (AeBi-1) covers same 1-2 ha and is surrounded by earthworks and palisade (Satith 1977)- Of the 18 cr so houses discove~edthrough trenching only one was almost completely excavated, Severaf of the houses overlap The site pottery resembles Lawson ceramtics and is thought to be associated, The site dates to A,D, 1500,
A siuafl portion of the Cleveland site (AhWbL7) was ope~ed to expose one house, Bo palisade line was found, although one was expected (Moble 1972a)- The site dates to ca, I580 and covers approximateXy 1-62 ha,
Also on the upper reaches af the Pairchild Creek, Ponger
(AhHb-8) is in clase p~oximityto Cleveland and ~a~ker.The site dates to 1610-1620 (3arsick 1982). Fonger is a palisaded village expanded once to reach a tinai size of 0.8 ha- Tho site cootains many overlapging houses,
The Historic Beutral
Christianscn (AiHa-2) is a coutact period site that was occupied around A,D, 11615 (Fitzgerald 3983)- In 1965 Noble excavated a saall house at Christianson, subsequent excavations in 1979 revealcd portions of 7 additional houses, one located beyond a multiple ~afisadeline, The site covess 1-6 ha of a drnmetlin oveslooking Spaces Creek, ~h~ Thorold site is bated on the Niagara Rscarpment near
Ste, Catherines, Tbe site was excavated in 1979- 1980, The village dates to ca, 1615- 1630 and covers approximately 4-1 ha, Hood (AiHa-7) , Hamilton (Bitla-51, and the two small hamlets
Bog~leI and Boggf e f I, are in close p~oxi~ityto Christianson, The
Rood village covers 2, 7 ha and contains 15 houses, of which all but two were completely exca~ated,and a palisade, up to five
rows deep (Lennow '1978). Tbe site. is thought to have been occupied ca. 1630-1641,
Excavations at Wa~iltonin 1972 and 1976 exposed
approxi~ata4y1,337 sg, a of the site. Pous houses and part of a fifth were coapletely exca~ated fZennox IWI) - The site is locate? on a 10% rise of sandy foalg and is surrounded by
a double palisade. The site dates to ca. 1638-1651,
Wssocinted with the large villages of Hood and Ma~iltoaare the Boggle haalets (Lennox pess, co~n.), These villages are
thought to have been occupied about the same time as the Larger
villages. Boggle X is the Bore completelp excavated, with 5
houses exposed, Although no midden or palisade was located on
Boggle K these features were uncovered at Boggle XI.
The Walker site {AgWa-9) excavated by H, Bright (1981) is considered to be late LIistoric fca, 3630) Neutral town- It
occupies of a sandy knoll that is well protected on three sides by steep ravines, although, no palisade was found. Portions of
the site were not greatly disturbed, and excavation uncovered se%eral wall trenches, Appeadix G: Results of Statistical Analf sis
Table 1: Pairwise t-tests
variable %edn mean diff std dev t-stat siynif
Rouse End Width (in m)
Berth end 5-1 -,I ,9 -1,2690 ,2072 South end 5-3 n= 107
Linear Taper Length (in m)
North end 2-6 -.I 1.4 --99130 ,3261 South end 2-7 n= 96
House Wall Post @old Nuaber, Side wall Hosth side 70-5 -.1 21.4 -,46747-1 ,8620 South side 70.6 a= 121
House Hall Post Bold gumber, End wail
North end 30-2 -*Q 12 ,Y -,39617 ,6924 South end 29-8 n= 129
Storage Cubicle Length (in to) fforth end 2.1 -,I 1.3 --65687 ,5126, South end 2-2 n= 135
Hearth Spacing to Ends (in a)
Morth end 4.6 a 2 3-1 ,61680 ,5392 South end 4- 4 n= 79
Bench Width (in a)
North side 1-3 ,OY -6 ,42635 ,6719 South side 1-3 n= Y5 Table '1 (cants d) variable aean mean diff std dev t-stat signif
Spacing betweer! Bench Posts (in a)
North side 1-3 -1 -5 ,95603 ,3448 South side 1- 2 R= 41
Feature Number, Benches
Berth bench 5-9 --2 3-7 -,68797 -4 929 South bench 6.1 ra= 112
Feature Number, Storage cubicles Northend ' 2. b - 2 2-9 ,64725 -5 188 South end 2-4 n= 116
Central Corridor Feature Density (per sq. 4m)
niddfe 12-3 3-5 10-3 2,9462 ,0044 South 9- 2 n= 70
North South
Feature Density (per sq. f~)
Worth half ,61 -,QY -3 -1,5450 ,1264 South half -66 n= 79 variable &earl mean diff std dev t-stat signif
Interior House Post Mold Hu~ber, Benches
North bench 13-2 -1 11-53 ,95385-1 ,9242 South bench 13-1 n= 911
Interior House Post Hold Number, Ends b'orkh end 12,O -.2 12-2 -,20001 -841 9 South end 12-2 n= 97
Central Corridor Pcnt Mold Density {per Ym sq)
aid dae 36.4 9-1 22-6 3,2707 , ,0021 Nor Lh 23-3 n= 64
Middle 35, Q 9-11 23-1 3,1908 ,0023 South 25-2 c= 51
Horth 27.6 ,2 21-8 ,68727-1 ,3455 South 27-43 n= 54
Post Diagtetess (in CB)
House wall 8.7 ,Y 2-1 2,2347 ,0272 8.3 n=127 Table .2: Pearson's Rank Order and Kendaflas Tau Correlation Goeffiecents
Variable n rho tau signif Exterior House Waf l
House Length (m) :
fiean Rouse End Width (m) 107
Ridth Difference (%) 107
Rean Taper Length (re) 96 Corridor Length (m) 104 1 Corridor Width (s) 121
Horth Bench Bidth (a) 42
South Bench Width (a) 3 9
Storage Leagth (a) 115
W Hearth-2-4 End Length (nr) 89
S ilearth-S End Length (a) 94
Hearth Number 7 04 ,5905 -4YY3 ,0000
Hearth Spacing (m) 75 ,5624 ,4097 -0000
Feature Density (rn sq,) 127 ,0980 ,0683 ,2616
Post Density (m sq,) 105 ,1876 ,2630 ,-0047
Origiual Length (n)
Extension Length 27 ,Ul64 -2738 ,0488 11 rho tau signif
House didline Width:
End Width 88 ,3341 ,2378 ,0016
Hidth Difference 88 ,1382 ,1021 ,0303
Bean Taper Length 88 ,2918 ,2041 -0070
North End Wall Width:
South End Wail Width 107 ,7387 ,5734 ,0000
North End Taper Length 107 -,4171 -.3039 -0000
North End Storage Length 105 ,0261 ,0221 ,7498 1 W Hearth-N Ead Length 66 0175 ,0202 ,8205
South End Waf l Width: South End Taper Length 300 -,3U29 -,2493 - 0004 South End Storage length 97 ,0859 ,0575 ,4210
S Hearth-S End Length 62 -.0821 -,0848 -6 192
Rean Mouse End Width: Width Difference 8 8 -.8383 -,S779 ,0000 Mean Taper Length 89 -.4154 -,2940 ,0001
Morth End Taper Length: South End Paper Length 79 ,4596 -3453 - 0 COO North End Storaye Length 93 ,4998 ,3500 ,0000
South End Stofage Length 86 ,2952 ,2105 -0059
N Hearth-N End Length 56 ,2700 ,1908 ,0446
5 Hearth-S End Length 52 ,1360 ,1190 ,2342 Table 2 [contqd)
Bar iabl e rho tau s ig nif
South End Taper Length:
North End Storage Length 87 ,4477 ,3144
South Rnd Storage Length 93 3721 ,2649
N Bearth-N End Length 55 ,0878 ,0471
S Hearth-S End Length 58 ,3851 ,2675
Hean Taper Length: Storage Length 80 ,5197 -4630
Rouse Wail ZYensity,S side:
#all Density,N side 157 ,6030 .4501
Wall Post Diameter 108 -,1773 -,3268
Hearth Nuuiber 66 ,2636 ;. 19195 Hearth Spacing 62 ,2096 -2217 Feature Density 118 ,1333 ,0907
Int, Post Density 98 ,3958 ,2854
Int. Post Diameter 128 -.I504 -,1801
Boase gall Diaaetes Feature Density 92 -,2541 - - 1785 Int, Post Mold Density 92 -,2160 -.I539 Tahfe .2 fcont'd)
Variable B rho tau
Central Corridor Dimensions
Corridor Length:
Corridor width 100
North Bench UidtR 3 3
South Bench Width 3 1
Morth End Storage Zength 97
Soath End Storage Zength 98
N Hearth-t4 End Length 65 , S Hearth-S End Length 64
Hearth Rumber 35 Hearth Spacing 56
Total Storage Length:
North Bench Width 3 3
South Bench Width 3 3
Hearth Nuaber 85
Hearth Spacing 59
North End Storage Length:
South End Storage Length 115 ,5043 ,4649 ,0000
N Hearth-N End Length 84 ,3970 ,2815 ,0002
5 Hearth-S End Length 73 ,3594 ,2661 ,0011
South End Storage Length:
% Hearth-% End Length 75 ,5787 ,4312 -0074
5 Hearth-S End Length 87 ,3629 ,2514 ,0018 D rho tau sigaif
North Bench Width:
South Bench width
Hearths
N Hearth to $4 End Length:
S Hearth-S End Length 79
Hearth Nu sber:
W Hearth-N End Length 43
S Hearth-S End Length 43
Hearth Spacing 73
Feature Density 8 6 fnt. Post Density 80
Hearth Spacing:
N Hearth-N End Length 3 6
S Bearth-S End Length 36
Feature Density 7 3
Int, Post Density 6 4
Feature Density:
Xnt, Post Density 77
Int, Post Diameter 5 0
1 nterior Post Density:
Int, Post Diaaeter Table 3: Develcpment of Lcnghcuses
Table 3a: Longhouse Aitribu tes through Time
House Length (in E) Statistic df siynif 52,154 3 ,0000 43.238 3 ,0000
Time periods n avg, rank median=2 1.8 n< n> n=
House Extension Length (in tu) Statistic df signif Kruskal- Wallis 13.259 3 ,0043 . Fiedian 14,235 3 ,0026
Tiae periods D avg. rank atadian= 6-2 n< n> n=
&,D. 700-1300 3 7,167 3 0 0 A, D, 1300-1450 4 29.250 0 4 0 A, D, 1450- 1509 16 17,875 5 31 0 A.D. 3610-1650 9 lf-5i)O 8 1 0 Total 3 2
Honse Hidline Pidth (in m) Statistic d-f signif Kruskal-Wallis 10-74 1 3 ,0332 Fledian 1QI&69 3 ,0150
Time periods n avg, rank median= 7-0 n< n> n=
A-D, 700-1300 51 143,186 28 18 . 5 A. D. 1300- 1450 36 214.847 10 22 4 A, D. 1450-1609 153 185.138 52 80 31 R, D, 1610-1650 311 181,320 37 52 22 To tal 361 Table 3a (cont8d)
Plean House End Gidth (in ra)
Tim periods n avg, rank
A, D. 7 03- 1300 8 29,688 A,D. 1300-1450 17 10.909 A. D, 1450-1609 33 71,485 A. Do 16 10- 1650 56 56.598 Total 108
Ridline - End Width Difference (X) St atistic Kruskal- WaUis 4% 779 Xedian 26,198
Time periods n avg, rank
A. D, 700-1300 8 88- 185 AID, 1300-1450 11 10 3,773 A- D, 1450- 1509 3 4 33,515 A, D, 1610-1650 57 54-71 7 Total 710
Mean Linear Taper Length (in B) Statistic Kruskal- Wallis 29,444 Hedian 15, 217
Time periods n avg. rank
A, D. 700-1300 11 38,818 A. D. 3300- 1450 31 81 136 A,DI 1450-1609 22 27,909 AoD. 1610-1650 52 52.356 Total 9 6 Soueh Side Hall Pcst Hold Density (posts per m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-wallis 28,361 3 ,0000 Yedian 13,630 3 ,0035
Tiae periods n avg, rank median= n< n>
B. D, 7 00- 1300 18 84.889 8 9 A- D. 1300-1950 15 135,767 3 12 A-D, 1450-1609 73 106,863 24 43 A-D, 1610-1650 7 7 71. 045 45 24 Total 183
South End Wall Post Hold Density (~ostper B) Statistic df signif Kr uskai-Half is 23,318 3 ,0000 Median 18,432 3 ,Ob)l)Y
Tim periods ii avg, rank median= n< n>
A-D, 700-1300 11 62,455 5 6 A,D, 1303-1450 12 84,417 2 10 8, i3, 1q50-1609 39 78, 167 10 27 A-D, 1630-1650 61 47,172 39 18 Total 123
Hoase Wall DiaeaelB~(ia cm) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 60,192 3 ,0000 P'fediarn 46.960 3 ,0000
Tiae periods n avg, rank median= n< n>
A, D, 700-1300 33 51.258 30 3 A.13, 1300-IU50 19 52.184 16 3 A, D, 7450-1609 97 115-608 40 57 A, If. 1510-1650 63 137.79Y 17 46 . Total 2 12 Table 3n (contvd)
Corzidor Length (in a) Statistic df signif KrusAal-Wall is 12.507 3 ,0058 Hcdian 8,1475 3 ,0431
Time periods n avg. rank @edian=13,7 n< n> n=
A-9, 700-1300 14 38-750 11 3 0 A-D, 1300-1450 11 73,227 3 9 0 A, f), 1450-1 609 3 9 6Y,684 7 12 0 A,D, 1690-1650 ti0 48,050 31 29 0 Total 104
Corridor Bidth (in B) Statis'tic as signif KruskaP- Wailis 7,6486 3 ,0539 Ple dian 5,9704 3 -0728
Time periods n avg, rank median= 4.7 n< n> a=
A, D* 701)- 1300 38 55,083 3 2 5 1 A.D, 1300-1450 14 67,393 8 6 0 A, 9, 1450-1609 35 67,614 19 13 3 A.D. 1610-1650 80 82.236 30 37 13 Total 147
North Bench Width (in a) Statistic df signif Kr uskal-Wallis 13.598 3 ,0035 Hedian 12,933 3 ,0047
Tim Periods n avg, rmk redian=1,2 n< n> n-
A,D, 700-1300 5 24,790 3 2 0 A.O. 3300-1USO 9 35.333 2 6 1 A, D, 1450- 1609 15 30,133 3 9 3 A-D, 1510-1650 29 16,575 15 2 .3 Total 49 Table 3a (contyd)
South Bench %idth (in m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 19- 075 3 ,0003 Median 17,473 3 ,0006
Ti~ePeriods n avg. rank @fdian=l,2 n< n> n=
A. D, 7 00- 1300 5 35.000 0 5 8 A-D. 1300-1450 9 36,611 0 9 0 A. D, 1450- 1609 13 23,500 6 4 3 A. I>, 1610-1650 46 15,632 14 4 1 Total 46
Storage Cubicle Total Length (in a) Statistic df signif Kr uskal- Wallis 12.532 3 ,0058 Median 9,1831 3 ,0270
Time periods
A, 3. 700- 1300 10 37,306 14 0 A, D, 1300-1450 15 78,000 4 11 0 8. D, 1450-lfii)9 19 61,421 10 8 1 A-D, 1610-1650 63 58,119 29 34 9. Total 115
Distance jEro~g Soiltheramst Hearth to South End fm) Statistic rlf signif Kruskal-Wallis 16,350 3 ,0010 Bediizn 12-7 3 3 3 ,0053
Time periods n avg, rank median= 4-3 n< n> n= Hearth Nu~ber Statistic df signif Kruskal- Wallis ,35577 3 ,9392 Median ,7704U 3 ,8565
Time periods n avg. rank median= 2-0 n< a> n=
A, D, 7 00- 1300 2 7 54-093 8 12 7 A, D, 1300-1450 1U 59-071 3 7 U A-D, 1450-1609 25 58,000 7 11 7 3-D. 1610-1650 45 55-07 8 15 22 8 Total 111
Hearth Spacing (in B) Statistic df signif Ksuskal-Hallis 23,258 3 ,0000 Re dim 9.5729 3 ,0225
Time periods n avg, rank median= 2,6 n< a> n=
A- D. 700- 1300 24 28,333 16 7 1 A.D. 1300-1450 34 70,250 3 11 0 A. Da 1450-1609 2 1 55,167 7 14 0 A, D- 3510-165.3 35 46,943 19 14 Z Total 94
Peature Density (features per B sy,) St atistic df signif Kroskal-Wall is 10- 187 .3 ,0170 Median 6,0147 3 ,1109
Tim periods n avg, rank ~edian=0,33 nt n> ra=
A,D, 700-1400 23 77,457 If 12 0 AID* 13b0-1450 45 108.567 3 32 0 A. D, 3450-1609 3 3 72,387 16 '14 1 A-Da 1670-1650 8 1 70,012 44 34 3 To taf 150 Interior Rouse Post Mold Density {posts per @ sq,) St a tis tic df signif Rruskal-wallis 25,838 3 ,0000 He d ian 13,021 3 ,0046 Time periods zf avg. rank aedian=U. 78 n< n> n=
Interior House Post Bold Diaaeter (in ca) St atistic df signif Kruskal-WaTlis 32,497 3 ,9000 Redian 25,256 3 ,ti000 Time periods n awg. rank median= 8-0 n< n> n=
8,D. 700-1300 13 82.538 4 8 f A. T3, 1300-7450 5 104,333 1 5 0 A. D, 1U50-1603 70 48,000 48 21 1 A-DI 1510-1650 39 81,974 9 28 2 Total 128 Table 3h: Average Length per Village
Einimuie House Length per Village (in a) Statistic df sigcif Kruskal- Wall is 2,7583 3 ,4302 Median 1-fib48 3 ,64Q8
Time Periods n avg, rank median=lt, 6 n< n> n=
A-D, 780-1300 8 13,125 5 3 0 A.D, 1300-1450 4 33,625 1 3 0 A-D- 1450-1609 9 18.000 4 5 D A-D, 1610-1550 9 13-238 5 4 0 Total 30
#aximuw Honse Length per Village (in a) Statistic dl skyrtif Kruskal-Baf lis 4,3676 3 ,0248 Eedian 7.7333 3 ,0519
Time Periods n avg. rank median=38,0 n< a3 n=
A-D, 700-1300 8 9,375 6 2 0 A.D, 1300-1450 4 22,753 i) 4 0 A.D, 1450-1609 9 19,889 3 6 0 A-D, 1610-1650 9 13-3 33 6 3 0 Total 30
Bean House Length per Village (in m) Statistic df signif Kruskal- Wallis 11.977 3 ,0075 Bedian 7.7333 3 ,0519
Tiiue Periods n avg, rank median=22,% n< n> n=
A-D, 700-1300 8 9,188 ti 2 0 A-D. 1300-1450 4 25,500 0 ri 0 A-D- 1450-1609 9 19.444 3 6 0 A-D. 1610-1650 9 12,722 6 3 0 Total 30 Twowap Cross-Tabu lation
The Muaber of House Exteasions
Ti~ePeriods Hone One > One
It- Total= Row% ColX
A.D, 700-1300 38 Ex gect ed Row% Col% 16-2
A.D. 1300-1450 20 Expected Row% Col% 8* 5
A=D. 1450-1509 83 Expected Row ColX 3 5-5
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif df- 6 n= 234
Max. Likelihood 19,231 ,0038 Craaer8s phi= ,I 8-79 Chi-square 16,522 -0112 Table 4: Village Characteristics
Table 4a: House Orientation
Twoway Cross-Tabulation
Rouse Orientation WMB ME
A-D, 700-1300 63 18 Expected 16 Bow$ 28-6 Cola 15.2 16-8
A-D. 1300-1450 41 15 Expected 11 Row% 36-6 ColX 9-9 14.0
A- D- 1450-1509 197 49 Expected 5 1 Row% 2Y.9 COX% 47-5 45-8
A*DI 1610-1650 114 25 Ex pec ted 29 EO~JX 2 1-9 COX% 27-5 23.4
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif df= 9 n= 415 flax, Likelihood Y5.028 ,0000 Craaer's phi= 1892 Chi-Sguare 44,500 Table 4b: Preferred Orientation
Twoway Cross-Tabu iation
najor Village House Orientation
Ti~ePeriods ElE EN E #I% NW none preferred
A.D. 1300-1450 5 Ex pec t ed BOW% ColX 14.3
A.D. 1450-3609 10 1 2 5 2 0 Expected 3 2 3 2 2 Row% 10.0 20.0 50.0 20.0 C 01% 28-6 33s3 25-0 45-5 33-3
A-D- 1610-1650 10 1 4 2 2 3 Expected 2 3 2 2 8 ow5 10.0 48-0 20-0 20-0 10.0 Col% 28-6 33-3 50-0 18,2 33-3 14.3 .
Tests of independence can not be co~puted- Table 4c: Development of the Village
Village Haximu@ Size {in ha1 statistic df siynif Kruskal-Wallis 12,655 3 ,0054 edia n 12.584 3 ,0056
Time Periods 11 avg. rank median= 1-2 n< n> n=
A-D, 700-1300 12 A-D* 1300-3450 6 A-Dm 1450-1609 19 A-D, 1610-1550 17 Total. ii 8
Average Spacing Between Houses, Side by Side (in m) Statistic df signif 3,4349 3 ,3293 5,3000 3 -0979
avg. rank median= 2,6 n< n> n=
Average Spacing Between Houses, End on End {in m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 4.9233 3 -3775 Eiedian 6,111 3 ,1063
Time Periods n avg, rank atedian= 6-1 n< n3 n=
A,D- 708- 1300 2 A,Ds 1300-1450 2 A-9, 1450-1609 6 A,D. 1610-1550 2 Total 12 Table 4d: Overlags
Twoway Cross-Tabulation
Overlaps The Periods None House- house- Rouse- House midden palisade n= 288 Total= Row% ColX
AwD, 1300-1450 12 Expected Elow% CollK; 4-2
A.D. 7450-1609 131 Expected Row% ColX 45.5
AIDw 1610-1650 94 Expected Row5 ColX 32.6
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif df= 9 n= 288 @ax. Likelihood 193-73 0- Crameras phi= -35.24 Chi-Square 107-31 0. Table 5: Conparisan of Longhouses within the Bail Village
Table 5a: Co~parisonof Houses by the General Distance betseen ~OUS~S
House Length (in m) signif
Ham-Yhitney O= 47.000 -05bY Hedian Test ,0891
House Positicn n avg. rank median- 18-5 n< n> n=
Surrounded 17 16.235 6 10 1 In The Open 10 10,209 7 2 0 Total 27
House !lidline Width (in m) signif
Mann-#hitmy U= 99,000 ,5111 Median Pest ,5904 '
House Position n avg, rank ~ediaw7. i) n< nS n=
Susrouaded 23 17,285 9 9 3 In The Open 11 15,OOC 5 4 2 Total 32
Hean Wouse End Width (in m) si y nif
Pfann-Whitney U= 21.500 ESedian Test ,1192
, Bouse Position IL avg. rank iuedian= 5-4 n< a> n=
Surrounded I4 9.036 8 5 .I In Thr Open 6 '13.9'17 1 3 2 Total 20 Table 5a (cont'd)
Hean Linear Taper Length (in m) siynif Mann-Hhitney U= 16,000 fiedian Test ,1556
Rouse Position n avg. rank median= 3-3 n< n> n=
Surrounded 13 11,769 4 8 1 In The Open 5 6,167 4 1 1 Total 19
South Rouse Wall Post Mold Density (post per m) signif
Mann-Whitney U= 50,000 Pledian Test ,4101
House Position n avg, rankc median= 3-4 n< nS n=
Surrounded 18 12,278 9 8 1 In The Open 5 13,157 2 3 1 Totar 2V
South 3nd wall Post Mold Density (posts per m) signif
Ham-Whitney U= 28,000 fledian Test -22 14
House Position n avg, rank rmledian.= 2.8 n< a> n=
Surrounded 15 9,867 7 6 2 In The Open 6 13,833 1 4 1 Total. 2 1 House idall Dia~eter(in cm) siynif Hann-Whitnep U= 55,000 ,2298 Redian Test ,2491
House Position n avg, rank nedian= 3- 3 n< n> n=
S urrouoded 18 15.889 7 11 0 Ia The Opec 10 12,000 6 4 0 Total 28
storage Cubicle Total Length fin a) signif
P'iann-Bhitney U= 52,000 ,2009 Median Test ,1831
House Positioa n avg. rank raediari= 5.0 n< n> n=
Surrounded 3 5 14,533 5 8 2 In The Open 10 10,700 6 4 0 Total 25
House Position n avg. rank median= 2-0 . n< n) n=
Surrounded 7 7,643 1 3 3 f n The Open 4 3,125 4 U 0 Total 12 Feature Density (features pez a sq.) siynif Ham-Whitney D= 55,500 ,1753 Median Test ,2999
Hause Position II avg, rank median= -25 n< n> n=
Surrounded 19 16,553 8 9 2 In The Open 10 12.050 6 4 0 Total 29 interior House Post Hold Density (~ostsper in) signif
Mann-Whitney 8= 50,000 ,0389 Hedian Test ,0173 House Position n avg, rank median= -59 n< n> 4=
Surrounded 19 17,368 '6 12 1 In T~EOpen 10 3 0,500 8 2 0 Total 28
Interior House Post Hold Dia~eter(in cm) signif
Mann-ghitney U= 50,500 Xedian Test ,4445
House I.acation 13 avg- rank median= 8.7 rt< n> a=
Surrounded 16 11.656 7 8 1 Zn The Open 7 12,786 U 3 0 Total 23 Table 50: Cornpaxison of Ball Houses By Length Ciasses
House Bidline Width (in no) Statistic df sigzaif Kruskaf -Wallis 6=6032 3 ,9857 Median 1)- 2903 3 ,2318
Length Classes n avg, rank rttedian= 7-0 n< n> a=
0-10 m 13-20 m 21-30 31-YO m Total.
Mean House End aidth (in a) Statistic df s ignif Kruskal-Callis ,89603 2 ,6389 Redian ,47138 2 ,7900
Length Classes n avg. rank' median= 5-4 n< ra> n=
11-20 m 23-30 m 31-40 a Total
Difference Between Midline and End Width (%) Statistic df signif Rruskal-Wallis ,93808 2 ,6256 Pledian 2-7350 2 ,2547
Length Classes zi avg. rank median= 25-0 n< n> n=
11-20 R 21-30 m 31-40 a Total Table Sb (cout'd)
Colnparisori of Ball Houses by Length Classes
Bean Linear Taper Length (in n) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Waf f is 2,6270 2 ,2639 Hedian 5,5103 2 ,0636
Length Classes n avg, rank median= 3-2 n< n> a=
11-20 n 21-30 m 37-40 nt Total
South Side #a11 Post Hold Density (posts per 3) Statistic df siynif Kruskal-idallis 1,7303 2 -4210 Redian 1.8357 2 -3994
Length Classes XP avg, rank @edian= 3-5 n< n> n=
11-20 iR 21-30 fn 31-40 m Total
South 2nd Wall Post Bold Density (posts per m) Statistic df signif Rruskaf-Wallis 1.0155 2 ,6018 Bedian 40657 2 -8160
Length Classes n avg. rank median= 2-9 . n< n> n= comparison of Ball Houses By Length Classes House Fall Post Mold Diameter (in c~) Statistic df signif Krnskal-Wallis 5,6616 3 ,1293 fledian 2- 8166 3 ,4208
Length Classes a avg. rank median= 9.3 n< n> n=
0-10 €a 11-20 itl 21-30 m 31-40 rtt Total
Storage Cubicle Tctal Length (in mf Statistic df signif Rruskal-gallis 14.175 3 ,0027 Median 7,7662 3 ,0511
Length Classes XP avg. rank' median= 5-1 m< n> n=
0-10 m 1 1-20 23-30 n 31-40 rn Total
Hearth Nu mber Statistic df siguif Krnskal-Ballis 8,5682 3 ,0356 Median 10,000 3 ,0186
Length Classes n avg- rank median= 2-0 n< fi> n=
0-10 m 11-20 3 21-30 m 31-40 in Total Table 4b [canted)
flearth Spacing (in nt) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Ballis 3,4773 2 ,1758 Media m 3,5833 2 ,1667
Length Classes n avg, rank median= 2- 4 n< n> n=
11-20 B 21-30 m 31-40 ra Total
Feature Density (features per 3 sg,) Statistic df signif KruskaP-Mall is 2- 1588 . 3 ,5401 fledian 1,8455 3 ,6051
Length Classes bt avg. rank aedian= -25 ' n< n3 n=
0-10 B 3 1-20 n! 21-30 m 31-40 nl Total
Interior House Post flo3.d Density (posts per m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 5,0880 3 ,1074 Median L. 109 1 3 ,5501
Length Classes n avg. rank tlledisn= -60 n< n> n=
0-10 la 13-20 au 21-30 m 31-40 m Total Table' 5b (cont df
Interior Mouse Post Mold Diameter fin cia) Statistic df signif Kruskai-Wallis 3- 3000 3 ,3Y76 Aedian 3,9000 3 ,2725
Length Classes n avg. rank cedia an= 8.6 n< n> n=
0-10 1 11-20 ra 21-30 s 31-40 Total Table 56: Coaparison between Ball tIouses with and without Side @all Bench Post Lines
House Length fin w) signif
Benches- n avg- rank ~edian=13-3 A< n> n=
Absent 20 13,950 I2 8 0 Present ? 0 18,600 3 7 0 Total 30
House 3idline Vidth (in m) signif
Hann-Whitney U= 107,20 ,3716 Median Test ,1654
Benches 13 avg, rank ' rneclianr 7,0 n< n> n= i Absent 2U 16,958 10 10 4 Present 11 20,273 2 6 3 Total 35
@@anHouse End Ridth jrn sf signif
Benches n avg, rank median= 5-4 n< n> n=
A bsen t 14 11,074 8 5 1 Present. 9 13,444 3 4 2 Total 23 Table Sc (cont'd)
Differnce between Midline and End Widths (in in) signif
Ram-Whitney U= 58,000 Hedian Test ,6369
Benches n asg, rank median= 26-0 a< n> n=
B bsent 14 42,357 6 7 1 Present 9 11,444 4 3 2 Total 2 3
Mean Linear Taper Length (in mj signif Hann-Whitney U= 46,500 tledian Test ,5003
Benches n avg, rank median= 3-2 ' n< n> n=
A bsen t Present Tatai
South Side Pall Pcst MOM Density (posts per m) signif flann-Whitaey 0= 61,000 -0854 Median Test ,0131
Benches n avg, rank inedfan= 3.5 n< 8) n=
Absent 2 0 17,450 d 12 2 Present 10 11,500 8 2 0 Total 30 Table 5c (cont'd)
Storage Cubicle "ftal Length (in m) signif
Benches n avg. rank median= 5.4 n< n> n=
Absent '1 7 11,500 11 6 0 Present 9 17.278 2 7 0 Total 26
Corridor Width tin i~) signif Mann-idhitncy U= 70,000 ,7785 Hediau Test ,5859
Benches
Absent 15 13,333 7 5 3 Present 10 12,500 5 4 1 Total 2 5
Hearth Number signif
Mann-Bhitney O= 4,0000 Hedian Test ,Y 667 /
Benches a avg, rank median= 2.0 n< a> n=
A ksen t 8 5,0013 3 3 2 Present 2 7,500 0 1 1 Total 10 Table 5c (coatad)
Hearth Spacing (in m) siguif
Ham- Whitney U= 13,500 Pledian Test ,5000
Benches T! avg- rank median= 2-6 a< n> a=
Absent 9 6,500 5 4 0 Present 3 6,500 1 2 0 Total 12
Feature Density [features per IB sq,) signif
Haan-Whitaey a= 112,UO ,9063 Hedian Test ,2144
n avg, rank median= -25 n< nS n=
Bbsen t 23 16,070 12 10 1 Present 10 17,300 3 6 1 Total 33
Interior House Post sold Density (posts per in) signif
Mann-Whitney 8= 105.50 ,7097 Hedian Test ,3969
Benches B avy, rank median= -59 a< n> n=
A bsen t 23 16,587 12 11 0 Present 10 17,950 4 5 1 Total 33 Table 5c {contrd)
Interior Honse Post Hold Diaaeter (in cm) signif Hann-ghitney a= 45.000 ,0516 Median Test ,0554
Benches n avg, rank median= 8-7 n< n> n=
Absent 15 11,000 10 5 if Present 11 16,999 3 8 0 Total 26 Table 5d: Comapison between Ball houses with and without Storage Partition Post Lines
House Length (in m) signif Mann-Whitney U= 39,000 ,0307 Bediao Test ,3441
Storage Cubicle n avg, rank median= 18-4 Partitions n< nS n=
& bsen t 16 10,938 9 7 0 Present 10 17-600 4 6 0 Total 26
House Bidline Uidth (in ra) signif
Mann-Nhitney !I=55,500 -7078 aedian Test ,2213
Storage Cubicle n avg, rank ' ntedian= 7-0 Partitions n< n> n=
A bsen t 16 14.469 7 8 7 Present 33 95-65ii 3 5 5 Total 29
Bean House End Yidth (in B) siynif
Ham-whitney O= 44, OQO ,2902 Median Test -2064
Storage Cubicle n avg, sank median= 5-11 Partitions n< n> n=
A bsent 12 12- 833 4 5 2 Present 10 9,900 6 3 1 Total 22 Bean Linear Taper Length (in m) siynif
Hann-Whitney U= 38,000 Median Test ,2849
Storage Cubicle n avg, rank laedian= 3.3 Partitions n< n> n=
A bsen t 12 9,667 7 3 2 Present 9 12,778 3 6 0 Total 2 1
House Wall Post Bold Piamter (in ca) signif Ham-Yhitney U= 35,000 -0I14 Hedian Test 0529
Storage Cubicle n avg. rank aiedian= 9.3 Partitions n< n> n=
Absent Prese nt Total
Storage Cubicle Tctal Length (in in) signif Bann-Whitney U= 31,500 ,0104 Median Test ,0207
Storage Cubicle n avg, sank niedian= 5.4 Partitions n< 0 n=
Absent 16 101469 11 5 0 Present 18 18- 350 2 8 0 Total 2.6 Hearth Number signif Eann-Mhitnep U= ,50000 Dledian Test ,3333
Storage Cubicle n avg, rank ~edian=2-0 Partitions n < n> n=
Absent 8 4,563 4 7 3 Prase nt 2 9,250 0 2 0 Total 10
Hearth Spacing (in m] signif Hann-ghitney U= 2,0003 Median Test ,3714
Storage Cubicle n avy, rank median= 3-4 Partitions n< n> n=
A bsent Present Total
Interior House Post gold Density (posts per m sq.) signif
Storage CubicXe n avy, rank rrtedian= -55 Partitions n< n> n=
Absent 16 12-5C3 9 S 1 Present 13 lfS.OOD 5 8 0 Total 29 Tabk 5e: Comparison between Ball Houses with and without features in Storage Ends
House Length [in m) signif
Harm-Whitney U= 15,000 Median Test ,0029
Storage Cubicle n avg, rafik median= 38-4 Features n< n> n=
Absent 2 3 17.238 7 14 0 Present '7 6,286 7 0 0 Total 28
House Bidline kiidth (in sa) signif Ham- Whitnep U= 90,500 Pledian Test ,5732
Storage Cubicle n avg, rank loedianz 7,0 f ea tu res n< n> n=
Absent Present Total
Nean House End Width (in re) signif
&am-Vhitney U= 31,000 Meaian Test ,1854
Storage Cubicle n avg. rank median= 5.4 Pea tures nt n> n=
Absent 18 13,222 1 O 6 2 Present 5 18. 800 1 3 1 Total. 23 Bean Linear Taper Length (in a) signif Ham-Whitney U= 10,008 Median Test ,0175
Storage Cubicle n avg, rank anedian= 3.2 Features n< n> a=
A bsen t 17 13.412 6 11 0 Present 5 5.000 5 0 0 Total 22
South House Wall Post Hold Density {posts per n) signif Hann-Whitney U= 54,500 fiedian Test ,5885
Storage Cubicle a avg, rank median= 3, WOO Features n< n> n=
Absent 18 12,528 8 R 2 Present 7 14.21$ 3 4 0 Total 25
Storaye Cubicle Total Length (ia a) signif
Mann-Whitney U= l8,50O Hedian Test ,0290
Storage Cubicle n &rag, rank median= 5-1 Features a< n> n=
Absent 20 16.575 7 13 0 Present 7 6,693 6 0 1 Total 23 Feature Density (features pes m sg-) signif
!lam-Whitney U= 84.500 Median Test ,1771
Storage Cubicle n avg. rank median= -24 Features n< n> n=
Absent 20 15.275 8 1 1 1 Present 9 711-3239 6 3 0 Total 29
Interior House Post Eofd Density [posts per nr sq,) signif fimn-MHitney U= 48.500 Median Test ,1771
Storage Cubicle n avg. rank fledian= ,56 Features n< n> n=
A bsen t 20 17-075 8 11 1 Present 9 10,389 6 3 0 Total 29 Table 5f: Comparison of Ball 30uSeS Icy Storage Feature Locatiasi
House Length (in nt) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis S-9641 3 ,0730 Median 3,0533 3 ,3823
Distribution of n avg- rank aedian= 19-0 S turage Features nt 11 > n=
Absent 2 13,750 1 1 0 Bench Area 8 9.375 6 2 0 Central coxridor 13 39,423 5 8 0 Bench E Corridor 8 18.125 3 4 7 Total 3 1
House Ridfine Width {in m) Statistic Kruskal-gallis 6,6894 Zedian 6,0033
Distribution of n avg, rank Storage Features
Absent 2 6,000 Bench Area 8 13,938 Central Corridor 14 18-393 Bench E Corridor 12 23,167 Total 36
Mean House End Width fin m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Vallis 1,0631 2 ,5877 Hedian 1,4693 2 -4797
Distribution ot n avg. rank median= 5,U Storage Features n< nS n=
Bench Area 5 9-900 3 2 0 Central Corridor 11 11,727 6 4 1 Bench C Corridor 7 13,929 2 3 2 Total 23 South House Wall Post Hold Density (posts per m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis ,43730 2 -8036 Median 2,6902 2 ,2605
Distribution ot n avg, rank nedian= 3.5 Storage Feat ares n< n> n=
Bench Area 5 17,400 1 3 1 Central Corridor 14 1U,508 6 7 1 Bench 6 Corridor 11 15,909 7 4 0 Total 30
Storage Cubicle Total Length (in m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 6,2239 3 ,1012 Hedian 4.8859 3 ,1803
Distribution of n avg, rank rnedian~5-l, Stofage Features n< n> n=
R bsent 1 2,580 1 0 0 Bench Area 8 9,813 6 2 0 Central Corridor 11 16,000 Y G 1 Bench @ Corridor 7 37,286 2 5 0 Total 27
Hearth 1Ju aber Statistic df signif Kruskal- Wallis 7,0939 3 ,0690 Median 10,000 3 ,0186
D istr ibution of n avg. rank median= 2.0 Storage Features n< nS n=
Absent I 2,000 7 0 0 Bench Area 3 2,667 3 0 0 Central Corridor 5 7,800 0 3 2 Bench F Corridor 2 8,500 0 1 1 Total 11 Tab& 5f (cont'd)
Hearth Spacing (in at) Statistic dE signif Kruskaf-Waf Xis -29087 3 ,9617 Median 1,8333 3 -6077
Distribution cf n avg, rank median= 2-6 Storage Features n< n> n=
Absent 1 Bench Area 1 Central Corridor 8 Bench 4 Corridor 2 Total 12 featufe Density (featuses per a s*.) Statistic df signif Kruskaf-Waif is 3.7430 3 ,2906 Median 2,0610 3 ,5598
Distribution cf n avg, rank median= -25 S toragc Features n< n> n=
Absent 3 2-900 1 0 0 Bench Area 8 18,313 4 4 0 Central Corckdor 14 19,821 5 7 2 3eacb G Corridor 11 15,361r b 5 if Total 3 4
Interior House Post sold Density (post per m sq,) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Hallis 6-3521 3 ,0957 Ea,edian 4,7458 3 -191tl
Distribution cf n avg, rank wediaa= -60 Storage Features nt n> n=
A bsen t 1 2,000 1 0 0 Bench Area 8 13,375 5 3 0 Central Corridor 14 21-679 4 10 0 Bench t? Corridor 71 1L591 7 4 .O Total 31 Table 5g: Comparison of Ball WGUS~S with Few or Many Interior House Post Holds
House Length (nt) skgnif
3ann-Whitney U= 22.000 ,0006 Hed ian Test ,0026
Interior Nouse n avg, rank ~edian=78-8 Post Holrls n< n> n= Few Many Total
House Hidline Oidth (a) signif
Tnteriof House n avg, sank median= 7-0 Post Balds nt n> n=
Hean House End Bidth (B) s igniE
Hann-Hhitney U= 37,500 Redian Test ,3652
Xnterior House a avg. rank median= 5.4 Post Bolds 5t< n> n= Few Many Tot a1 Difference between aidline and End Wdiths (&) signif
@an&-Whit ne y U= 50- 500 aedian Test 5368
Interior House n avg. rank median= 26.0 n< n> n=
Feu 6 12,083 3 3 0 Haay 17 11,971 7 7 3 Total 23
!lean Linear Taper Zength (B) signif
Hann-ghitney U= 7.5000 aedian Test - 0062
Interior Hoase n avg. rank median= 3.2 Post golds n< n> n= fev Sany Total
South Side Val1 Post Hold Density (posts per nt) s ignif
Bann- Whitneg U= 66,000 Redian Test ,40t15
Interior House n avg, rank median= 3-50 Post #oldis n< n> Q= Pew Hany Total Table 5g (cont'd)
Rouse gall Diametes fcm) siyaif
Mann-Whitney U= 96-500 ,8774 Bedian Test ,5539
Interior House n avg, rank median= 9-3 post mids n< n> n= Few F4an y Total
Storage Cubicle Total Length (a) signif
Mann- Whitney U= 26, 500 ,0032 #edian Test -0351
Interior Nouse n avg. rank aedian= 5.3 . Post aolds n< a> n= Few #any Total
Hearth Number signif
ffann- ahitney U= 4- 0000 Hedian Test - 01355
Interior Hoose n avg, rank eedian= 2-0 Post Holds n < n> n= Table 5q {cont9a)
Hearth Spacing (a) signif Hann- Whitncy U= 3,0000 Hedia n Test a 7818
fnterior House n avg, rank median= 2-4 Post Holds n< n> n=
Feu Macy Total
Feature Density (features per a sg,) signif
Elann- Whitne y U= 13 1-00 0452 BgeRian Test ,3932
Inter lor House n avg, rank median= -2'5 , Post Balds n< n> n= Few Waldy Total
Interior House Post Bold Density (posts per I& sq,) signif
Mann- Whitney U= 40,500 ,7932 nedian Test .584 6
Interior Rouse n avg, rank ntediaa= 8-6 n< n> n= Few nany Tot af Table 5 h: Comparison of Ball Houses by Orientation Clusters,
House Length (in m) Statistic Of signif Rruskal-Aallis ,14868 3 ,9854 Median 1,0385 3 ,7919
0 rientation n avg, rank median= 19-3 Groups n< a> n=
Group 1 6 34,667 2 4 0 Group 2 3 14,333 2 1 0 Group 3 6 13,417 3 3 0 Group Y I3 34,962 7 6 0 Total 28
Rouse Ridth (in s)
Statistic df signif Kruskal-Uaflis 1,7499 3 ,6259 Hedian 4,5333 3 ,2093
Orientation n avg- rank aediarn= 7.0 Groups n< n> n=
Group 1 7 13,643 3 4 0 Group 2 5 22,700 0 2 3 Group 3 7 16,145 4 2 1 Group 4 1d 16,1625 8 6 2 Total 35
Bean House fSnd Width (in a)
Statistic df signif Kruskaf-Wallis .13939 3 ,9857 Ffedian ,42593 3 ,9348 Orientation n avg, rank median= 5-3 Groups n< nS n= .
Group 1 3 11,167 1 1 1 Group 2 3 12.167 1 1 1 Group 3 5 30,fjOE) 2 3 0 Group 4 10 10,800 5 5 0 Total 21 Difference betveen the Midline and End Widths Statistic df signif
R ruskal-Wallis Median
Orientation n avg, rank median= 2 6-0 Gfoups n< n> n=
Group 1 3 12,667 1 1 1 Group 2 3 9,000 2 1 0 Group 3 5 9,200 3 2 0 Group 4 10 12,000 3 5 2 Total 21
Bean Linear Taper Distance (in mj
Statistic df signif
O~ientatiou n avg, rank median= 3,1500 Groups n< n> n=
Group 3 3 2,833 3 0 0 Group 2 3 7,000 2 1 0 Group 3 S 106200 3 2 0 Group 4 9 3i2,389 2 7 0 Total 20
South Side wall Post 3old Density (in @) Statistic df signif Kruskal-wall is PI edia A
Orientation n avg, rank median= 3-6 Groups n< n> n=
Group 1 5 11,900 3 1 1 Group 2 5 77,800 2 2 3 Group 3 5 11,800 2 1 .2 Group 4 12 14,208 fi 6 0 Total 27 Table 5h (cont'd)
House Waf1 Diameter (ia cta) Statistic df signif
Orientation n avgP rank nediau= 9,3 Gfoups n< n> n=
Group 1 3 5,000 3 0 0 Group 2 5 .20.700 1 4 0 Group 3 6 14,000 3 3 0 Group 4 16 16,406 7 9 0 Total 30
Storage Total Length (in a) Statistic df signif Kruskaf-Wallis Median
Orientation n avg, rank aedian= 5-1 Groups n< n> n=
Group 7 4 7,750 3 1 0 Group 2 3 14,333 1 2 0 Group 3 5 12.900 3 2 0 Croup 4 12 13.Y58 -,r; 7 0 Total 24
Hearth Number Statistic df signif
Orientation ~f avg. rank median= 2- 0 n< 31) n=
Group 1 2 3.250 1 0 1 Group 2 2 9,000 0 2 0 Group 3 2 6.500 0 1 1 Group 4 4 4,375 2 1 1 Total. 10 Table 5h (coattd)
Hearth Spacing (ia a) Statistic df sigmif Kruskal-Wallis Pledian
Orientation n avg, rank aedian= 2-5 Groups n< a> n=
Group 1 3 4,500 2 3 0 Group 2 2 6,000 1 1 0 Group 3 3 4,333 3 0 0 Group 4 4 9,875 0 Y 0 Total 12
Feature ffesnity {posts per sq, m) Statistic df signif
Kruskal-Wallis sWi~dian oreintation n avg. rank nedian= -25 Group n< n> n=
Group I 6 15,333 Y 2 0 Group 2 5 19.500 1 4 0 Group 3 5 22.000 'I Q 0 Group 4 14 11,821 9 5 0 Total 30
Interior House Post Mold Density {posts per sq. XI) Statistic df signif
Kruskal-Wallis Wediars
Orientation n avg. rank nedia-m= -54 Group n< n> n=
Croup 1 8 16.083 3 3 0 Group 2 5 15.400 2 3 0 Group 3 5 15,700 2 3 0 Group Y 14 15,214 8 6 '0 Total 30 Interior Rouse Post Mold Diameter (in cm) Statistic dE sfgnif Kruskal-Wallis Hedian
Orientation n avg, rank mdian= 8.5 Group A< n> n=
Group 1 2 10, 500 2 0 0 Group 2 4 16,375 2 2 0 Group 3 4 12,500 2 2 0 Group 4 14 11,679 6 8 0 Total 24 out of 36 TabXe 5i: Comparison or' Dall Core and ";pansion Area Houses
Eouse Length (in n) Statistic df sigzif Kruskal-Pal lis 2,1482 1 JY27 lYIedian ,9551 1 1 ,3284
House Location n ave. rank median= 19.0 nt n> n=
Core 20 14,225 11 9 3 Expa nsion 11 19,227 4 6 1 Total. 3 1
Wvuse aidth fin nt) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Uallis ,15621 1 ,6927 Hedian -29503 -1 1 ,8636
Rouse Location a avg, rank median= 7-0 nt n >. B=
Core 25 20.540 10 11 4 Expansion 14 19-036 6 6 2 Total 39
House End Vidth (in m) Statistic dr" signif Kruskal-Wallis -57065 -1 1 ,8112 Ptodiara 0, 1 1,0000
House Location n avg. rank nttedian= 5.4 n< n> n=
Core 14 11,250 7 7 0 Expansion 8 11,938 4 4 0 Total. 22 Difference Between Ridline and End Bidth (X) Statistic df signif Rruskal-Wall is ,22826 1 ,6328 Median ,57692 -1 1 ,8102
House Location n avjI rank medias= 26,0 n< n> IL=
Core 14 12,000 5 7 1 Expansion 8 10.625 3 3 2 Total 22
Eean Linear Taper Length (in m) Statistic df signif K suskal-Baf lis 4,8437 1 ,0277 El edian 4,4545 1 ,0348
House Location n avg. rank median;= 3.3 n< n> n=
Core 14 8,893 9 4 1 Expanison 7 15,234 1 5 1 Total 2 1
South Side gall Post Density (posts pes m) Statistic df signif Xruskal-Wallis 1,592 1 1 ,2070 Bedian ,40421 1 ,5249
House Location n avg.. rank median= 3-5 n< n> n=
Core 19 13,553 10 7 2 Expansion 10 17,750 Y 6 0 Total 29 South 3nd 8.111 Post Hold Density (posts pen: 3) Statistic df signif KruskaL-Wallis ,39683 -2 1 ,3498 Eedian ,64835 -1 1 ,7390
House .Location n avg. rank median= 2-9 n< n> n=
Core Expansion Total
Hause Wall Post Elaid Diameter (in cm) Statistic df sicjnif Kruskal- Wallis ,27489 -1 1 ,8603 Mediaen ,3981 1 1 ,5281
House Location ra avg. rank aedian= 9-3 n< n> B=
Core 20 - 7 6,775 7 Y r) Expa nsiori 13 17,345 6 7 0 Total 33
Storage Cubicle Total Length fin m) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 1,0069 f ,3159 Median l,lY29 1 ,2850
House Location n avg. rank aedian= 5-1 n< n> R=
Core 18 12,817 10 7 1 Expansion 9 16,167 3 6 0 Total 27 Table 5i (cont'd)
Hearth Nu mber Statistic df signif Ksuskal-Wallis ,21368 I ,6439 nedian .10476 1 ,7462
House Location n avg. rank aedian= 2-0 n< n> n=
Core 9 6,222 4 3 2 Expansion 3 7,333 1 1 1 Total 12
Hearth Spacing {ia i~) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis 5,2572 1 ,0213 ffedian 5, SO00 3 ,0190
Aouse bocatiao n avg, rank snedian= 2- 6 n< n> n=
Core 8 9,813 6 2 0 Expansion U 9,875 0 4 0 Total. 12
Feature Density (features per m SE*) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Half is ,30491 1 ,5808 Redain ,13043 1 ,7180
House Location n avg, rank median= -25 n< n> a=
Core 23 18,152 11 12 0 Expansion 11 16.136 6 5 0. Total 34 Table 5i (cont'd)
Interior Bouse Post flald Density (posls per IQ sq,) Statistic df signif Kruskal-Wallis ,28492 '1 ,5935 Hedian .I 30U3 1 ,7180
House Location n avg. rank median= -52 n< n> a=
Core Expansion Total
Interior Rouse Post Mold Diaaeter (in c~) Statistic af signif K ruskal- Wall is 4,8653 1 ,0274 Beiliaxi 1,3635 1 ,2429
House Location n aug. rank median= 8-7 n< n> n=
Core 15 16,333 6 9' '0 Expansion 13 9,836 7 4 0 Total 26 Table 6: Inter-regional Coaparisons
Table 6a: Co~parisonbetween the Pickering and Glen Heyes Houses
Variable Tribes Test Statistic df Pic kering Glen #eyer
House Length fin R)
House Hidline Wid th {in r
aean Nouse End Width (in a) aea n 15-5 4.6 t=-= 36242 6 var .I -3 F= 2,7566 3, 3 P! 12 tt
Difference Between Ridline and End Bidth (X) mean 38.0 3t1-3 t= .90784 6 var 52.3 15-9 F= 3,3797 3, 3 n 4 4
Bean Linear Taper Length {in 8a)
South Side Wall Post Hold Density (posts per m) Table b a (cont 'd)
Var iable Tribes Test Statistic df signif Pickering Glen #eyer
South End Wall Post Hold Density [posks per a) mean 3.7 Q, 0 t=-,24610 9 ,8111 var 10.6 9 P= 11,374 5, 4 ,0177 n 6 5
House &allPost Hold Diasneter: (in cm)
Storage Cubicre Total Length (in a) aean 1.8 3.2 t=- 1,2269 16 ,2376 var 4.9 6.7 P= 1,3524 9, 7 -3531 a 8 10
Coslcidor Width (in ntt)
Corridor Length (in m) mean 16.5 13-0 t= ,46668 12 ,6491 var 134.9 169.3 F= 1,2556 9, 3 ,4730 Tt 4 10
Distance froxi Southernixost Hearth to South End (in a) Table 6a fcontid)
Variable Tribes Test Statistic df signif Pickeriag Glen Beyer
Distance from Northernmst Hearth to North 2nd (in m)
Hearth Spacing (in m) nean 1-6 2-2 t=-, 9345 1 22 ,35 02 var 1- 5 3.0 F= 1,92916 9, 13 ,1364 n 14 10
Feature Density (features per m sq,)
Interior House Post Bold Density (~ostsper m sq-) atea n 1,053 -91 t= ,49525 f 7 ,6268 var ,57 -44 F= 1,3511 9, 8 ,3411 n 10 9
Interior House Post Bold Diaaeter fin em) Table '6 a (cont d)
gaximum Village Size (in ha) signif Hann-ghitnep a= 15,009 Hedian Test ,6894
Tribe n avg, rank median= ,fi nt n> n= Picker ing Glen Heyer Total
3iniauna House Length per Village (in at) signif Mann-Vhitney U= 6,0000 3edian Test ,5000
11 avg, rank median= 11.3 n< n> n= Picker ing Glen Beyer Total
iYaximu@ Nouse Length per Village fin m) sigaif
Kann-Ehitney U= 7,0000 Bedian Test ,5000
Tribe avg, rank median= 20.2 n< n) n=
Picker ing Gleri Reyer Total. Bean House Length per Village (iu m) signif
Bann-Hhitney U= 6- 0000 Esdian Test ,5000
Tribe n avg, rank median= 76,0 n< m> n=
Picker inq Glen #eyer Total
Hedian House Length per Village signif
Tribe avg* rank mdian= 13.5 n< n> n=
Picberiny Glen @eyer Total Tribe House Location Pickering Glen Eleyer
Eao Palisade B Expected Row% C o 1% 12-9 Core 47 Expected Row% Col% 75-8
1st Expansion 4 Expected Row% Colf 6.5
Later Expansions 2 Expected Pow31 C01% 3.2
Outside Palisade 1 Expected Row% ColX 1-6
Tests of Independence
Statsitic siynif df= 4 n= 62
#axl Likelihood 20.816 ,0003 Craaer's phi= -49 222 Chi-square 15,021 ,0047 Table 6a fcont'd)
Twoway Ccoss-Tabulation
Tribe Pickering Glen Meyer
Bo Overlaps '1 3 Expected Bow% C 01% 25-5
Hou se-House 32 Expected fi a%% Col% 62-7
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif df = 2 n= 51 &ax. Likelihood 8- 3042 ,0157 Cramerss phi= - 3992 Chi-Square 8,1282 ,0172 Table'6a {cant'd)
Tvo way Cross-Tabulation
Tribe Pickering Glea Meyer
BWW 2 0 Expected Row% C 02% 31-7
se 9 Expected Row% Col% 14, 3
XVB I6 expected Row% CofX 25-4
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif $f= 3 n= 53
Hax. Likelihood 2.9559 ,3985 Cramer's phi- -215hi Chi-Square 2,9238 ,4035 V Variable Tribe Test Statistic df s ig nif ffurcn ATeutral
House Length (in m)
mean 31-7 19-3 t= 4,1319 122 ,0001 var 232-7 72.2 F= 3.2244 91, 31 -0002 n 92 3 2
House Bidline 2idth (in a)
mea ~t 7-2 6.5 t= 5,7430 16 1 ,0000 var ,3 -6 F= 1,7788 37, 124 ,0102 11 125 38
mea f~ 5-9 5- 3 t= 2,7192 2 9. . ,2260 var 1.7 -6 P= 6,7192 20, 9 ,0737 n 24 3
Difference between flidlino and EE~Pidth (in a)
wan 15.5 35- 9 t= -.3067 27 ,7647 var 149,Y 112-6 F= 1,3269 2Y, 3 ,3547 a 2 5 4
South Side Pall Post Hold Density (posts per a)
mea n 4-53 4-0 t= 1,3329 7 1 -1868 var 1-7 4 -3 I?= 1,3523 51, 20 ,2329. n 52 21
South End gall. Post Bold Density (posts per m)
aea n 4.1 4.5 t=-, 62658 37 ,5348 var 2-4 3-0 F= 1,2617 8, 29 ,3010 n 39 9 Variable Tribe Test Statistic df sigaif Huron Neutral
Rouse gall Post WcLd Dia~eter (in cm)
mea a 8,9 6.4 t= 6,4805 77 ,0000 var 1-5 -1 F= 11,874 67, 10 ,0001 a 6 8 11
Storage Cubicle Total Length (in R)
mean 5-0 4-2 t= ,651305 14 52&3 var 8-7 3.3 F= 2,4795 10, 4 1204 n 11 8
Corsidor Widtb (in B)
mean U-1 3-7 -t= 2.6744 33 ,0116 var -2 ,i) F= 1.9257 11, 22 . ,0919 n 23 12
Corridor Length (in m)
mean 27-6 12.5 t- 1,9473 17 ,0682 var SU7.6 5.7 P= 60,562 32, 5 ,0001 n 13 6
Distance l;etwe.en Sonthernmst Hearth and South End (in a)
mean 4-8 4.2 t= ,87982 2b -3e70 va r 3-0 4-5 P= 1.505 3 8', 10 ,2235 n 19 9
Distance between Northernatost Hearth and Borth End (in a)
mean 5-4 J,8 t= 2,0870 24 ,0477 va r 3-6 2.5 F= 1,4522 17, 7 -3 194 R 18 5 Ba riable Tribe Test Statistic df sig nif Euron 3leut.r a1
mean 3,Y 2-7 t= 1.8192 23 - 0819 va f 4, 8 2-1 P= 2,3162 11, 12 ,0823 n 12 13
Hearth Spacin3 (in m)
Feature Density (Pca-tures per m sg.)
Interior House Post Bold Density (posts per m sq-)
mean 2.0 1-0 t= 2-Q432 %U ,0240 var 4.3 -25 F= 17,985 12, 8 ,0002 n 1 3 5 Eaxirrtum Village Size {in ha) signif
Bann-Whitney fJ= l6,OOO Igledian Test ,1674
Tribe D avg, rank median= 1-5 n< a> n=
Prehistoric Huron 11 11,545 4 7 0 Prehistoric Beutral 7 6.286 5 2 0 To tnl 18
Original Village Size (in ha) signif
flann-Qhitney U= 23,000 Hedian Test - 3522
Tribe m avg, rank wdian= 1-2 nt n> a=
Prehistoric Huron 11 1 C.909 4 5 2 Prehistoric Xeutraf 7 7,286 4 2 1 Total 18
Average Spacing Eetueen liouses in a Row (in ro) siynif Mann-Whitney U= 7-0000 Median Test ,5000
Tribe n avg, rank mcdiaa-- 2-9 n< n> n=
Prehistaric Huron 5 4,600 2 3 0 Prehistoric geutral 3 4.333 2 1 0 To t a1 8 Table 6b (contqd)
Bean House Length per Viliage signif
Tribe n avg, rank median= 25-4 a< n> a=
Prehistoric Huron 6 5*833 2 4 0 Prehistoric Neutral 3 3,333 2 0 1 Total 9
Bedian House Length per Village (in s) signif
Wann-Whitney ;J= 5,0000 Bedian Test ,YOY8
n avg, rank ~&d.iarl=2 3.3 n< n> n=
Prehistoric Huron 6 5,667 2 il 0 Pfehistoric Neutral 3 3.667 2 0 1 Total 9 Variable Tribe Test Statistic df signif Huron aeu tsa 1
House Length (in ra)
raean 20- 4 18-9 t= ,79691 86 ,4277 var 60.5 109,9 F= 1.8150 37, $9 - 0255 n 50 38
House Bidline Width (in m)
mean 7.1 6,8 t= 2.1061 I09 -0375 var ,7 -5 F= 1,1073 64, 45 ,3625 n 65 B6 fiean House End Midtis (in ~f
mean 5.4 5.1 t= 1,3786 5Y ,1737 trar - 6 -3 F= 1.9597 35, 19 ,0608 a 36 20
Difference Between MidJine and Bnd Width (in a)
Hean Linear Taper Xength (in ID)
South Side Wall Post !!old Density (posts per af
mean 3-7 3-1 t= 2-9356, 75 ,0230 var 8 1-2 P= 1.5071 29, 46 ,070tr Table 6c (cont'd)
Variable Tribe Test Statistic df signif Huron Neutral
Sooth End Wall Post Hold ~ensity(posts per a)
mean 9.7 8. U t= 5,3030 79 ,0000 var 1.5 1.0 F= 1.5124 38, 44 ,0979 n 39 42
Storage Cubicle Total Length (in la)
man 5.0 2- 8 t= 4.3387 6 1 .OQO1 var 4.7 2-9 P= 1,6209 VO, 21 ,1188 n 4 1 22
Corridor gidth (in la)
mean 4-2 4-1 t= 1,7472 83 ,0854 gar ,2 ,1 P= 1,1937 43, 40 ,2871 n 44 41
Corridor Length (in B)
Distance between Southernaost Hearth and South End {in w) Table. 6b fcont 'd)
Average Spacing Between Raws of Bouses sigsif
Mann-Whitney U= 3,0000 Bedian Test ,8000
n avg, rank raedian= 5-5 nt n> n=
Prehistoric Huron 4 3,750 2 2 0 Prehistoric Heutral 2 3,000 'I 1 0 Total 6
Minimura House Length per Tillage (in lti) signif
Tr i be n avg. rank w&diar;i= 12-8 n< n> n=
Prehistoric Rufon 6 6,000 1 4 1 Prehistoric Weutral 3 3,000 3 0 I) Total 9 fiaximm Rouse Length per Village (in a) signif
n avy. rank trtedian= .Y 6.5 ' n< n> n=
Prehistoric Huron 6 6,000 2 4 0 Prehistoric Neutral 3 3-000 2 0 1 Total 9 Variable Tribe Test Statistic df signif Huron Neutral
Distance ketueen #orthernmost Hearth and Worth End (in m) mat. 4, 4 4.0 t= ,54563 Y Q - 9 865 var 1.8 5- 0 F= 3.1632 26, 1Y - 5884 n 15 27
Hearth Humber
mean 2.5 2-5 t=-,33114 4 3 ,9737 vas 3-3 3,4 F= 1,0271 2ti, 17 ,4886 n 18 27
Hearth Spacing [in B)
Feature Density (fea tuxes per m sq,)
mean -28 ,42 t=-11,1609 79 ,0001 var -01 41 F= 2,9801 28, 51 ,0003 n 52 29
Interior House Post Hold Density (posts per ~JI sq,)
Lntsrior flouse Post E4cld Diameter (in c@)
mean 8-9 8-53 t=-, 12864 37 ,8583 var 1-9 1.2 P= 1,6590 26, 17 ,1907 n 27 12 Baximum Village Size (in ha) signif
Trike fx. avg. rank median= 2.6 n< n> n=
Hu rm 5 6,800 3 2 0 Neutral 7 6,286 3 4 0
Total. 12 fliniinum House Length per Village (in rs) signif
Bann-Whitney U= 8,0000 Bedian Test ,5952
Tribe R avg, rank median= 6-9 n< a> n=
Huron 3 4,667 1 2 0 Meutra 1 6 5, 367 3 2 3 To tal 9
?laximum nouse Length per Village (in m) siynif
Huron 3 5.333 1 1 f Neutral 6 4,833 3 3 0
Total 9 Hedn House Length per Village signif
Harm-Whitney U= 7.0000 Hedian Test ,5952
Tribe x3 avg, sank median= 79,900 nC n> 8=
Huron 3 5-567 1 1 1 Neutral 6 4,667 3 3 0
Total 9
Hedian Gouse Length per Village signif Rann-Bhitney U= 6-0000 Hediaa Test - 5952
Tribe n avg, rank median= 19-5 n< n) dl=
Huron 3 6- QOO 3 2 0 Neutral 6 4-500 3 2 1
Total 9 Table Gc (cont 'd)
Tribe House Location if uron Neutral
No Palisade 2 1 3 Expected 10 BouX 14-3 ColF 15-8 4-5
Core 99 Y7 Expected 1)5 Row% 52-2 ColZ 67-7 71-2
fst Expansion 20 15 Expected 10 ROWS 75.0 CofX 15, D 22-7
Outside Palisade 2 1 Expecteci. 1 Row? 50.0 ColX 1-5 1.5
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif df= 3
Bax- Likelihood 17,290 ,0006 Cramerss phi= ;3 456 Chi-Square '15-885 -0012 Table 6c (cont8d)
Twoway Cross-Tabulation
Tribe Overlaps Huron
No Overlaps 9 1 Expected Row% ColS 80-5
No use- Ho use 15 Expected Row% Co3.3 14-2
Bouse- Bidden P1 Expected RnwX CO~X 3-5
Rouse-Palisade 2 Expected Bow$ ColX 1-8
Tests of Indepencence
Statistic signif dE= 3
Hax, Likelihood 19,624 ,0002 Craaerss phi= -3i-490 Chi-square 13,765 -0032 Table' de fcomt*d)
Twoway Cross-Tabulation
Tribe Ho use Extensions ~auron Neutral
None Expected BovX Col% One Ex pee ted Bow% ColX
Tests of f ndepencence
Statistic signif df= 1 n= 96
Hax, Likelihood .3b104 ,3479 Craaerls phi= ,0511 Ch 5-S y uare ,35849 ,5493 Binoaial Test of Synmetry ,0000 fisher Exact Prob-, 3971 Twoway Cross-Tabulation
Tribe In Rouse Burials Huron Neutral
Absent 59 Expected RovX ColX 87-3
Present 10 Expected Row% COP% 12- 7
Tests of Independence
Statistic signif df= 3 a= 79
@ax. Likeiihood ,16524 -1 ,8977 CramertS phi- -0145 Chi-Square ,15535 -1 ,8977 Biwmial Test of Symmetry ,0000 PisHer Exact Proh=, 5813 TakfB 6c (contr8)
Twoway Cross-Tabulation
Tribe Orientation Huron Weutral n= Total= 67 Row% 50.4 Col%
EN E 6 Expected 15 Row% 20.7 Col% 9-0
WNE 17 Expected 15 Row% 56.7 ColR 25*4
N E 2 Expected 1O Bow% '10-5 co295 3-0 NW 42 3xpected 28 Feu$ 76-4 ColX 62.7
Tests of Tradpedence
Statistic
Bax. Likelihood 40,806 Bibliography
Biggar, A, P, (ed,) 1924 The voyages of Jacques Cartier, ggb&&cations of the Public ----Archives -of --Canada ---No. 11, 1922-1936 iiorks Samuel & Chaaplain, 6 vo3.s- The Charaplain Scciety, Toronto,
Blalock, f-!, PI, 1972 Sacla& Statistics- EcGfaw-Hill Book, Co., 8, Y.
Blouet, B, U, 1972 Factors influencing the evolution of settlement patterns. In 9En. SegL&eng Urban&&, edited by P- J. Ucko, 8, Tringhan, and G, 8, Dimbleby, pp, 3-76, Gerald Duckworth and Co,, Ltd,, Cambridcp, Mass,
Boyer, 8, 1971 sgRoyal flictiona~Agsidcred (17Qg1, The Scholar Press LLd, ilenston, England,
Channen, E. R. and Clarke, N1 B,
A 1855 The Copeland site: a precontact Huron site in Si~coe County Ontario, 8ationaI 8useura-gf Caaadq, ~nthrs~o_3.o~icg1 -Pgers -- ---No. 8 Chapman, L, 3. and PutnaE, O. F', 1966 Tfig I??ysiograph~ Southern Ontau . University of Toronto Press, Toronto-
Cotgrave, 3, 1971 Dictionarie of the frencA a@ Enqfish Tongues f1631~ Theatrum Orbis Terrarura Ltd*, Aasterdaa,
Coyne, 3- H. (ed,) 1903 Exploration and the Great Lakes 1668-1670: Part 1: Galineess Naf ratiee and Bap, Onfarip Historical Society -Pxers --- --and Records-- &:2-75, Cranstone, 33- A- 1. Techniques, pf aaning and cultural change. In 8anL ..ISettle~ent ,,,and ,,Drbanisa, edited by PtJ, Ucko, R, Tringhaaa, and F.W. Dinrbleby, pp, 487-503, Gerald Duckworth and Co-, Ltd,, Cambridge, Bass,
Desai nliens, C. I970 & IlLlionar~ of French psEnglish, The Scholar Press Ltd-, Renston, England,
Emerson, N. 3, 1954 The archaeology of the Ontario Zroguois. Unpablished Ph. ft, dissertation, The Uni.versiLy of Chicago, f 'llinois.
1961 The longhoase, Lecture on Cahiague presented .at the University of Toronto.
Engefbrecht, W, 1972 The reflection of patterned behavior in Iroquois pottery decoration, Peaasvlvania Archaeologist 42: 1-15,
Featon, W, I, and Boore, E. 3. (eds.) 1974 Customs of $& American Indians gospared with Bz ---Custons of Priraitive Tines. 2 vols. The Champlain Society, Toron La, Finlayson, 8. 0, and Poulton, Do 1979 R preliminary report of investigations at the new Toronto Tnternational Airport, Report prepared by the Buseua of Indian archaeology for the Piinistry of Transport and %he National Buseuas of Canada,
Finlayson, W, D, and Pihl, R. H, 7980 Soine inplications for the attribute analysis of ria sherds fro@the Draper site, Pickering, Ontario, I??ocefzdiaqs of the 1979 froggois Pottery Conference Pochester Euseua ,------,, -I--L --- p- and Science Center: Research Becords no- 13: l13-t3f ------u-----I--- .. Fitch, J. fi. and Branch, I3, P1 1960 Pri~itive architecture and climate. ScienLif ic Anr?risa,g 203 f6) : 134-144,
Fitting, J, E, 1372 The Huron as an ecotype: the li~itsof aaxiaization in a Bestern Great Lakes Society, Uro~ologica1Y: 3- 18, Fitzgerala, W, R. 1981 Lest the beaver run loose: the early 17th century Weutral Christianson site, Unpublished ff, A, thesis, Departnent of Anthropology, McHaster Dniversity-
Flannery, Re 33, 1972 The origins of the village as a settlemnt type in Resoa~ericaand the Near East: a co~parativestu3y, In ifgf, -,Settlement ,-and ,,-Urbanism I edited by P, 3- Gcko, R- Tringhaa, and WI G- Dimbleby, pp- 23-SY- Gerald Duckworth and Co,, Ltd, ,Ca%bridge, Bass.
Fox, f).J, and Guire, K, E, 1976 Docuaentatian for Hidas, Statistical Research Laboratory, The University of Bichigan, Pox, D. J, et- al, 1976 aementagy Statistics using e&g. statistical Research Zaborataory, The University of Hichigan,
Fox, W* X, 1975 The central north. Erie shore. Xn g4g Late eehistoay of --the --Lake ---Erie ---Drainas 1972 mposium Revised, edited by DIS, Brose, pp, 362-392, The Cleveland 3usenm of Ratural Nistory. Bayden, 3, 1976 Corporate groups and the Late Ontario Iroquois Longhouse, Ontag& Archaeoloqp 28: 3- 16-
1978 Bigger is Better?: Factors determining Ontario Iroquois site size, Jousnaf of ~anadiagArchaeoloqj! 2: 107-116,
1979 The Draper and Yhite sites: preliminary and theoretical considerations, Ia Settlement Pattern3 of Qweg gad Yhite Sites --1973 --Excavations 3 edited by 8, Hayden, --Department -- gg &&haeol~gj!~ Simon grasqf g&i=ysitvL pbiication go, 6: 1-28,
1982 The corporate group as aa archaeologicaZ unit,Jouraal -of --Ar~thr~loqicaJ Archaeofoqy 1: 132- 58- Heidenreich, C, E, 1973 gurol&q, & Bistorp of Geoqfaphy pf the fluson Lndiagg -----1600-1550, Historical Sites Branch, Ontario Binistry of Natural Besources, Ottawa,
Yodder, S, 1979 Economic and social stress and material culture patterning. Aaerlcan lhh&c'fiitp 44:446-454-
2ress, Toronto,
Boise, R, C, 1973 Rative Tree2 @ Canada , Binistry of the Environment, Ottawa,
Hunt, G, T, 19Q0 gnrs of && xro~ilois, 2 study jg Intertribal ----Relations, Ihe University of Wisconsin Press, Hadison- Yun ter- Anderson, R, LI 1977 B theoretical approach to the study of hause form, In E33Jdiaq jg AschaegloqyL edited by L, in ford, pp 287-315, Acadeslic Press, I, Y, dameson, 9, F, . 1909 Wprratives of Weu Netherlands, 1509-1664, Charles Scrihner's Sons, N-Y, Jamiesoa, S= H. 1979 The Slack-CasveXi guarcy and workshops (AfHa-9) : soae organizational implications- Unpublished report on file with the Ontario Heritage Foundation, Toronto,
195 7 Economics and Qntafio Irog3oian social organization, Canadian Journal gf Archaeology 5: 19-30, ---I__ ----- Jchnson, D- S, '1980 The Sckenzie or Woodbridge site (AkGv-2) , and its place in the Late Ontario Tradition, Archaeolaqy ~ Eastern Worth ---A~erica 8: 77-87, Jogues, I- 1977 Warrative of captivity anong the Hohawk Indians, ---Garland --Librarjr 92 Barratives & North Agterican g~dian mtkvities Vol, 57,
Johnston, B-0, and Jackson, L- J, 1980 Settleaent pattern at the Le Cafon site, a 17th century Huron village, Journal 21 Field Archq.eg&qqy 7 12) : f 73- 199-
Jury, W- and Jury, E, fl. '1955 Saint Louis, Huron Indian village and Jesuit raissiori site. Raseurn Bulletin 80-70, Museum a Indian Archaeoloqy, --The ----Univers& of Western pntario- Kapches, fl- 1981 AlGo-29: the Buda site, Bope taunship, Ontario, Unpublished re~ortsub~titted to Eldosado Nuclear Ltd,, Port Hope, Ontario,
Kenyon, W, A, 1968 The Rifler site, Qntario Huseul, Universit~of _----AToronto _-Art -and Brchaeoloq~l,Occaiogq& Papers no, 34 Kidrl, R- E, 1952 Sixty years of Ontario archaeology, In Archaeolox gf . &&& Easten! gn_&~gdStates, , edited by J, 8, Griffin, pp 71-82, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Knight, D. 1979 fnteria report of the excavations at the Ball site (BdGv-3). Unpublished report to the Ontario Binistry of Culture and Fecrea tion-
Knight, D., Connor, K, and Cranston, P, 1981 The 1980 excavation at the Barf site- Unpubfished report, Department of SocicPogy an3 Anthropology, Vilfrid Laurier University,
Knight, D, and Snyder, M, 1982 The 1981 excavations at the Ball site. Unpublished report, Depar taeut of Sociology and Anthropology, Wilf rid Laurier University-
Lattn, fl. A, n,d, The nacPeod site; a fate Ontario froquois village in Ontario County, Gnpublished aanuscript-
1980 Controlling the heights: the Iroquoian occupations sf the Albion Pass region, Archaeoloqy qf Eastern Bps& Aaerica 8: 71-77,
LeClerq, C, 1973 Bp First EstabPish~entof &he Faith A. Neu gyaece* 2 vofs. Aaes Press I%,, New York,
Lennox, P. A, 1978 The Hood site: a bistoric Neutral town of ISYO A=D- rfnpublished manuscript suhmoitted to the Ontario i-leritage Foundation, Toronto.
Lerinson, D. and Malone, 3, J, 1980 Zoward Ex~aininq sufture: q CrdticaA ?&?vie%?of . &he l??~din~ %40rldwi.de Cross-Cutlural Research, RRAF Press, U, S, 1952 Iroquois pottery types- Nationgl Eusuen of Canada. ------Bulletin 124.
Marshall, A- 1979 Bxialf y-pitched longhouses from Mew Guinea and neolithic Euro~e, Sghaeology 2nd Phyg&&& Anthropoioqy hg ------Oceania 14:99-107, 198 1 Environ~ental adaptation and structural design in axially pitched longhouses f o~mMeolithic Europe, Horld ------Archaeology 13: IOl-12O. Milisauskas, S, 1972 An analysis of Linear culture longhouses at Olszanica 31, Poland, Eorfg Archaeof oqy 4: 57-74,
Bobohy-Nagy, 5, 1957 Hative Genius in BaonYmous Architecture- Praeger, N-Y,
Basmith, C, L, 1981 The Kirche site: a late prehiskoric Huron village in the upper Trent valley- Uapublished H,A, thesis, Department of Anthropology, BcHaster f3nlvessity.
Neitzel, R, S, 1965 hrchaeology of the Fatherland site: the Grand village of the Natchez, ligthropolgy PapersL American Husegg 9s -----Natura.1 -----Historx ----Volulne 51: Part 1,
BobZe, We C, 1968 Iroquois archaeology and the development of Iroquois social orgarnizaticn, 1000 - 1650 A, D, Unpublished Pb-D. dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary.
1969 Some social ifapfications of the Iroquois "in situM theory. Ontarig &chae_oloqgs 13:16-28, b tl tE t-' @ 0 ci c 0 w w & rt n cb a n
n pl la, ca Its a la (U n IVI
pr+ In, Paddea, R, C, Cultural change and military resistance in Araucanian Chilie, 1550-1730. In Eative South eericans , edited by P,J. Lyon, pp,. 327-342, Little, Brown, aad Co,, Boston,
?earce, R. J, 1978 Archaeological investigations of the Pickering Phase in the Rice Lake Area, Ontario &c@g&qp 29:17-24.
Prussin, L. 1969 Architecu- kn Northem Gfaana, & Stndv of Forms 2nd ------Functions, University of ~aliforniaPress, Berkeley, Quaife, 3. E4. (ed,) 7952 aggester~ Con~tr~ & 17th Century, The Citadel Press, N. 'fl,
Quinby, G. 1. 1957 The Bayou Goulc site, 1 berville Parish, Louisiana. ----Chicago Natural Nistor~PIuseum& &sMiana Anthmolwy 47, No. 2,
Ramsden, P, G, 1977a A refineaent of siarrte aspects aE Baron ceranric analysis. Natioaal &usenm of Ban, &_rMggp Series, -----8rchaeolqqLi.L Survey of Canad& gpgey 63: 19775, Late Iroquoian occupation of south central. Ontario, A report on the 1976 investigations subraitted to Canada Council,
1378 An hypothesis concerning the effects of Early European trade aaong sorae Ontario Iroquois, Canadian Journal Ilf ----Archaeology 2: 105- 106.
Xicbards, C, 1967 Huron alas Iroquois residence patterns, Iroquois Culture Bobbins, M, 1966 House types and settlement patterns: a application of ethnology to archeologica 1 interpreia tion, Gnnesota -----Archaeo1.oaist 28: 3-34. Bowlands, PIY1, J. 1972 Defence: a factor in the organization of settfe~ents, In Wan* Settlement, grbanisg, edited by P,J. Ucko, R- Triaghan, and G,Y, Di@blt;by, pp- 447-Y62, GeraZa Duckworth an4 Co., Ca~bridge,Bass.
Eozel, 3. 1979 The Gunby site, Dnpablished aasters thesis, Departaent of Anthropology, MacHaster University-
Sckaden, E, t962 Egq;lamental Aspects Df Guarani Culturs, Difusao Europeia do Lfvre, Sao Paulo.
Sqars, W. No 1955 Settlement patterns in Eastern United States- Zn Prehistoric settlemeat Btterns &kg gel^ Tdorid, edited by ------_. -----I_- G, R, Elilley, pp, 45-51, Wennez-Grea Foundation for Anthropological Research, Enc,, N.Y. Siegel, S, 1956 lonparame trig Statistics gpy Behavorial Sciences. HcGf ~PI-H~~I,Book Company, Men York,
Simonsen, P, 7972 The transition from food-gathering to pastoral is^ in gorth Scadinasia and its inapact on settlement patterns. fn
-,-,,,-Settlesent ,,and -----#Urhanisltl edited by P.3- Ucko, 8, 'Ifringhaat and G.Fit. Dimbleby, Gerald Duckworth and Co., Lkd,, Rertfordshire, England, Smith, D, 1977 The acchaeological investigations at the Southwold earthworks, 1935 aad 1976, Parks Canada Banuscript Report no, 31tl. Srait'n, P. E, L, 197b Food &roduction Cossessencgs. Cumings Publishing Co, ,f nc,, Men1 o Eark, California,
Snow, 3, n-d. Architectural variability at the Seed site: an expsraeatal statistical cowparison of wall construction amnq Iroguoian longhouses, Unpublished nanuscript,
Sou dsky , 3, 1969 Etude de la aaison neolithigue, S&ovenska .Archaeofo~ia 17: 5-96,
Sondsky, B. and Pavlu, I, 1972 The linear pottery culture settlement patterns of central Europe, In gs, Settiebtlent, a& grbanisg, edited by P, J, Ueko, fa, Tringhaiit, G, 8, Diableby, pp, 317-328. Gerald Duckworth and @a,, Cashridge, Bass,
Stothers, D. B. 1970 The Porteous site: a late manifestation of the Priacesr Point corapf en, Hewletter t& $& 0E)nari.g Arcfaaeof ocfical ----Society go, 70-4,
1975 The princess goint coaplex, a regional representation of an early Late Tdoodland horizon in the Great Lakes area, In: &,if Prefiistory of 3s take Drainaqe 3 --1972 Synposiua &lised, edited by D- S, Brose, pp- 137-151, The Cleveland Hnseuta of Natural History.
Sutherland, GI E, 1980 The transition betveen the Early and iliddle Ontario Iroquois stages.Atch Notes 80-6 :13 17-
Sutlive, V, R, 1978 I ban Qf sarasslr. AH@ Pub-, carp- Arlingtoo, . Illinois, Trigger, 0- 1962 The historic focalion of the Huron, Ontarig History 54: 137-148-
1967 Settlement archaeology - its goals and praaise, -----Araesican ---Antiguity 32: 199-160, 1968 The determinants of settlelnent patteXn% f n SettIement ------Archaeology, edited by LC, Chang, pp, 53-78, Rational Press, Palo A1to, California,
1969 3%~ lffq, farmers of the North* Rolt, Rinehart and dinstsn, N, Y, 1976 ag Children qg thf AateGsic, q $story of Hurqn geople 32, 2 vols, McGill-Queen's Universi.ty Press, Wontreal.
1978a Iroquoian ntatrility, Pen_n$yaania brchaeol~g_ist -----Bulletin 48 (3-2) :55-65,
Trigham, R, 1972 Territorial deaarcation of prehistoric set tf ements, In m, Settl-ement~ Urbanisnt, edited by P, J, Ucko, A, Tringham, and W, GI Dirnhley, Gerald Duckuorth and Co,, Ltd., Hertfordshire, Eagland.
Tyyska, A, Et 1969 Archaeology of the Penetang Peninsula, In' Palaeoecoloqy ---and -----Ontario -----Prefiistoyy, Depar t!aent of Antfiro~&qy~ -----University pT =onto, Research l33zt ?do- 1. Wagner, N, E-, TOO!~~,L, E,, and Reigert, E, R, 1973 Es Mg~rass, 2 Prehistoric Village in gaterloo CouqtX- Sir WiLfrid Laurier University, Waterloo- 1945 f&'i'id Xeiseri 1696-1760, Friend of Colonist 2nd lohawk - University of pennsHfvaaia Press, Philadelphia,
garrick, I;, 1982 The Ponger site: a protohistoric Neutral comaunity, Onpublished rego~tsubaitted to the Ontario Heritage Foundation. 61-68,
Whallon, R, I 1968 favestiyations of late pzehistoric social organization in York state, In & l?erspectives Arcbaeo&gy, edited by S. Binford asd L, Binford, pp,. 223-24Q- Aldine Pub, Co, , Chicago,
Whiting, 3-B- H, and Ayres,B, 1968 Iaferences forntt the shape of dwellings, Xn Se_ttleatent ----Archaeofoqy, edited by K,G, Chang, pp. 1 l7-A 33, . National Press, Palo Alto, Calif,
'H'illiam, B, J, 1968 Establishing cultural heterogeneities in settlcaent patterns: an ethnographic exanrtr;le, In Neu Persectives ig ------Archaesfaqy, edited by S 8, Binford and LIB. Binford, pp 151-170. Aldine Publishing, Co,, Chicago,
1936 Roebuck, Prehistoric village site, Grenville County , Ontario. National @ieu& of ganada Bg&X&g 83-
1939 Lavson prehistoric village site, Widdiesex county, Ontario, Matiogxil Eluse= of Canada palletin 9ii, -1966 The Ontario Iroquois Tradition- National fiuseum of 8an -I_------Bulletin 2 10.
Wright, 3, 7979 The Dren site AfHd-3: a re-appraisal of the Uren type site, Submitted to the Ontario Heritage foundation,
1981 The Hafker site. Hational Museum man, #ercaq Series --of ganada, me2 & 103 1932 A report on the analysis of fauna from two longhouses on the Urea prehistoric villaye site. Submitted to the Ontario Heritage Foundation,