society for american archaeology - clas usersusers.clas.ufl.edu/davidson/proseminar/hart et...

Society for American Archaeology

Extending the Phytolith Evidence for Early Maize (Zea mays ssp. mays) and Squash (Cucurbitasp.) in Central New YorkAuthor(s): John P. Hart, Hetty Jo Brumbach and Robert LusteckSource: American Antiquity, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Jul., 2007), pp. 563-583Published by: Society for American ArchaeologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40035861 .

Accessed: 04/01/2015 15:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.227.157.72 on Sun, 4 Jan 2015 15:01:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40035861?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


EXTENDING THE PHYTOLITH EVIDENCE FOR EARLY MAIZE (Zea mays ssp. mays) AND SQUASH (Cucurbita sp.)

IN CENTRAL NEW YORK

John P. Hart, Hetty Jo Brumbach, and Robert Lusteck

The timing of the adoptions of maize and squash across eastern North America has been a topic of long-standing interest among archaeologists and paleoethnobotanists. The use of flotation for macrobotanical remains beginning in the 1960s and 1970s coupled with the application of accelerator mass spectrometry dating beginning in the 1980s has led to substantial revisions of knowledge about the history of these crops in the region. A complementary source of evidence for the crops

'

histories in the eastern North America comes from opalphytoliths. Analysis ofphytolith assemblages recovered from charred

food residues has shown that maize and squash were being used in central New York well before the macrobotanical record indicates. In combination with previously analyzed samples, 16 additional residue assemblages help to clarify the history of maize and squash in central New York. The results indicate that maize and squash were being used in New York by 2270 B.R and 2945 B.R, respectively.

El fechamiento de las adopciones del maiz y la calabaza a traves del este de Norte America ha sido un topico de interes por mucho tiempo para arqueologosy paleobotdnicos. La utilizacion del metodo de flotac ion para restos macrobotdnicos comenzo en los 1960s y 1970s, emparejo con la aplicacion del fechamiento por Acelerador de Espectrometro de Masa, el cual comenzo en los 1980s, esto ha llevado a revisiones substanciales en el conocimiento acerca de la historia de estos cultivos en la region. Unafuente complementaria de evidencia para las historias de los cultivos en el este de Norteamerica proviene defitolitos de

opalo. Andlisis de colecciones defitolitos en residuos de alimentos han demostrado que el maiz y la calabaza fueron utilizados en el centro de Nueva York mucho antes de lo que el record macrobotdnico indica. En combinacion con muestras previa- mente analizadas, 16 colecciones de residuos adicionales ayudan a clarificar la historia del maiz y la calabaza en el centro de Nueva York. Los resultados indican que el maiz y la calabaza fueron utilizados en Nueva York en 2270 B.R y 2945 B.R, respectivamente.

the histories of agricultural

Determining crops has been an important focus of archaeological and paleoethnobotanical

research in eastern North America for decades (e.g., Asch and Hart 2004; Blake and Cutler 2001 ; Craw- ford and Smith 2003; Ford 1985; Fritz 1990; Gilmore 1931; Green 1994; Hart, ed. 1999; Kee-

gan 1987; Minnis 2003; Riley et al. 1990; Scarry 1993; Smith 1992; Woods 1992; Yarnell 1964). The flotation revolution beginning in the 1960s (Chapman and Watson 1993) led to substantial revisions in our knowledge of crops and their histories

in eastern North America through the systematic recovery of macrobotanical remains (e.g., Struever 1962). The flotation revolution was enhanced in the 1980s with the advent of accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) dating, which allows direct dating of key crop remains (e.g., Adair 2003; Conard et al. 1984; Crawford et al. 1997; Fritz and Smith 1988; Hart et al. 2002; Riley et al. 1994).

However, because of the vagaries of macrobotanical preservation, a complete understanding of crop histories requires complementary sources of evidence (Hard et al. 1996; Hart 1999a). One such

John P. Hart Research and Collections Division, New York State Museum, 3140 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230. (jph_nysm@mail. nysed.gov) Hetty Jo Brumbach Department of Anthropology, University at Albany, SUNY, Arts & Sciences Building, Room 237, 1400 Washington Ave., Albany, NY 12222. ([email protected]) Robert Lusteck Department of Anthropology, University of Minnesota, 395 Hubert H. Humphrey Center, 301 19th Ave. S., Minneapolis, MN 55455. ([email protected])

American Antiquity, 72(3), 2007, pp. 563-583

Copyright ©2007 by the Society for American Archaeology

563



564 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 72, No. 3, 2007]

source of evidence comes from opal phytoliths (Pearsall 1982; Rovner 1983). Analysis of phytoliths to help build regional crop histories has been done extensively in Central and South America (e.g., Pearsall 1978; Pearsall et al. 2003; Piperno 2004; Piperno et al. 1985; Piperno and Flannery 2001; Piperno and Pearsall 1998; Piperno and Stothert 2003 ; Staller and Thompson 2002 ; Thomp- son 2006). Fewer studies have focused on eastern North America (e.g., Bozarth 1987, 1990, 1993; Thompson et al. 1994), especially east of the Mis- sissippi River (Starna and Kane 1983).

Recently, using methods and techniques developed by Robert Thompson, we have begun to explore the potential of phytoliths recovered from directly AMS dated cooking residues adhering to the interior of pottery sherds to obtain better understandings of the histories of maize (Zea mays ssp. mays) and other crops such as squash (Cucurbita sp.) in central New York (Hart et al. 2003; Thomp- son et al. 2004). Our preliminary results from five sites have shown that cooking residues from this region are productive sources of phytolith assemblages and implied that maize and squash were being used much earlier in central New York than the macrobotanical record has suggested.

Our previous results indicated maize use in the region from 1960 ± 28 B.P. (cal 2a 39 B.C.-A.D. 1 19) through 1221 ± 16 B.P. (cal 2a A.D. 718-880), and squash from the 1515 ± 27 B.P. (cal 2a A.D. 434-613) through 1228 ± 42 B.P. (cal 2a A.D. 681-889), both well before the earliest confirmed macrobotanical evidence in the region (Hart et al. 2003; Thompson et al. 2004). Our immediate goal for the current project was to extend the temporal coverage. We sought to extend our analysis so that we had a more-or-less chronologically continuous series of samples from the end of the prehistoric sequence, when maize and squash are known to have been staple crops (Asch and Hart 2004; Engel- brecht 2003; Funk and Kuhn 2003), to earlier times when the use of maize in New York had only previously been speculated on but not documented through the verified recovery of maize macrobotanical remains (e.g., Ritchie 1944, 1969; Ritchie and Funk 1973; see Hart and Brumbach 2003). This would also extend to times when squash had been identified though macrobotanical remains in adjacent states but not in New York (Hart and Asch Sidell 1997).

For the present study, we analyzed an additional 21 residue samples of which 16 (76.2 percent) produced phytolith assemblages. This brings the total number of samples analyzed to 33, 24 (72.7 percent) of which have produced phytolith assemblages. These assemblages come from 12 sites that span a period of some 2,500 years, from among of the earliest assemblages of pottery in the New York State until the last centuries before massive changes in Native American lifeways that resulted from interactions with Europeans. The results show that maize was being used in New York by 2270 ± 35 B.P. (cal 2a 399-208 B.C.) and squash by 2905 ± 35 B.P. (cal 2a 1256-998 B.C.).

Methods and Techniques

AMS Dating Residue sampling was done under low magnification (generally lOx) using a dissection probe to carefully remove the residue from each sherd's interior surface. The amount of residue sampled for AMS assay has ranged from 4.0 to 56.7 mg. Approximately 1 mg of carbon following pretreat- ment is needed to obtain an AMS date. Carbon yields, following standard chemical pretreatments at the Illirois State Geological Survey (ISGS) Iso- tope Geochemistry Section, ranged from 18.5 percent to 61.64 percent (Table 1). As these high carbon yields became evident, in general, we submitted smaller samples for AMS dating in the present project than we did in the earlier projects. Following chemical pretreatments and target prepa- ration, ISGS submitted the samples to the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ISGS nos. below A0452) or Lawrence Livermore National Labora- tory (ISGS nos. A0452 and above) for assay.

We calibrated all of the resulting 14C ages, along with those obtained earlier, with CALIB 5.0 (Reimer et al. 2004; Stuiver and Reimer 1993). In our analysis of the results we rely primarily on calibrated 2a ranges. We also report the median probability for each date. Telford et al. (2004; also see Stuiver et al. 2005) demonstrate that the median probability is a more reliable representation of the calibrated radiocarbon date than are calibration curve intercepts. For dates from the same site not significantly different from one another at the 95 percent level of confidence, we calculated pooled



REPORTS 565

Table 1. Residue Sample AMS-Dating Data.

NYSM Phytoliths ISGS C yield Site Catalog # Present? Lab # 513C (% dry) C14 B.P. Cal 2o B.C./A.D. (relative area) Source3

Scaccia 71492 Yes A0541 -25.8 18.50 2905±35 1256-1235 B.C. (.027), 1215-998 B.C. (.973) 1 Vinette 40047 No A0456 -29.1 33.60 2510±35 790-519 B.C. (1.00) 2 Vinette 40031-2 Yes A0500 -28.1 48.00 2270±35 399-349 B.C. (.446), 313-208 B.C. (.554) 1 Felix 40701-21 Yes A0505 -30.0 56.60 2205±30 376-197 B.C. (1.00) 1 Fortin2 46238-26 Yes A0410 -29.0 55.70 1995±35b 90-72 B.C. (.024), 59 B.C- A.D. 80 (.976) 2 Vinette 40046 Yes A0455 -29.8 40.80 1990±40 930 B.C.-A.D. 86 (.987), 106-119 (.013) 2 Vinette 40135 Yes A0452 -29.3 43.30 1940±35 35-28 (.015), 24-10 B.C. (.027), 2

2 B.C.-A.D. 130 (.958) Wickham 40291-3 No A0454 -30.4 55.80 1695±35 A.D. 255-418 (1.00) 1 Wickham 40170 No A0194 -29.0 58.05 1648±47 A.D. 259-295 (.077), 321-537 (.923) 3 Wickham 40290-5 No A0453 -28.0 49.40 1635±35 A.D. 339-536 (1.00) 1 Simmons 40518-1 Yes A0542 -28.7 37.80 1620±35 A.D. 349-368 (.033), 379-540 (.967) 1 Westheimer 44533-67 Yes A0498 -25.9 28.80 1600±35 A.D. 393-544 (1.00) 1 Westheimer 44608 No Fortin2 46238-16 Yes A0406 -29.0 59.70 1525±35 A.D. 432-605 (1.00) 2 Fortin2 46232-80 No A0407 -29.0 53.30 1505±35 A.D. 435-491 (.154), 509-517 (.014), 2

529-639 (.832) Felix 40788-3 Yes A0497 -27.2 47.60 1575±35 A.D. 413-561 (1.00) 1 Felix 40690-9 Yes A0503 -27.9 50.40 1525±40 A.D. 428-612 (1.00) 1 Felix 40647-1 No A0504 -27.4 33.60 1520±35 A.D. 432-610 (1.00) 1 Felix 40727-19 Yes A0499 -27.3 36.80 1430±40 A.D. 559-662 (1.00) 1 Felix 40652-18 No A0502 -26.7 54.50 1405±40 A.D. 570-674 (1.00) 1 Felix 40677-9 Yes A0506 -26.3 26.30 1315±50 A.D. 637-783 (.947), 787-822 (.037), 1

842-860 (.016) Wickham 40525-1 Yes A0190 -28.1 61.64 1425±45 A.D. 552-667 (1.00) 3 Wickham 40194 n/a A0195 -29.7 61.20 1450±43 A.D. 542-658 (1.00) 3 Simmons 40518-2 Yes A0501 -29.7 51.00 1390±35 A.D. 594-683 (1.00) 1 Kipp Island 41119-5 Yes A0225 -26.4 53.85 1470±43 A.D. 443-450 (.008), 462-483 (.026), 3

533-656 (.966) Kipp Island 41119-2 n/a A0226 -26.5 56.34 1461±43 A.D. 469-478 (.008), 535-659 (.992) 3 Kipp Island 41119-8 Yes A0227 -27.0 55.87 1428±41 A.D. 559-663 (1.00) 3 Kipp Island 42729-5 n/a A0228 -26.1 59.74 1260±39 A.D. 668-831 (.918), 836-869 (.082) 3 Wickham 40525-8 Yes A0191 -25.8 50.35 1228±42 A.D. 681-889 (1.00) 3 Hunter's Home 48580-110 Yes A0192 -26.7 50.92 1231±44 A.D. 678-889 (1.00) 3 Hunter's Home 48580-115 n/a A0193 -27.2 53.57 1286±40 A.D. 655-783 (.934), 788-818 (.047), 3

842-859 (.018) Hunter's Home 41356-6 n/a A0197 -27.5 47.12 1247±48 A.D. 670-884 (1.00) 3 Hunter's Home 48584-1 Yes A0198 -27.8 25.99 1211+46 A.D. 682-897 (.965), 921-944 (.034) 3 Hunter's Home 41797 Yes A0196 -24.9 53.51 1138±40 A.D. 779-794 (.040), 801-988 (.960) 3 Street 48217-10 Yes A0229 -26.1 45.98 1043±40 A.D. 892-1042 (.990), 1107-1117 (.010) 1 Haner n/a n/a A0235 -18.1 54.99 781±42 A.D. 1176-1285 (1.00) 1 Smith-Pagerie 44728-13 No A0528 -20.7 48.30 445±40 A.D. 1408-1516 (.950), 1596-1618 (.050) 1 Klock 45738-43 Yes A0523 -23.6 57.70 480±40 A.D. 1327-1342 (.025), 1394-1475 (.975) 1 Garoga 42826-2 Yes A0522 -20.8 53.30 425±40 A.D. 1417-1522 (.853), 1574-1626 (.147) 1

aSources: (1) Hart and Brumbach (2005; phytolith analysis this study), (2) Thompson et al. 2004; (3) Hart et al. 2003. Considered too early for context (Thompson et al. 2004).

mean dates using Ward and Wilson's (1978) method as implemented in CALIB 5.0.

Phytoliths The methods and techniques used to extract and classify phytolith assemblages for the current project are the same as those described in Hart et al. (2003:627). For the present project, between 12 and 42 mg of residue was sampled from each sherd. The amount of residue sampled depended in most instances on the amount of residue present on the

sherd. Any soil adhering to the surface of residues was removed prior to sampling. The organic material of each residue sample was dissolved with heated nitric acid in Thompson's lab at the Uni- versity of Minnesota. This was followed by cen- trifuging at 3,000 RPM for 15 minutes and then replacement of the nitric acid with distilled water. Each sample was then rinsed with distilled water five times and with alcohol twice. Ten drops of each sample were placed on a microscope slide and mounted with Permount. A total of 100 rondel




phytoliths, characteristic of grass inflorescences (Mulholland 1993; Pearsall et al. 2003; Thompson and Mulholland 1994), were then examined for each sample under magnification (400x) by Thompson. Rondel phytoliths are short cylinders with rounded to oval bases (Mulholland and Rapp 1992) that are produced in the glumes of maize and other grasses. Assemblages of rondel phytoliths can be incorporated into foods when grass seeds/kernels are processed (Thompson and Mul- holland 1994). Each rondel phytolith was classified by Thompson according to the taxonomy he developed (Hart et al. 2003:627) building on previous work by Mulholland and Rapp (1992). Also recorded for each phytolith were the length and width and aspect ratio (length/width) of the infe- rior face of each phytolith. Lengths and widths were categorized by whole micron and the aspect ratio in units of one-tenth micron. The classifica- tions resulted in count data for each taxonomic and morphometric (width, length, and ratio aspect) cat- egory. These in turn were transformed into pro- portions for use with the statistical techniques.

The basis of the analysis of rondel phytoliths recovered from cooking residues is comparison with assemblages from modern plants (Hart et al. 2003; Thompson et al. 2004). The deposition of silica in maize and teosinte glumes is genetically con- trolled (Dorweiler and Doebley 1997; also see Wang et al. 2005), as it presumably is in the glumes of other grass species. Rondel phytolith assemblages from maize and other grasses recovered from cooking residues can be identified to the species level based on statistical comparisons with rondel phytolith assemblages from modern speci- mens (Hart et al. 2003; Thompson et al 2004). For the present analyses we used a database of 36 modern comparative samples (Table 2) including wild rice (Zizania aquatica-3 samples; Zizania palustris-A samples), little barley (Hordeum pusillum-3 samples), foxtail grass (Setaria glauca-l sample), gramagrass (Bouteloua curtipendula-l sample), barnyard grass (Echinochloa muricata-l sample) and maize (Zea mays ssp. mays-23 samples from 15 traditional varieties). Also used for some analyses were nine rondel assemblages extracted from charred maize cobs recovered from archaeological sites in New York and Pennsylvania. One hundred rondel phytoliths were classified for each comparative sample by Thompson using the same taxon-

omy used for the residue assemblages. Two statistical techniques were used to compare

residue and modern plant assemblages: squared chord distances and cluster analysis using Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean (UPGMA) linkage with squared chord distances. The statistics were calculated using the entire data set including the taxonomic and morphometric data with MultiVariate Statistical Pack- age (MVSP) version 3.1 (Kovach 1999). The statistical techniques allowed us to assess to which modern plant rondel phytolith assemblage each residue derived rondel phytolith assemblage is most similar. We present additional information on the use of these statistics in our discussion of the results.

Individual phytoliths produced by the edible portions of other plants may be identified to the genus or species level. The rinds of cucurbits (squashes, gourds) produce distinctively scalloped spherical to oval phytolith shapes (Bozarth 1987; Piperno et al. 2002), while edible sedges {Cyperus sp.) produce dimpled plate phytoliths (Ollendorf 1992). Small numbers of cucurbit and sedge phytoliths have been found in a number of residues as reported in Hart et al. (2003) and Thompson et al. (2004).

Twenty-one additional residue samples were analyzed for the current project. Of these, 16 produced phytolith assemblages. This brings the total number of analyzed samples to 33, from 12 sites (Figure 1), and the total number of analyzed samples with phytolith assemblages to 24, represent- ing all of the sites sampled (Table 2). Of this total, 21 had rondel phytolith assemblages that could be subjected to statistical analysis: 10 from the previously published results and 1 1 from the present project. The earlier samples are included in the present analysis to take advantage of the expanded database of comparative modern samples.

Results

AMS Dates

The results of the AMS dating of residues for this and previous projects, provided in Table 1, are reviewed in detail in Hart and Brumbach (2005). In summary, the 38 dates from 14 archaeological sites (Figure 1) span a period of approximately 2,500 years, from 2905 ± 35 B.P (cal 2a 1256-998 B.C.; ISGS-A0541) at the Scaccia site to 425 ± 40



REPORTS 567

Figure 1. General locations of New York archaeological sites mentioned in the text: (1) Scaccia, (2) Hunter's Home, (3) Kipp Island, (4) Felix, (5) Wickham, (6) Simmons (7) Vinette, (8) Garoga, (9) Klock, (10) Smith-Pagerie, (11) Westheimer, (12) Fortin 2, (13) Street, (14) 211-1-1, (15) Haner (from Hart and Brumbach 2005).

B.R (cal 2a A.D. 1417-1626; ISGS-A0522) at the Garoga site. The dates cover the pottery-producing period of central New York prehistory until approximately 1000 B.R The 550-year gap in coverage between approximately 1000 B.R and 450 B.R is explained by our primary research focus on the time before macrobotanical remains of crops become evident in the archaeological record of the region. In addition, there is a paucity of sherds in the New York State Museum's collections with enough residue for both dating and phytolith analysis from that 550-year period despite the presence of large collections of pottery from numerous sites. The dates provide a chronological framework for the phytolith analysis.

Grass Phytolith Analysis If our methods and techniques work, then we expect that rondel phytolith assemblages from modern maize cobs will be distinguishable from modern indigenous grass inflorescence assemblages. Table 3

is a squared chord distance matrix for 23 assemblages from 15 modern traditional maize varieties and 15 assemblages from 6 indigenous grass species with seeds known to have been consumed prehistorically in northeastern North America (Crawford and Smith 2003). The lowest indigenous grass distance values for the various modern maize assemblages range from 1 .332 to 3.605 times greater than the lowest value for another maize

assemblage. This means that each maize assemblage is more similar to another maize assemblage than it is to an indigenous grass assemblage. Fig- ure 2 is a dendrogram of a cluster analysis using the modern indigenous grass and maize assemblages. It clearly shows the maize assemblages (nos. 16-39) clustering separately from the indigenous grass assemblages (nos. 1-15). Bouteloua curtipendula (no. 1), Echinochloa muricata (no. 2), and Setaria glauca (no. 6) do not cluster with the other indigenous grasses, but they do not cluster with maize. These results show how modern maize




Table 2. Comparative Sample Proveniences.

Samplesa Provenience Source Modern Indigenous Grasses

Zizania aquatica Lake George, NY University of Minnesota Herbarium Zizania aquatica Lake Erie, ON University of Minnesota Herbarium Zizania aquatica Ohio University of Minnesota Herbarium Zizania palustris Clay County, MN University of Minnesota Herbarium Zizania palustris Koochiching County, MN University of Minnesota Herbarium Zizania palustris Hubbard County, MN University of Minnesota Herbarium Zizania palustris Mille Lacs County, MN University of Minnesota Herbarium Hordeum pusillum Illinois NYS Museum Herbarium (NYSM 3 1 29) Hordeum pusillum Iowa Thompson, collected 1989 Hordeum pusillum Georgia NYS Museum Herbarium (Moore 2044) Setaria glauca Iowa Thompson, collected 1989 Bouteloua curtipendula New York NYS Museum Herbarium (A 18272, Young 1397) Echinochloa muricata New York NYS Museum Herbarium (House 23843)

Modern Zea mays Arikara Flint North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993

Chapalote Tennessee Gary Crites, University of Tennessee Cherokee Flour Tennessee Gary Crites, University of Tennessee Dakota Flint North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1988 Devil's Lake Sioux Flint North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993

Iroquois Flour New York Jane Mt Pleasant, grown in 2001 Mandan White Flint A Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Herbarium Mandan White Flint B Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Herbarium Mandan Black Flour A Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Herbarium Mandan Black Flour B Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Herbarium Mandan Blue Flour A North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993 Mandan Blue Flour B North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993 Mandan Blue Flour C North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993 Mandan Clay Red A Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Herbarium Mandan Clay Red B Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Herbarium Mandan Red Flour A North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993 Mandan Red Flour B North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993 Mandan Sweet Corn A North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1988, 1993 Mandan Sweet Corn B North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1988, 1993 Mandan Sweet Corn C North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1988, 1993 Mandan Yellow Flour North Dakota Fred Schneider, grown in 1993 Northern Flint Unknown Nora Reber, Harvard University Herbarium

Shoepeg Dent Unknown University of Minnesota Herbarium

Archaeological Zea mays Briggs Run 1 Briggs Run Site, NY New York State Museum

Briggs Run 2 Briggs Run Site, NY New York State Museum

Gnagey 3-1 Gnagey 3 Site, PA Carnegie Museum of Natural History Gnagey 3-2 Gnagey 3 Site, PA Carnegie Museum of Natural History Klock Site 1 Klock Site, NY New York State Museum Klock Site 2 Klock Site, NY New York State Museum Peck 2 Peck 2 Site, PA Carnegie Museum of Natural History Roundtop Site Roundtop Site, NY New York State Museum Snell Site Snell Site, NY New York State Museum

phytolith assemblages can be distinguished statis- tically from modern indigenous grass assemblages.

If the methods and techniques work properly, then we expect that phytolith assemblages recovered from archaeological maize cobs will be most similar to modern maize cob assemblages. Sam-

ples of nine archaeological maize cobs were ana-

lyzed. Six of the cobs from New York sites were previously reported in Hart et al. (2003). They range in age from approximately 700 B.R to 300 B.R Three other cobs are from two sites in southwestern Pennsylvania, which have AMS dates from



REPORTS 569

îninON^r-^tin-ÔNcnsoso - < oo oo invomh..înfnhnrvH.a(N-iIA-iocn,r,>nTt _ oo

^ ^cNenoôqcNqON^trînsqoooq ^-N^gNNgt^rSSpôoSoNSôo^g -J ^n<N(NN(Nrnnrn(N(N(NrJ(N(N(N - «-h • _; _; • _; _; • • _;_;_; • .__;_; •_;_ . x ^

cn Tf -h -h qo -; r^ in - q in oo so vq oq oq ^ q r) ?! • p ri ri oo^^f. ?S9^â^tto^ 9 wcncN<NTHCNcoeoeocneNcNcNcN(NcN • -h - . • • ^ _ -_^_ • • „ •_ • • • ^_" _'_;_; • -en

^ CN S© O CN SO - 'O^NNCM'OhM (^ in rt O CN - 00^>îD^MNOO(Sh>rf(Sa0- Tf en t^ -hi- icnôoocNONOo-NOinoooN ososo- 'ooosoootÔNr-ONsorînoooosocnooTj-^soin o

w mNmfnmTf^Tt't^tnmmwci - < «-*' cn - < - '

r4 cn - ^ - <" -^ - - '

-I «h -h - «' - h" -i _;_-;_; • _; _; _;

ôC'-ôooNoooNr^-ON'Nj-sooNr-sor- o^ôeoeNONinso - 'OONÔNinoooooNr-Of-sONONin en v>n OsenînOON^J"Tj-r--cNOr~-sOONr~ oOsOcnOO^tenÔ'^fONSoricncn - <iDO\oorsX'tM« O ro i/>ino\inqcnoNr~;sqensqcNenTrin sqcnsqininTt^sqoqoN.eNTtSqcN-^--<cNcnqgsq^t;-'?i- r- w r4 en en en Tt uS Tt Tt Tt Tt ^ Tt ^t Tt Tt - - i -h' - ; - ; cs cn - - ; - ; - ; - '> • _;-;_-;_; - ^ _ • « _; _; cn

ôoÔ\h\dO'- oosor-ONinsot^-oo ONt^-t^soinoom'<tcoso.r.in,^-HTi-inONsooor~.©eN[Î~ on m mhoo«hO\hh- t^- m cn m tj- <n ^tsoeNinmorÔsocnJ?]ONênenoineNo2t--ooo^ en m rrj -

joqqi^- ;tnqvqr-;fN«nrfTt;vqoo otN^-H-^qqq^^g^. ' o\" > ^ -

q - '

^ o P ^ "™

on ^ ^rnrimpiw^Ttficnmrnmrnmr! _' _' -I J J ri (sj -

' _; ^_; •_' -_;^_;_;_'rt__;

o -^_;_;^;

on • ^

t+ nrôa>iniîno^tvor^(Noor-m cMfninoo-Hôm^-inm^moorsioôt^vDSooom^tr^ o

^Nrimrjw'tmmMtnmMmcirn - ; __; _; ^_- - ; h oi ^ - ; -^ ^j - ; ^ __ ; ^j __;_;_: -^_;^_;_;^_; ^

^hWooooa\(S>oinM««mooO(N i^tcscNtsr~'-^r-^tTj-»n^-ON,r>cS'^-On^r^fNivoovr-~>.«»n in ro in^«^-H-i^«m*Oinin>hm tÔÔsrnooo-|(Nfn(NrnJi?(N'Orn00SÔ(NaNÔr5'0 r~- ro rî/joo^qqrninin

- oo-ôsov- ;(N -H-â-'mhTtooqqqj^h-'Jgrj-ojrfj^q ' oo

ra . ^fNNfNrifn^'rnfnfntsrnNcifnr! -i-i^ - '

- '> - >' - ^J (Ni >-< - I •«-,'-; • •_"-_;-, • ^J <vj

^ ^Tt^roo»HOÔ(NO^-inô>nôo-H ^t>sD(NO^Tj-r-aO'-'(Nf^^S°2r-iQS22îninoo^2 o

g s^rn(N(Nr<(NTtrncnr«-)(Nrnroroc«-)rn - > - i • - ^ -^ -^^rt • • • -_h • • •_-,-,_ • 'on

^ CTmoiîriorMONcNOinooinfoo oo h oo o ^ - oa>vor-"^^^^RJG^ô--oo^;^ m

xj v - '

firiciNNTtficifit'ifiwfifici ^_J • _J rt -^ -^ - h° • • • • »- I • • _.' -h rt - h - h • -cn

-5 ^-s»r)^r*-Tt'-<omso»noovsoocsoo môooONtînOiarîninmr-f-sOOÔN^tinoooo- i m 2 o *\0^(NÔ(^soô^-soo>nmov^t o n n oo n oo - ioSL.r-ino- 'g'Ot^'OOmminmoo (N ^ fo ^h i/i ô in r^- r*^ co '•o oo ô o^ *o r - ^ oo r~- on t}" in oo t^ on - ̂ ^l ^J ^^ ^ on ^d ^^ ^D ^ c^^ ro in cn in in ^& ^t

;P ^Nrnririrninini-'^Tt'^^'i-'*^ -i-ri-i-i(\irirt • • -I - ; - ^ - ; • « « « ^ ^J ^ ^J _J ^ ^sj

v) ,-^movmON- 'ONm-H<NoomooO(Nin ONi^m-HrôN000oor«-)_1.vooof-,r--_1.Qe(N>sO - ONeN-êN m J£ On ms©-HoooNinoor~-rôoi^r~ONOO ^^^0(Nôosop:ino5LONini=c--'^r^(N(Nfnr«-)(NS-:ô ^t

O ^tnNrnwro/i^TfTt'^^^^-;'^ -H"«rtrtrtr«jtsi • ^, ^ ^ __; • - ; • • ^_; ^-i _; - ; __ ; -^j^

3 ^ÔN(NOQOt~~- 'in- '^trÔ- 'OOtÔO OOtj-- 'QC^_CN00(N^t(Nrslnr,r-.00m/-., rNi/-> - i-~. OOVDOn Tt O ooM'tffifl«)'HN'tONfn^viin-- Oro^J-XlIOOoOTfm^rxinoSSi^ML'^^M'i-

rNi/-> i-~. On

^ ^mmNNNTf'wm^mmmtncin h«-h - -h - ^ rj • • • ^, - ( • • • - ; • •rt'^_;_;r^

"O ^00- iÔO - ^sJ-mO(N*«OOOOONOVO ^tvONH^-H-Ht^t^fn-jn^Ôin^Ô^TiirOî1^^. O c (^ Tj-^to\^^Dinoo^D(Nininm- > n h> tsa-inUiocnio-Hi-^sraioSrlmtnaâÎ m •- '

^ (^

intnqoerjoqinrnqoN- ;ONqqq ^qq"i§fflfi<NO\q5o§^-hf;^qir)(N'th^ * ^ "^ ^ffiriNHrimmmf^cjmricirn^ - < - <

* • *-< - < - < - < <N • • • ^, ^ • • - <" « -J _; ^ • -co

n GÔNfooN-fô-Ni-cNsoocot^c^cai^r- ooNsooF-ÔN^(NinS^C^Str-^^(N'sOÔNr-^^ m •g n GÔNfooN-fô-Ni-cNsoocot^c^cai^r-

^ os.sqcr>încsq«nsq-H^<Ncn«tin r-. - Ttvo^rîn^

- cNggg^g-j^gq

- SgtNTtppo

m in

^1 ^^(N(Nr^r^<N-rfTtrornrnrnr<-)rnrnr«-) - > - > -^_^h -^_^4 • • • • _ • •^_^_ -_^_, • -rn

e^^r-ivDm-înmcNinm-HO^mtô -MO>min«^Ti.noom(smK«i(iin-iOrtm(sm o e^^r-ivDm-înmcNinm-HO^mtô ir> ^r-ômmomONOino^toooo ooo<n-HO^tco2^^în^tmof^r^(NcommTtoN- >in r- « ir>

(N °o*-:|^:^r~~:T* ^t^qo^mootor^rô cn-^âôs^ggrjqcnNôq^q^vqo;^^* o\

q " - '

Nrfic*irfirf)i/iiriTt^-Tt''t't'1:Tt'io -^ cî fN - n ^ (nJ H • • ' -h ri m' -^ • « rt m' « -h ^ - 1 _J -^' c4

2 int^-ONCNrnoÔoo^Dvot - on M oo cninONcotNt - Ô, n . o\ I - ^t oo ^ i - in^^w^hôt^ On ,_ t+ in^HmmroOoomOTtt^mÔTt-ON ot^-^ô- ir-o^??^S(N- '^tinSô-^cNinôotôo- • o

*** o cn ONQO^rNinoooo-înoNCNq'- corn rih't\t;^*otv;jQgl5'-o\-iqjt^vqoqinTtoq\i;fn^; - <

*** ^ ri ri r^ ri ^ ^ 't <t Tt ri -*' ^ Tf rt rt -' -' (N -h -< (N d • • • - < ^ (N - <* • - < - I - ! - I - '- - «' - - ^ - <' c<-i

B -.t^f^m- r~-(Nin'^-ooincNrN)ON-ôo in o\ m >n - rtfsnn^-tsNnnoxn.T)-(si-in^Ttrfs *n o3 m-HHinvonoNooao-HôstNNin o^fiooTta(Ni22Sg|noo25oo\jHô^M^S

rtfsnn^-tsNnnoxn.T)-(si-in^Ttrfs oo 5 (vj ro io r-; u-^ oq ^h ro vo on -^f- r~-^ ̂ r-^ oo on oqinoÔN-Hajoog^fc^ritn^-HC^^Tt-ioqsqrn^^ ' ' in

^mfirJfNifN^^Mrnwcnmmmri '

- < - - '

- J - ^ - <' • • • • _; _ ; •_;_; -^h'_;^-;^-;_; • • ^ >.

8 « c ^ôooTfi-Hoo^-ONminONootNOmô (NOinON^- .(-.r^soôoo- 'oooin- i- it^înONOomm (N 'C «3 tN ON^fO©\in(NOON(NOt^(NOin'vO ONCOTj-ON^^^cNOOOONroO'O- 'OlÔmi^mvOÔsO en cd 55 fM <-

;sqcNi-HO|vqasosin- <-

<vqrînoq -"vq-oooe^goqr-iONintNiornovt^fNi^fNq^t^fNrj ' * rn > •js ^ ^ (nJ _; h -' ri -h -^ -' ci ri -< -< -< -h' - « - < -<

' * • • - <' cn cn - < ^ >-^ cn cn - « - < - < oi H <n oi - ^ - <" - '> -g w a> "p ^m- 1 n in ci « r~O(Nino»r)-Hcnin minôocNf-se^-Ht^-inov- i(NOni~ÔnO- 'fôocN- i- i -^ m h fc - h -H\OTf(Nin^ta- ir-inooooNr^r- m^tir)oor-~^S(:^N^'^"^HinoooO'-iTtooisDOî-oÔfN cn «

_g cn os - ; vq vo vq-ÔN' -

;sooosovovor~; ^^.q^qQÔNsqoNt^rnsqinr^sqcncnqq^tsDrncN in Jt3 QJ

" - ' en'cN*-" - - CN - CN - N (si H -h - h_h -^ - ^h - - • • ,^ cN CN -^ --^ •- « (N CN -^ --^ '-«' CN fN CN fN - h ^-1 ^J "O

D ^^00 - Ttôso-ôooinin-^tNt^- ->o\hinOfSj.-(Ncn^K_hO\NwhOinfnMNIO i-- ^ b o ÔoommcNoor^- isoinm^tooN oo- iON-HOt^2r^t'- 'O^S^sON!n^m- iinoooC:^ cn °

§ b

cn o

«nr^vqv>ooTtoqsqsqsqooTt^;Ttsq ^-;oqnqq^^sqo;^5^(Noo^^-H^-H«n^p^ ' ' ' ' in <u cr

^^ cn cn - "TH-^rncNcNcNcNcNcNcNcNcN '

-h" ' ' '

- ; • ^ ^ ^ • • -__;^h' • -^_;^_;^_;_;_h" • -cN.y ^ 2

^înONcnm- 'cnONCNoooo- <oomin ^vosooinooa.l_cnr^QO_^QO-HOf-^îrs,r-soooly~,^ ^t c m 2 o^r-ONOfNvommcNONO^-insoooo ^înONcnm- 1^-00- ^vosooinooa.l_cnr^QO_^QO-HOf-^îrs,r-soooly~,^ .o - oo2>^so - SSjôgcNooS^ôomo- 'X?^; so J^

c m w

o^r-ONOfNvommcNONO^-insoooo 2 (NsqooiÔNsqqoosqrôq^tinini^ vq^qqcn-Hg^-* 1^-00- .o - -

"^S^rS-: lf!°xar!':^0°?lh 'X?^; so

^ ^ J^

2 "^^mCN- 11-H - mmCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN -^ - 1 - 1 • -_<_h • • -_^_h • • •_^h_^^_ • -CN «d

r* -^ moN-H^f~-t~-oot - -^ vo so ^t ^" ^t ^t cNOOvot^'^j"incnONsoinfsl'-Hcnoo- ÔNCNi^r~~Tf'rf-^cn tj- ^3 00 -^

OOt^-^mr^tÔ^t-ÔOCN-^ - On socNO-HONinTj-cn- 'insOi-H^fsOCNOOCNsOinCNensOsOCN "-1 2 ^ so CN sO ^H *O *n On cî OO 00 On Tf" so in in in On ^^ ^^ OO ^^ *-* On "^" t - ^1" ^^ CN ON ^t" CN in ^ t - so so - ^ cN CN - ^ OX) ^^ cn CN CN <S CN cn CN cn CN CN CN CN CN CN CN -

' ' -

' -< - < ~-° CN CN - ' »H -^' - ^ CN ^ - ^ - I - .' - h' - <' CN - < -h CN c«

^^N(N-Hi-(Noooorohinô\-<h sooosooNinooNinoooNsorft^rÔN'ri-cNcni^'^-ini-Hso in 2^ t~?mir)oomsoin- icninin-HcnotÔN (NOcNoo-H^-m"^-tôoNONcnTtcNr~soomsososoo>n >n S<u - 1 rtÔ\h^00rnh(N\qO\h0000h <srOO\-H-«^îrits;^^q(NTt;0;-;N-'*(NrninO-< ' ' ' ' sq (3n<-< ^^ cn 1-5 cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn - '>

' - < - '< - < - < - * -

' cn -< -

' - '> - ^ - '> -h - i -^ -

' - I ^ - m i-h - i -^

^ ^

^ôor-oonomcNr-oomoo- 'oooin OsocN^'-imcNl/-.m- 'l^._tooONmor)vnÔNONOr-~(- lliO 00 •- £< vo t^-O\- 'TtosoincNcn- 'cnoosooo 0(Nsoi~--oomONÔooU,^0'^-oS^;t^cN^-oooS^

lliO "^ ^ c vo i; cNcnoosqoNsqcNoqr^^sqTfintôs qînsq^w-g^rn^gj'H^^^^-^qsDoqg^ ' sq <o - c

^^ cn cm' -< ^ -<' cn cn cn cn cn cn cn oi cn cn - >-h ^ - ' • - <' -^' • • - h - i - <' • • -^ - <" - ; - ; - ; • • cn ^ "^

Z^ ZZZ| s ™

u« I 8

l|d<S Z^

g,§SdJ^S|l"il<-lili^^ s

as 1 ^2 u« 8

E ^-^^^^^^^^^^-v^v^^^-vO- 'CNcnn-in soiôoonO - cNcnTfinso^-ooosO- 'CNcn^-insot^-ooON 2 o^^h ^ -H<NcnTj-insor~-oooN- 1- 1- 1- 1- ^- - 1- <- 1- iCNCNcNcNcNcNcNcNCNCNcncncncncncnmcncncn Jj PQZQ




Figure 2. Cluster analysis results of modern maize and indigenous grass phytolith assemblage data. Sample numbers correspond to those used in Table 3. In this and/or subsequent cluster diagrams, aZm= archaeological Zea mays ssp. mays, Bc= Bouteloua curtipendula, Em= Echinochloa muricata, Hp= Hordeum pusillum, R=residue, S= Setaria glauca, Za= Zizania aquatic a, Zm=Zea mays ssp. mays, and Zp= Zizania palustris.

early historic times, approximately 360 B. P. to 200 B.R (Means 2005). Means considers each of these dates too late for their contexts, which, based on other AMS dates from the sites, are 615 B.R for the two Gnagey 3-2 samples and 367 B.R for the Peck 2-2 sample (Means 2005:55-56).

Table 4 is a squared chord distance matrix for the nine archaeological maize cobs and the modern maize and indigenous grass rondel phytolith assemblages. For each of the archaeological maize cobs the lowest squared chord distance is a modern maize sample. These squared chord distance values are 2.277 to 4.423 times less than the lowest value for an indigenous grass. This indicates that each prehistoric maize rondel phytolith assemblage is most similar to a modern maize assemblage. Fig- ure 3 is the results of the cluster analysis. The archaeological maize cob assemblages (nos. 61-69) cluster with the modern maize cob assemblages (nos. 16-39). These results indicate that changes in maize cob morphology through time,

as well as charring and burial for hundreds of years, do not affect the ability of our methods to properly identify maize from prehistoric phytolith assemblages. The two Mandan Red Clay maize assemblages (nos. 21 and 22) cluster with the indigenous grass assemblages in this analysis. This suggests that some maize assemblages may be mistaken as indigenous grass assemblages in some analyses (Type I error). In sum, the results indicate that rondel phytolith assemblages from maize cobs, both modern and archaeological, can be differentiated from those recovered from modern indigenous grass inflorescences.

A squared chord distance matrix for the residue and modern maize and indigenous grass rondel phytolith assemblages is presented in Tables 5a and 5b. The residue assemblages are ordered from left to right in descending chronological order. The lowest squared chord distance value for all but three residue assemblages is with a modern maize assemblage. These values generally fall within or close



REPORTS 571

Table 4. Squared Chord Distance Matrix for Archaeological Maize and Modern Maize and Indigenous Grass Phytolith Assemblages^

Peck Gnagey Gnagey Briggs Briggs 2 3.2 3.1 Run 1 Run 2 Klock 1 Klock 2 Snell Roundtop

Samplesb (61) (62) (63) (64) (65) (66) (67) (68) (69)

(I) Bouteloua curtipendula NY 3.071 3.797 3.781 2.633 2.248 3.589 3.126 3.096 2.406 (2)EchinochloamuricataNY 2.364 2.364 2.488 2.687 3.727 2.157 2.521 2.042 3.517 Q)HordeumpusillumIL 2.827 1.632 1.264 2.810 3.722 2.126 2.842 2.573 3.763 (4)HordeumpusillumlA 2.508 1.526 1.411 2.708 3.686 2.091 2.799 2.530 3.727 (5) Hordeum pusillum GA 2.911 1.761 1.350 2.930 3.836 2.262 2.996 2.714 3.803 (6) Setaria glaucalA 4.415 3.625 3.338 4.688 5.526 4.163 4.840 4.190 5.515 (7) Zizania aquatica OH 4.239 3.233 3.129 4.285 5.108 3.957 4.738 3.847 5.206 {%) Zizania aquatica NY 3.690 2.948 2.607 3.948 4.607 3.406 4.167 3.667 4.650 {9) Zizania aquatica ON 3.897 2.717 2.450 3.649 4.754 3.319 4.082 3.369 4.647 (10) Zizania palustris KC, MN 3.455 2.391 2.467 3.452 4.523 2.882 3.732 2.828 4.470 (II) Zizania palustris CL, MN 3.806 2.636 2.757 3.779 4.963 3.178 4.079 3.185 4.878 (\2) Zizania palustris HB, MN 3.484 2.488 2.413 3.449 4.416 2.967 3.747 2.906 4.423 (\3) Zizania palustris ML, MN 3.570 2.565 2.463 3.570 4.585 3.142 3.882 3.147 4.624 (14) Zizania palustris RE 3.705 2.674 2.558 3.665 4.758 3.304 4.005 3.275 4.647 (15) Zizania palustris HE 3.706 2.765 2.659 3.873 4.856 3.407 4.208 3.302 4.815

(16) Mandan Yellow Flour 1.001 .595 .639 1.119 1.828 ,661 1.084 .817 1.602 (17) Mandan White Flint A 1.378 1.445 1.461 1.358 1.770 1.569 1.476 ,916 1.864 (18) Mandan White Flint B 1.821 1.515 1.551 1.924 2.492 1.829 2.024 1.397 2.485 (19) Mandan Black Flint A ,996 ,579 ,555 1.018 1.543 ,875 1.086 .872 1.535 (20) Mandan Black Flint B 1.137 .662 .577 1.228 1.715 1.029 1.164 1.027 1.815 (21) Mandan Clay Red A 2.160 1.432 1.181 2.061 3.061 1.635 2.268 1.297 2.810 (22) Mandan Clay Red B 2.093 1.224 .897 1.897 3.015 1.409 2.108 1.384 2.799 (23) Mandan Sweet Corn A ,578 ,865 ,925 ,839 1.463 ,602 ,572 ,851 1.046 (24) Mandan Sweet Corn B ,772 1.457 1.654 1.015 1.124 1.157 .744 1.386 ,805 (25) Mandan Sweet Corn C ,857 1.717 1.779 ,947 1.228 1.373 ,902 1.412 ,744 (26) Mandan Blue Flour 1 ,869 ,622 ,731 ,965 1,205 .722 .815 .742 1.211 (27) Mandan Blue Flour 2 1.090 .757 .733 1.359 2.001 1.075 1.180 .848 1.988 (28) Mandan Blue Flour 3 1.483 1.125 1.156 1.584 1.730 1.391 1.572 1.108 2.032 (29) Mandan Red Flour A ,991 1.124 1.207 1.012 1.052 1.047 .811 1.109 1.101 (30) Mandan Red Flour B ,906 1.741 1.821 ,991 ,260 1.463 ,874 1.392 ,544 (31) Arikara Flint 1.185 1.013 1.046 1.446 1.773 1.185 1.296 ,962 1.892 (32) Devil's Lake Sioux Flint A 1.204 .781 .791 1.172 1.661 ,872 1.207 .671 1.528 (33) Devil's Lake Sioux Flint B 1.460 1.304 1.303 1.210 1.659 1.318 1.455 ,976 1.657 (34) Dakota Flint 1.312 1.565 1.695 1.088 1.545 1.565 1.365 1.389 1.462 (35) Northern Flint 1.314 1.210 1.401 1.404 1.503 1.362 1.318 1.130 1.584 (36) Iroquois White Flour 1.582 1.907 1.958 1.466 1.158 1.855 1.604 1.392 1.380 (37) Dent 1.336 1.849 1.860 1.137 1.439 1.552 1.224 1.399 1.393 (38) Cherokee Flour ,794 ,589 ,638 .894 1.561 ,638 ,908 ,630 1.537 (39) Chapalote 1.081 .583 .833 1.242 1.869 .853 1.108 .652 1.556

Lowest Grass/Lowest Maize 4.090 2.617 2.277 3.138 2.958 3.473 4.407 3.241 4.423

aBolded values are smallest values for indigenous grass and maize. Underlined values are at or below the cutpoint of 1.259 (see text for explanation). bNumbers correspond to those used in Figure 3.

to the range for smallest squared chord distance value established for the archaeological maize cob assemblages (.544-. 839). This includes the youngest (Klock 45738-43, .557; Garoga 42826- 2, .569; Street 48217-10, .569) and oldest (Vinette 40135, .698; Vinette 40046, .805; Vinette 40031- 2, .690) residue assemblages. The lowest squared chord distance values for the earliest-dated residues

corresponding to maize are 1.521 to 3.060 times less than the lowest value for a modern grass assemblage, within the range for modern maize assemblages (1 .332-3.605); the ratio for the earliest-dated Vinette sample (4003 1 -2) is 2.696, within the range established for the archaeological maize cobs (2.277-4.407). These results suggest that maize is the, or the primary, grass responsible for the ron-




Figure 3. Cluster analysis results of modern and archaeological maize and indigenous grass phytolith assemblage data. Sample numbers correspond to those used in Table 4.

del assemblages from most of the residues. The squared chord distance matrix for the

archaeological maize cob assemblages allows us to identify a cut point (Overpeck et al. 1985) for classifying rondel phytolith assemblages extracted from cooking residues as maize. An examination of Table 4 indicates that the lowest distance for an archaeological cob assemblage corresponding to a modern indigenous grass assemblage is 1.264 (Gnagey 3.1/Hordium pusillum IL). As shown in Figure 4 this value falls well within the distribution of distance values for archaeological against modern maize assemblages. Using 1.259 as a cut point in the analysis of residue assemblages mini- mizes Type II errors, misidentifying non-maize assemblages as maize, at the sacrifice of poten- tially increasing Type I errors, misidentifying maize assemblages as non-maize assemblages. A less con- servative cut point would increase the chance of Type II errors. Given that the methods and techniques used in our analyses have not been widely

Figure 4. Distribution of squared chord distance values for archaeological maize phytolith assemblages versus modern maize and indigenous grasses phytolith assemblages.



REPORTS 573

Table 5a. Squared Chord Distance Matrix for Residue and Modern Maize and Indigenous Grass Phytolith Assemblages.3

Hunters Hunters Klock Garoga Street Home Home Simmons Simmons Wickham Wickham (40) (41) (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48)

Samples11 45738-43 42826-2 48217-10 48580-110 48584-1 40518-2 40518-1 40525-1 40525-8

(1) Bouteloua curtipendula NY 3.749 3.625 3.393 3.952 4.817 3.103 5.266 4.151 4.216 (2) Echinochloa muricata NY 2.341 2.480 2.231 2.718 3.565 2.062 3.102 2.762 3.280 (3) Hordeum pusillum IL 1.325 1.884 2.030 1.566 1.695 2.055 1.847 1.592 1.457 (4) Hordeum pusillum IA 1.406 1.815 1.879 1.391 1.511 1.963 1.779 1.546 1.431 (5) Hordeum pusillum GA 1.381 1.991 2.278 1.560 1.698 2.260 1.935 1.602 1.497 (6) Setaria glauca IA 2.695 3.675 3.328 3.180 2.442 3.586 1.434 3.089 2.538 (7) Zizania aquatica OH 2.402 3.353 2.693 2.584 2.182 3.189 ,335 2.797 2.235 (8) Zizania aquatica NY 2.193 2.897 2.895 2.233 1.527 3.192 1.486 2.059 1.672 (9) Zizania aquatica ON 1.952 2.940 2.418 2.388 2.236 2.839 ,729 2.532 1.952 {\0) Zizania palustris KC, MN 2.427 2.753 2.382 2.512 2.854 2.594 1.036 2.661 2.752 (\ I) Zizania palustrisCL, MN 2.447 2.960 2.544 2.706 2.699 2.864 ,921 2.672 2.560 (\2) Zizania palustris UB, MN 2.061 2.697 2.136 2.372 2.390 2.542 ,571 2.375 2.154 (13) Zizania palustris ML, MN 2.126 2.733 2.148 2.328 2.066 2.680 ,537 2.287 2.049 (14) Zizania palustris RE 2.002 2.866 2.190 2.258 1.969 2.643 ,675 2.282 1.894 (1 5) Zizania palustris HE 2.247 2.909 2.334 2.444 2.268 2.741 .713 2.544 2.169

(16) Mandan Yellow Flour ,965 ML LQ28 .902 2.107 ,788 2.924 1.162 1.900 (17) Mandan White Flint A 1.524 1.278 ,839 1.537 2.955 ,884 3.127 1.786 2.786 (18) Mandan White Flint B 1.081 1.238 .717 1.380 2.555 1.029 2.650 1.635 2.431 (19) Mandan Black Flint A /737 ,577 J07 /734 2.134 ,659 2.686 1.157 1.951 (20) Mandan Black Flint B ,557 i>05 ,569 ,692 2.011 ,696 2.617 1.054 1.871 (21) Mandan Clay Red A J02 1.163 .937 1.106 1.709 1.138 1.613 1.005 1.459 (22) Mandan Clay Red B ,658 1.048 .888 .821 1.564 1.043 1.621 ,941 1.369 (23) Mandan Sweet Corn A 1.519 1.065 1.480 1.191 2.800 1.054 4.030 1.493 2.399 (24) Mandan Sweet Corn B 2.115 1.699 2.015 2.007 3.425 1.650 4.510 2.222 3.027 (25) Mandan Sweet Corn C 2.401 1.886 2.288 2.110 3.716 1.680 5.066 2.500 3.407 (26) Mandan Blue Flour 1 1.148 .569 1.043 1.009 2.665 ,764 3.715 1.308 2.497 (27) Mandan Blue Flour 2 ,866 ,668 ,687 ,932 2.519 ,672 3.167 1.457 2.426 (28) Mandan Blue Flour 3 1.285 ,829 /776 1.157 2.715 ,969 3.405 1.459 2.494 (29) Mandan Red Flour A 1.858 1.163 1.553 1.654 3.564 1.107 4.619 1.969 3.114 (30) Mandan Red Flour B 2.310 1.882 2.063 2.250 3.852 1.520 4.945 2.576 3.355 (31) Arikara Flint 1.454 ,889 1.060 1.271 2.789 ,978 3.626 1.548 2.594 (32) Devil's Lake Sioux Flint A 1.050 .728 1.099 .984 2.439 /758 3.390 1.144 2.138 (33) Devil's Lake Sioux Flint B 1.438 1.041 .941 1.425 2.825 .875 3.275 1.648 2.566 (34) Dakota Flint 1.826 1.537 1.366 1.819 3.163 1.330 3.618 2.113 2.803 (35) Northern Flint 1.751 1.103 1.409 1.118 2.611 1.345 3.933 1.449 2.354 (36) Iroquois White Flour 2.282 1.642 1.476 2.003 3.729 1.381 4.694 2.235 3.301 (37) Dent 2.088 1.804 1.729 2.165 4.000 1.538 4.159 2.535 3.443 (38) Cherokee Flour 1.049 .703 .869 1.020 2.513 .604 3.187 1.384 2.370 (39) Chapalote 1.105 .830 1.071 .899 2.170 .915 2.946 1.015 1.870

Lowest Grass/Lowest Maize 2.379 3.190 3.302 2.010 .966 3. 250 .208 1.643 1.045

aBolded values are smallest values for indigenous grass and maize. Underlined values are at or below the cutpoint of 1.259 (see text for

explanation). bNumbers in parentheses correspond to those used in Figure 5.

applied and established, we would rather err on the side of caution in classifying residue-derived phytolith assemblages as maize.

Using the 1 .259 value as the cut point, 1 5 of the 21 assemblages are identified as maize (Tables 5 a and 5b). Of those assemblages not identified as maize, Simmons 405 18-1 is most similar to wild

rice, with the lowest distance value (.335) corresponding to Zizania aquatica. Two samples, Hunter's Home 48584-1 and Wickham 40525-8, have no values below the cut point, suggesting mixed assemblages (Hart et al. 2003) or origina- tion from either maize related to a modern variety not yet sampled or from an indigenous grass not




tj ^ ' on © tj- Tt r- on <* in no - on oo o o r-~ ^ f*~ Koi )Q ^ ooi enl "^ »n en cni 22 >o »n| -<t v©| °£ t"H "3" oo on - < 2 rd ^c u o

^ ^ r» so oo -h »/i o t}- o vo o r~> o on oo r- Sd°iS]naH^1Jyooo5?3|>'lf|hO'/i«*0f>%îriSS on °° ^

c vo q fnWfntN^^-HfSoomtnmfninin on °°. p on on jsj -h on -^ ^ p °n cn cs Kq - on - ' Tt cn -rj- en ^ °° *o

^Ô q

fiin'ririritnrocnrits'Nriririri | | -h| | | ^ - <| - - «"| | - - - <" > - ^| | - «' - <| -*' -H | -1 - <' - <' - «' - <" | cn

*j ^ i£ enin»/)|s©en-HenTtrîneniêntîn ^| - * en ^| 9^1 SI Il!l © °o cn ^| cni on so oo [- ^-l on cn in cn »n îl i£| - ' "Son^ *j ^ r- - N\ooa*Moom\ooôcN °o S o m ©hg d s \o ^ o ô >k> > oo t^ o a m ff> ^ m ^ on 5 on ^ e »n § ^ "^ <^ **i ^ ^ en p oo c 5 cn oo oo r^ p °o r-; in «» °°. °°. °°. cn r~; on p p ^t oo on Tf cn en m r^ en - ; on on ^

jj w

^ w rs H -h -h H (S ri ^' H m' -h >-< -^ pj | - -h | | | | - « - < ^J -^| - *| _*' -J -J - I - <'| - '< -h' -h' rj (N | -^

S ^ " i^ t^ tj- m r<5 \o o m -^ vo (N m ti- o ^ Tf oi - 1 O| 2°| 2!| o <n m Tt in oni 2©| ^1 o m ^1 ooi oni cn on «ni m r^l >n| o q oo

^ " oooNOrr5vDoo-HOOoNON<N*^ôo»n >o >o H r l? oo o^ o > ^ o S ^ ^ ^ d O H ^ rt 'thf SSK> ô

c q oo

in ^ q >n rn Tt »h in ?s r-; in rn c^ in ra cs cn in - ; <n H r ^ M^ in ?n ^q - ; cs p p* ^ f^ - ; °^ p H >n ' co ' cs - ; °° cs p

tjj ^

^ q (rj fi ri n N ^ fi rn w en (^ en ci en en H H H | | -- -h -- rj cn - <| | | - h cn | -I -I - ' - '

-I cn | -1 en

& i ^ J2 .£ ^^ i - cn - i ^^ (-^ r^ m cs tj- t^- in eN ô r- in ml in M J^l rJl ooi r-l r~- O cn ^-i ]Q\ -h c^- eN in inl - <| oo on on - « J£}| - 1| m 'S u ^^

c» en ooinvomoineNeNONeNoovOTtONr^ oo n oo ^ fj rnho o rt -* ô r ON- O oo es H -- ô 10 en y rs r~ "^ ^ in en en Ô cn O en on -^f en r-; oo on vq On oo p - ' en p °°. °S O O Kq en ^t - On ^ ^ rn eN p *- ' r-; in r-; -^ °^ cn rf C m^|O en'NNNeNenen'en'eses'esririeNen ^1-h-hI | | - -I - <| -^' cn cn - 1 | -H - - eN - « - <| - <| - i - I - ! eN | - h cn

on 1> <

3 -^^^ oooort^sivooortvoeN-Heno - oon S!| <n *-* rtl ig| ml ;T| r-i en m ^r| eN| - < - - oo on cni cn r- - ' cn o ?^| JC!| en >^ .Svooo eNrêno-^-ôenoNr-r-ONCN-HTi-en ^m^^f^cNONQSînCr)(xîni^^^cNTtaNor--^:S!; o r*' "Cên ^-^ ^qinen rênooin- ioqp - ONpONCN ^ ^ ^ * ^ ^ * ^ > q o oht t^ o\ r) qht ^ t rt 9 1 • ^

Cu O ^-^ f^ en cn -h fh| - I cn cn cn - cn cn - '- cn -- cn I -h -^ I I -I I - h'| -4 r4 -h'I - h| - ^ - ^ ^-1 »- i - 1| - . I - ^ - I eN eN

1 I

• - '

1 I o 1 ^ cn i£ "H. S ̂

_î r^^îoN|^|cNOooeNr^m-ÔinÔen|ON0 2?|cN|5fI}|!j|-^-o-^-oinôô--iONoooN-î^-cNi-Hrn|0|0 ^ X

s .5 in oo ONOOin£ninoNi--ONt--ôoN\os'©"n Hh-t^^KoSiôooocnôoooooeninN^^^-iriht on ^

0X) O ^ - '

^ r*S C-4 -^| - ^1 I CN CN - h' - I CN CN - '< - 3 - '< -^ - ^| -^ -h' | H | | - h' CN CN - I - '< - ^ CN CN - - ! - "

- ' - I CN <N - ^1 H - '< £

cd rt in f^. <D ,i5 . - . aL, r-enoo^HO- lOocN- iin«n<nenr-- i enih-o»noo|^«|«oo*ooinoo-H- cN^-Tj-r--r--eNinoô en ^

f^. N ~^tilH

. . enoo- iOC~-ONOTfinooNON- i-Hin 'thn -^ o irivo » oo in oo - <cnÔenoN- ienomor--incNON oo cn

m •- w -h Tt CN - « »H - <' CN CN -^' CN CN CN CN CN CN CN H ci N -^' - i -^' fJ - '

CN CN - '

- < - < CN eN - ' - ^ -^ CN -h CN CN -

' - <* - '

7~\ 5 m ^ ^ CN - i CN CN - - < - < CN eN - - CN -h CN CN - - -

'o e s

s • " T3 h2^^ct> enên|fN|ONt--ooinenoooor-enincN OI ^ oo a\| ^1 ,^| Jfil \o m -< -> M -<t vo r- (N -I n o m o m inl ooi r-- % £ _ rn I, Ôeninoo- Hen"rtoor~--ôot--encNoo a oo tn O h; MC ? hn ô oo o 't oo ^ m ô (N -< in m Tt 't H o r- *2 c3 q|

_ in w ZH ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ f"". "^ on p cn en p p on - i ^ oo ^ o ^ ^ ^. ^ ' ^ vq rt <nk ^ oq io ^ho « vo in r^ ^ -« \D >

qj ] ̂ q| w -^ -^f CN H i-?| - * CN CN ~h CN CN CN CN CN -^ CN | »-h - < -h'I | | | - '

CN CN - < - 1 ~* CN CN - i - <| - < CN -- CN CN -^| -h| - ^ Q

-a ^

6 t3 J^ On 1>

^g x^, r-oofNominr--or-ooNTtcNONOO|Ooo|^|^|cN|Ti-|enen- < cni d cni vo vo o 01 o\| o i^ « o - 'imo cd :J3cNt-- enr-©r-~oooo^j-inoooN- ioooenoo c^ oo ot *

oo S inN- a ^ ^ ^ S ^ ^ ^ o (^ o o\ es in h aN" - * cs> X <u in cn in ^q ^ -^ ^t r~- - i en in -^ r~; ^t^q ^ oq - i en -h oo i oc p p Kq cn | -^t cn °°. p r^ in en cn \\ -* r^ ' r^ on p p en oo ^ cs>

'C ^ w ^ en cn r4 cn cn en en en cn cn cn cn cn cn cN - <l -^ - <l - <1 - i - « cn cn - <| -h'I - < cn - '* - h'I - i| -

' - < - < cn -^| -h' f\i 3

i . I -t-" x^-i, inrêN- 'OenONenr--- i-h - rnin^t- JQl cni M -^-i oi i£l oi oni -^t cn ^t| - < o - < on ^t oni cn en in vo ^t J^l - 'I >n "O 22 3 h x mrÔNen^too-^-TfooNôooTtONoo J^ en tH tH v© 3t en cn n© -h on v© en v© oo on o ô oo v© on - ^ S o en c

1-1 q « >n ^^ S^ "^ <^ <N - ; en p oo on in - j rn -^ en en rf °: O p p O °; O -< in On p CN in vq On en - i cn in in On ' r-; «« p >n ^ 1-1 ^ ^^ O m' i-H CN CN CN rn CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN CN -*'l -H -h'I ~-\ - h| - <1 - - - < - <'| - '< - ^ -4 ^h' - «' -J| -h - ^' - I - ' -h' - h'| _h'

12 ^ n O '3 .

U on Is

§ 13 in w ^ ^q oo on r*; p cn on r~^ in -; en -« en en rf ^ oq p ^ ^ \os on p r- oo » so -^ Nj- on p M» p >n en on r^ vj f~: p «g £

3 tt< w o en - < - ! i-h cn rn cn cn cn eN cn cN cn cn cn | | -h'I I I I I - <| - '< - h I I - <| - h - ^ - h'| I - <| - < - . - h - h I rn cs -

JD rn W) g n x ^^ -1 o Os O cn f- cn oo en ô Ô oo rt on r- Ô v^ 2P CNI f^l O| vo enl on| in en °o| ^1 oi enl ô enl "^t| enl r-- r~- on cn S^l )Q - ' "U "^ -C cd - On

^^ 55 ^1- m ^D cn oo cn m cn en r- en O en - i O ^ ooi ^ H ^ n d ooi N j H en h k^ ^ h S n 29 ^ OK j h ^ oo IS j O cn vo ^ -> [a 2J cn

"U c "^ -C

f-5 cd -

w ^- ^^ ^S cn © cn - rn on ^q ^ - ' t-~: p on p p o ooi o; ^ n ooi ^ j h ^ |>. h n q j !^ h oo j ^ cs Tt ^ ^ o; eN •-- o ^-i ^^ o enfNeNCNeNenenenencNencNenen'rn | | - -\ \ \ -^ -h'| -^| ^ -^' - h'| -h| -J -h'| -^'| -4 -h -J -^ rn n *"*

I!Iil!ii!iiIIiiiSSfB!i!i!ii!IJLii i ill -« 1 J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 § I G B ^^^^^^^^^S>^Nn^^G>P^Ô-^c^n?inGvPMÔ^Rc^îr)"£iPoo^ S °3

^ -^rên^în^^rôoô^^^^-H-H-H ^^-(^(NfNirJcscscsrscNNMmenencnmcnenenrncn jj 03Z



REPORTS 575

Figure 5. Cluster analysis results of modern maize, indigenous grass, and residue phytolith assemblage data. Sample numbers correspond to those used in Table 3. 5a and 5b.

yet sampled. The three remaining samples, Fortin2 46238-16, Fortin2 46238-26, and Vinette 40046, have values below the cut point for both maize and Hordeum pusillum. In all three cases, however, the lowest value corresponds to a modern maize assemblage. Another sample, Kipp Island 41119-5, although having three values below the cut point corresponding to maize, has a ratio of lowest indigenous grass to lowest maize value of only 1 . 1 83. This is the lowest ratio of those samples identified as maize.

Results of the cluster analysis are shown in Fig- ure 5. The maize (nos. 16-39) and most of the residues (nos. 40-60) form one large cluster, while the indigenous grasses (nos. 1-15) and four of the residues (Wickham 40525-8 [no. 48], Kipp Island 41119-5 [no. 54], Hunter's Home 48584-1 [no. 44], and Simmons 40518-1 [no. 46]) fall in other clusters. The cluster analysis indicates that the phytolith assemblages from samples Fortin2 46238-16 (no. 55), Fortin2 46238-26 (no. 56), and Vinette 40046

(no. 49) are most similar to modern maize assemblages.

Of the sample assemblages clustering away from the modern maize assemblages, Simmons 405 18-1 (no. 46) clusters with wild rice (nos. 7-15) as would be expected from the squared chord distance values. Hunter's Home 48584-1 (no. 44), Kipplsland41 1 19-5 (no. 54), and Wickham 40525- 8 (no. 48) fall into a cluster with one wild rice and the little barley assemblages. The results suggest these are mixed assemblages and/or we do not have an analog in our comparative collection of samples from indigenous grasses or maize varieties.

Non-Grass Phytoliths Other phytoliths were also identified in some of the residue samples. Most significantly, cucurbit phytoliths (Figure 6), probably corresponding to Cucurbita sp., were recovered from the Scaccia 71492 residue, which produced a date of 2905 ± 35 B.P. (cal 2c 1256-998 B.C.). Cucurbit phy-




Figure 6. Cucurbita sp. phytolith recovered from Scaccia 71492 (bar=20um. Original magnification 400X).

toliths were also recovered from Fortin2 46238-16 as reported in Thompson et al. (2004), and from Wickham 40525-1 and 40525-8, Kipp Island 41 1 19-5 and 41 1 19-8, and Hunter's Home 48584- 1 as reported in Hart et al. (2003). Small, scalloped phytoliths with a morphology consistent with cucurbits (Figure 7) were recovered from Felix 40701-21, Westheimer 44533-67, and Hunter's Home 41797. Sedge (Cyperus sp.) phytoliths were recovered from Fortin2 46238-16 as reported in Thompson et al. (2004), and Wickham 40525-1 and Kipp Island 411 19-8 as reported in Hart et al. (2003).

Discussion

The cumulative results of the phytolith analysis summarized here along with those previously published are presented in Table 6 along with the direct dates obtained on the same residues sampled for phytolith analysis (see Hart and Brumbach 2005). These results have important implications for the histories of maize and squash in central New York specifically and eastern North American generally.

Maize

The chronology of phytolith evidence for early maize in New York is combined in Table 7 and Fig- ure 8 with that for pre- 1 000 B .P. maize from directly dated macrobotanical maize remains in northeastern North America. With the exception of the earliest date from the Vinette site, the dates associated with the rondel phytolith assemblages identified as maize fall within the temporal range of the directly

Figure 7. Small, scalloped phytolith recovered from Hunter's Home 41797 (bar=20um. Original magnification 400X).

AMS dated macrobotanical remains in the region. However, the phytolith evidence indicates that early maize was more widely spread geographically than is indicated by the macrobotanical evidence.

As a whole, the phytolith evidence suggests that maize was commonly used in central New York by calibrated fifth-century A.D. This is consistent with earlier speculations by some (e.g., Ritchie and Funk 1973:369) about the use of maize in New York before macrobotanical evidence suggested, but well earlier than dates suggested by others (e.g., Galli- nat 1967:4; Snow 1995:71). There is a gap in the

phytolith evidence for maize of over three centuries between the 1960 ± 35 B.P. (cal 2a 39 B.C.-A.D. 119) Vinette date and the 1600 ± 35 B.P. (cal 2a A.D. 393-544) date from Westheimer. Given the

general lack of samples from the intervening period of time we cannot assign any significance to this gap. The Vinette date is consistent with regional chronology and site stratigraphy (Hart and Brum- bach 2005), and it falls between dates on macrobotanical remains from Holding in Illinois and Icehouse Bottom in Tennessee and Edwin Harness in Ohio. There is a similar gap in time between the Holding date in Illinois and the next youngest date on maize macrobotanical remains at Icehouse Bot- tom in Tennessee.

The 2270 ± 35 B.P. (cal 2a 399-208 B.C.) date at Vinette, however, is earlier than the earliest

directly dated maize macrobotanical remains in eastern North America from Holding (2077 ± 70 B.P., cal 2a 1 16 B.C.-A.D. 52; Riley et al. 1994). This result suggests maize was present in central New York up to eight centuries before the earliest



REPORTS 577

Table 6. Summary of Phytolith Analysis Results.

Site Cal 2o range (median probability)3 Phytolith results

Scaccia 1256 (1096) 998 B.C. Squash Vinette 1 790 (638) 519 B.C. No phytoliths Vinette 1 399 (296) 208 B.C. Maize Felix Zone 5 376 (285) 197 B.C. Squash? Vinette 2 39 B.C. A.D. (40) 1 19b Maize Wickham 2 A.D. 263 (39 1 ) 430b No phytoliths Simmons A.D. 349 (448) 540 Wild rice Westheimer 2 A.D. 393 (475) 544 Maize Felix Zone 4 A.D. 432 (5 10) 575b Maize Fortin 2 zone 3 A.D. 434 (557) 613b Maize, squash, sedge Wickham 3 A.D. 568 (619) 655b Maize, wild rice?, squash, sedge Kipp Island 3 A.D. 600 (630) 655b Maize, wild rice, squash, sedge Simmons A.D. 594 (645) 683 Maize Felix Zone 4 A.D. 608 (646) 668b Maize, squash? Wickham 3 A.D. 681 (792) 889 Wild rice, maize?, sedge Hunters Home A.D. 7 1 8 (805) 880b Maize, wild rice, squash Street A.D. 892 (994) 1117 Maize Klock A.D. 1327 (1431) 1475 Maize Garoga A.D. 1417 (1465) 1626 Maize Smith-Pagerie A.D. 1408 (1448) 1618 No phytoliths aCALIB 5.0 (Stuiver et al. 1998). bPooled mean of multiple dates (Ward and Wilson 1978).

macrobotanical evidence for this crop in southern Ontario (1570 ± 90 B.R, cal 2c A.D. 345-648; Crawford et al. 1997), and five to six centuries before the earliest macrobotanical remains in Ohio

(1730 ± 85 B.R, cal 2a A.D. 136-423; Ford 1987) and Tennessee (1775 ± 100 B.R, cal 2a A.D. 25-532; Chapman and Crites 1987).

Of particular interest is that the early date from

Table 7. Early Maize Evidence from Northeastern North America.

Site/Location Dated Material 14C Age B.P. Cal. 2c rangea Median probability8 Source

Street, NY residue 1043 ± 40 A.D. 892-1 1 17 A.D. 994 This study 21 1-1-1, NY maize 1050 ± 50 A.D. 884-1150 A.D. 985 Cassedy and Webb (1999) Grand Banks, ON maize 1060 ± 60 A.D. 782-1 152 A.D. 973 Crawford and Smith (2003; Forster, ON maize 1150 ± 100 A.D. 66 1 - 1 1 1 6 A.D. 876 Crawford and Smith (2003; Hunters Home, NY residues 1221 ± 16b A.D. 718-880 A.D. 805 Hart et al. (2003) Wickham, NY residue 1 228 ± 42 A.D. 68 1 -889 A.D. 792 Hart et al. (2003) Grand Banks, ON maize 1250 ±80 A.D. 650-968 A.D. 778 Crawford and Smith (2003; Meyer, ON maize 1270 ± 100 A.D. 607-979 A.D. 767 Crawford and Smith (2003; Simmons, NY residue 1390 ±35 A.D. 594-683 A.D. 645 This study Felix, NY residues 1392 ±26b A.D. 608-668 A.D. 646 This study Kipp Island, NY residues 1423 ± 20b A.D. 600-655 A.D. 630 Hart et al. (2003) Wickham, NY residues 1438 ±31b A.D. 568-655 A.D. 619 Hart et al. (2003) Crane, IL maize 1450 ± 350 172 B.C.-A.D. 1263 A.D. 564 Conard et al. 1984 Fortin 2, NY residues 1515 ±27b A.D. 434-613 A.D. 557 Thompson et al. (2004) Felix, NY residues 1541 ± 23b A.D. 432-575 A.D. 510 This study Grand Banks, ON maize 1551 ± 78b A.D. 345-648 A.D. 501 Crawford and Smith (2003; Westheimer 2, NY residue 1600 ±35 A.D. 393-544 A.D. 475 This study Edwin Harness, OH maize 1730 ± 60b A.D. 136-423 A.D. 307 Ford (1987) Icehouse Bottom, TN maize 1775 ± 100 A.D. 25-532 A.D. 245 Chapman and Crites (1987 Vinette, NY residues 1960 ± 28b 39 B.C.-A.D. 1 19 A.D. 40 Thompson et al. (2004) Holding, IL maize 2037 ±41b 166 B.C.-A.D. 52 45 B.C. Riley et al. (1994) Vinette, NY residue 2270 ± 35 399-208 B.C. 296 B.C. This study aCALIB 5.0 (Stuiver et al. 1998). bPooled mean of multiple dates (Ward and Wilson 1978).




Figure 8. Calibrated date probability distributions for pre-A.D. 1000 maize evidence in northeastern North America corresponding to Table 7. Black plots are for dates on residues with phytolith assemblages identified as maize. Gray plots are direct dates on maize macrobotanical remains. (Produced with OxCal 3.10 [Brock Ramsey 2005]).



REPORTS 579

Vinette is contemporary with the wood charcoal dates of 2325 ± 75 B.R (cal 2a 751-198 B.C.) and 2290 ± 60 B. P. (cal 2c 749-106 B.C.) associated with maize macrobotanical remains at the Mead- owcroft Rockshelter in southwest Pennsylvania (Adovasio and Johnson 1981). Also of note is that the earliest Vinette date is approximately 500 years younger than Ritchie's (1969) estimated date for the Wray site in New York (c. 2800 B.R). Excava- tions at this site in the 1930s yielded what was described as a 2.54 cm-long segment of maize cob (Ritchie 1944:126). Unfortunately, several years later the object was found to have disintegrated beyond recognition (Ritchie 1969:189) and is no longer present in the site's collection at the Rochester Museum and Science Center where it was originally curated. The Vinette date is also contemporaneous with or younger than dates associated with pollen identified as maize from a number of locations in southeastern North America: Lake Shelby, Alabama (ca. 3500 B.P.; Fearn and Liu 1995); Fort Center, Florida (ca. 2500 B.R; Sears 1982); B.L. Bigbee, Mississippi (ca. 2400 B.R; Whitehead and Sheehan 1985); and Dismal Swamp, Virginia (ca. 2200 B.R; Whitehead 1965).

The macrobotanical remains from Meadowcroft and the pollen from the various sites in the South- east are generally treated with skepticism (e.g., Crawford et al 1997; Eubanks 1997; Smith 1992), and we fully expect that the early phytolith evidence from Vinette will be treated skeptically pending additional supporting evidence. A direct AMS date on the Meadowcroft maize would go a long way toward resolving the status of such ancient maize in eastern North America (Crawford et al. 1997).

Cucurbits

The identification of cucurbit phytoliths from the Scaccia site (2905 ± 35 B.R, cal. 2c 1256-998 B.C.) should not be controversial because of the macrobotanical-based establishment of cucurbit in eastern North America at even greater antiquity, by 7100 B.R in the Midwest (Asch and Hart 2004; Smith 1992). Directly AMS dated cucurbit rind fragments establish the presence of Cucurbitapepo gourds at the Memorial Park site, Pennsylvania (Hart and Asch Sidell 1997) and the Sharrow site, Maine (Petersen and Asch Sidell 1996) during the sixth millennium B.R In addition, 10 rind fragments from apparently edible squashes, identified

as Cucurbita pepo, were recovered at the Memor- ial Park site from a feature containing Meadowood bifaces. An AMS assay on one of these fragments yielded a date of 2625 ± 45 B.R (cal. 2c 903-596 B.C.; Hart and Asch Sidell 1997), only slightly younger than the residue date from Scaccia. More recently Monaghan et al. (2006:219) report an AMS date of 2820 ± 40 B.R (cal. 2c 1 1 15-854 B.R) on a squash seed from Michigan, contemporaneous with the Scaccia residue date. The identification of cucurbit phytoliths at Scaccia, then, extends our knowledge of the early use of presumably edible squashes into central New York. The residues producing later dates that contained cucurbit phytoliths help to establish the continued presence of this crop in central New York well before the earliest macrobotanical evidence at around cal. A.D. 1 300 (Hart 1999b). It also suggests that maize and squash were being cooked, and presumably grown together for hundreds of years prior to the widespread use of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) at the end of the calibrated thirteenth-century A.D. based on direct dates of macrobotanical remains (Hart et al. 2002; Hart and Scarry 1999). There is no phytolith evidence for the common bean - the pods of which produce hook-shaped phytoliths that can be distinguished from hooked forms produced by other plants (Bozarth 1990) - in the cooking residues analyzed to date.

Conclusion

The investigation of crop histories has been a major research focus for many archaeologists and paleoethnobotanists working in eastern North America. Improved macrobotanical recovery methods and the introduction of AMS dating during the late twentieth century resulted in much firmer understandings of those histories. However, given the vagaries of macrobotanical preservation, additional sources of evidence are needed to build regional crop chronologies. One such source of data is opal phytoliths. The research summarized here and elsewhere (Hart et al. 2003; Thompson et al. 2004) demonstrates that phytolith assemblages recovered from directly AMS dated charred cooking residues can be important sources of evidence for crop histories. Such evidence can be obtained from curated collections in museums as well as from collections generated during new excavations. Phytolith




assemblages from cooking residues, which to date have been exploited in eastern North America for crop history evidence only in New York, Minnesota (Thompson et al. 1994), and several states in the Southeast (Lusteck 2006) have the potential to enhance our understandings of crop histories throughout the East.

The results of our analyses indicate that maize and squash, two of the crops that dominated Native American agriculture throughout much of eastern North America late in prehistory, were being grown and consumed in New York for at least two mil- lennia before the advent of written history in the region with the European entrada. This long history of use and cumulative agricultural knowledge and experience was not imagined among some archaeologists in the Northeast just a few years ago. Rather, the crops' introductions in the region, through the migration of agriculturists from elsewhere or adoption by indigenous groups, were thought to have resulted in major changes in regional subsistence-settlement systems (e.g., Snow 1995). Other archaeologists speculated about the presence of maize in New York at earlier times (e.g. Ritchie and Funk 1973), but lacked direct evidence for its presence.

Given the results in New York, we anticipate that phytolith analysis of cooking residues will push back the date of maize introduction/use in other areas of eastern North America as well. The intensive flotation (5340 liters of soil) and identification efforts at Holding (Riley et al. 1994), suggest that the timing of maize may not change as drastically in west-central Illinois as it has in central New York. However, we suspect it will in other areas given that the level of flotation sampling has been less than it was at Holding.

Despite the adoption of flotation recovery and AMS dating of key crop remains in New York, published direct AMS dates on maize macrobotanical remains are still no earlier than ca. A.D. 1000 (Cassedy and Webb 1999), while the earliest well- established date for squash macrobotanical remains in New York is ca. A.D. 1300 (Hart 1999b). The A.D. 1000 date is coincident with the initiation of northern Iroquoian traits in the traditional New York culture history (e.g., Ritchie 1969; Snow 1995; Tuck 1978; but see Hart and Brumbach 2003, 2005; Starna and Funk 1994). Crop histories at much greater time depth, suggested by residue-

derived phytolith assemblages, indicate that introductions of maize and squash did not have immediate major consequences for subsistence and settlement systems in the region. Rather, these two crops apparently contributed to subsistence systems for well over a millennium before evidence is found for compact villages, longhouses, and intensive maize-bean- squash agriculture, traits tra- ditionally associated with northern Iroquoian speakers (Snow 1995). Our results suggest that these crops were one component of diverse subsistence systems, only much later becoming the subsistence focus as recorded by Europeans, related by northern Iroquoian tradition, and inferred from the late prehistoric archaeological record (Engel- brecht 2003). The reasons for the intensification of use among some populations are added dimensions to research programs focused on the later prehistory of the region.

While the phytolith evidence for early maize and squash in central New York presented here suggests different histories for the crops than the macrobotanical record, those histories are far from settled. What is clear is that relying on single sources of evidence for crop histories in a given region and building models of prehistoric subsistence and settlement systems thereon, as has been done in New York and elsewhere, is problematical. While we need additional phytolith data, building on the temporal and spatial distributions of the analyses done to date, other sources of evidence are needed to complement the phytolith evidence. For maize, these might include isotopic analyses of the apatite and collagen components of human teeth and bone (e.g., Harrison and Katzenberg 2003; Kelly et al. 2006), isotopic analysis of lipids recovered from pottery sherds (e.g., Reber et al. 2004), and/or the recovery of starch grains from secure contexts (e.g., Messner and Dickau 2005; Piperno et al. 2000). While macrobotanical remains can provide critical evidence for the histories of both maize and squash (e.g., Crawford et al. 1997; Hart and Asch Sidell 1997), they should no longer be viewed as stand- alone sources of evidence for those histories.

Acknowledgments. Most of the funding for the research

reported in this article came from a grant by the New York State Biodiversity Research Institute. Other funding came from the New York State Museum and the University at

Albany-SUNY. Robert Thompson did the phytolith extrac- tion and classification. We thank Daniel Cassedy and an



REPORTS 581

anonymous reviewer for their comments, corrections, and suggestions. The abstract was translated into Spanish by Amarilys La Santa Morales.

References Cited

Adair, Mary J. 2003 Great Plains Paleoethnobotany. In People and Plants

in Eastern North America, edited by Paul E. Minnis, pp. 172-257. Smithsonian Books, Washington, D.C.

Adovasio, James M., and William C. Johnson 1981 The Appearance of Cultigens in the Upper Ohio Val-

ley: A View from the Meadowcroft Rockshelter. Pennsyl- vania Archaeologist 5 1 ( 1 ): 63-80.

Asch, David L., and John P. Hart 2004 Crop Domestication in Prehistoric Eastern North

America. In Encyclopedia of Plant and Crop Science, edited by Robert M. Goodman, pp. 314-319. Marcel Dekker, New York.

Blake, Leonard W, and Hugh C. Cutler 200 1 Plants from the Past. The University of Alabama Press,

Tuscaloosa. Bozarth, Steven R.

1987 Diagnostic Opal Phytoliths from Rinds of Selected Cucurbita Species. American Antiquity 52:607-615.

1990 Diagnostic Opal Phytoliths from Pods ot Selected Varieties of Common Beans {Phaseolus vulgaris). Amer- ican Antiquity 55:98-104.

1993 Maize {Zea mays) Cob Phytoliths from a Central Kansas Great Bend Aspect Archaeological Site. Plains Anthropologist 38:279-286.

Bronk Ramsey, Christopher 2005 OxCal Program v3.10. Oxford: University of Oxford

Radiocarbon Unit, http://www.rlaha.ox.ac.uk/oxcal/ oxcal.htm accessed 6/26/06.

Cassedy, Daniel and Paul Webb 1999 New Data on the Chronology of Maize Horticulture

in Eastern New York and Southern New England. In Cur- rent Northeast Paleoethnobotany, edited by John P. Hart, pp. 85-100. New York State Museum Bulletin 494. The University of the State of New York, Albany.

Chapman, Jefferson, and Gary D. Crites 1987 Evidence for Early Maize (Zea mays) from the Ice-

house Bottom Site, Tennessee. American Antiquity 52:352-354.

Chapman, Jefferson, and Patty Jo Watson 1993 The Archaic Period and the Flotation Revolution. In

Foraging and Farming in the Eastern Woodlands, edited by C. Margaret Scarry, pp. 27-38. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Conard, Nicholas, David L. Asch, Nancy B. Asch, David Elmore, Harry Gove, Mayer Rubin, James A. Brown, Michael D. Wiant, Kenneth B. Farnsworth, and Thomas G. Cook

1 984 Accelerator Radiocarbon Dating of Evidence for Pre- historic Horticulture in Illinois. Nature 308:443-446.

Crawford, Gary W, and David G. Smith 2003 Paleoethnobotany in the Northeast. In People and

Plants in Ancient North America, edited by Paul E. Min- nis, pp. 172-257. Smithsonian Books, Washington, D.C.

Crawford, Gary W., David G. Smith, and Vandy E. Bowyer 1 997 Dating the Entry of Corn (Zea mays) into the Lower

Great Lakes. American Antiquity 62: 1 12-1 19. Dorweiler, Jane E., and John Doebley

1997 Developmental Analysis of Teosinte Glume Archi- tecture: A Key Locus in the Evolution of Maize (Poaceae).

American Journal of Botany 84: 1 13-1322. Engelbrecht, William

2003 Iroquoia: The Development of a Native World. Syra- cuse University Press, Syracuse.

Eubanks, Mary 1996 Reevaluation of the Identification of Ancient Maize

Pollen from Alabama. American Antiquity 62: 139-145. Fearn, Miriam L., and Kam-biu Liu

1995 Maize Pollen of 3500 B.P. from Southern Alabama. American Antiquity 60: 109-1 17.

Ford, Richard I. (editor) 1985 Prehistoric Food Production in North America.

Anthropological Papers, Museum of Anthropology, Uni- versity of Michigan, No. 75. Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Ford, Richard I. 1 987 Dating Early Maize in the Eastern United States. Paper

presented at the tenth Ethnobotany Meetings, Gainesville, Florida.

Fritz, Gayle J. 1990 Multiple Pathways to Farming in Precontact Eastern

North America. Journal of World Prehistory 4:387-476. Fritz, Gayle J., and Bruce D. Smith

1 988 Old Collections and New Technology: Documenting the Domestication of Chenopodium in Eastern North America. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 1 3 : 3-27.

Funk, Robert E., and Robert D. Kuhn 2003 Three Sixteenth-Century Mohawk Iroquois Village

Sites. New York State Museum Bulletin 503. The Univer- sity of the State of New York, Albany.

Gallinat, W. C. 1967 Plant Habit and the Adaptation of Corn. Bulletin 565,

Experimental Station, College of Agriculture, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Gilmore, Melvin R. 1 93 1 Vegetal Remains of the Ozark Bluff-Dwellers Culture.

Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Let- ters 14:83-102.

Green, William (editor) 1994 Agricultural Origins and Development in the Mid-

continent. Report 19, Office of the State Archaeologist. The University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Hard, Robert J., Raymond P. Mauldin, and Gerry R. Raymond 1996 Mano Size, Stable Carbon Isotope Ratios, and Mac-

robotanical Remains as Multiple Lines of Evidence of Maize Dependence in the American Southwest. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3:253-3 1 8.

Harrison, Roman C, and M. Anne Katzenberg 2003 Paleodiet Studies Using Stable Carbon Isotopes from

Bone Apatite and Collagen: Examples from Southern Ontario and San Nicolas Islands, California. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:227-244.

Hart, John P. 1999a Maize Agriculture Evolution in the Eastern Wood-

lands of North America: A Darwinian Perspective. Jour- nal of Archaeological Method and Theory 6: 137-180.

1999b Dating Roundtop's Domesticates: Implications for Northeastern Late Prehistory. In Current Northeast Pale- oethnobotany, edited by John P. Hart, pp. 47-68. New York State Museum Bulletin 494. The University of the State of New York, Albany.

Hart, John P. (editor) 1 999 Current Northeast Paleoethnobotany. New York State

Museum Bulletin 494. The University of the State of New York, Albany.

Hart, John P., David L. Asch, C. Margaret Scarry, and Gary W Crawford

2002 The Age of the Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris




L.) in the Northern Eastern Woodlands of North America. Antiquity 76:377-385.

Hart, John P., and Nancy Asch Sidell 1997 Additional Evidence for Early Cucurbit Use in the

Northern Eastern Woodlands East of the Allegheny Front. American Antiquity 62:523-537.

Hart, John P., and Hetty Jo Brumbach 2003 The Death of Owasco. American Antiquity

68:737-752. 2005 Cooking Residues, AMS Dates, and the Middle-to-

Late- Woodland Transition in Central New York. Northeast Anthropology 69:1-34.

Hart, John P., and C. Margaret Scarry 1999 The Age of Common Beans {Phaseolus vulgaris) in

the Northeastern United States. American Antiquity 64:653-658.

Hart, John, P., Robert G. Thompson, and Hetty Jo Brumbach 2003 Phytolith Evidence for Early Maize {Zea mays) in the

Northern Finger Lakes Region of New York. American Antiquity 68:619-640.

Keegan, William F. (editor) 1987 Emergent Horticultural Economies of the Eastern

Woodlands. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 7. Carbondale, Illinois.

Kelly, Jennifer A., Robert H. Tykot, and Jerald T. Milanich 2006 Evidence for Early Use of Maize in Peninsular Florida.

In The Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary Approaches to the Prehistory, Linguistics, Biogeography, Domestica- tion, and Evolution of Maize, edited by John Staller, Robert Tykot, and Bruce Benz, pp. 249-261. Academic Press, New York.

Kovach, W L. 1999 MVSP-A Multivariate Statistical Package for Win-

dows, Ver. 3.1. Kovach Computing Services, Pentraeth, Wales, United Kingdom.

Lusteck, Robert 2006 The Migrations of Maize into the Southeastern U.S.

In The Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary Approaches to the Prehistory, Linguistics, Biogeography, Domestica- tion, and Evolution of Maize, edited by John Staller, Robert Tykot, and Bruce Benz, pp. 521-528. Academic Press, New York.

Means, Bernard K. 2005 New Dates for New Deal-Excavated Monongahela

Villages: Some Implications for the Chronology of Late Prehistoric Southwestern Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 75(1):49-61.

Messner, Tim, and Ruth Dickau 2005 New Directions, New Interpretations: Paleoethnob-

otany in the Upper Delaware Valley and the Utility of Starch Grain Research in the Middle Atlantic. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 2 1 :7 1-82.

Minnis, Paul E. (editor) 2003 People and Plants in Ancient Eastern North America.

Smithsonian Books, Washington. Monaghan, G. William, William A. Lovis, and Kathryn C. Egan-

Bruhy 2006 Earliest Cucurbita from the Great Lakes, Northern

USA. Quaternary Research 65:216-222. Mulholland, Susan C.

1993 A Test of Phytolith Analysis at Big Hidatsa, North Dakota. In Current Research in Phytolith Analysis: Appli- cations in Archaeology and Paleoecology, edited by Deb- orah M. Pearsall and Dolores R. Piperno, pp. 131-145. MASCA, The University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Mulholland, Susan C, and George Rapp, Jr. 1 992 A Morphological Classification of Grass Silica Bod-

ies. In Phytolith Systematics: Emerging Issues, edited by George Rapp Jr. and Susan C. Mulholland, pp. 65-89. Plenum Press, New York.

Ollendorf, Amy L. 1992 Towards a Classification Scheme of Sedge (Cyper-

aceae) Phytoliths. In Phytolith Systematics. Emerging Issues, edited by George Rapp Jr. and Susan C. Mulhol- land, pp. 91-1 1 1 . Plenum Press, New York.

Overpeck, J. T., T. Webb III, and I. C. Prentice 1985 Quantitative Interpretation of Fossil Pollen Spectra:

Dissimilarity Coefficients and the Method of Modern Ana- logues. Quaternary Research 23:87-108.

Pearsall, Deborah M. 1978 Phytolith Analysis of Archaeological Soils: Evidence

for Maize Cultivation in Formative Ecuador. Science 199:177-178.

1 982 Phytolith Analysis: Applications of a New Paleoeth- nobotanical Technique in Archeology. American Anthro- pologist 84:862-871.

Pearsall, Deborah M., Karol Chandler-Ezell, and Alex Chandler- Ezell

2003 Identifying Maize in Neotropical Sediments and Soils Using Cob Phytoliths. Journal of Archaeological Science 30:611-627.

Petersen, James B., and Nancy Asch Sidell 1 996 Mid-Holocene Evidence for Cucurbita sp. from Cen-

tral Maine. American Antiquity 61:685-698. Piperno, Dolores R.

2004 Crop Domestication in the American Tropics: Phy- tolith Analyses. In Encyclopedia of Plant and Crop Sci- ence, edited by Robert M. Goodman, pp. 326-329. Marcel Dekker, New York.

Piperno, Dolores R., Karen H. Clary, Richard G. Cooke, Anthony J. Ranere, and Doris Weiland

1985 Preceramic Maize in Central Panama: Phytolith and Pollen Evidence. American Anthropologist 87:871-878.

Piperno, Dolores R., and Kent V Flannery 2001 The Earliest Archaeological Maize (Zea mays L.)

from Highland Mexico: New Accelerator Mass Spec- trometry Dates and Their Implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98:2101-2103.

Piperno, Delores R., and Deborah M. Pearsall 1998 The Origins of Agriculture in the Lowland Neotrop-

ics. Academic Press, San Diego. Piperno, Dolores R., Anthony J. Ranere, Irene Hoist, and Patri-

cia Hansell 2000 Starch Grains Reveal Early Root Crop Horticulture

in the Panamanian Tropical Forest. Nature 407:894-897. Piperno, Dolores R., Irene Hoist, Linda Wessel-Beaver, and

Thomas C. Andres 2002 Evidence for the Control of Phytolith Formation in

Cucurbita fruits by the Hard Rind (Hr) Genetic Locus: Archaeological and Ecological Implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 99: 10923-10928.

Piperno, Dolores R., and Karen E. Stothert 2003 Phytolith Evidence for Early Holocene Cucurbita

Domestication in Southwest Ecuador. Science 299:1054-1057.

Reber, Eleanora A., Stephanie N. Dudd, Nikolas J. van der Merwe, and Richard P. Evershed

2004 Direct Detection of Maize in Pottery Residues via Compound Specific Stable Carbon Isotope Analysis. Antiq- uity 78:682-691.

Reimer, Paula J., Mike u. L. Baillie, hdouard Bard, Alex Bayliss, J Warren Beck, Chanda J. H. Bertrand, Paul G.



REPORTS 583

Blackwell, Caitlin E Buck, George S. Burr, Kirsten B. Cutler, Paul E. Damon, R. Lawrence Edwards, Richard G. Fairbanks, Michael Friedrich, Thomas P. Guilderson, Alan G. Hogg, Konrad A. Hughen Bernd, Kromer, Gerry McCormac, Sturt Manning, Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Ron W. Reimer, Sabine Remmele, John R. Southon, Minze Stuiver, Sahra Talamo, F. W. Taylor, Johannes van der Plicht, Constanze E. Weyhenmeyer

2004 IntCalO4 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 Cal Kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46: 1029-1058.

Riley, Thomas J., Richard Edging, and Jack Rossen 1990 Cultigens in Prehistoric Eastern North America:

Changing Paradigms. Current Anthropology 3 1 :525-541 . Riley, Thomas J., Gregory R. Waltz, Charles J. Bareis, Andrew

C. Fortier, and Kathryn E. Parker 1994 Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) Dates Con-

firm Early Zea mays in the Mississippi River Valley. Amer- ican Antiquity 59:490-497.

Ritchie, William A. 1944 The Pre-Iroquoian Occupations of New York State.

Rochester Museum of Arts and Sciences. Rochester, New York.

1 969 The Archaeology of New York State Revised Edition. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York.

Ritchie, William A., and Robert E. Funk 1 973 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in the Northeast. New

York State Museum and Science Service Memoir 20. The University of the State of New York, Albany.

Rovner, Irwin 1983 Plant Opal Phytolith Analysis: Major Advances in

Archaeobotanical Research. In Advances in Archaeolog- ical Method and Theory Vol. 6, edited by Michael B . Schif- fer, pp. 225-266. Academic Press, New York.

Scarry, C. Margaret (editor) 1993 Foraging and Farming in the Eastern Woodlands.

University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Sears, William S.

1 982 Fort Center: An Archaeological Site in the Lake Okee- chobee Basin. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.

Smith, Bruce D. 1 992 Rivers of Change: Essays on Early Agriculture in

Eastern North America. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Snow, Dean R. 1 995 Migration in Prehistory: The Northern Iroquoian Case.

American Antiquity 60:59-79. Staller, John E., and Robert G. Thompson

2002 A Multidisciplinary Approach to Understanding the Initial Introduction of Maize into Coastal Ecuador. Jour- nal of Archaeological Science 29:33-50.

Starna, William A., and Robert E. Funk 1994 The Place of the In Situ Hypothesis in Iroquoian

Archaeology. Northeast Anthropology 47:45-54. Starna, William A., and Donald A. Kane

1 983 Phytoliths, Archaeology, and Caveats: A Case Study from New York. Man in the Northeast 26:21-32.

Struever, Stuart 1962 Implication of Vegetal Remains from an Illinois

Hopewell Site. American Antiquity 27:584-587. Stuiver, Minze, and Paula J. Reimer

1 993 Extended 14C Database and Revised CALIB Radio- carbon Calibration Program. Radiocarbon 35:215-230.

Stuiver, Minze, Paula J. Reimer, and R. W Reimer

2005 CALIB 5.0. Manual, www.calib.qub.ac.uk/crev50/ accessed 3/30/2005.

Stuiver, Minze, Paula J. Reimer, Edouard Bard, J. Warren Beck, G. S. Burr, Konrad A. Hughen, Bernd Kromer, Gerry McCormac, Johannes van der Plicht, and Marco Spurk

1998 INTCAL98 Radiocarbon age calibration 24,000-0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40:1041-1083.

Telford, R. J., E. Heegaard, and H. J. B. Birks 2004 The Intercept is a Poor Estimate of a Calibrated Radio-

carbon Age. TheHolocene 14:296-298. Thompson, Robert G.

2006 Tracing the Diffusion of Maize into South America through Phytolith Analysis of Food Residues. In Docu- menting Domestication: New Genetic and Archaeological Paradigms, edited by Melinda A. Zeder, Eve Emshwiller, Bruce D. Smith, and Daniel G. Bradley, pp. 82-96. Uni- versity of California Press, Berkeley, California.

Thompson, Robert G., John P. Hart, Hetty Jo Brumbach, and Robert Lusteck

2004 Phytolith Evidence for Twentieth-Century B .P. Maize in Northern Iroquoia. Northeast Anthropology 68:25-39.

Thompson, Robert, G., Rose A. Kluth, and David W. Kluth 1 994 Tracing the Use of Brainerd Ware Through Opal Phy-

tolith Analysis of Food Residues. Minnesota Archaeolo- gist 53:86-95.

Thompson, Robert G., and Susan C. Mulholland 1994 Identification of Corn in Food Residues on Utilized

Ceramics at the Shea Site (32CS101). The Phytolitarien Newsletter 8 (2): 7-11.

Tuck, James A. 1978 Northern Iroquoian Prehistory. In Northeast, Volume

15, Handbook of North American Indians, edited by B. G. Trigger, pp. 322-333. The Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Wang, Huai, Tina Nussbaum-Wagler, Bailin Li, Qiong Zhao, Yves Vigouroux, Marianna Faller, Kirsten Bomblies, Lewis Lukens, and John Doebley.

2005 The Origin of the Naked Grains of Maize. Nature 436:714-719.

Ward, G. K., and S. R. Wilson 1978 Procedures for Comparing and Combining Radio-

carbon Age Determinations: A Critical Review. Archaeom- etry 20:19-31 .

Whitehead, Donald R. 1965 Prehistoric Maize in Southeastern Virginia. Science

150:181-182. Whitehead, Donald R., and Mark C. Sheehan

1985 Holocene Vegetational Changes in the Tombigbee River Valley, eastern Mississippl. American Midland Nat- uralist 113:122-137 .

Woods, William I. (editor) 1992 Late Prehistoric Agriculture: Observations from the

Midwest. Studies in Illinois Archaeology No. 8. Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Springfield, Illinois.

Yarnell, Richard Asa 1 964 Aboriginal Relationships Between Culture and Plant

Life in the Upper Great Lakes Region. Anthropological Papers, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michi- gan, No. 23. Ann Arbor.

Received December 20, 2005; Revised October 16, 2006; Accepted October 16, 2006.



society for american archaeology - clas usersusers.clas.ufl.edu/davidson/proseminar/hart et...

Documents